[Corone1960]

This is my filed complaint with CONTINENTAL AIRLINES today. Would anyone having been mistreated by this Nazi Female Agent named A. please PM me ? I intend to taken legal action. WWII is over!

"
Dear Sirs :

Please consider the following statement as a formal incident report, from which I expect a prompt answer, follow up and a settlement from your customer service.

I checked-in flight CO339 departing MIA to EWR @ 03.24.11 10:25AM. I had a connection to the 18:15 flight to CDG France. This would have been a 15hr10mn journey.

Due to the fire at MIA airport the same day, I arrived early and had to wake up at 5:00AM. Before boarding the plane, there were several PA announcements stating that “because the plane was small, oversized carry-one items were to be checked”. I did not worry as my carry-on DID P-E-R-F-E-C-T-L-Y fit regulations.

As boarding the plane from the back, I was one of the last one to be called. At this point, everything went ugly and fast.

As I was entering the plane, your gate agent named A* requested that, in an very inappropriate tone, I check my luggage, which I refused. She invoked all overhead bins were full, so she had to check my bags.

The real problem was that she requested at least 20 people before me to check oversized carry-on, tagging the pieces. Unfortunately, these people did not follow instructions, de-tagged the luggage and placed them in the overhead bins. How do I know ? She completely lost it when she shouted over the 2-way radio : “OMG, I got a situation here, everybody de-tagged, there’s no more space in the plane…”.

FACT #1: I am not responsible for CONTINENTAL to operate “small sized” aircrafts, in the same time imposing tight regulations / significant fees to customers.

FACT#2: I fully complied with said regulations.

FACT#3: I am not responsible for your Agent’s errors, which in this case are fully proven.

Now, with the inappropriate manner:

- Your employee’s version, as reportedly logged: I would have pointed my finger at her and told her she was a piece of ****.

- My version: I formally deny having ever insulted your Agent. That is her version, that can be only vouched by other Agents (of course). Any case, why would I have insulted her, as she was the one hysterical ?

This is the way I felt: treated as low level cattle driven to slaughter, given instructions like I was a detainee in a WWII Nazi Concentration Camp. Everything there but whips and dogs. I am not understating. I am ready to make a notarized statement. Your Agent never looked me in the eye, shouting at me to leave my carry-on at the plane doorstep. I requested she’d better get the oversized ones out, so to let me in with my compliance (Did I mention I only had my diabetic medicines, breakables and laptop ?).

From this point, I respectfully requested that “she did not treat me as a piece of ****”. This was her problem, not mine. She solved it by getting me out of the plane.

I was denied boarding, asked to leave the plane, threatened with security, and directed to your MIA supervisor outside the secured area. I immediately complied with these instructions.

I waited about 2.5 hours to meet with your supervisor, Ms. *, who handled my situation the best way she could, under the duress of the MIA fire situation. I told her this version and informed her that I would write to CONTINENTAL pertaining to this matter (ccing her).

Rest of the story:

I boarded the 1:45 flight to EWR. For the record, please note that I have witnessed the SAME burlesque show put by your Aufseherin A* (please do check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aufseherin).

I came into EWR, but could not get into my original 6:15 flight to PARIS because of my checked luggage, that was to be re-routed in the same aircraft for security reasons. So I waited till 9:25, actually 11:00 because the plan was late. We landed in PARIS after 11:15 local. No baggage on the carrousel, another 45mn wait, baggage report, to find out that my bag had actually flown with the 6:15 flight (I bow to your security loopholes). So my journey lasted more than 24 hours, mistreatment and aggravation included…"

End of story: NEVER, NEVER, NEVER FLY CONTINENTAL AIRLINES

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

With regard to carry-ons: If an airline wants to bust your chops my understanding is that they can make you check ANYTHING that does not fit COMPLETELY under the seat in front of you. If you're sitting in a bulkhead seat you could be SOL and be told you can't carry anything on. Hence, the overhead rack exists only for those occasions where the airline wants to do you a favor.

To protect yourself against jerks like the woman you encountered you have to weed through an airline's website and find the dimensional restrictions for carry-ons. Also, if your itinerary involves travel on a commuter aircraft (ie: a Beechcraft 1900) the maximum dimensions for a carry-on will be further restricted. What may be acceptable on a Boeing 737 may not fit on a commuter aircraft.

The best solution is to avoid overseas travel on ANY US-based airline. You may have thought you were saving money by using Continental. However, as you can see, you paid-out a lot in aggravation. If you had booked a non-stop MIA - CDG flight you, almost certainly, would not have had the problem you described. Even with the Frankfurt connection, you would have done better on Lufthansa.

[Corone1960]

Yeah, right... But not so...

The carry-on fitted perfectly the said required dimensions... So no luck for the airline...

The REAL problem, guys and girls, is the way they treat you. And you're the one paying! Sorry, I am not into Nazi SM...

Anyways, thanks for the input.

Corone1960

[jimworcs]

It is all about the attitude... These employees start from a hostile approach and seem shocked when the passenger reacts. The only choice we have is to stop using them.

The hyperbole, particularly in red is a bit off putting. To be inconvenienced the way you were is annoying and outrageous, but your suffering is not comparable with those who suffered at the hands of the nazi's, and your choice of analogy is a bit offensive.

The problem of the attitude and abuse of power displayed by airline employees is so endemic, it is time someone reigned them in. If the airlines won't do it, perhaps there should be a regulator. The use of video at airports should be used more extensively. Employees who abuse their power should be dismissed.

[Corone1960]

Originally Posted by jimworcs

It is all about the attitude... These employees start from a hostile approach and seem shocked when the passenger reacts. The only choice we have is to stop using them.

The hyperbole, particularly in red is a bit off putting. To be inconvenienced the way you were is annoying and outrageous, but your suffering is not comparable with those who suffered at the hands of the nazi's, and your choice of analogy is a bit offensive.

The problem of the attitude and abuse of power displayed by airline employees is so endemic, it is time someone reigned them in. If the airlines won't do it, perhaps there should be a regulator. The use of video at airports should be used more extensively. Employees who abuse their power should be dismissed.

I follow you 100%.

My mother surviverd a Nazi Camp, so I guess that makes me able to compare the treatment I received.

Everything there, but whips and dogs. A living nightmare.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Corone1960