[CWas]

Originally Posted by jimworcs

CWas,
No employer is going to call you back and say they either fired the employee, gave them verbal warning, put it on their file, etc.... When you complain about the conduct of an employee, you do have to trust the employer will take action. You are not entitled to know that action took place.

If you’ll allow me to wade through your ad hominem garbage pile for a moment, I’d like to address this one point (BTW - using ad hom is never a good sign that your argument’s going in the direction you’d want it to):

Where in my post did I ever complain about the conduct of an employee? If you are talking about the driver… Why do you assume that I hold him accountable? And how did you arrive at the conclusion that I wanted him punished? Granted, I realize that may be exactly what does happen to him. I realize also, that lesser managers often resort, first, to using terminations, reprimands, or even torture to get the job done – despite its being the sign of a poor manager, it’s also about as imaginative as throwing money at the customer in lieu of fixing the problem. Regardless, in my experience, coming down heavily with punishment is always counterproductive; it’s never good for morale, nor as a motivator; it does nothing to foster loyalty, nor does it instruct. And so, why do it?

Yes, I realize that I’m not ENTITLED to know anything internally. But you asked me what I wanted, what would satisfy me. And I told you. What goes on inside American Airline regarding its personnel is none of my business. Still, don’t tell me that businesses never provide information or status updates apprising their customers as to steps taken (progress) to resolve an issue. I know for a fact it’s done. I’ve done it myself for clients/customers. How difficult (or out of line) would it have been for AA’s customer service to have said to me, “We’ll check into that Mr. W. and get back to you,” – and then actually check into it and get back to me? How difficult (or out of line) would it be to inform me that, “Yes. We have investigated the problem. And because of our investigation, we have determined that ___________ was the cause. And so, to ensure that this problem will never happen again, we have taken certain preventative measures; instead of __________, we now _________ and ___________. The flight attendants, cart drivers, and various other airport personnel have all been notified and/or have received appropriate in-service training, and as such, they have been brought up to present standards. The problem appears to be fixed, Mr. W. And, as a token of our appreciation for you as a customer (and for bringing this problem to our attention) we want to send you a $125 gift voucher, good towards your next flight with AA.” Instead of throwing cash, at me, hoping that doing so will work as a soothing balm… Why not simply address the problem head-on? How difficult a thing can that be? Had they done this, AA would still have me for a customer.


And wading even deeper into your ad hominem ****e (and hoping to clarify any misconceptions your have in the process)….

*Waterboard the driver??

No, I hold American Airlines’ management squarely to blame for problems my mother experienced (and I said as much in my post). Any sizable company MUST have some sort of quality assurance program in place, or else it will ultimately collapse under the sheer weight of its own incompetence. Standards are key. In manufacturing, I know they use ISO guidelines. I’m not sure what, if anything, airlines use to assure quality. But whatever it is, once you have your system in place, if something happens - if there’s a breakdown somewhere - then you investigate the problem (not the employee). And once the problem’s been identified, then new and/or modified protections and procedures are put in place which will address the issue. The only time an employee would be at fault, would be in matters involving gross negligence of his or her duties. And so, as long as employees are trained, understand, and are fully capable of doing their jobs (and associated ambiguities are kept to a minimum) then the system can and will run smoothly, and do so with minimal supervision. So easy…

Hope this helps to clarify things.

Oh, and be sure to have a nice day, arsewipe!