Airline Beats Up Doctor who wont give up seat

3912 views
68 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November, 2009
  • 38 posts
Airline Beats Up Doctor who wont give up seat
Posted by XOTOWER on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 11:39 AM

In spite of the latest Chicago horror story about the ordeal of traveling by air....the general public is still mainly unaware of Amtrak. A radio host voluteered that he will now drive any trip of 6 hours or less to avoid the airport.  Not me. I am in the lounge car reading and sipping overpriced wine.

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 12,704 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 12:56 PM

Oscar Munoz and his minions blew it.  Forcing PAYING PASSENGERS off of a flight so the company employees can deadhead to the flights destination is wrong on too many levels to count.  The flight was not overbooked, it was fully sold and only had a seat shortage when United, through the incompetence of it's crew management department felt they needed to deadhead a crew.

Your ERROR does not create a EMERGENCY for ME.  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  A former boss of my LOVED getting bumped, and drove a hard bargin for it, most of the time round trip 1st class passage to any and all destinations that the carrier had.  He valued 'free' vacations more than getting home at the 'appointed' time.  Each of us have our own motivations.

         

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    July, 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 1:05 PM

BaltACD

Oscar Munoz and his minions blew it.  Forcing PAYING PASSENGERS off of a flight so the company employees can deadhead to the flights destination is wrong on too many levels to count.  The flight was not overbooked, it was fully sold and only had a seat shortage when United, through the incompetence of it's crew management department felt they needed to deadhead a crew.

Your ERROR does not create a EMERGENCY for ME.  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  A former boss of my LOVED getting bumped, and drove a hard bargin for it, most of the time round trip 1st class passage to any and all destinations that the carrier had.  He valued 'free' vacations more than getting home at the 'appointed' time.  Each of us have our own motivations.

 

 

Given the doctor was Chinese, this is now a diplomatic and PR mess.

Ordinary Chinese (friends) are angry.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    December, 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 8,321 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 1:32 PM

Being in the business it would have been cheaper for Untitdy to run an extra section to Louisville (SDF) than what this bad publicity is going to cost.  As well why didn't gate agents just keep uping the ante for denied boarding compensation until they got volunteers ?. 

Every employee involved is going to be called on the carpet.  Gate agent, Gate agent's supervisor. concourse manager, station manager. flight attendants. their supervisors, pilots, their supervisors, PR just to name a few.  + possibily the contract security firm, and now hear some asian countries are complaining.

Wonder what the US DOT will want to know ?   The sword will reach as high as the top management can keep it from reaching . 

All 4 removed from airplane will get a nice compensation especially the doctor who was assulted.  Wonder if United will try to ban him from their airline ?  The lawyers are going to get rich.

EDIT:  This appears to be a last minute schedule for the  D/H  flight crew since 4 passengers had to be taken off.  Whenever involved with one of these it was the responsibility of crew schedule to notify gate agent of an X number of must rides that had to be left vacant.  So crew schedule may also be on the carpet.  Unknown how United handles the notification.

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 2,135 posts
Posted by PNWRMNM on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 2:50 PM

blue streak 1
 

Every employee involved is going to be called on the carpet.  Gate agent, Gate agent's supervisor. concourse manager, station manager. flight attendants. their supervisors, pilots, their supervisors, PR just to name a few.  + possibily the contract security firm, and now hear some asian countries are complaining.

Wonder what the US DOT will want to know ?   The sword will reach as high as the top management can keep it from reaching . 

I agree entirely with Balt, but not with Streak above. According to the President, the employees were simply following proceedure. If that is so, and I believe it is, then the person really responsable is the middle management bureaucrat who wrote the proceedure, and whoever approved it. Neither will be found and if they are, so what. The working folks have the "I was following orders/proceedures defense", and it will stick if United is stupid enough to go after them after congratulating them for following proceedures.

Top management is responsible for the militaristic mindset of the gate agents and cabin/flight crews who failed to offer enough to buy passengers off the plane. My only question is why they did not offer enough to get the four seats? Proceedure or mindset?? That is where things went wrong.

Involuntary removal has probably happened dozens of times before. This time the victim did not go quietly (good for him), and there were lots of cell phone videos, and extra bonus there was blood involved.

Solution is an abject apology from Munuoz and to change the policy to give gate agents unlimited authority to buy back seats and to prohibit forceable removal.

Not rocket science, just common sense. Like John Prine said "It don't make no sense that common sense don't make no sense no more."

Mac

  • Member since
    August, 2004
  • From: NW indiana
  • 1,552 posts
Posted by n012944 on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 3:04 PM

BaltACD
  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  
 

No it is not.  While you don't have to volunteer your seat, the moment you are selected for to be denied boarding involuntarily, you are at the mercy of the law.  Which was the case for the United passenger.  It is all laid out in the contract of carriage, the fine print you get when buying the ticket.  While the process of removing the passenger went horribly wrong, the passenger bears some responsiblity when he refused both the flight crew and police's demands to leave the aircraft.

 

That being said, I don't understand why they needed four seats.  Unless the cockpit jumpseat was inop, one of the pilots of the deadhead crew should have been up there.  My guess was the pilots were acting like primadonnas and refused to fly in the jumpseat.  I encountered way too many pilots like that when I worked for an airline.

 

What airlines are required to give you when you have been IDB.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 12,704 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 4:22 PM

n012944
BaltACD
  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  

That being said, I don't understand why they needed four seats.  Unless the cockpit jumpseat was inop, one of the pilots of the deadhead crew should have been up there.  My guess was the pilots were acting like primadonnas and refused to fly in the jumpseat.  I encountered way too many pilots like that when I worked for an airline.

What airlines are required to give you when you have been IDB.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

The problem is - the passenger WAS NOT denied boarding.  He was thrown off AFTER he had occupied his assigned seat.  Laws are written in words, words have meaning.  He was removed from a flight he had lawfully boarded. 

If the United crew management is so incompetent that the permitted the flight to board WITHOUT having confirmed takers for 'denied boarding' then all the guilt falls to United's incompetence.

         

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    August, 2004
  • From: NW indiana
  • 1,552 posts
Posted by n012944 on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 4:38 PM

BaltACD

 

 
n012944
BaltACD
  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  

That being said, I don't understand why they needed four seats.  Unless the cockpit jumpseat was inop, one of the pilots of the deadhead crew should have been up there.  My guess was the pilots were acting like primadonnas and refused to fly in the jumpseat.  I encountered way too many pilots like that when I worked for an airline.

What airlines are required to give you when you have been IDB.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

 

The problem is - the passenger WAS NOT denied boarding.  He was thrown off AFTER he had occupied his assigned seat.  Laws are written in words, words have meaning.  He was removed from a flight he had lawfully boarded. 

 

Irrelevent.  IDBs come in many forms.  While oversales is one reason, so are weight and balance and overweight situations.  Those do not come up until after boarding, and fall under the same rules as I posted above, as long as the plane is over 60 seats.  Under 60 seats, you get less compensation.

 

 

  • Member since
    November, 2005
  • 3,970 posts
Posted by wanswheel on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 4:43 PM

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 12,704 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 5:46 PM

n012944
BaltACD
n012944
BaltACD
  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  

That being said, I don't understand why they needed four seats.  Unless the cockpit jumpseat was inop, one of the pilots of the deadhead crew should have been up there.  My guess was the pilots were acting like primadonnas and refused to fly in the jumpseat.  I encountered way too many pilots like that when I worked for an airline.

What airlines are required to give you when you have been IDB.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

The problem is - the passenger WAS NOT denied boarding.  He was thrown off AFTER he had occupied his assigned seat.  Laws are written in words, words have meaning.  He was removed from a flight he had lawfully boarded.

Irrelevent.

$255M of irrelevant in todays stock market losses.  Remember - Perception is reality.  United has been percieved to be in the wrong.

         

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    August, 2004
  • From: NW indiana
  • 1,552 posts
Posted by n012944 on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 5:50 PM

BaltACD

 

 
n012944
BaltACD
n012944
BaltACD
  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  

That being said, I don't understand why they needed four seats.  Unless the cockpit jumpseat was inop, one of the pilots of the deadhead crew should have been up there.  My guess was the pilots were acting like primadonnas and refused to fly in the jumpseat.  I encountered way too many pilots like that when I worked for an airline.

What airlines are required to give you when you have been IDB.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

The problem is - the passenger WAS NOT denied boarding.  He was thrown off AFTER he had occupied his assigned seat.  Laws are written in words, words have meaning.  He was removed from a flight he had lawfully boarded.

Irrelevent.

 

$255M of irrelevant in todays stock market losses.  Remember - Perception is reality.  United has been percieved to be in the wrong.

 

And in the next couple of weeks, bargin hunters will drive the stock back up.

 

However, stock price has nothing to do with your original statement, that the price of you giving up your seat is "your decision."

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 12,704 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 8:10 PM

n012944
BaltACD
n012944
BaltACD
n012944
BaltACD
  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  

That being said, I don't understand why they needed four seats.  Unless the cockpit jumpseat was inop, one of the pilots of the deadhead crew should have been up there.  My guess was the pilots were acting like primadonnas and refused to fly in the jumpseat.  I encountered way too many pilots like that when I worked for an airline.

What airlines are required to give you when you have been IDB.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

The problem is - the passenger WAS NOT denied boarding.  He was thrown off AFTER he had occupied his assigned seat.  Laws are written in words, words have meaning.  He was removed from a flight he had lawfully boarded.

Irrelevent.

$255M of irrelevant in todays stock market losses.  Remember - Perception is reality.  United has been percieved to be in the wrong.

And in the next couple of weeks, bargin hunters will drive the stock back up.

However, stock price has nothing to do with your original statement, that the price of you giving up your seat is "your decision."

With me they would be beating up a WASP! not a Chinese.

         

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    July, 2004
  • 2,219 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 8:13 PM

BaltACD
 
n012944
BaltACD
  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  

That being said, I don't understand why they needed four seats.  Unless the cockpit jumpseat was inop, one of the pilots of the deadhead crew should have been up there.  My guess was the pilots were acting like primadonnas and refused to fly in the jumpseat.  I encountered way too many pilots like that when I worked for an airline.

What airlines are required to give you when you have been IDB.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

 

The problem is - the passenger WAS NOT denied boarding.  He was thrown off AFTER he had occupied his assigned seat.  Laws are written in words, words have meaning.  He was removed from a flight he had lawfully boarded. 

If the United crew management is so incompetent that the permitted the flight to board WITHOUT having confirmed takers for 'denied boarding' then all the guilt falls to United's incompetence.

 

BaltACD:

All-caps in Internet ettiquette is considered shouting at someone.  Your writing has always been very clear to me and I get what you are saying in normal words.

I could study the FARs on this, but my understanding is that this passenger was at the very least guilty of "interfering with a flight crew."  There are all kinds of reasons why a crew may ask you to disembark their airplane -- maybe they are over their takeoff weight, in this case, they had to position another crew, maybe because the original crew at their destination was "dead on hours."

It might be very bad PR for United Airlines and their contracted regional airline, a cop may get disciplined, the government in China may fume, "You complain about human rights but look what kind of Fascists you are in the U.S. to one of our people."  But as far as I can tell, as an airline passenger I don't have any kind of legal right to occupy a seat, even after boarding.  Unless someone cites legal authority on this, I don't think it works that way.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 12,704 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 8:17 PM

Paul Milenkovic
BaltACD
n012944
BaltACD
  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  

That being said, I don't understand why they needed four seats.  Unless the cockpit jumpseat was inop, one of the pilots of the deadhead crew should have been up there.  My guess was the pilots were acting like primadonnas and refused to fly in the jumpseat.  I encountered way too many pilots like that when I worked for an airline.

What airlines are required to give you when you have been IDB.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

The problem is - the passenger WAS NOT denied boarding.  He was thrown off AFTER he had occupied his assigned seat.  Laws are written in words, words have meaning.  He was removed from a flight he had lawfully boarded. 

If the United crew management is so incompetent that the permitted the flight to board WITHOUT having confirmed takers for 'denied boarding' then all the guilt falls to United's incompetence.

BaltACD:

All-caps in Internet ettiquette is considered shouting at someone.  Your writing has always been very clear to me and I get what you are saying in normal words.

I could study the FARs on this, but my understanding is that this passenger was at the very least guilty of "interfering with a flight crew."  There are all kinds of reasons why a crew may ask you to disembark their airplane -- maybe they are over their takeoff weight, in this case, they had to position another crew, maybe because the original crew at their destination was "dead on hours."

It might be very bad PR for United Airlines and their contracted regional airline, a cop may get disciplined, the government in China may fume, "You complain about human rights but look what kind of Fascists you are in the U.S. to one of our people."  But as far as I can tell, as an airline passenger I don't have any kind of legal right to occupy a seat, even after boarding.  Unless someone cites legal authority on this, I don't think it works that way.

Sometimes one needs to SHOUT!

Munoz was #2 in my former employer's chain of command and decided to jump ship for United.  His PR performance in the recent United problems shows why he had to leave CSX, and his board may very well ask for him to leave United.

         

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    July, 2004
  • 2,219 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 9:17 PM

BaltACD
 

Sometimes one needs to SHOUT!

 

Yes, I agree.  Sometimes.  Sometimes.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
  • Member since
    March, 2016
  • 1,119 posts
Posted by CandOforprogress2 on Wednesday, April 12, 2017 5:44 PM

Thank You!

  • Member since
    March, 2016
  • 1,119 posts
Posted by CandOforprogress2 on Wednesday, April 12, 2017 5:49 PM

Seen passengers get roughed up at Greyhound Terminals all the time. Seen paying passengers left standing at the gate and then thrown out into a cold snowstorm when the bus is full. As for myself on Amtrak was phisically escorted and put out of Union Station at closing time even though I had a ticket because the destination was within commuter distance (the ticket was 15.00 but far enough not to be able to walk there.

  • Member since
    September, 2010
  • From: East Coast
  • 828 posts
Posted by D.Carleton on Thursday, April 13, 2017 7:48 PM

The real issue of course (for this board) is, why was this doctor or anyone else on a plane in Chicago for Louisville? The distance is 300 miles and as a civilized society there should be fast and frequent rail service between these points, one of which doesn't have any passenger rail service whatsoever. The moral is simple: a lack of basic rail service results in gross uncivil behavior.

Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak

  • Member since
    July, 2004
  • 2,219 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Thursday, April 13, 2017 8:58 PM

D.Carleton

The real issue of course (for this board) is, why was this doctor or anyone else on a plane in Chicago for Louisville? The distance is 300 miles and as a civilized society there should be fast and frequent rail service between these points, one of which doesn't have any passenger rail service whatsoever. The moral is simple: a lack of basic rail service results in gross uncivil behavior.

 

C'mon, this "civilized society" argument is overused.

The flight was a Regional Jet -- barely as many seats as a single railroad coach.  The reason there was an argument over the seat is that the frequency of those Regional Jet flights isn't all that high.

Seriously, is Chicago-Louisville on anyone's list of accelerated-speed corridors let alone HSR?  Other city pairs are much higher in priority and Chicago-Louisville will continue to be served by a Regional Jet for a long time.  Or a motorcoach bus.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
  • Member since
    September, 2010
  • From: East Coast
  • 828 posts
Posted by D.Carleton on Friday, April 14, 2017 12:09 AM

Paul Milenkovic

The flight was a Regional Jet -- barely as many seats as a single railroad coach.  The reason there was an argument over the seat is that the frequency of those Regional Jet flights isn't all that high.

If the frequency of this regional flight isn't all that high then why were they deadheading a crew there in the first place?

But seriously folks, I may have been just a tad facetious. However, the underlying point still stands: we have way too many short haul flights in this country and no realistic way of resolving it.

Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak

  • Member since
    December, 2012
  • 196 posts
Posted by A McIntosh on Friday, April 14, 2017 8:13 AM

D.Carleton

 

 
Paul Milenkovic

The flight was a Regional Jet -- barely as many seats as a single railroad coach.  The reason there was an argument over the seat is that the frequency of those Regional Jet flights isn't all that high.

 

 

If the frequency of this regional flight isn't all that high then why were they deadheading a crew there in the first place?

 

But seriously folks, I may have been just a tad facetious. However, the underlying point still stands: we have way too many short haul flights in this country and no realistic way of resolving it.

 

At the risk of veering off topic, one of the things being eliminated from the proposed Trump budget is the essential air service subsidy, as well as privatizing air traffic control. What affect, if any, would this have on regional flights such as this, as well as air service to smaller cities?

  • Member since
    February, 2016
  • 570 posts
Posted by JPS1 on Friday, April 14, 2017 9:08 AM

[quote user="A McIntosh"] 

At the risk of veering off topic, one of the things being eliminated from the proposed Trump budget is the essential air service subsidy, as well as privatizing air traffic control. What affect, if any, would this have on regional flights such as this, as well as air service to smaller cities? /quote]

This was not an Essential Air Service Program flight.  As of October 2016, according to the U.S. DOT, only two cities in Kentucky, Owensboro and Paducah, have Essential Air Service Program flights.

If the Trump Administration is successful in eliminating the Essential Air Service Program, which I support, most of the qualifying communities would lose their commercial airline service.  However, many of them are within reasonable driving distance of a major airport.  For example, Owensboro is 107 miles from Louisville.  Or Johnstown, PA is 84 miles from the Pittsburgh Greater International Airport.

Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII

  • Member since
    August, 2006
  • From: South Dakota
  • 1,543 posts
Posted by Dakguy201 on Friday, April 14, 2017 9:10 AM

A McIntosh

At the risk of veering off topic, one of the things being eliminated from the proposed Trump budget is the essential air service subsidy, as well as privatizing air traffic control. What affect, if any, would this have on regional flights such as this, as well as air service to smaller cities?

I live in a MSA of about 170,000 people.  For years, the essential air program provided about $1 million a year to Delta for 2 commuter flights a day to the Twin Cities.  A few years ago when the service came up for renewal, American offered 2 daily flights to O'Hare for the same money.  Since then, they started a trip to Dallas/Ft Worth at no cost to the Feds.  When the last program renewal rolled around, American announced they were foregoing the subsidy entirely.  

I ride those planes several times a year; they are almost always sold out.  Of course, they are smaller commuter jets with the cramped seating, etc. that is the standard these days.  It's 90 minutes of misery.

However, the rails don't leave me with a reasonable choice.  West of the Mississippi, we fly, we drive or we just don't go. 

  • Member since
    August, 2004
  • From: NW indiana
  • 1,552 posts
Posted by n012944 on Friday, April 14, 2017 9:10 AM

D.Carleton

 

 
Paul Milenkovic

The flight was a Regional Jet -- barely as many seats as a single railroad coach.  The reason there was an argument over the seat is that the frequency of those Regional Jet flights isn't all that high.

 

 

If the frequency of this regional flight isn't all that high then why were they deadheading a crew there in the first place?

 

But seriously folks, I may have been just a tad facetious. However, the underlying point still stands: we have way too many short haul flights in this country and no realistic way of resolving it.

 

 

United flys to Chicago, Denver, Houston, DC, and Newark out of Louisville.  The crew could have been for anyone of those destinations.

 

As an aside, I have encountered far more unruly passsengers while riding trains vs planes.  

  • Member since
    December, 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 8,321 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Friday, April 14, 2017 12:42 PM

Most often a D/H crew is because the trip they are covering the previous crew ran into HOS problems.  You cannot leave an airport ( take off time ) for the next one if enroute time will run you over HOS before landing. After landing has never counted.  If unanticipated long tasi time can cause crew to return because they will exceed HOS enroute.

  • Member since
    December, 2001
  • From: Altadena, CA
  • 308 posts
Posted by 081552 on Friday, April 14, 2017 1:03 PM

Would the Trains Forums moderator please move all of these postings to the "Airlines" section?

  • Member since
    July, 2006
  • From: KS
  • 746 posts
Posted by SFbrkmn on Friday, April 14, 2017 1:38 PM

After this I will, at all costs, try to avoid United in the future. United was deadheading crewmembers and needed psgrs to give up seats in exchange for a voucher on another flight. Freight rr crews routinlely deadhead on Amtrak. The BNSF general order, which covers deadheading procedures, states that deadhhead employees are entitled to seating on Amtrak trains. That is a policy in writing--outside of that it means nothing. If the train is packed to the nill, no psgr is going to be asked to give up their seating. It is not out of the norm for deadheads to be given an empty roomette in leiu of a coach seat.  Amtrak will not throw riders off the train for freight crews. Not happening, never will. 

  • Member since
    June, 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 2,717 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Saturday, April 15, 2017 12:38 AM

Folks it was actually a Republic Airlines flight and because the plane had United Express paint.........it was reported as United Airlines.    Still have to give TV's Cramer for the most witty anti-Munoz headline:  "Coal does not complain but Passengers sure do"..........I had a good chuckle with that for a while as a former CSX stockholder.

  • Member since
    July, 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Saturday, April 15, 2017 3:52 AM

CMStPnP

Folks it was actually a Republic Airlines flight and because the plane had United Express paint.........it was reported as United Airlines.    Still have to give TV's Cramer for the most witty anti-Munoz headline:  "Coal does not complain but Passengers sure do"..........I had a good chuckle with that for a while as a former CSX stockholder.

 

Agree.  What is surprising is there are some on here who seem to think what UAL- Republic did was justified.  Fotunately most people were horrified.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 7,333 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Saturday, April 15, 2017 9:23 AM

Seeing instances like this, plus business failures big and small, especially in what's supposed to be customer-centric enterprises I have to wonder just WHAT they teach in the various business schools and MBA mills around the country.

Common-sense customer relations and basic retailing sure doesn't seem to be part of the curriculum.  These people, supposedly the "best and the brightest" make mistakes the owner of a mom-and-pop corner grocery store wouldn't make.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy

Search the Community