I must apologize to everyone, as this is something I should have posted from the beginning. I had just plain forgotten about it. However, for whatever reason, it popped back into my head this evening. So, before I forget it again, here is a truly fantastic link!
Airtoons!
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
Zagat Outtakes for 2009
Zagat is a company that does lots of "customer satisfaction" surveys for all kinds of industries. You've probably seen a "Zagat Rated" sign in a restaurant or two. Well, Zagat also rates the Airline Industry.
When it comes to these surveys, most people want to talk about who ranked where and in what category. I'm more interested in the "outtakes." Our billions and billions of passengers do have a lot to say, and some of them, find some very colorful ways to say it. Here are some outtakes from the 2009 Zagat Airline Survey.
"Treats occasional fliers like dirt, and treats frequent fliers like a better class of dirt."
"Basks in its adequacy."
"You have a better chance winning the lottery than trading in your miles for a flight."
"The only strongpoint is their website...because it is not human."
"Old worn-out birds staffed with old worn-out birds."
"Lining up to board, I couldn't tell if I was at the DMV or the draft board."
"I expected a coin slot for the toilet."
"Spectacularly unspectacular."
"Another contender for the highly prized 'Passengers Come Last' award."
"The miracle airline…23 wheelchair passengers pre-boarded but only four need them after landing."
"If there was any less legroom, I’d have to check my legs."
"At least you don’t have to pay extra to have your luggage delayed."
"The way they have synthesized all the bad things about airline travel is practically performance art."
"At least cattle are put out of their misery at the end of their trip."
"For peanuts and nothing but peanuts, this is your airline."
"They still serve bad airline food, so retro!"
"You're never #1, but at least you know it from the start."
"Cabin staff has been on duty since Sherman sacked Atlanta."
"Didn't know that candy bars qualified as a meal."
"Mean people like working here."
"Should I have to pay extra for my knees?"
"Planes are younger than the crew."
"The seat space makes an MRI seem spacious."
and my personal favorite......
"Asked why we didn't have blankets, the steward said, 'so they could give the executives bonuses.'"
When it comes to these surveys, most people want to talk about who ranked where and in what category. I'm more interested in the "outtakes." Our billions and billions of passengers do have a lot to say, and some of them, find some very colorful ways to say it. Here are some outtakes from the 2009 Zagat Airline Survey.
"Treats occasional fliers like dirt, and treats frequent fliers like a better class of dirt."
"Basks in its adequacy."
"You have a better chance winning the lottery than trading in your miles for a flight."
"The only strongpoint is their website...because it is not human."
"Old worn-out birds staffed with old worn-out birds."
"Lining up to board, I couldn't tell if I was at the DMV or the draft board."
"I expected a coin slot for the toilet."
"Spectacularly unspectacular."
"Another contender for the highly prized 'Passengers Come Last' award."
"The miracle airline…23 wheelchair passengers pre-boarded but only four need them after landing."
"If there was any less legroom, I’d have to check my legs."
"At least you don’t have to pay extra to have your luggage delayed."
"The way they have synthesized all the bad things about airline travel is practically performance art."
"At least cattle are put out of their misery at the end of their trip."
"For peanuts and nothing but peanuts, this is your airline."
"They still serve bad airline food, so retro!"
"You're never #1, but at least you know it from the start."
"Cabin staff has been on duty since Sherman sacked Atlanta."
"Didn't know that candy bars qualified as a meal."
"Mean people like working here."
"Should I have to pay extra for my knees?"
"Planes are younger than the crew."
"The seat space makes an MRI seem spacious."
and my personal favorite......
"Asked why we didn't have blankets, the steward said, 'so they could give the executives bonuses.'"
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Shoes
Not quite sure how to state this, so I'll just come out with it. I recently paid $200 for a pair of shoes. Now, a few items to clarify up top: 1. I NEVER would have imagined I'd spend that much money on a pair of shoes since my name is not Stacy London. 2. I don't make a great deal of money, so I don't really have $200 just lying around to spend on unneeded items.
Most people wouldn't think shoes are important to an airline pilot. Most pilots have just one pair of "flying shoes." Perhaps some have more than one pair, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that most have just one pair. These shoes are likely on the feet of regional pilots at least 15-20 days per month. And, that means all day for those days as well.
Airports aren't usually small places. Getting through security and out to a gate, doing the aircraft walk-around, then swapping planes and walking back across the airport a few times a day, standing at the gate waiting for a late inbound flight, then walking all the way out of the airport, walking out to the shuttle area for your ride to the hotel, etc, etc. When you do this day in and day out, all year long, it really adds up. Especially if you're putting all this on a single pair of shoes whether it's hot, cold, wet, snowy, or whatever.
I used to wear cheap pilot shoes. After all, that's all I could afford. I got about a year out of each pair. I found that the soles became thinner and thinner, and then eventually began to split. I usually noticed the splitting part on an early morning walk-around on a wet ramp area. It really blows having a cold/wet foot for a 12 hr duty day.
Then, there is the important qualification of being "airport friendly." When pilots are in uniform, they are not required by TSA to remove their shoes when going through a security check point. The caveat to this is that the shoes must not have a steel shank in the sole which would set off the metal detector.
So, this year, I started considering some more expensive shoes rather than another $40 pair. Why? Well, it certainly wasn't because I would feel like a "better person" having spent more money on myself. I was looking for a pair of shoes that would last longer and perhaps, be more comfortable. This became paramount after my last trip. I had a new pair of shoes that I had bought for $40. They seemed OK. They felt a little tight, but they were leather, so they would likely break-in a little as had past shoes, or so I thought. They were miserable. They were a slightly new style for me, but still from the same maker that I had gotten my shoes from for the last several years. These were almost unbearable. At night, I was stuffing all my socks into the toes of the shoes trying to get them to stretch out some more. The results were marginal at best.
The shoes that I had were also advertised as being "airport friendly." Turns out they were not! So for 4 days, I had uncomfortable shoes that I had to take off every single time I went through security. I couldn't imagine spending a full year in these damn things. Also, since I had now worn them outside, I couldn't take them back either.
So, I went on a shoe-mission. I was considering trying to find a pair that would be comfortable, airport friendly, long lasting, and perhaps even resole-able. Not all shoes are resole-able, in case you were wondering. I ended up going to with a pair that had a really nice classic style, one that I wouldn't be tired of in several years, had a poly-urethane sole, were very comfortable and were advertised as airport friendly. The sales-dude was quite helpful, and also mentioned that he sells shoes to lots of pilots. He said they were guaranteed for 3 years. He also spoke of a 30-day return policy. He said "You don't have to only wear them inside or anything like that. Don't hold back. Do what you normally do for 30 days. If you don't like them, bring them back and we'll trade you for something else or give you a full refund." I really couldn't ask for more than that.
So, for the first time, I spent $200 on a pair of shoes. They indeed are airport friendly, they are quite comfy and supportive, too. Now, we'll see if they hold up for at least 3 years.
Most people wouldn't think shoes are important to an airline pilot. Most pilots have just one pair of "flying shoes." Perhaps some have more than one pair, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that most have just one pair. These shoes are likely on the feet of regional pilots at least 15-20 days per month. And, that means all day for those days as well.
Airports aren't usually small places. Getting through security and out to a gate, doing the aircraft walk-around, then swapping planes and walking back across the airport a few times a day, standing at the gate waiting for a late inbound flight, then walking all the way out of the airport, walking out to the shuttle area for your ride to the hotel, etc, etc. When you do this day in and day out, all year long, it really adds up. Especially if you're putting all this on a single pair of shoes whether it's hot, cold, wet, snowy, or whatever.
I used to wear cheap pilot shoes. After all, that's all I could afford. I got about a year out of each pair. I found that the soles became thinner and thinner, and then eventually began to split. I usually noticed the splitting part on an early morning walk-around on a wet ramp area. It really blows having a cold/wet foot for a 12 hr duty day.
Then, there is the important qualification of being "airport friendly." When pilots are in uniform, they are not required by TSA to remove their shoes when going through a security check point. The caveat to this is that the shoes must not have a steel shank in the sole which would set off the metal detector.
So, this year, I started considering some more expensive shoes rather than another $40 pair. Why? Well, it certainly wasn't because I would feel like a "better person" having spent more money on myself. I was looking for a pair of shoes that would last longer and perhaps, be more comfortable. This became paramount after my last trip. I had a new pair of shoes that I had bought for $40. They seemed OK. They felt a little tight, but they were leather, so they would likely break-in a little as had past shoes, or so I thought. They were miserable. They were a slightly new style for me, but still from the same maker that I had gotten my shoes from for the last several years. These were almost unbearable. At night, I was stuffing all my socks into the toes of the shoes trying to get them to stretch out some more. The results were marginal at best.
The shoes that I had were also advertised as being "airport friendly." Turns out they were not! So for 4 days, I had uncomfortable shoes that I had to take off every single time I went through security. I couldn't imagine spending a full year in these damn things. Also, since I had now worn them outside, I couldn't take them back either.
So, I went on a shoe-mission. I was considering trying to find a pair that would be comfortable, airport friendly, long lasting, and perhaps even resole-able. Not all shoes are resole-able, in case you were wondering. I ended up going to with a pair that had a really nice classic style, one that I wouldn't be tired of in several years, had a poly-urethane sole, were very comfortable and were advertised as airport friendly. The sales-dude was quite helpful, and also mentioned that he sells shoes to lots of pilots. He said they were guaranteed for 3 years. He also spoke of a 30-day return policy. He said "You don't have to only wear them inside or anything like that. Don't hold back. Do what you normally do for 30 days. If you don't like them, bring them back and we'll trade you for something else or give you a full refund." I really couldn't ask for more than that.
So, for the first time, I spent $200 on a pair of shoes. They indeed are airport friendly, they are quite comfy and supportive, too. Now, we'll see if they hold up for at least 3 years.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
So long, Mesa! :-(
Well, I'll go out on a limb here and say it. I don't think Mesa Airlines (Mesa Air Group, officially) will be around too much longer. In all honesty, I hope to be wrong on this one. Even though their management is one of the worst in the business, they are a very good group of pilots. However, they have lost flying they were doing for United, and now Delta is taking them to court for a SECOND TIME trying to get out of their contract. This seems to be sealing the fate of Mesa even if its not immediate.
As I sit back, trying to stay isolated from it all, I see all the other regional carriers biting and scratching at the fence like a pack of wolves, eyeing the United flying that Mesa no longer has, it occurs to me that this is exactly what the mainline carriers want. Everyone talks of how Delta is in a tough position with too many regional carriers. I call bullshit. Delta and Northwest knew this would be the case and it's just what Dick Anderson and Doug Stealin wanted. With too many regionals to contract flying out to, this means the regionals are once again, feverishly pitted against one another for survival. This means the mainline companies can demand more for less from the regionals. This is what has gotten us to where we are today. Pilots with $100k worth of training being paid $20k/year to work 15hrs per day, be paid for 8, and get about 7 hrs of sleep. All the while they live under constant threat of company discipline and/or FAA enforcement.
In the past, this has been called "Whipsawing." This is what big corporations do. They have contractors which they farm work out to, so they pit them against each other and let them fight to the death over what is being offered. Makes perfect business sense. Doesn't make any other kind of sense, really, but these corporations have no understanding outside of "the bottom line." None. None whatsoever.
As a flying passenger, it might be worth taking a minute to understand that the airline you booked your ticket on can operate routes cheaper when they farm the flying out to smaller regional carriers who fly aircraft painted to look just like the mainline carrier you booked your flight with. The aircraft are smaller, cheaper, burn less fuel. They require fewer flight attendants, and the pilots are paid less. A lot less. For the regional carrier you are on, just take a moment to think about what cost cutting measures may have occurred in order for that carrier to "win" the route you are flying from other regional carriers. The pilots might have taken pay cuts. The flight attendants might have given up some 401k matching. The ground crews kicking your bags around the tarmac might have been dropped from $8.50/hr back to $8.00/hr, a gain that took them 2 years to get in the first place. Perhaps also, the maintenance staff was reduced by 10% to help cut costs. What might that mean? Might mean the aircraft you are on has more systems on it that are being deferred, rather than actually fixed. Keep in mind, this is perfectly legal. However, depending on what is deferred, this might increase pilot workload. Also, keep in mind, the decision to make these reductions and pay cuts come from a group of people who take no such pay cuts themselves. They just sit back on their thrones, complain about the price of oil, and force others to make consolations in order to keep their paychecks coming in, unharmed and ever larger. And, let's not forget about the tens of MILLIONS of dollars in bonuses and stock awards that they receive on top of those multi-million base salaries.
Anyone up for bringing back public flogging?
One exception that is worth noting here: Southwest. The one carrier in all of the US that seems to get it. Southwest's CEO, Gary Kelly, actually took a cut from his base pay for 2009. Of course, I'm sure he's still not sweating a rent check this month, but this is a different world that the other airline CEOs live in. Am I the only one who sees that Southwest flight crews are some of the best paid in the industry? What about the fact that Southwest routinely ranks at or near the top of endless customer satisfaction ratings?
“If the employees come first, then they’re happy. A motivated employee treats the customer well. The customer is happy so they keep coming back, which pleases the shareholders. It's not one of the enduring Green Mysteries of all time, it is just the way it works.” -Herb Kelleher, Former CEO, Southwest Airlines
Ironic... don't cha think?
As I sit back, trying to stay isolated from it all, I see all the other regional carriers biting and scratching at the fence like a pack of wolves, eyeing the United flying that Mesa no longer has, it occurs to me that this is exactly what the mainline carriers want. Everyone talks of how Delta is in a tough position with too many regional carriers. I call bullshit. Delta and Northwest knew this would be the case and it's just what Dick Anderson and Doug Stealin wanted. With too many regionals to contract flying out to, this means the regionals are once again, feverishly pitted against one another for survival. This means the mainline companies can demand more for less from the regionals. This is what has gotten us to where we are today. Pilots with $100k worth of training being paid $20k/year to work 15hrs per day, be paid for 8, and get about 7 hrs of sleep. All the while they live under constant threat of company discipline and/or FAA enforcement.
In the past, this has been called "Whipsawing." This is what big corporations do. They have contractors which they farm work out to, so they pit them against each other and let them fight to the death over what is being offered. Makes perfect business sense. Doesn't make any other kind of sense, really, but these corporations have no understanding outside of "the bottom line." None. None whatsoever.
As a flying passenger, it might be worth taking a minute to understand that the airline you booked your ticket on can operate routes cheaper when they farm the flying out to smaller regional carriers who fly aircraft painted to look just like the mainline carrier you booked your flight with. The aircraft are smaller, cheaper, burn less fuel. They require fewer flight attendants, and the pilots are paid less. A lot less. For the regional carrier you are on, just take a moment to think about what cost cutting measures may have occurred in order for that carrier to "win" the route you are flying from other regional carriers. The pilots might have taken pay cuts. The flight attendants might have given up some 401k matching. The ground crews kicking your bags around the tarmac might have been dropped from $8.50/hr back to $8.00/hr, a gain that took them 2 years to get in the first place. Perhaps also, the maintenance staff was reduced by 10% to help cut costs. What might that mean? Might mean the aircraft you are on has more systems on it that are being deferred, rather than actually fixed. Keep in mind, this is perfectly legal. However, depending on what is deferred, this might increase pilot workload. Also, keep in mind, the decision to make these reductions and pay cuts come from a group of people who take no such pay cuts themselves. They just sit back on their thrones, complain about the price of oil, and force others to make consolations in order to keep their paychecks coming in, unharmed and ever larger. And, let's not forget about the tens of MILLIONS of dollars in bonuses and stock awards that they receive on top of those multi-million base salaries.
Anyone up for bringing back public flogging?
One exception that is worth noting here: Southwest. The one carrier in all of the US that seems to get it. Southwest's CEO, Gary Kelly, actually took a cut from his base pay for 2009. Of course, I'm sure he's still not sweating a rent check this month, but this is a different world that the other airline CEOs live in. Am I the only one who sees that Southwest flight crews are some of the best paid in the industry? What about the fact that Southwest routinely ranks at or near the top of endless customer satisfaction ratings?
“If the employees come first, then they’re happy. A motivated employee treats the customer well. The customer is happy so they keep coming back, which pleases the shareholders. It's not one of the enduring Green Mysteries of all time, it is just the way it works.” -Herb Kelleher, Former CEO, Southwest Airlines
Ironic... don't cha think?
Sunday, November 15, 2009
How to boost profits
United Airlines Exploring Viability Of Stacking Them Like Cordwood
Some jokes are based on far more fact than some realize...
Some jokes are based on far more fact than some realize...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)