Ugh.
I hate O’Hare Airport.
And I’m not terribly fond of United Airlines at the moment, either.
Regular readers may recall my night as Viktor Navorski a few months back, when my flight from South Bend to Chicago was delayed for ages on the O’Hare runway, causing me to miss my connecting flight to Hartford, thus stranding me at the airport overnight. Well, this time, flying in the opposite direction — Hartford to Chicago to South Bend — I again got stuck in Chicago, this time missing my connecting flight to South Bend by about 5 or 10 minutes thanks to a multitude of delays both at Bradley and at O’Hare.
This is actually the third consecutive time I’ve had trouble while attempting to connect at O’Hare on United Airlines. I didn’t blog about it, but on Thursday night, I almost had a Groundhog Day-like rerun of my September experience, as another long runway delay casued me to come within a minute or two of missing my flight to Hartford. But I just barely caught that flight.
This time, however, a combination of weather delays at both ends (it was pouring rain at Bradley and windy at O’Hare) turned my 65-minute layover into about a 5-minute layover — and 5 minutes just isn’t enough time to get from the far end of Concourse B all the way to Concourse F. That terminal at O’Hare is ridiculously huge, and it’s very frustrating to have connecting flights — on the same airline! — so far apart from one another. In all three of my recent United Airlines experiences at ORD, I’ve had to run like hell across the entire length of two concourses in an attempt to catch my flight. (Another O’Hare pet peeve: getting to the Bus/Shuttle Center takes forever, and involves walking down two flights of stairs down, then riding back up one floor on an elevator, then taking a circuitous path that leads you through the corner of a parking garage before you finally reach your destination. It’s ridiculous, especially when you consider that people have luggage when they’re doing all this. The architect who designed that place should be fired.)
Anyway, I missed the last flight out, so once again I was faced with a decision: camp out at the airport, or stay in a hotel. Last time, I chose the former option; this time, I chose the latter, and am blogging now from the Best Western O’Hare. (A third option — calling up Becky’s cousin Jon, who had previously offered to put me up if I ever got stranded in Chicago again — didn’t occur to me until too late. Drat.)
United isn’t paying for my stay here, of course, thanks to their annoying policy, noted in my Navorski post:
United gave me a coupon for a discounted hotel room (they did not offer to pay for the hotel outright, because, they said, gate problems are not their fault, they’re air traffic control’s fault…)
I actually think their decision is more defensible in this case than it was back in September, when it was another United flight that gummed up the works by staying late at the gate, thus forcing air-traffic control to delay us. This time, it was the weather that messed things up, and certainly United Airlines doesn’t control that.
Still, I’m not happy. I explained to the United ticket agents that this had happened to me before, quite recently, and I indicated that I was not entirely satisfied with their “discount coupon.” They weren’t as vociferously sympathetic as I would have expected under the circumstances, instead mostly wasting their breath offering excuses and reiterating the company policy: they only pay for overnight stays if the delay was caused by a mechanical failure. I got a half-hearted “I’m sorry” as an afterthought, but all in all, the customer service left something to be desired, under the circumstances. (And it’s not like I was being nasty or anything. I actually didn’t put up nearly as much of a fight as I could have, because I’m exhausted.)
I plan on calling several other airlines to find out what is their policy regarding paying for overnight stays. Perhaps United’s policy is the industry standard, in which case I can’t hate them too much for it. But if I find out that Southwest or whomever has a more generous policy, you can bet United will be hearing from me.
Regardless, this has now turned from a “sh*t happens” one-time thing, into “hmm, twice in a row, that’s quite a coincidence,” into an unmistakable pattern: whenever I fly on United through O’Hare, trouble ensues. (Keep in mind, I’m a relatively frequent flier, and I almost never have problems like this on, say, Southwest, JetBlue, etc.) The circumstances were different in each case, and perhaps not entirely in the airline’s control, but the common denominator is United and O’Hare, so fairly or not, I’m now inevitably going to think twice before flying that route on that airline again. United may well lose my business as a result, simply because I won’t want to take the risk of this happening again. On the other hand, they may well have kept my business if they’d reduced my annoyance by ponying up the extra $50 for the (discounted) hotel room, policy or no policy. I hope the savings was worth it, guys.
Anyway… if all goes as planned, I’ll be back in South Bend at 9:50 AM tomorrow.
And now, I sleep. G’nite all.
|
Categories: Uncategorized
|
January 30th, 2006 at 1:05:53 am
Presumably, you generally travel on the airline that offers you the cheapest fare. Are you really going to take your business to a non-United, higher fare airline because it rained in both Chicago and Hartford?
Even if you do, the $50 of lost profit you represent (though it is potentially much more if one considers you the “marginal” passenger in each case - very little extra marginal cost for the same amount of money) is not enough to make United and other airlines (and their paying passengers) start paying for hotel rooms for the average passenger every time there are weather delays.
So, one question remains, did you tell the airline that you were the weather nerd and just filmed with Spike Lee? Do you not carry around a copy of the New York Times article to wave in people’s face? (ok, 2 questions plus one more: Did you try the Coach USA bus - the last one leaves around 9pm, the airline probably would have provided a voucher for that)
January 30th, 2006 at 1:54:29 am
I have a firm policy — I do not fly through O’Hare unless there are at least 3 more flights that day to my destination. Period. I had one very special night spent in the G terminal because by the time I got stuck there, every hotel room within 50 miles was booked, every rental car rented, every taxi gone. And all food closed.
Fortunately, I was able to locate a cot stashed behind a wall, and got a (minimal) amount of sleep. But nevermore. If I’m going through O’Hare, it will be morning.
January 30th, 2006 at 3:21:09 am
Weather, schmeather, obviously I Jinxed you when, in bidding you a Fond Farewell at Bradley/Hartford, I so Oxymoronically wished you “Good Luck at Chicago, this time.” :| Rather like exhorting somebody to Stay Cool during this particular layover in Hell. ;> Fie. :)
January 30th, 2006 at 3:56:19 am
PS ~ “…did you tell the airline that you were the weather nerd and just filmed with Spike Lee?…”
Y’know, squid’s interrogatory inkjet, there :) , paradoxically Reveals to me This vision: Considering that you were, after all, Spike’s Guest ~ iow that your whole United Airlines RT Fare was Paid for with Forty Acres & a Mule :) ~ might Spikey not want a Word with Unitey, re their rather chintzy treatment of his newbuddingstar Mikey? :)
IOW to hell with the Back of the Coach USA bus, just get the Ticketbuyer ~ Mr. Lee ~ to Break their Levees for ‘em.
:}
January 30th, 2006 at 5:23:27 am
Ooooh, the travel horror stories I could got into Brendan. You never really have lived until you’ve gone through an aborted landing, during descent, due to pea soup fog.
But one of the best was the plane stuck at BWI for 2 hours because the crew had gone home (we were diverted from Dulles) and it took 2 hours to find the right person to OPEN THE FRONT DOOR. Not any person, but the right person. Maintenance had already opened the BACK of the plane and were waiting in seats for the FRONT of the plane to be opened so we could disembark.
The airline industry is the only one that actually makes me re-think government regulation.
January 30th, 2006 at 7:34:19 am
Squid, the last Coach USA bus to South Bend left at the exact time time as the last United flight to South Bend. So I missed both.
And you’re right, they can’t offer hotel rooms to everybody who gets delayed because of the weather. But the previous time this happened to me, it wasn’t because of the weather — it was because my flight from South Bend, despite being a half-hour early, was stuck on the runway for over an hour. Why? According to United, the reason was because air-traffic control told them to wait there and couldn’t find them another gate, but the reason air-traffic control had to do that in the first place was because another delayed United flight was hogging the gate. That had nothing to do with the weather, and the reason for the other United flight’s delay didn’t even come into play; they just said it was “air-traffic control’s fault” that they were forced to stay on the runway, which is, on the face of it, bull. And then the same exact happened again last week, almost stranding me in Chicago again.
As I said in my post, “I actually think their decision [not to pay for my room] is more defensible in this case than it was back in September.” If what happened yesterday/today was the first time anything like this had happened to me, I would not get all uppity about it. I’d accept that “sh*t happens” and, although I’d be frustrated, I wouldn’t act like I have a legitimate beef with United. They don’t control the weather, after all.
But this is now THREE TIMES IN A ROW that I’ve had some variation on the same problem with United Airlines at O’Hare, and the second time in three flights that I’ve been stuck overnight in Chicago because of said problems. (A minute or two here or there on Thursday, and it’d be three-for-three.) I think, under those circumstances (which I explained to the ticket lady), it would be the better part of valor to make an exception to the policy in order to stay in this particular customer’s good graces.
But, perhaps you’re right. Perhaps it doesn’t make good business sense to keep your customers happy. Then again, given that United Airlines is under bankruptcy protection, I’m not sure how much they know about either good business sense or good customer relations.
One thing that’s undeniable, even if you’re right that they made the right call re: the hotel room… their customer service needs work. Even if the delay isn’t their fault, and even if they’re not going to pay for my motel, they should be extremely apologetic in discussing the situation with me. That’s just basic customer service. Explain to me what happened, sure, but also apologize about ten times, not one time, under your breath, as an afterthought. I was unimpressed with that aspect of things both times this happened.
I’m actually not a particularly cranky traveler. Yeah, I b*tch on the blog when things go wrong, but I’m very accepting of problems as they are occurring and I am not one of those people who makes a huge scene out of every little thing. (People who do that actually drive me nuts.) So it doesn’t take much to keep me happy. A simple, heartfelt “we’re very sorry for the inconvenience” will go a long way with me. And with a lot of people, I’d wager.
And seriously, there must be some way that they can organize their gates better…
January 30th, 2006 at 8:00:47 am
Brendan -
Problem with the airlines is that their whole system of routing this plane to take care of that flight suffers the Domino theory badly. All it takes is one delay somewhere to end up delaying 5 flights somewhere else.
These days, I’m stunned if my flight is on time.
January 30th, 2006 at 8:39:14 am
Write a letter and watch the free flights come in. I’ve done it 2-3 times, and as long as you are kind, explain your position, and show why it simply wasn’t weather (or tell them what they could have done better if it was), they will give you $ — or at least some airline credit — for your efforts.
January 30th, 2006 at 8:49:18 am
Lojo:
I guess I’ve been spoiled by my experience flying Southwest, which is my usual airline of choice. Somehow, I never seem to have these problems on Southwest. I guess there’s a good reason it’s one of the few profitable airlines out there.
January 30th, 2006 at 8:56:55 am
This is why govt regulation and point-to-point travel needs to come back. This is the result of the crap hub-and-spoke system the major airlines have been allowed to go to. That’s why you don’t have as many of these problems with airlines like Southwest and JetBlue. (Keep in mind, I’m the daughter of parents who worked for airlines before the industry was deregulated and went to crap, so perhaps I’m biased.)
O’Hare itself just sucks as well. There’s always delays there. I’ve had to run from my gate for my flight arriving from South Bend to my gate for my flight to wherever many a time. The best part was when Katie and I were traveling for the Observer, and we made our connection to Newark, but our luggage didn’t. Then, when our bags finally came into Newark on a flight that evening, they only brought Katie’s bag to the hotel. I didn’t get my luggage till the next morning. I miss ATA flying from South Bend to Midway.
January 30th, 2006 at 9:03:01 am
I used to have problems ALL THE TIME with United at Chicago. Because of that, I avoid O’Hare whenever possible. My favorite was when they had the wrong gate on the departures and arrivals board. My plane landed late, because another United flight wouldn’t get out of the gate. So I double-checked with United AND the flight board before beelining it across the entire terminal to the gate on the very, very end - only to find that no, it wasn’t my flight to LA, it was a flight to Germany. And the board still said it was my flight. (The only plus side of this was that I randomly ran into this really cool German girl who was boarding that flight and needed someone to send some postcards. They were postcards from Disney in Orlando and ended up being postmarked from Los Angeles, but whatever.) Eventually a band of about 10 of us who needed to be on the LA flight found each other and raged against United til they found our plane, which was taking off, and we made them hold it. Big pain! Curiously, I have never had a problem with Southwest, and they’re much cheaper…
January 30th, 2006 at 9:34:30 am
To providea little historical perspective on this problem, I was stuck at O’Hare after running the length of an entire Concourse with luggage in hand in 1970. My problem was limited to the airport, not the airline. Nonetheless, I can vouch for the fact that O’Hare was waaaay too hard to traverse on short notice even 35 years ago, and flights were missed then, too, with equal amounts of huffing and puffing to no avail, for that reason alone. (I ended up having to change destination AIRPORTS on that occasion, which forced my parents to double their drive time to pick me up.)
Civic pride is one thing. Airports CAN be made traversable, no matter their size, and 35 years should be enough to devise some solution.
January 30th, 2006 at 9:58:26 am
Ugh. United has been terrible to me. While my stepmother seems to have a relatively good experience with them, I have had everything from minor annoyances (having had my seat assignment moved to the last row, so that I (at 6′3″) am cramped into the last seat with now way to lean back; to having my flight delayed until 5 AM (effectively precluding any sort of hotel stay).
I’ve had good luck with Continental. I haven’t had the opportunity to do Southwest or JetBlue, but I hear good things.
My most interesting airline story had to be October 1989, as we were landing in San Francisco. On descent, an (the Loma Prieta) earthquake hit. We popped back up and were redirected to Seattle. Spent two days there, and then back to SF. That was an act of God, I suppose, but the airline still picked up our tab.
January 30th, 2006 at 10:00:24 am
Brendan, this might make you feel a *little* better. A while ago I came across this blogger who needed to voice his travel complaints against Orbitz, and its actually quite funny. What’s even more hilarious is that, since so many people read his website, they all wrote nasty letters to Orbitz and refused to do business with them.
Oh, and this guy starts off his blog the EXACT way you did, too :)
Check it out:
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=orbitz_blows
January 30th, 2006 at 10:41:30 am
Well, Maddox was a complete moron for not checking to make sure he had a flight from each city before booking. Honestly, who would ever book an itinerary without flight numbers?
Services like Orbitz do ridiculous nonsense all the time to save money, like long layovers or drive time between cities. Read the freaking itinerary before purchasing, or don’t use a service that doesn’t provide flight details.
January 30th, 2006 at 10:50:18 am
Dude, just fly Southwest from Midway to Hartford! O’Hare is always on the top 5 list of busiest airports in the world. Why bother stressing over it?
January 30th, 2006 at 11:09:00 am
just fly Southwest from Midway to Hartford!
Usually, that’s what I do, in large part because it’s cheaper. But when I have classes in the late afternoon on my departure date, it’s not an option (well, unless I skip class) because of all the extra time I have to build in for either the bus or train ride to Chicago. Flying out of South Bend is, in theory, quicker (in large part because the SB Airport is so small, check-in and security screening are a snap — you can arrive at the airport like 30 minutes beforehand and be fine), so when someone else is picking up my tab (e.g., a Phoenix law firm, Spike Lee), I have them fly me out of South Bend. After these two experiences, however, I may rethink that. Clearly, taking the last flight out of South Bend, and then the last flight out of Chicago, is a risky proposition.
January 30th, 2006 at 11:23:42 am
Kormal, I really don’t understand attitudes like yours. It seems like your default setting is to blame the consumer. You let the company off with an off-handed comment that they “do ridiculous nonsense all the time to save money,” but it’s the consumer who is screwed over by that “nonsense” who you call a “moron.” And I mean, yeah, caveat emptor and all that jazz… sure, he could have, and maybe should have, been more careful… but when someone is screwed over by a scam, just because they’re dumb doesn’t mean the scam is less awful. Clearly, Orbitz is the blameworthy party for giving him a physically impossible itinerary and refusing to give him a refund when he pointed this out. He made a mistake, but they acted in an indefensible manner. And you’re focusing your insults on him? That doesn’t make sense.
Besides… I’m not even sure your premise is correct. How is the average consumer, inexperienced in the ways of online travel, supposed to know that “services like Orbitz do ridiculous nonsense all the time to save money”? Must I call the Better Business Bureau or do a Google search looking for customers’ accounts of past experiences every time I want to fly on an airline or book a flight on a website? These companies are holding themselves out as providers of reliable travel services, and they can’t escape that responsibility just by muttering “caveat emptor.” I realize we don’t live in an ideal world, but still, it is a basic premise of good business practices that consumers should be able to rely on companies to act in a rational and responsible manner, and if the companies fail to do so, the consumer deserves some sort of recompense… and if they don’t get it, and they complain, that doesn’t make them “morons.”
Also, “who would ever book an itinerary without flight numbers?” I dunno, anyone who’s ever used Hotwire or Priceline? I used Hotwire once and had a very satisfactory experience… but if they’d done with Orbitz did to Maddox, damn right I’d be pissed, and I’d be right. Would I be a “moron” for having bought tickets in that particular manner? Um, no.
Along the same lines as Maddox’s impossible itinerary… United allows customers to book itineraries from South Bend with 30-minute layovers at O’Hare, even though many of the flights they may be connecting to are a 15-to-20-minute walk (or 10-minute sprint) away from the gate where the flight from South Bend lands. This might not be “physically impossible,” but it leaves no margin for error whatsoever. I have now come to the conclusion that any O’Hare itinerary with less than an hour layover is too risky, but how was I supposed to know that before having had these recent bad experiences? It’s not my job to make sure my itinerary is possible, because I don’t necessarily have all the relevant info (where the gates are, how long it takes to get there, etc.) That’s the airline’s or air-travel website’s job — they should not sell tickets for itineraries that are extremely likely (or, as in Maddox’s case, certain) to result in a missed flight. It’s irresponsible. Simple as that.
January 30th, 2006 at 12:11:55 pm
You said it yourself …
Caveat emptor
January 30th, 2006 at 12:20:38 pm
Wow, way to not address anything I said. I certainly hope you don’t think that was a rebuttal in any way, shape or form. Because, yeah, I mentioned “ceveat emptor” … and then I made a whole bunch of arguments about how it’s not that simple in this case. Your response is… to repeat something I already said, and ignore all my other arguments. Weak, dude, weak.
Repeat after me:
“Caveat emptor” is not an excuse for irresponsible corporate behavior.
“Caveat emptor” is not an excuse for irresponsible corporate behavior.
“Caveat emptor” is not an excuse for irresponsible corporate behavior.
Repeat until you f***ing understand.
I hate it when people use “caveat emptor” (or its ugly stepsister, “life isn’t fair”) to justify the unjustifiable, or to minimize things which should not be minimized.
“Caveat emptor” means that consumers need to be careful because some companies will try to rip them off, or behave irresponsibly/irrationally/annoyingly. But that doesn’t mean it’s okay for those companies to behave in that manner, nor does it mean we should focus our ire on the “moron” consumer while giving the badly behaving company nothing more than a verbal slap on the wrist. “Caveat emptor” means that consumers should exercise caution, but it has no effect whatsoever on the culpability of the companies who behave badly. And there are times when it simply doesn’t apply at all — like if the buyer doesn’t, and can’t, have the necessary information that would make it possible to “beware.”
January 30th, 2006 at 12:54:13 pm
Not sure if Northwest flies into Hartford, but Detroit Metro airport is infinitely more user-friendly than O’Hare.
Front page article WSJ Saturday about the guy who is supposed to get all this air taffic control stuff fixed for the FAA.
January 30th, 2006 at 1:09:33 pm
Brendan - accepting that you are taking it personally, cuz *you* were the one affected recently, is it possible that you are over-reacting ?
You said yourself that this isn’t the first time it has happened to you … and *you* chose to stand under the well-fed seagulls perched on the telegraph wires … and it’s the fault of the seagulls that your hair will grow great roses ?
Nope - it ain’t the seagulls’ fault …
True - most of us hate it when we hear “Caveat emptor” or “Life isn’t fair” … and, when you have kids, and are thinking fully rationally (two things which may or may not coincide, but that’s a debate for another thread), you will realise, most likely that Life has no duty to be fair, and Life is as fair as we each can do our best to make it …
My own history with United is that, after the third time United treated me badly - first time happens, second and third were within a couple of weeks of each other - I was giving United a second chance when I booked both second and third time flights - after that third time, I will fly pretty much *anyone* except United unless I have NO other choice … and, when asked, I explain to anyone who wants to know why that is my decision …
As far as I know, the only recourse available to most of us mere mortals is to withdraw our purchasing power from the Uniteds of this world … a few, a privileged few, get to publicise our wrath in fora such as this one …
You will also learn, once traveling with small kids, that plans are sorta cute yet seldom stand up to reality … you will learn that you need to allow perhaps double the time for connections, double the time for getting from bed in the morning onto the plane to somewhere more than 1000 miles away … precisely because “Stuff happens” - a direct corollary of “Life isn’t fair” …
Life just happens to be a bunch fairer for those who ask a lot of Life, yet don’t demand a lot … it’s amazing what we get when we ask of the Sense of Humour of The Gods, while asking in a polite way …
So - we both agree that “caveat emptor” doesn’t excuse *anyone’s* irresponsible behaviour, I hope …
January 30th, 2006 at 2:08:25 pm
You said yourself that this isn’t the first time it has happened to you … and *you* chose to stand under the well-fed seagulls perched on the telegraph wires … and it’s the fault of the seagulls that your hair will grow great roses ?
Don’t be stupid. Seagulls are not culpable actors. Sentient human beings, and companies run by sentient human beings, are.
And, yes, something similar had happened to me before I booked this itinerary. *Once* before. Both of the other two problems I reference were on *this* particular trip. So what are you suggesting, that I shouldn’t have flown United this time because I had *one* previous problem with that? I wrote that off as “shit happens.” It was only ONE problem, after all. Only now has it become clear that it’s a pattern.
I think my post made clear that I will think twice before flying United again, particularly through O’Hare, so there’s no need to suggest that. Obviously that is where “caveat emptor” legitimately comes into play. Where it does NOT legitimately come into play is if you are trying to downplay the culpability of the people whose bad customer service, bad planning, etc., puts you in the situation in the first place, or if you are trying to suggest that the person who gets screwed over should just shut up and stop bitching about it, as kormal seemed to be implying with regard to the Orbitz situation here (which is what we were talking about above).
I’m sure you mean well, but your post has a very condescending tone, just so you know. I don’t need to grow up and have kids in order to acquire common sense and “realize” all these things you mention. I’m perfectly well aware, for example, that “Life has no duty to be fair, and Life is as fair as we each can do our best to make it.” The latter point is precisely why I get so annoyed when people use “life isn’t fair” as an excuse to behave unfairly themselves. Life has no duty to be fair, but EACH OF US DOES, and the broader fact that life is sometimes unfair is no excuse for any individual person to make it more unfair than it needs to be, just as than “caveat emptor” is no excuse for companies to screw people over with reckless abandon and be immune from criticism because, hey, the consumer is a moron. This is not the naivete of youth talking, Alasdair, this is the basic truth of common sense and, dare I say it, morality.
There is also no need to lecture me about the importance of having a good sense of humor and rolling with the punches. I’m actually quite good at that. You may recall, in my post about “my night as Viktor Navorski,” I believe I mentioned how I sort of looked at the whole thing as an unexpected adventure. It was actually kinda fun. A random night in a hotel wasn’t so bad, either, though I did miss Becky and I’d rather have my $49 back. But it’s not like I’m sitting here fretting about it now. The fact that I bitch on the blog about getting screwed by an airline problem doesn’t mean that I’m sitting around at the airport or the hotel having a bad attitude about the whole thing. I am definitely not the sort of person who berates ticket agents, grumbles constantly about problems, etc. I hate people who do that; they make everything so much worse. I tend to accept what is going on, be friendly and gracious to the employees (who are generally helpless to fix things anyway), smile and keep a good attitude and make the best of things… and then I vent on my blog, which I think is a sensible way to react because that way, others can hear about what happened and learn from my experiences and perhaps they, too, will make the considered judgment not to fly United or through O’Hare or both. Anyway, the point is, I know perfectly well how to keep a good attitude, and I’m perfectly well aware that plans don’t always go according to plan, etc. None of those general platitudes delegitimize anything I’ve said here, though.
But really, you’re kinda changing the subject. I was really talking more about the Orbitz thing than my own situation, and my bottom line was this. Those of you who seem to think people who get screwed by airlines should just shut up and deal, that they’re “morons” who shouldn’t be taken seriously, are completely off-base. Caveat emptor doesn’t mean that. If you get screwed, you SHOULD bitch about it. As you say, Alasdair, that’ll help other emptors with their caveating! :)
January 30th, 2006 at 2:16:08 pm
P.S.
you will learn that you need to allow perhaps double the time for connections, double the time for getting from bed in the morning onto the plane to somewhere more than 1000 miles away … precisely because “Stuff happens” - a direct corollary of “Life isn’t fair”
Again - I already know all of this - and when I’m on a schedule where an on-time arrival is absolutely critical, I do all of these things. Other times, like when the worst-case scenario is I miss a class or two, I’ll cut it a little closer in order to, say, spend more time with my parents before leaving. I’m well aware I’m taking a risk. I only take the risk when I can afford to do so. I know that “stuff happens.” But again, that doesn’t mean I’m wrong to complain when stuff happens. So I’m not sure your point is.
January 30th, 2006 at 2:20:39 pm
P.S. A good example of “I already know all of this - and when I’m on a schedule where an on-time arrival is absolutely critical, I do all of these things” is … like a year ago, when Becky and I were looking at possible wedding dates, we considered the FIRST weekend of winter break (since the second weekend was Christmas and the third weekend was New Year’s). The reason we rejected it is because I said, well, I can’t leave South Bend till finals are over, and what happens if there’s a big snowstorm that Friday or whatever, and I get stuck in Chicago and miss my own wedding? In that context, even a day or two wasn’t enough leeway. So we rejected the idea of getting married on that weekend.
So yeah. There’s no need for the condescending “when you’re older, you’ll understand that life is unpredictable and stuff happens” bullsh*t. I already know all of that, and I am perfectly capable of acting accordingly when the need arises.
(Sorry to keep harping on this, but I really don’t like it when people do the whole “when you’re older, you’ll understand that I’m right and you’re wrong” crap. It’s a cheap rhetorical/logical trick, and it really ticks me off.)
January 30th, 2006 at 2:52:55 pm
(I think I better understand how the guy in the easy chair sitting in front of the big speakers being blown backwards feels ! OY!)
1) Most importantly - while I may well use words and phrases which permit people to perceive said words as being condescending, for most of us, they are words … just words … and we put into ‘em and take out of ‘em what applies to us ourselves … thus, when I call someone a “moron” or a “cretin”, chances are, I’ve seen the psych’s eval … which is why you’ll have to hunt to find me using any such term … (even for Mendacious Mouse or David) … you can check enough comments on enough of the posts on *this* blog to confirm the truth of this paragraph …
1a) Now, “*twit*”, on the other hand, being a relative term of semi-affectionate disrespect, *that* I will use when warranted or at whim … especially to twit such a one …
2) If you are going to attribute a ’straw-man’ to me - “Those of you who seem to think people who get screwed by airlines should just shut up and deal, that they’re “morons” who shouldn’t be taken seriously, are completely off-base. “, then at least have the grace to put said ’straw-man’ in a kilt of the right clan affiliation ! Since neither you nor I happen to believe that particular ’straw-man’, then either start with “Those of us …” or point your venting somewhere else, please, ‘K ?
3) “When you are older, you’ll understand …” *can* be condescending … and/or it can be an expression of the relativity of experience earned the hard way … for example, when you have kids yourself, and they do something cute yet atrocious, you will finally be able to realise at a gut-level, from the inside, just how improbable it is that you (or almost any human teenager) survived to become a parent … prior to experiencing someone about whom you care greatly do something mind-numbingly stupid, none of us (remember, I tend not to use words like “none” lightly) realise just how mind-numbingly stupid the thing was when we, ourselves, did it … and we will also, at that time, realise that our own parents not only did their best, yet they also probably got little or no credit for having done so from their then-teenagers …
So - I cannot stop you taking offence - while I can point out to you that you have the option not to take offence …
If you harbour doubts about what I am saying, ask your parents what they were like as teenagers with *their* parents …
(nervously reminiscent grin)
January 30th, 2006 at 3:46:07 pm
I’ve yet to be delayed at Midway.
January 30th, 2006 at 4:54:02 pm
Those of you who seem to think people who get screwed by airlines should just shut up and deal, that they’re “morons” who shouldn’t be taken seriously, are completely off-base.
I just wanted to say that I never said Maddox should just shut up and deal; I faulted him for not reading the itinerary. Failure to read the itinerary is a completely separate issue from Orbitz’s scheduling of an impossible itinerary. Simply becuase I chose not to comment on the latter doesn’t mean I condone it (notwithstanding the reality that services like this do, indeed, do it all the time).
The point was that Maddox clearly didn’t read the itinerary before he purchased his ticket; if it were me (or any other reasonable consumer, in my opinion), it would seem strange to me that one of my flight numbers and specified airlines had shown up, but the other didn’t. Something was amiss. Incidentally, this has happened to me on several occasions booking through Orbitz and Expedia in the past, particularly going through Chicago. I simply decline to select the itinerary that would have me transfer from Midway to O’Hare. They don’t have flashing red signals telling you to provide your own transportation, but the lack of flight information and provided details makes it clear that you have to get there on your own.
Your analogy to Priceline is inapt, because that’s how those services operate from the outset. Expedia/Orbitz/etc., on the other hand, provide up-front flight details. I don’t think a consumer sophisticated enough to book an itinerary on one of these Web services would see the specified flight from Location A to B and C to D, wonder why there was no flight from B to C, yet somehow not be sophisticated enough to check before assuming it would magically appear after purchase. I think it’s reasonable for someone to read the itinerary for flight details before they book.
As for saddling me with a “default setting” becuase you couldn’t be bothered to read my post accurately, I would again say that “After I booked the ticket, I noticed something strange: there were no travel details on how I would get from San Jose to San Francisco” is an entirely different issue from “Orbitz made a mistake: they sold me an impossible itinerary.”
January 30th, 2006 at 6:26:10 pm
I’ve yet to be delayed at Midway.
That’s because they land the planes whether is snowing and blowing or not. Sometimes taking out a few cars and lives with the landing!!!
January 30th, 2006 at 6:27:57 pm
Kormal, thanks for the clarification, and I’m sorry if I misunderstood or misrepresented your views.
Alasdair, I wasn’t saying that you called anyone a “moron”; that was kormal’s quote. It was relevant to our discussion because you seemed to be criticizing me for what I had been saying, and what I had been saying was a response to what kormal said, so I couldn’t really respond without talking about what kormal had said.
Anyway, I didn’t mean to offend anyone here, I just 1) don’t like the tendency of some folks (whether or not that fairly includes either of you) to jump on the consumer in a case like this, and 2) don’t like being lectured about all the things I’ll understand when I’m older (because if something is true, you should be able to explain it without resorting to such arguments). So that’s why I’ve been a bit vehement and verbose. :)
January 30th, 2006 at 7:01:29 pm
Hmmm … “should be able” …
… to explain to a 5 year old what going through puberty is like ?
… to explain to an adolescent what it’s like to be present at the birth of one’s own child ?
… to explain to a teenager what it’s like to see one’s child graduate from University ?
… to explain to a 10 year old what it’s like to drive out-of-state for vacation without any parental supervision the first time ?
… to explain to a 25 year old what it’s like to realise that one has fewer friends of one’s own generation still alive and healty than one has attended funerals for now-deceased friends of that same generation ?
… and, of course, the ever-popular … to explain to any age of male what it is like to be the delivering mother during that miracle of child-birth ?
And I’m not lecturing you, you *twit* !
(grin)
January 30th, 2006 at 7:21:14 pm
That’s a cheap cop-out. All of the above are descriptions of emotions or life experiences. They all include the phrase “what it’s like.” Of course you only truly know what X or Y emotion feels like once you’ve experienced it. But saying that is very different from saying that, when I’m older and have kids, I’ll suddenly understand various concrete life lessons and reach various particular opinions about how the world works.
So, let me rephrase: I don’t like being lectured about all the concrete life lessons I’ll inevitably learn, factual and logical conclusions I’ll inevitably reach, and opinions I’ll inevitably hold, when I’m older. If such lessons/conclusions/opinions are in fact true, you should be able to convince me of them without resorting to arguments that rely on “you’ll understand it when you’re older.” Anyway, it is almost always the case that such lessons, conclusions and opinions are not universal, no matter how much the “older, wiser” adult thinks his/her “take” on life is the correct one. And the ones that are universal, or nearly so, are generally the easiest ones to understand, and there is certainly no inherent age barrier to understanding them.
Better?
January 30th, 2006 at 7:24:23 pm
P.S. I’m waiting for Mike to jump on the bandwagon here. Mike? Mike? :)
January 30th, 2006 at 8:31:37 pm
Alasdair, perhaps you should consider that you “should be able”…
…to use proper punctuation and typographical conventions regarding spacing by the time you’re a grown man?
…to admit when you’re being an asshole, and that you’re clearly wrong?
…to realize that your condescending tone and claims of superiority based solely on age prompt many of us to dismiss you as a blowhard?
January 30th, 2006 at 9:38:12 pm
Booyah!
January 30th, 2006 at 10:15:12 pm
Braindot, you forgot
…realize that you aren’t nearly as humorous or clever as you think you are. Since you laugh at your own jokes and no one else seems to. One would think someone with so much wisdom would have figured out something so simple by now.
January 30th, 2006 at 11:59:42 pm
First, the subwoofer …
Brendan @ 6:26 pm …
First, I hae to say that I hope you get to experience any or all of the ‘life experiences’ I listed that *you* would like to experience … cuz *none* of ‘em is a slam-dunk certainty for any of us … we can plan for ‘em all we want, and they inevitably may or may not happen …
(reaching over, and handing Brendan the small chip from Brendan’s shoulder) Fair comment - I do the older thingie from time to time … wiser ? is in the eyes of the beholder most of the time … and time will tell, as you get to experience what you get to experience, whether directly or vicariously … I have been very lucky to be able to do both …
I have also spent decades pointing out that I have yet to find The One and Only Correct Way (TM) … I have found many ways that work well, and have shown people the possibilities … some of ‘em I have found work well for me, and I tell people that … some will never work for me, personally, but that doesn’t prevent ‘em working for others - and I often pass that sort of information on to others who may well be able to enjoy it …
Mike - you are welcome to hop up beside me on this “bandwagon” or join Brendan on his - or even enjoy your own … (grin) …
Briandot - your ‘One True Way’ may work well for you, but it’s not for me … when I’m ‘clearly wrong’, I’m usually the second or third person to point it out … and move forward in Life, yet another lesson learned … as for me being an asshole, like the rest of us, it is indeed a component of my nature - but not a defining part …
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again - I can neither make you accept my words (even if I wanted to) nor can I make you dismiss my words … you will perceive my words through a filter of your own experiences and your own self …
We should not forget the tweeter !
David - I had *you* figured out a long time ago … say hi to “Braindot” for me, please !
January 31st, 2006 at 12:23:23 am
OK, I’ll weigh in. I am in stress mode, though, so I’m almost certainly being more blunt than normal.
1) There are various people on this blog who get to make claims at being older. In all cases, I get the advantage of claiming wiser status. There are times when last names can be useful, besides just distinguishing among the ridiculous number of people with overly common names. :)
2) I agree wth Brendan that when debating positions/impacts of lessons/etc, the “when you’re older”/”if you had experienced what I’ve experienced”/etc lines are bogus, and often quite condescending. If you have a position in an argument, it should stand on its own whenever possible.* Each of us has a position on a given matter (certain politicians seem to have upwards of 5…), and a personal history which we think is relevant. It doesn’t necessarily follow that someone else having the same experiences as you will end up at the same finish point. Taking this position, even implicity, requires that there is One True Way which has been found.
* obviously, there are some exceptions. When we’re debating efficiency of the immigration process, to pick an example from thin air, Bea’s personal experience is perfectly valid if she wants to take a stand of “these particular aspects which I dealt with should be streamlined”.
3) While you do tend to dismiss him outright, Alasdair, like David I do tend to think that you aren’t as funny as you portray yourself as seeing yourself. I do personally enjoy puns, for the most part–and have been known to make plenty myself–but I very rarely find your particular wordplay funny. That’s just personal preference, though.
January 31st, 2006 at 1:38:06 am
Oooh big bad Alasdair picked on my for my spelling mistakes, such a damning critique of my positions and arguments whatever will I do.
You still haven’t given one example of what Bush has done to make this a better country btw.
Oh and its spelled piÃ’ata NOT pinhata Mr. spelling Nazi.
January 31st, 2006 at 4:38:12 am
Mike - bluntness appreciated … and tastes often differ …
David - so Spanish good, Brazilian (or Portuguese) bad ? An interesting outlook on Life …
Oh well …
January 31st, 2006 at 10:26:40 am
hmm a quick google search comes up with no matches for pinhata, so i’m not sure what youare talking about. but again way to dodge the issues at hand.
January 31st, 2006 at 10:28:27 am
ah forgive me, i put the Ã’ in when i typed it, pinhata does appear to be a valid portugese word. Sorry about that.
January 31st, 2006 at 2:16:34 pm
Gracious apology accepted …
and
Gracious ! Apology accepted !
(both sentiments apply ! (grin))
January 31st, 2006 at 2:46:43 pm
David,
I’ve checked several Portuguese dictionaries and I can’t find any matches for the word pinhata. In what context was the word used?
January 31st, 2006 at 3:27:10 pm
Ricardo - in the general area of linguistic shift, that which in Spanish has the n-tilde tends to have the nh in Portuguese or Brazilian … in English, it tends to have the ny …
A little further research turned up
“Today there is controversy because some people believe (against the official position) that it might be useful for Galician to move back closer to Portuguese, and write LH instead of LL (eg, lhama instead of llama), NH instead of â€â€? (eg, canhon instead of caÃ’on), and G, J instead of X (eg, geologÃŒa instead of xeoloxÓa, and hoje instead of hoxe); that is, they replace Castilian with Portuguese graphemes in order to ‘purify’ the Galician language of Castilian influence. “
Enough, already ? (grin)
January 31st, 2006 at 3:57:03 pm
Alasdair,
What you’re saying is true, but it doesn’t make an argument that pinhata is a proper Portuguese word.
January 31st, 2006 at 4:28:22 pm
I did a google search for the word and it came up on a number of Brazilian/Portugese sites. Not sure what context it was being used in though I just wanted to see if it was even a real word as Alasdair had claimed. It appears that atleast one link (a story i think) uses it in the correct sense, but its hard to tell since I don’t speak Portugese. Cross-translating because of the similarties to Spanish are tough for more complex things of course.