Earlier this week I talked about the renewed focus on safety at United Airlines. As part of that effort, the carrier is guiding reservations agents on how to talk to passengers who may be afraid of stepping onto a Boeing aircraft but stopping short of offering a refund for those who claim to be too nervous to fly.
How United Airlines Is Dealing With Nervous Passengers Looking To Avoid Boeing Aircraft
United has provided a script to its reservation agents to help navigate when customers express discomfort over safety concerns, specifically flying on a Boeing jet.
If a customer calls who is “uncomfortable” about flying on a Boeing jet, agents are advised to inform the passenger:
“U.S. airlines have among the highest maintenance and flying standards in the world.”
or
“Every aircraft we fly, including our large Boeing fleet, has been certified by the Federal Aviation Administration. And they are all maintained to some of the highest standards in the world by mechanics who are licensed by the FAA.”
If this does not satisfy them, a customer can cancel their flight and use the credit at a later time:
“I hear your concern. If you do not feel comfortable right now, we can help cancel your ticket and you can use the value of your ticket, free of any change fees, at a later time, but fare differences may apply. The ticket can be used within a full year from the original ticketing date.”
Fees to change Basic Economy tickets still apply.
If a passenger asks to move to a non-Boeing aircraft, there is no way to avoid it on an international flight:
“I hear your concern. Our international routes are operated with Boeing equipment which means that all alternate flights will be Boeing as well.”
If the request is for a domestic flight, agents are to say:
“I hear your concern. The majority of our domestic routes are operated with Boeing equipment which means that most alternate flights will be Boeing as well.”
But if the passenger insists:
“I’m happy to check for a different equipment type. We no longer have change fees, but you may need to pay more if the fare on the alternate flight is higher.”
No exceptions for refunds will be granted and United also will not provide inspection reports on request:
“Our aircraft inspection reports are not publicly available. However, every aircraft we fly – including our large Boeing fleet – has been certified by the Federal Aviation Administration. And they are all maintained to some of the highest standards in the world by mechanics who are licensed by the FAA.”
No compensation will be offered either, with United “not offering any type of compensation or other special exceptions for customers concerned about flying on United.”
Finally, I do want to put the Boeing issue in perspective (more details here). You’re still significantly safer, at least statistically, on a Boeing jet than driving. Those who are pledging to drive in order to avoid Boeing jets strike me as…insane.
> Read More: The “If It’s Boeing, I’m Not Going” Canard
CONCLUSION
United is well aware that many customers are currently hesitant to fly in the Friendly Skies, particularly on Boeing jets. But while it has prepared its agents to be understanding and attempt to offer alternate flights, it is stopping far short of allowing refunds for those who claim to be too afraid to fly.
> Read More: United CEO Scott Kirby Tells Employees: Don’t Be Defensive, But Focus On Safety
image: United Airbus A319…United has a lot more Boeing than Airbus planes
Haha, the problem is McDonnell Douglas. Boeing took over that company but the new Boeing CEO was the McDonnell Douglas guy, Stonecipher. Remember the DC10 that lost its certificate in the late 70’s?
Merger happened in 1997 – Stonecipher took over in 2003 after Condit, the Boeing lifer engineer turned manager who was CEO before and during the merger including moving to Chicago and left in scandal.
Perhaps it’s less MdD / Boeing and engineers union vs management. Engineers union at Boeing were not being very cooperative as well- right up there with pmUA pilots in management cooperativeness and being adaptable. I see both sides as playing a role.
It’s a little bit of both but the consensus amongst a lot of people at Boeing past or present, analysts…and so forth felt that it was due to Stonecipher bringing in the business culture and then bringing in McNerney who worsened it. Sure there always has been labor and management issues but none as bad as post merger.
The problem with Boeing is there is a bean counter in charge and not an engineer. Check their company history, I believe they started declining a long time ago. With a bean counter in charge it becomes a quantity versus quality issue.
Good for UA – the hysteria is getting silly
OK, the idea of “fearing” Boeing aircraft is laughable. Driving to the airport is many times more hazardous than your 5 hour flight on a MAX (one of which I took not terribly long ago). There are so many layers of safety built into aviation that you need not stress over flying.
That said, Boeing as a company has indeed gone down the tubes. Taken there by Wall Street buttkissing elitists running the company with the goal of “enhancing shareholder value” much in the same way as a restaurant chain is operated to maximize profit. Now, there’s nothing wrong with profit. But there’s everything wrong with running a company solely for quick up=front cash while not thinking (much) about the future. And this is a well-known trait of these elite Wall Street types. Boeing was profitable when they were incredibly well respected and run by engineers. When they prioritized innovation. Now, these idiots in the board roon are running the place like it’s TWA in 1998. And that sucks.
@AngryFlier … +1 . An old saw in business is : when looking for a cause of company problems , first look at the MBAs. Another old saw is : hire family before MBAs , ( Walmart , In-N-Out , etc) . Many MBAs are out to maximize Their Own Rewards , and are cutthroat in doing so .
If United has to have a limit when you change a flight, you should be able to use it 1 year from the date of the flight.
They really should have no time limit. UA has your money.
Tickets are valid for one year, so you’d have a year from the date you bought the ticket to exchange it for another. From there, you have 331 days, the farthest out reservations are made, to complete travel.
Theoretically, you could keep rolling it over, year after year, indefinitely, just as long as you never let it expire.
If I had money from a flight cancellation on UA and then booked another flight within the year, but then cancelled that, would my money from the initial purchase rollover a year from the time of the 2nd booking or would I lose the money from the first booking after a year from the initial booking.
Did you just go to the airport in Romania ? I thought you were going to Transylvania and bran castle and all that.
Only one night…just a long layover on the way to Bulgaria.
Telling them to F#ck off would be better. We are a nation of wussies in 2024.
And the company that formerly set the standard for aircraft safety now has the worst reputation in the industry. I guess this is what happens when you have terrible leadership.
This is simply the way things work in big faceless multinational corporations. Bean counters rule, all other considerations – including safety, comfort, reputation, etc. – are secondary or way down on the list of concerns. Nothing matters except how much money they can grab quickly.
Boeing’s problem is just that they took this greed-above-all approach to it’s logical extreme. All big corporations behave the same way. It’s just about grabbing as much money as they can, as fast as they can, then the so-called “leadership” just floats away with their pockets filled, on their golden parachutes, with the yachts and multiple palaces and billions stashed away, all intact. The only thing that would change this is personal liability and real hard time in prisons.
Why is anyone shocked about this? It’s Econ 101, taught everywhere and accepted as the global norm for a certain class (including most commenters here, except for all the Russian and Chinese trolls and bots). Expect more of the same.
Regarding international travel, the script should include another option. Cunard does have some voyage crossings in 2026! Sadly the people married to notion air travel isn’t safe are unlikely to be swayed by any reassurance.
@Maryland … +1 .
Someone at my old job was afraid of flying, but was considering it for the first time.
I told him that the 747 is “generally fast and smooth, but we also went through a thunderstorm and the wings flapped like a f***ing bird.”
He didn’t go through with the flight.
It’s amusing (in the classical sense of the word) that Jack Welch management principles have so poisoned the Boeing brand that a company script had to be developed to handle it. It’s not just Corporatism and, well, Reagan “supply side” economics that have failed, but also DEI and wokeism. It brings to mind the USSR in 1991 and the sad lost decade that followed where millions of people lived in horrific poverty. Sometimes these “dark ages” require centuries to recover such as the fall of Rome.
I think it was George Orwell that said before WWII, there was at least a time when people found notions of utopia unrealistic and the future unknown, but didn’t live in absolute terror of the future. The notion of a post-apocalyptic dystopian nightmare was born in the WWII era and we’ve celebrated it ever since with such films as Mad Max and THX1138 but instead it’s a slow boiling of the frog that makes trying to figure out what to do as human beings to make a better world seem like swimming in quicksand.
When is “enough” going to be “enough” and SOMEONE in authority do something about Boeing?
“DEI and wokeism”
Nothing to do with the issue at all. But thanks for letting us know you want to say the N-word in public.
“But thanks for letting us know you want to say the N-word in public.”
I continue to hear the “stupid Pollack” slur in public without apology from many on the left but it’s ok because I’m white. It doesn’t matter that none of my ancestors engaged in enslaving someone of another race (actually, there’s a statue to Tadeusz Kościuszko in DC that was vandalized by BLM despite him being an abolitionist) My relatives fought against Nazis and their allies, the Russians.
I never would use the term “stupid pollack” in public except in this context (to describe the word itself) but I hear the “N word” all the time on public transit and in music. If it’s such an awful word, why is it used so often? I have friends of all nationalities and they don’t use the ethnic slurs used against them gratuitously or for fun.
Has DEI made Boeing planes safer? Quite frankly, I’d love to see Japan take over Boeing. My WW2 era father would roll over in his grave hearing me say that but they’d do a heck of a better job and for a lot less. I drive a Japanese made car. The computer I’m typing this on was made in Taiwan. I’m all about diversity when it just happens to work with merit.
Boeing should have designed a clean sheet 737 replacement 20 years ago. Bandaiding a 60 year old design and expecting cutting edge technology is idiocy. Also the faa wasn’t doing its oversight job by just accepting what Boeing told them and not reviewing test results.
Boeing didn’t design a clean sheet of paper 737 replacement 20 years ago because no customer wanted one.
There was nothing a new plane could have offered 20 years ago that would have justified the cost, both to Boeing and to the airlines.
More recently, Boeing chose to make the MAX rather than a clean sheet of paper even though there were newer technologies, they still weren’t enough to justify the cost. In fact, Ryannair, one of the largest 737 customers explictly said words to the effect of “Not just no, but hell no.”
United is a safe, reliable airline. Every once in a blue moon, something will happen – some kind of maintenance issue – will arise and the flight gets delayed. I think the FAA should not stop with United. They should develop increased oversight of the industry and do forensic auditing of all carriers in a continuous, rolling manner. Just need federal dollars to set it up.
When an airline has closing in on 1,000 flights a day, things happen.
FEDERAL OVERSIGHT in any business concerning public usage goes without saying, yes? There’s no reason in this day and age to ignore public safety without transparency applications from the very start. Of course money talks and that IS the main reason that USA business in any area will be suspect vs honesty, integrity and loyalty in the public safety arena. Personal and corporate greed IS and has been the American way of business since you know when. This business style shouldn’t be surprising.
Customers want the truth, they should be told the truth. The 777 tire fell off because of maintainence, which Boeing does not do. Same with other 777s and the 737-800 that lost a panel. The recent 787 turbulence happened because of weather phenomenon that Boeing, Airbus, United, and any other airline would be unable to prevent. The MAX overrun was caused by ATC and pilot error, root cause was ATC. The 737-900 engine fire was caused by bubble wrap, airport’s fault. Customers should simply be told that Boeing is to blame for none of the March incidents and the media is just fear mongering for clicks. At least this is what UA staff should be given the right to say.
Sheila, they bought their tickets. They knew what they were getting into. I say, let ’em die.
(And the replies will be even more wild from the people who don’t get the reference)
Will be holding off on a United cc for now…
Disagree about making fun of people who do not want to fly Boeing or even United. It’s not silly or something to be made fun of, Matt (from this post and prior posts). Some people actually do have a fear of flying, but still fly anyway if it’s not to an extreme level of fear. The issues with Boeing may worsen that fear, so they book Airbus instead.
It’s really no different than people with claustrophobia – elevators for example – my wife won’t get in a crowded elevator on her own, but will if I’m there. If I’m not, she’ll wait for an empty or much less crowded elevator. Others have a fear of heights and is that silly/crazy? For example, I’ve heard (so not directly) that a co-workers wife was in the Caribbean and is an excellent swimmer, but the water was so clear she could see the bottom, couldn’t tell the depth of it, and was scared to jump in off the boat.
So really, it’s not a big deal if someone won’t fly Boeing, and I won’t make fun or them or call them unreasonable, or otherwise pass judgment on them. They are a human, and can make their own choices for what is best for them.
They were toeing this line even before they finished the FAA review of the Max and I had a flight about one or two days after they said they’d be done with that review, on a Max. I called (1K line) and said I’d like to switch to another route/flight in case the review isn’t done on time (and we were also facing possible imminent govt shutdown at the time) and they refused. I didn’t want to “trust” they’d find me a spot on a plane if the govt shutdown occurred thus delaying the final audit/inspection review and cancelling that flight on the Max or “trust” they’d find me another plane that wasn’t a Max to get to my connecting airport to make my final flight for a trip for work. So I cancelled and have used the credit on another work flight. But they really really won’t do anything else.
They are not willing to refund money very often; they want to keep the cash and make you figure out how to use it in the timeline allotted. It makes sense from a business perspective for UA, but when you are having reputation issues because people think all you care about is money and profit, and they think you are skimping on maintenance, training, quality control, etc then wouldn’t that be EXACTLY the time to say let’s do some good faith customer support that isn’t about making maximum profit?
Murphy’s Law: Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong. Lol.
No, flying is pretty safe and I’m on an airplane at least every other month.
But, when you look at a website called Aeroinside, things happen every day!