Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums - Find your next job as a Pilot > > >
 

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-22-2013, 08:13 AM   #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
APC225's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,661
Default "Jeff Smisek needs to step down"

Jeff Smisek needs to step down as United Chairman and CEO

By Rohan Anand
This is one of the most controversial and subjective articles I've ever written, but after thorough reasoning, I've concluded that Jeff Smisek needs to abdicate his title as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of United Airlines sometime in 2014.

And the sooner he does so, the better.

Nothing personal here, but I think it's time for the UA Board of Directors to hit the "refresh" button and replace Smisek with a much more effective leader who is capable of steering the World's Largest Airline towards a consistent path to deliver on all of its promises before the damages become irreparable.

"The Fish stinks from the head" (and yes, I said this once already over a year ago)

United merged with Continental in October 2010. Jeff Smisek, who hailed from the Continental side of the equation, was nominated to lead the combined company at the time of the merger closing. It was chalked up to be one of the largest, most complex marriages in the history of the airline industry, but once consumated, the sheer size and scale of the company would deliver immense value for shareholders and consumers worldwide.

The public wasn't unfamiliar with the concept of airline mergers, particularly in the United States. Delta Air Lines had merged with Northwest Airlines in 2008, and within a two year span, the combined entity was generating healthy, consistent quarterly earnings, streamlining costs and operations, and making continuous improvements to its onboard product offering, which in turn led to high consumer satisfaction scores and pleased Wall Street analysts.

But something in the blueprint of United's own merger plan was somehow horrifically flawed, because when the two carriers migrated to a single IT platform in March 2012, all hell broke loose. The aftermath entailed a year's worth of system outages, cancelled reservations, unacceptable on-time performance rates, infuriated customers and poorly-equipped front-line employees to handle recovery efforts. United watched its corporate base plummet as its high-revenue paying customers flocked to competing airlines offering elite status matches and other incentives.

As time wore on, Wall Street grew more and more exasperated with the tight-lipped explanations from United's C-Level personnel, and it became obvious that the entire saga could be pinned on pure management folly to adequately prepare and execute the merger in a manner consistent with what they had promised to the public.

A year ago, I wrote an entry on how United needed to put 2012 in its past and focus on making a comeback in 2013. Twelve months later, that opportunity has come and gone and little has changed.

With respect to its leadership personnel, even then I had a hunch even then that Smisek wasn't cut out for this job.

Over time, that intuition has become a certainty.

United's disappointing Q3 2013 results served as the initial baseline for my reasoning, and the recent green-light to the American Airlines - US Airways merger by the US Department of Justice certainly augmented my stance even more.

However, something snap-fired on Tuesday, November 19 during United's Investor Day Conference in New York City that pushed me over the edge.

As a United elite for several years, amid all of the "changes" I've seen occur consistently at the carrier since 2010, ranging from increasingly common flight delays, dilution of its loyalty product, repeated technical outages, underwhelming fiscal performance and corporate back-pedaling, I discovered, listening to a recorded webcast of presentations delivered by Smisek and his Investor Relations team, another flagrant attribute about the way United runs its business.

It's very own Chairman and CEO simply fails to inspire his employees to strive to make the company a successful business operation.

And he probably, likely, if not most certainly, will never live up to the basic expectations required of a competent CEO to bring United Airlines to that point as long as he's running the show.

It went off like a light bulb in my head.

In light of his opening remarks during that presentation in New York, he probably has convinced shareholders, and subsequently the Board of Directors as well, that he is no longer adequate for his position.

And like that, boom. Nail in the coffin.

Here is why.

"I think you'll like the changes you see, as we aim to not fall in last place [again]."

One of the biggest things I strive for, not only as a blogger, but also as an airline/aviation business enthusiast, is to avoid thinking and speaking like an "armchair CEO" (a euphemism for someone who pretends to know everything about how businesses function without truly possessing in-depth knowledge or expertise on how to execute sound decisions in a hypothetical scenario).

However, it doesn't take years of working in the field or an Executive MBA to listen to Jeffy speak and realize he has largely failed the company as a capable leader. He continues to repeat the same, frivolous crapola while largely ignoring or barely even addressing the periphery of United's core revenue and costs challenges.

It would be almost funny if it weren't so frightening and obvious.

Here are some quips that made me cringe yesterday while listening to the presentation via webcast:

"We do the basics well from point A to point B."

"We're very focused on increasing efficiency and quality to drive significantly improved earnings."

"The only way you can differentiate yourselves is through excellent customer service."

"We have dramatically increased our customer satisfaction scores."

"We have the best network in the long-haul."

"We do the basics well?" Pray tell me. How would you feel if ANY CEO made that type of comment aloud to investors? You might as well ditch the new advertising campaign and change the slogan to "Fly the mediocre skies!"

Put simply, none of the above statements show any indication that Jeff Smisek actually cares about his job, the future direction of the company, or even worse - delivering on shareholder returns. I mean, even the most corrupt of CEO's would at least realize that the task on hand is to convince investors that United is committed to this cause and, as a result of that, would parse in jargon to drive that point home on the spot, even if they were lying through their teeth.

Well, SMI/J, at least you haven't hit rock bottom yet by getting on your hands and knees begging for forgiveness.

Then again, I'm not sure whether that's better or worse than ignoring the severity of the situation in which you've put the company. In his remarks, Smisek doesn't even come close to acknowledging that United has let down shareholders consistently quarter after quarter, and, per usual, throws out the classic, "we're committed to earning a consistent, sustainable profit," and "running a good, clean, safe reliable operation," mumbo jumbo, spewing out robotic buzzwords and mundane statements which yield absolutely nothing of importance.

It's not just frustrating, saddening and disappointing. Frankly, it's worse than that. It's just plain irresponsible.

Claiming that your company is committed to delivering "industry-leading unit revenue" does nothing to explain why United has recorded a string of flat unit revenue improvements every three months while virtually EVERY single one of its legacy and low-cost competitors have seen increases over the same periods, including a major one restructuring in bankruptcy. Same goes for yields and profit margins.

United has had no problem monetizing more and more components of the customer experience, even so far as to gouge away at its small, yet ultra lucrative elite population for perks that they've rightfully paid for through their business. Smisek can say all he wants about wanting to earn an additional $700M in ancillary revenue each year, but he certainly needs to confess that this has been a habitual tactic United has employed for many years, and the public isn't stupid about knowing airlines charge for checked bag fees.

While the business logic behind product unbundling is a rational concept, the fact that United's ancillary revenue earnings aren't padding its bottom lines is not.

Saying that "anyone can put in Wi-Fi on their planes," and that you think yours will "be the best in the business" does not account for admitting to shareholders that the Wi-Fi installation rollout on United's domestic aircraft has a). experienced YEARS of implementation delays and b). essentially put the airline in dead-last place to nearing a completion date amid all of its competitors. Not to mention, it fails to elaborate on c). WHY [Smisek] thinks United's WiFi will "be the best," as he claims. Will it be faster than other networks? Will it be offered on more international or overseas flights than UA's competitors? Will it be cheaper? Do you think your waning corporate traffic will have higher conversion rates?

Nope. Nada. Just words that contribute about as much value as a full fare Lufthansa business class ticket from Chicago to Dusseldorf adds towards your Premium Qualifying Dollar accrual to maintain elite status starting January 1, 2014.

Which is nothing, just for the record. You can read more about the devaluation of MileagePlus, United's loyalty program, on its website, effective next year.

Finally, and perhaps more infuriating than dodging hoops and fabricating stories is Smisek's habitual tendency to scrape at the bottom of the barrel to generate enthusiasm over celebrating mediocrity.

Case in point: touting "dramatic improvement" in customer satisfaction scores.

I mean, heaven forbid, I would hope so. United ranked DEAD LAST in 2012 among US carriers for system-wide complaints per 100,000 enplanements, according to calculations by the US Dept of Transportation.

A good leader is ballsy enough to admit when and where the carrier failed, and only THEN does it become more credible and acceptable to speak of improvements that have taken place when you're rising up from the bottom of the stack.

But to make it seem like United is improving in customer satisfaction rankings without any comparative basis is just disgusting. You're either out of touch with reality, or you've really sunk so low that you've lost all respect for the key facets of your business operation, your employees, and worst of all, yourself.

#FlyerFriendly? More like #LiarFriendly

Truth be told, those examples are just a handful among many, many other structural deficiencies that are looming at United.

I would have really liked to hear Smisek at least admit, even if tangentially, in his opening presentation to investors that United's revenue and cost challenges were problematic in the Q3 2013 results. It would have actually even been acceptable if he had done so and still mentioned "the dog ate the demand forecast" excuse that has been tossed around in earnings calls. United claims that its revenue forecasting system opened up lower-yielding inventory buckets further ahead in the booking curve, stimulating demand, but at lower revenue streams for the carrier.

At the very minimum, it would have been the accountable and ethical thing to at least touch on this point. We're talking about relevant discussion topics to be assessed at an Investor Conference in New York, not cool new gadets to be shown-off at a Social Media convention in New Mexico.

But, alas, Jeff Smisek did not comment on any of these crucial details.

Smisek instead made some jolly remark along the tunes of, "we've developed a set of very detailed standards that we've borrowed from the hospitality industry" or some BS like that.

What I would love to hear is how those "standards" are going to fix United's revenue woes and curb its cost control issues.

I'm curious to understand how those "standards" justify United's reasons for waging war against its elites by calling them "over-entitled," instituting minimum flying spend requirements on United metal, discouraging them from flying United partner airlines and overall diluting the value of investing in the United/Star Alliance global brand.

I'd love to know how these "standards" are going to explain why United still sucks operationally. The SHARES IT reservations platform United uses continues to be a nightmare for its employees to use. I still am baffled by how long it takes agents to process passenger records at the airport, and how it's led me to distrust United on virtually all fronts when I fly because I feel like there is no guarantee that I'm "always connected" to what is happening with my reservation at any stage in the journey.

When I show up at the gate 5 minutes prior to scheduled boarding time, and I discover they are making final calls for "all rows, all passengers," (which happens pretty much every time my flight isn't delayed or cancelled), I feel violently ill at the mere thought of what would have happened if I had experienced a 5 minute hold up at security, shown up "on-time" at my flight for boarding and had been denied at the gate for being "late" just because United wants to shove off from the gate ASAP and artificially inflate its On-Time Performance rate to overcompensate for when it screws up elsewhere.

Is that supposed to make me feel like a valued elite? Stressed out and disillusioned because flying United has turned into a giant guessing-game?

#CustomerFriendly my foot, SMI/J.

I'd also really like to know how these hospitality "standards" show how United's product is really all that special. When I flew transatlantic in EconomyPlus recently on a legacy United 767, all I could think about was how ready I was to get the hell off that plane. The catering, 1st-generation In-Flight Entertainment system and surly crews are nothing for even a Soviet-era carrier to feel proud of. I've even flown domestic and international premium on United a few times and believe you me, it's nothing to write home about.

And finally, I'd really want, most of all, to understand why and how United believes that it is a "great place to work for" and where the "system of trust" is truly manifested, other than in "in God we trust, and in trust we hate working among each other," because talk to anyone who works for United, and it's clear as crystal across the board that there is still an "us versus them" mentality pervasive when it comes to pre-merger Continental and pre-merger United employees working in unison.

Be it front line employees or corporate, its always, "their system" and "their policies" and "their people" that receive the blame when failure occurs. Word on the street is that the aforementioned system forecasting scapegoat excuse for lackluster Q3 revenue performance was traced back to a "pre-merger Continental method we tested out" that led to the fallout.

Oh, cry me a river. It's one of the saddest things I've ever seen. Again, it doesn't take an MBA to learn the mantra that if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

On that end, I've yet to hear a single United employee ever say, "it's OUR problem," which would represent a huge step towards actually taking responsibility and making a commitment to come to a resolution for the betterment of the corporation, its shareholders and its guests.

But, that goes back to my original point: the fish stinks from the head. If your CEO isn't going to make such acknowledgements in front of investors, be rest assured that the same mentality is going to trickle all the way down to your bottom-tiered workers, and everyone in between who interacts with the customer.

In closing: keep Rhapsody in Blue, and Fly the Friendly Skies, but give Jeff the boot

My biggest fear is that United under Smisek is heading in the same direction as American Airlines did under former CEO Donald Carty and Gerard Arpey's guidances in the 2000s: perpetually becoming a poorly run business, with jaded employees, waning product investments, alienated elites, sub-optimal operational performances and when the P&L numbers don't stack up to expectations, the quick-fix, unanimous solution is to yell, "cuts, cuts, more cuts!"

Herein the cliche makes its case: the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results every time. Then you trim and slim, churn and burn some more until you self-destruct completely.

American was on this path until almost two years ago to the date, when it filed for bankruptcy on November 29, 2011, replaced Gerard Arpey with Tom Horton, and started moving and shaking. Although I can't say I am a fan of AA's new logo and rebranding scheme, at least elsewhere, the company is on a stellar path on its way to exit the court relatively quickly.

As such, American's momentum is creating a big predicament for United: when a bankrupt competitor is outperforming you and plans to merge with another major competitor to become an even more powerful combined entity, as an inept CEO, your safest bet is to step out of the way when you've failed to deliver on promises over 36 months.

Thanks for all that you've done, Jeff. I'm sure you're a great guy and I would still love to grab drinks with you sometime, but not until I see a new face writing the intro letter in future issues of Hemispheres magazine.

http://upgrd.com/aerospace/jeff-smis...n-and-ceo.html

Last edited by APC225; 11-22-2013 at 08:34 AM.
APC225 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2013, 08:32 AM   #2  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
APC225's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,661
Default

United Airlines CFO Labels Certain MileagePlus Elites as "Entitled"

By Matthew Klint
Many are up in arms over recent comments about certain MileagePlus elite members made by United Airlines CFO John Rainey at the Bank of America Merrill Lynch Global Transportation Conference last Thursday. I am yawning. While not very savvy, his statements were not at all a surprise.

We had certain groups in this program that were over-entitled if you will. And now we’ve re-aligned the benefits of that program with what the customers and program participants are actually providing to the program, it’s a good change going forward.

You can listen for yourself through this audio link.

Actions speak louder than words, and post-merger United has made very clear that it places a higher value on transactional loyalty than long-term loyalty. We have seen that mindset reflected in the way complimentary upgrades are processed, with full-fare elites trumping all others. That means a silver traveling on a B-fare will clear before a 1K traveling on a Q fare. And yet transactional loyalty doesn't always win out: if that silver happens to be a government employee traveling on a YCA (specially negotiated government fare), the upgrade will also come before the 1K's Q fare, even if the 1K spent more on his ticket.

United's new policy is what it is--shortsighted when you look at loyalty the way Gary and I do, but something I will have to get used to if I ultimately stick with United Airlines.

By now, every United frequent flyer understands the mindset of the new United, so I just cannot get worked up over Rainey's statement. But his thoughts were still imprudently expressed, like saying your wife looks fat in a dress--even if everyone knows it, you just don't say it.

Frequently Flying notes that the following SHARES slide was displayed when Rainey made the statement.

That does not make me think of the ordering of complimentary elite upgrades. Instead, it brings to mind the more egregious practice of hawking upgrades to anyone willing to pay a small incremental amount before elites receive complimentary upgrades. This practice ultimately rubs me the wrong way more than awarding elite upgrades by fare class.

Think about it--the husband and wife who fly once a year to Hawaii on the airline with the cheapest ticket check-in for their United flight and see the opportunity to upgrade to first class for $199. Being a special trip, they opt to upgrade. Meanwhile, a Global Services member who has spent more than $25,000 on United tickets this year finds himself in an exit row behind the curtain. The couple enjoy the flight, but quickly forget the experience and cannot even remember what airline they flew last year when it comes time to book next year's ticket. Or worse still, they do remember it was United, but see Hawaiian Airlines is $20 cheaper and go with that carrier instead. The disgruntled Global Services member, tired of missing upgrades on routes that used to be a sure-thing, switches to American Airlines.

My example is a bit extreme and not even the best one--I think Gary's discussion of marginal buyers in the link above is an even better way to look at this--but you get my point. Transactional loyalty just does not always add up.

I want to make sure that this does not come across as an entitlement issue, like CFO Rainey claimed. We, United elites, are not entitled to upgrades, but when they become part and parcel of being a United top- and mid-tier elite for the last decade, suddenly altering the upgrade practice in an almost vindictive manner ("we're tired of you freeloaders") is bound to rub frequent flyers the wrong way and drive away business.

Time will tell whether United's experiment will work, but the initial signs suggest an increasing amount of disgruntled passengers and a total disconnect from reality displayed by top United management. That concerns me more than a snide remark from a CFO.

http://upgrd.com/matthew/united-airl...-entitled.html
APC225 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2013, 08:33 AM   #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: Gets weekends off
Posts: 1,168
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by APC225 View Post
When I show up at the gate 5 minutes prior to scheduled boarding time, and I discover they are making final calls for "all rows, all passengers," (which happens pretty much every time my flight isn't delayed or cancelled), I feel violently ill at the mere thought of what would have happened if I had experienced a 5 minute hold up at security, shown up "on-time" at my flight for boarding and had been denied at the gate for being "late" just because United wants to shove off from the gate ASAP and artificially inflate its On-Time Performance rate to overcompensate for when it screws up elsewhere.
I've never understood why we do this? I've seen passengers walk up almost 10 minutes prior to the scheduled arrival time, and the gate is closed and they are standing there incredulously. The CSR is telling them, sorry but we had to make an "on-time" departure. Now we've ****ed off a bunch of people, incurred more cost for the airline, and created a bad image for ourselves, but hey, the CSR has 10 minutes more to go on break before her next flight so she's happy....
pilot64golfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2013, 08:36 AM   #4  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
APC225's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,661
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by APC225 View Post
United Airlines CFO Labels Certain MileagePlus Elites as "Entitled"

By Matthew Klint
Many are up in arms over recent comments about certain MileagePlus elite members made by United Airlines CFO John Rainey at the Bank of America Merrill Lynch Global Transportation Conference last Thursday. I am yawning. While not very savvy, his statements were not at all a surprise.

We had certain groups in this program that were over-entitled if you will. And now we’ve re-aligned the benefits of that program with what the customers and program participants are actually providing to the program, it’s a good change going forward.

You can listen for yourself through this audio link.

Actions speak louder than words, and post-merger United has made very clear that it places a higher value on transactional loyalty than long-term loyalty. We have seen that mindset reflected in the way complimentary upgrades are processed, with full-fare elites trumping all others. That means a silver traveling on a B-fare will clear before a 1K traveling on a Q fare. And yet transactional loyalty doesn't always win out: if that silver happens to be a government employee traveling on a YCA (specially negotiated government fare), the upgrade will also come before the 1K's Q fare, even if the 1K spent more on his ticket.

United's new policy is what it is--shortsighted when you look at loyalty the way Gary and I do, but something I will have to get used to if I ultimately stick with United Airlines.

By now, every United frequent flyer understands the mindset of the new United, so I just cannot get worked up over Rainey's statement. But his thoughts were still imprudently expressed, like saying your wife looks fat in a dress--even if everyone knows it, you just don't say it.

Frequently Flying notes that the following SHARES slide was displayed when Rainey made the statement.

That does not make me think of the ordering of complimentary elite upgrades. Instead, it brings to mind the more egregious practice of hawking upgrades to anyone willing to pay a small incremental amount before elites receive complimentary upgrades. This practice ultimately rubs me the wrong way more than awarding elite upgrades by fare class.

Think about it--the husband and wife who fly once a year to Hawaii on the airline with the cheapest ticket check-in for their United flight and see the opportunity to upgrade to first class for $199. Being a special trip, they opt to upgrade. Meanwhile, a Global Services member who has spent more than $25,000 on United tickets this year finds himself in an exit row behind the curtain. The couple enjoy the flight, but quickly forget the experience and cannot even remember what airline they flew last year when it comes time to book next year's ticket. Or worse still, they do remember it was United, but see Hawaiian Airlines is $20 cheaper and go with that carrier instead. The disgruntled Global Services member, tired of missing upgrades on routes that used to be a sure-thing, switches to American Airlines.

My example is a bit extreme and not even the best one--I think Gary's discussion of marginal buyers in the link above is an even better way to look at this--but you get my point. Transactional loyalty just does not always add up.

I want to make sure that this does not come across as an entitlement issue, like CFO Rainey claimed. We, United elites, are not entitled to upgrades, but when they become part and parcel of being a United top- and mid-tier elite for the last decade, suddenly altering the upgrade practice in an almost vindictive manner ("we're tired of you freeloaders") is bound to rub frequent flyers the wrong way and drive away business.

Time will tell whether United's experiment will work, but the initial signs suggest an increasing amount of disgruntled passengers and a total disconnect from reality displayed by top United management. That concerns me more than a snide remark from a CFO.

United Airlines CFO Labels Certain MileagePlus Elites as "Entitled" - Live and Let's Fly
Company response,

Quote:
Hi Everyone, we see there’s a lot of interest in our recent presentation at Bank of America. To clarify, the message that wke’re investing in our Premier program and ensuring greater access to elite benefits at higher elite tiers is not a new one. An example of this is when our Premier tiers get access to Economy Plus seating. This change has materialized into a meaningfully better experience for our Gold members and above. In fact, in markets that have the highest proportion of Premier flyers, a higher percentage of Premier Platinum and Premier Gold members are getting access to Economy Plus (comparing February 2012 to April 2012, and comparing April 2011 to April 2012), while the percentage of Premier Silver members sitting in Economy Plus hasn’t decreased meaningfully. Some of those Premier Silver members may be choosing to purchase Economy Plus seating, but, in general, Economy Plus seating remains available at time of check-in.

While John was not referring to upgrades, we know they remain a hot topic, especially with respect to selling upgrades. As discussed in other threads, our continued goal is to simply sell our First Class seats as close to their intended retail price as possible. The Y/B/M instant upgrade fares that we offer our Premier members, for example, are only a modest discount from our retail First Class fares, and the buy-ups we offer based on these fares are simply an extension of this. In the coming year, we will be adding more transparency to the upgrade process, and will also be making important improvements to the upgrade system itself. Please be assured, whether your concern is that we reward loyalty solely or that we also offer a higher level of benefits to those loyal members who also spend more, we are listening.

Thanks as always for allowing us the clarify these points.

Shannon Kelly Director, Customer Insights United Airlines

Last edited by APC225; 11-22-2013 at 09:19 AM.
APC225 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2013, 08:42 AM   #5  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
APC225's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,661
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pilot64golfer View Post
I've never understood why we do this? I've seen passengers walk up almost 10 minutes prior to the scheduled arrival time, and the gate is closed and they are standing there incredulously. The CSR is telling them, sorry but we had to make an "on-time" departure. Now we've ****ed off a bunch of people, incurred more cost for the airline, and created a bad image for ourselves, but hey, the CSR has 10 minutes more to go on break before her next flight so she's happy....
I suspect it has something to do with the "targets" that are set up for exec bonuses. The execs may be more incentivized for making ontime than for preventing misconnects. They certainly seem to be when I'm working.

Quote:
United more than triples CEO Smisek's pay

(Crain's) — CEO Jeff Smisek saw his compensation soar to $14.7 million last year from $4.4 million in 2010 as United Continental Holdings Inc. completed its first full year as a merged airline.

Most of Mr. Smisek's compensation increase came from a restricted stock grant valued at $7.5 million that will vest over three years, according to the company's proxy statement

About $4 million of that restricted stock requires that the airline meet certain goals related to the merger, such as reaching joint labor contracts with unions and achieving revenue and cost-savings targets.

He also received $4.4 million in long-term cash incentive compensation largely based on performance of Continental Airlines prior to the merger with United. His salary was $975,000. The total compensation also includes an estimated increase in pension value during the year of $1.4 million.

In awarding Mr. Smisek's compensation, the company's compensation committee cited performance including $1.3 billion in pre-tax income and achieving approximately $400 million of the $1.2 billion in annual revenue and cost savings targeted by 2013.
APC225 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2013, 08:43 AM   #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: Gets weekends off
Posts: 1,168
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by APC225 View Post
...we are listening.

Actually, they weren't listening. It was a one way conversation. UAL guys were talking to the investors.

Listening would mean they say "You guys are all smart, you fly all the time, how would you like it to work so that it was easier, more transparent, and something we at United could logistically and technologically implement?"

Then LISTEN.
pilot64golfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2013, 11:57 AM   #7  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 847
Default

This management team is in so far over their heads it's laughable, at least Bethune had a grasp on what was important to the high yield customers- Smisek doesn't even care.
JoePatroni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2013, 07:30 AM   #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Airhoss's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Currently not bumped.
Posts: 4,498
Default

Quote:
Bethune had a grasp on what was important to the high yield customers- Smisek doesn't even care.
There in lies the problem. Smisek really doesn't care. I've never seen a more aloof, self centered person in a position like his. It's actually amazingly bad..
Airhoss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2013, 10:17 AM   #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Baron50's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: Cub Cap
Posts: 172
Default

I am no fan of Simsek and maybe he should go for a variety of reasons, but these bloggers are so much hot air. They proclaim not to be arm chair CEO's, but in fact that is what they are bloviating about. For them they are all about themselves, cheap fares, and shareholder returns. They would pay employees Wal-Mart wages if their fares would be one dime cheaper. Safety is of no concern to them, it is about their next upgrade.

They want to get to the gate 5 minutes before departure and expect royal treatment. They are too obtuse to recognize that if everyone did that, no one would leave on time. They don't care about connections of others, much less about the people waiting for the gate, ATC constraints, slot times, etc.

The solution would be to outlaw all "loyalty programs," let the airlines compete simply on performance and transparent fares. While, it is unlikely for this to happen, no one should feel for these sorry, entitled, elites.
Baron50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2013, 10:34 AM   #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,023
Default Hmmm

Your post misses the mark on several points regarding the majority of 'elites' but even if it didn't you should be smart enough to keep your mouth shut as an employee. Even here on APC there are more elites of the various airlines than you probably realize.
Daniel Larusso is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
 

 
Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FCC License CitationJason Regional 60 10-10-2015 06:44 AM
Interesting reading........ ewrbasedpilot United 7 10-09-2010 10:40 AM
Comair Interview gintasr Regional 586 07-02-2008 12:31 PM
FCC radio telephone permit brownie Regional 12 02-11-2008 07:36 PM
FCC Radio License DON*T HATE ERAU Regional 26 05-29-2007 08:43 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:41 PM.


vBulletin® v3.9.3.5, Copyright ©2000-2019, MH Sub I, LLC dba vBulletin
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright 2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1