Search results

It's pretty simple really: 1- There are lots of jobs where your location can't be guaranteed and you can be moved around. Those jobs aren't for everyone - don't like it - pick a different career. 2- There's plenty of folks (like the 80% of the workforce who aren't unionized plus some who are)...

Agreed - don't like it, can't get your way via the proper negotiation channels - then strike in the form of not processing boring administration paperwork for the minister - the second you take action like this - you can F off and go and find a real job in the private sector with zero empathy...

Well then those reviews are, how do you say.... A little "rose tinted". Paging Tony Hancock to the white courtesy phone..

Hardly a "loophole". Think of it like QFF...... To earn more SCs - say... to get 3600 for P1.... you need to fly a lot, in premium cabins. Flying only in discount Y, even a lot - is much, much harder to earn the requisite number of SCs. The AA system works exactly the same - it's just that...

You might be onto something there Trippin.....

The price of a super short haul has nothing to do with the price of a short-mid haul. Any resemblance is purely coincidence. Remember pricing is dynamic. If the airline can fetch more on a segment they will. Minimum points guarantees were designed so that folks that were flying small...

I'm just saying that if you've never flown on a Chinese airline - then you're not comparing apples with apples. Or lavatories that are usable vs ones you'd rather hold it till you land.....

I'm not quite sure how it goes against their new philosophy?? I'm not following your argument. I certainly think it's a stupid decision - but that's more due to making the AAdvantage program and AA less attractive to customers.

No - it's based on competitive pricing.

That's because QF NEVER said that they were moving to a revenue-based model. Only inaccurate commentary by many on AFF and other places stated that. QF did however use similar rhetoric to justify Simpler and Fairer saying that those who spent more should get more than those who bought cheaper...

I'll take steak and kidney pie as a British delicacy ðŸ

Marketing and Loyally are different departments. - yep - that's the problem!

As per the "El Segundo" method.... Or the 0+postcode method.

Good thinking and theory..... except that you'll be flying on China Southern.... Have you ever flown on a Chinese airline???

The trick is that you leave it selected as United States, you don't select Australia.

Redirect - forget cultural sensitivities.... Please explain to me why any single food item (or even food group) should be a requirement on an airline or route?? Seriously? Flip the argument right around. I like Nutella - so why should I not be able to demand that every airline serve it as an...

Yes - and for the OP it was a loss - I accept that as I prefer the piece system. However - whilst QF did revert back to the weight system with the alliance - they were previously on the weight system for non-US travel, and even without the alliance may very well have shifted back to it to...

Agreed - which is why the OP needs to take out the superfluous hyperbole - and list only the "benefits" which have been reduced. Things like lounge access, points/SC earning, CD - these are all things that are directly and objectively assessable. There have indeed been a number of benefit...

Yes - so the weight system. Which is what it was before, before. Like I said - they chopped and changed several times. But traditionally - non-US-International was weight-based.

On European routes? Are you sure? The "piece" system was only used for domestic and for routes to and from The Americas.