WHAT?

[cleolinda]

Okay, I am just absolutely stunned by this.

Disabled LJer evilpuppy is mistreated by United Airlines, which consistently drags its feet on supplying a requested wheelchair (I'm guessing she only has to use one in physically strenuous situations, like traveling, and therefore doesn't have one of her own on hand?) and is generally assy about helping her get

Comments

[cleolinda]

After I hit post, I had this brief moment of, "Is there any way she could be making this up? ANY way? Because this is just astounding." I mean, I believe her. I just cannot even begin to wrap my mind around the Kindness of Strangers policy or this Dina person. I do not grok this.

[cleolinda]

Okay, I want to pre-emptively clarify what I just said. I completely believe her. The subtext of "Is there any way she could be making this up?" was, "Wow, there is a part of me that wishes people were not this shitty," and the answer to it was, "No, she is not making this up."

[naeelah]

That's the thing about this shit happening these days -- I don't think people who behave this badly realize that The Internet exists. It won't just be one person and maybe a few of their friend who never fly United again. It could be thousands and thousands of people deciding to boycott United and calling to rip them a new one on this one person's behalf. I'm sure the CEO's office is getting to hear aaaalll about it.

[cyranocyrano]

Having worked for United for five years, I can confirm that this is indeed policy. Part of the policy, I think, was to discourage the people who bring on carry on luggage larger than they are without, you know, actually *confronting* them and saying "That's too big--it's not a carry on if you can't carry it". Part of it was that FAs were getting hurt hefting bags up into already-crammed overhead bins, and then they were liable if they damaged something in the carry on while trying to get it stowed.

United is lame, and ever since the employees all lost their pension they've been a bit less interested in customer service.

[annlarimer]

Judas Priest! That's unconscionable. It's bad for the employees and the passengers.

[celestineangel]

BZUH????

[lost_garnet]

Your icon made me snort so hard it hurt.

[cleolinda]

See, I can even understand the problem buried deep in all of this, which is that people are trying to take huge luggage onboard, and that FAs are getting injured trying to help with it. At which point, luggage needs to be checked, confrontation be damned, or the "I'm not allowed to lift that" policy needs to be politely enforced. It can be a stupid, harmful policy, but that's all on the airline at that point, I guess is what I'm saying. It's that the employees went out of their way to be heinous about it that astounds me.

[cyranocyrano]

I'm not attempting to defend the employees. God knows, I had to work with them for five years (doing the same job at half the wages), and I fully agree that this policy is not approaching the problem correctly.

I'm just providing my nugget of information from Inside the Beast. (:

[lizziecrowe]

And thank you for presenting it. It adds to the facts.

[foresthouse]

And you're also using one of my favorite icons ever. *matching icons woo*

[darth_snarky]

Isn't United one of the airlines that's now charging for ANY checked baggage? That's only going to make people carry on more and heavier luggage. If they really had a problem, they could let people check a bag or two for free (it works for Southwest, anyway.)

[cyranocyrano]

Yeah, policy doesn't always talk with policy at United to be sure that one doesn't completely counteraffect the other. It's one of the many reasons I'm glad I don't work at the airport any longer.

[lyras]

I agree that this is the problem behind the madness. That said, I really don't understand why they can't do what I've seen other airlines doing (Virgin in the UK, for example), which is to make their carry-on bagage policy highly visible, and have staff check any baggage that looks overweight or over-sized before it reaches the aircraft.