To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.funOpen lugnet.off-topic.fun in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Fun / 1095
1094  |  1096
Subject: 
Re: Carryon vs. checked (Re: WTB: 6557 (really, really badly) and 6861
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.fun
Date: 
Mon, 8 Mar 1999 04:16:43 GMT
Viewed: 
457 times
  
Larry Pieniazek writes:
Mike Stanley wrote:

Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote:
Yes, but dirt, wet, straps torn off, scratches, or rips in the material
are all "normal wear and tear", so, **essentially**, no.

I would think that if you forced an airline employee to sign a receipt
for your luggage stating that it had none of those things that if you
get it back with damage you can demonstrate that it wasn't nomral wear
and tear YOU caused.

I've tried. They won't. You can waste lots of time trying, though. Also,
it doesn't matter the cause, the point is that they claim that rips THEY
cause are part of the luggage "protecting its contents" process and
therefore normal. <snip>

However, let me point out that all this seething discontent usually
roils beneath the surface.
<snipped Mr. Nice Guy>

<Customer relations anecdote>

Having once worked as a bank teller I try to do the same thing because I
really appreciated it when folks that had problems would come in and calmly
state their case, and then patiently wait while any applicable fixes were
made. This is a difficult thing to be sure, cuz there aren't many things that
people are more concerned about than their money.

When customers did not act civilly, all I wanted was for them to leave. Once a
customer personally insulted me, over something I had no authority to waive
myself, so I locked my cash drawer and did nothing further for them. I called
my supervisor and completely walked away from the counter. No reprimand
appeared on my record. Not acting civilly at a counter always hurts you
directly.

</customer relations anecdote>


At my present job, my boss travels a lot, and his wife works for United so
they fly really cheaply. He says the airlines are essentially a big conveyor
belt of people, as well as luggage. They're the only realistic, long-distance
game in town, and they know it.

But in the airlines defense, to supply such TLC for luggage requires more
personnel. Would you want even more union people working at an already
expensive service? I believe a term that can be applied to air travel is
"necessary evil". In order to avoid tears, maybe we should all wrap our
suitcases in that weird plastic fibrous stuff that FedEx uses for envelopes.

-Tom McD.



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Carryon vs. checked (Re: WTB: 6557 (really, really badly) and 6861
 
(...) No, it requires luggage handling equipment that does not mangle luggage. Most rips occur because the equipment is not properly designed, or was not properly maintained. Since this is typically a shared resource, owned by the airport itself, (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Carryon vs. checked (Re: WTB: 6557 (really, really badly) and 6861
 
(...) I've tried. They won't. You can waste lots of time trying, though. Also, it doesn't matter the cause, the point is that they claim that rips THEY cause are part of the luggage "protecting its contents" process and therefore normal. Therefore I (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

90 Messages in This Thread:







































Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR