Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
ual763 wrote:And yet this guy in the inc.com article, still manages to bash United for firing them. He, almost daily, bashes the airline for having sour employees and service, and then when they set an example, he bashes them for setting an example. How can anyone take him serious?
jersey777 wrote:Fired for using an IPAD for 15 minutes and not wearing an apron for the service after flying 40 years with no prior infractions? Maybe cases like this are why morale was so bad at United.
Ionosphere wrote:This is exactly when there is no morale at UA. These FAs did the service. I don't think an apron is necessary to pour drinks. It seems like a witch hunt to get rid of senior FAs. Something similar at TWA in 1987. A FA with 25 years was fired for taking 4 cup cartons of milk and a used Ambassador Class Amenity Kit after a JFK-CDG flight.
USAirKid wrote:IMHO setting up a discipline matrix is HR301, and is kindof amazing that it hasn't been established and agreed upon in the union contract.
beechnut wrote:If these are first offenses, they merit a verbal warning first. We're all human, we all screw up from time to time and perfection is an impossible standard to be held up to, otherwise everyone would be out of a job.
Varsity1 wrote:The bigger, underlying problem is the high cost of these career cat ranchers. Sitting at the top of the payscale for 25+ years and being less productive/enthusiastic than someone fresh off the street is a problem the airline can't shake with lawyers like these.
ual763 wrote:Ionosphere wrote:This is exactly when there is no morale at UA. These FAs did the service. I don't think an apron is necessary to pour drinks. It seems like a witch hunt to get rid of senior FAs. Something similar at TWA in 1987. A FA with 25 years was fired for taking 4 cup cartons of milk and a used Ambassador Class Amenity Kit after a JFK-CDG flight.
It’s not just the apron. The main issue was watching movies on their iPad. And service does not end after pouring drinks. And your case against TWA. I stand by TWA on that one too. That is stealing. It doesn’t matter that it is 4 cartons of milk. She/he stole it. At my previous workplace, we fired someone for stealing toilet paper.
ual763 wrote:But unfortunately, these 2 were caught doing it by an undercover supervisor apparently. They knew better. This is the issue people have with United these days, flight attendants/staff that don’t think the rules apply to them, and ignore the customer.
ual763 wrote:Varsity1 wrote:The bigger, underlying problem is the high cost of these career cat ranchers. Sitting at the top of the payscale for 25+ years and being less productive/enthusiastic than someone fresh off the street is a problem the airline can't shake with lawyers like these.
Exactly! The FAs United needs (and has), are the ones who go above and beyond in making the experience a good one for the customer. I’m talking about the FAs that go around after drink service with glasses of water asking if anyone would like some, going around with the trash bin multiple times, or even going around and offering people coffee/tea after the main beverage service. I’ve seen these flight attendants on flights before, young and old. I know they exist. This is what FAs should be doing. There is simply no excuse to be playing on your iPad. I’m not suggesting we fire all old FAs, but if one has gotten to the point where they simply don’t care enough to provide a quality service, the company should have the right to terminate them, and replace them with someone who will. In fact, they are within their rights to do that. No law was broken, this was simply a civil case (IIRC). But still, I fear that the decision made will continue to breed laziness in certain FAs, that don’t take pride in their job anymore.
RamblinMan wrote:ual763 wrote:But unfortunately, these 2 were caught doing it by an undercover supervisor apparently. They knew better. This is the issue people have with United these days, flight attendants/staff that don’t think the rules apply to them, and ignore the customer.
The very fact that "undercover supervisors" are spying on employees is highly indicative of a toxic work environment. It's hardly surprising that the FAs don't seem to give a rat's ass about the customers when they are shown a total lack of respect.
Drucocu wrote:For f***'* sake you're at work. You dress in your work uniform and don't slack off watching iPads during the boss's time. Is it really that hard?
Is it harsh to fire them over this? Yes, it is. Just some disciplining would've been enough (in my point of view). But well, here we are.
ual763 wrote:I guess we don’t know if they were undercover or not. That probably wasn’t the best choice of words on my part. But it happens in a lot of service industries, particularly hotels/restaurants. The cabin is a publicly accessible place (w/ a ticket of course), the office is typically not. Ever see the show Undercover Boss?
Ionosphere wrote:This is exactly when there is no morale at UA. These FAs did the service. I don't think an apron is necessary to pour drinks. It seems like a witch hunt to get rid of senior FAs. Something similar at TWA in 1987. A FA with 25 years was fired for taking 4 cup cartons of milk and a used Ambassador Class Amenity Kit after a JFK-CDG flight.
aa87 wrote:I'm a lawyer, I don't specialize in employment but have more than passing experience with situations like this. I respectfully, vehemently disagree with everyone defending UA here (I'm also anti-unions). Unless there are other material facts, you simply can't/shouldn't terminate employees for minor infractions with unblemished 30-year careers. Cases like this always make me wonder how defense counsel allowed it to go to trial (when I was on defense side, I always looked for plaintiff's best evidence and arguments, then tailored settlement negotiations accordingly).
Personally, I think the biggest factor in a good flying experience is attitude of the cabin crew. Friendly/nice makes for a great flight, even in middle seat with delays and bad weather. Obnoxious/tyrannical crew makes it miserable, even in aisle seat and clear skies. If pax are being tended to, why on earth should anyone care if an FA takes 10 or 15 minutes to watch on an ipad ? I've often gone to the galley for water and seen FA's in the jump seat reading a magazine or scheduling papers. They've always looked up and asked if I needed anything. BTW, if it was OK to fire them, then its OK to fire every office worker incl lawyers who spends 15 min surfing the web or on personal email during work hours.
The entire problem with airline flying today is everything feels like a maximum security prison - both pax and crew are under constant fear of rule infractions and the consequences, unrelated to safety which is all that matters. No more decency and common sense, and when a lawyer has to say that we're in big trouble.
ual763 wrote:The main issue was watching movies on their iPad. And service does not end after pouring drinks.
Varsity1 wrote:The bigger, underlying problem is the high cost of these career cat ranchers. Sitting at the top of the payscale for 25+ years and being less productive/enthusiastic than someone fresh off the street is a problem the airline can't shake with lawyers like these.
compensateme wrote:This thread makes me laugh, because it demonstrates people's ignorance. Most everybody takes a "5-minute vacation" every (or nearly every) day at work (especially in the smart phone era) and I I guarantee you there's not a single person on these forums who's nevertaken an extended one. Problem is, we're all human and we're all going to have "those moments." Of course, that won't stop some posters with an inferiority complex from insisting they've never done it and anybody who has should be disciplined. And guess what? They're probably writing those comments while at work (and not on a designated break).
"5-minute vacations" aren't problems until they become habitual and it doesn't seem like it was for these employees -- the articles report they had clean records and UA did not try to argue it was a habitual problem they had been repeatedly warned about.
There's almost no doubt there's another reason these employees were fired (in other words, this was just an excuse to can them), and almost undoubtedly related to age (they're protected by laws & a union, and their superiors were looking to circumvent it).
Shame on United!!!!
JHwk wrote:Varsity1 wrote:The bigger, underlying problem is the high cost of these career cat ranchers. Sitting at the top of the payscale for 25+ years and being less productive/enthusiastic than someone fresh off the street is a problem the airline can't shake with lawyers like these.
I have to say, I have had pretty good luck with some of the most senior flight attendants at United. They know their job and do it well. They might not look as fresh as they were 40 years ago, but we get great service out of them. They don't take shit from people, but I respect that; they do their job.
rbavfan wrote:Ionosphere wrote:This is exactly when there is no morale at UA. These FAs did the service. I don't think an apron is necessary to pour drinks. It seems like a witch hunt to get rid of senior FAs. Something similar at TWA in 1987. A FA with 25 years was fired for taking 4 cup cartons of milk and a used Ambassador Class Amenity Kit after a JFK-CDG flight.
That would be theft, so yes they were fired.
ual763 wrote:USAirKid wrote:IMHO setting up a discipline matrix is HR301, and is kindof amazing that it hasn't been established and agreed upon in the union contract.
It’s an HR philosophy that is suited more towards the office environment, not the service industry, especially for a customer-facing, safety-centric position. I would bet that United has a discipline matrix setup for employees at HQ. But regardless, it still doesn’t negate the fact that they didn’t do their job as per the guidelines of the company.
SFOformerFA wrote:As a former UA flight attendant for 20 years, I have to wonder if these employees had a history of poor performance.
ual763 wrote:Ionosphere wrote:This is exactly when there is no morale at UA. These FAs did the service. I don't think an apron is necessary to pour drinks. It seems like a witch hunt to get rid of senior FAs. Something similar at TWA in 1987. A FA with 25 years was fired for taking 4 cup cartons of milk and a used Ambassador Class Amenity Kit after a JFK-CDG flight.
It’s not just the apron. The main issue was watching movies on their iPad. And service does not end after pouring drinks. And your case against TWA. I stand by TWA on that one too. That is stealing. It doesn’t matter that it is 4 cartons of milk. She/he stole it. At my previous workplace, we fired someone for stealing toilet paper.
aa87 wrote:Personally, I think the biggest factor in a good flying experience is attitude of the cabin crew. Friendly/nice makes for a great flight, even in middle seat with delays and bad weather. Obnoxious/tyrannical crew makes it miserable, even in aisle seat and clear skies. If pax are being tended to, why on earth should anyone care if an FA takes 10 or 15 minutes to watch on an ipad ? I've often gone to the galley for water and seen FA's in the jump seat reading a magazine or scheduling papers. They've always looked up and asked if I needed anything. BTW, if it was OK to fire them, then its OK to fire every office worker incl lawyers who spends 15 min surfing the web or on personal email during work hours.
The entire problem with airline flying today is everything feels like a maximum security prison - both pax and crew are under constant fear of rule infractions and the consequences, unrelated to safety which is all that matters. No more decency and common sense, and when a lawyer has to say that we're in big trouble.
Varsity1 wrote:[
They like to collectively bargain for more more more, like they are pilots or something, in an attempt to turn a job into a career, that really isnt a career.
ual763 wrote:And most of us have probably never been caught either. Sure, I’ve taken a so-called “5 minute vacation,” but if I was caught, I would have to own up to it. It’s a risk we take, it didn’t pan out for them. But then again, I work in an office environment now. If I was sitting in front of 200+ customers while representing my company, I most definitely would not be on my iPad watching movies. That’s the difference here. While sitting at the airport, FAs are permitted to use their phones/iPads however they please. But, when on board, there is no place for that kind of behavior.
SFOformerFA wrote:As a former UA flight attendant for 20 years, I have to wonder if these employees had a history of poor performance. It was well known that "problem children" --f/a's that disregarded rules, had poor attendance, pilfered common property, or had a number of negative comments from customers and fellow employees -- were watched more carefully than the good performers. While the violations that got them fired weren't severe, it's likely they both were under the watchful eye of management.
I disliked the attitude on the property, at the time, that you could be a bad employee and the Union would defend you. The Union was also aware that their were some rotten eggs that frequently came to the company's attention. Maybe they don't need to defend people who clearly and blatantly violate rules.