Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SouthwestAirlines' Meltdown Shows How Corporations Pit Consumers Against Workers

thecolumn.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 277 posts

Re: SouthwestAirlines' Meltdown Shows How Corporations Pit Consumers Against Workers

#161

Post by bee_rider »

gruez wrote: post #156
bee_rider wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn’t obvious that you were making a proposal, it looked more like you were describing the current situation. As an idea… it might be neat to try at least. But I think you’d have to build the whole service around delivery bidding, there must be abuses in this sort of market, right? As a customer, make 10 accounts and “take” every bid higher than yours, that sort of thing.

> It isn’t obvious that you were making a proposal, it looked more like you were describing the current situation. I realized that after reading some of the replies. I made various edits accordingly. >As an idea… it might be neat to try at least. But I think you’d have to build the whole service around delivery bidding, there must be abuses in this sort of market, right? As a customer, make 10 accounts and “take” eve…

Cool! As I edited into my comment — I do think it could at be an interesting idea.

Re: SouthwestAirlines' Meltdown Shows How Corporations Pit Consumers Against Workers

#162

Post by grogenaut »

joshstrange wrote: post #55
rqtwteye wrote: post #13

It’s the same with the tipping that seems almost everywhere these days. Instead of the workers being paid properly by the company the customer gets guilt tripped to tip and when you don’t tip the worker is angry at the customer, not the company.

Agreed. Not only is tipping a scourge but it doesn't even try to hide what it is, you paying the worker for doing the minimum. In a lot of apps/websites you have to enter a tip before any service is rendered and you have no option to change it later if the service is bad. For some services like Uber Eats/DoorDash I've heard that orders will just sit on a shelf because the tip isn't high enough to entice someone to "c…

If my order doesn't get delivered, uber eats or door dash eat the cost... or I get refunded and their metrics go down. Feels like punishing them for their bad economics.

Re: SouthwestAirlines' Meltdown Shows How Corporations Pit Consumers Against Workers

#163

Post by dragonwriter »

gruez wrote: post #82
joshstrange wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Not only is tipping a scourge but it doesn't even try to hide what it is, you paying the worker for doing the minimum. In a lot of apps/websites you have to enter a tip before any service is rendered and you have no option to change it later if the service is bad. For some services like Uber Eats/DoorDash I've heard that orders will just sit on a shelf because the tip isn't high enough to entice someone to "c…

>For some services like Uber Eats/DoorDash I've heard that orders will just sit on a shelf because the tip isn't high enough to entice someone to "claim" that order. Tipping is mandatory if you want to get your food in any reasonable timeframe. Honestly this is great, for two reasons: 1. You're letting the market figure out the right price for delivery service at any given moment, which reduces deadweight loss. For i…

> You're letting the market figure out the right price for delivery service at any given moment

No, you aren’t, because there is no clear signal to the buyer about acceptable price (except, the outright fraudulent, if one accepts that the tip is actually part of the delivery charge, membership + delivery free charged by the intermediary).

> It strengthens the case for DSPs treating their delivery workers as contractors, because the price isn't set by the DSP.

Unless you are a shareholder of the DSP, this isn’t a benefit.

Re: SouthwestAirlines' Meltdown Shows How Corporations Pit Consumers Against Workers

#164

Post by adriancr »

SnowHill9902 wrote: post #142
adriancr wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

last time i tried that i got a 'please repeat' a couple times and call closed. On the other hand, calling a bank and saying you'd like to report fraud to the prompt directs you really fast to customer support.

If you don’t really have a fraud case to report, you are actually reporting fraud on yourself. Think about it.

That is pretty funny now that you mentioned it.

Re: SouthwestAirlines' Meltdown Shows How Corporations Pit Consumers Against Workers

#165

Post by phpisthebest »

standardUser wrote: post #143
phpisthebest wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure how that is a "sensible metric", how would you even begin to create a wage around that? What is "supporting yourself" even mean? Does a teenager need to make the same wage as a mother of 3? if there are 2 20yo waitstaff one is a single mother living alone, and the other is guy living in his parents basement should one be paid differently due to their life situation? This is problem with basing wages on…

The concept of a living wage is not new and it is calculated and used by many governments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage

the problem here is none of that is actually connected to what a person needs. "Living Wage" Laws are just a different way to implement minimum wages, none of the laws shown on that page are connected to any kind of structure or process by which things needed to "live" like food, housing etc are tabulated where by a wage is set.

it is just a arbitrary wage picked by legislatures exactly like a "minimum wage" law only the "living wage" seems to apply to older people, where "minimum wage" laws apply to everyone. For example a 20yo in the UK can make "minimum wage" but a 24yo will need to make "living wage" both of which are just numbers pulled out of thin air, not connected to "the amount of money you need to support yourself. "

Re: SouthwestAirlines' Meltdown Shows How Corporations Pit Consumers Against Workers

#166

Post by Macha »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #71
barbazoo wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you go about finding out how to access the manager of some department within MegaCorp? All one can do these days is fill out some contact form and maybe someday getting an email from some noreply email address. I'm also chuckling at the thought of me mentioning that I'm a stock holder. This feels very detached from reality.

The simplest way to find out would be to ask the nice person in front of you who's trying to help you.

The base level staff often aren't allowed discretion to do more than "computer says no".

Re: SouthwestAirlines' Meltdown Shows How Corporations Pit Consumers Against Workers

#167

Post by mbg721 »

gruez wrote: post #122
mbg721 wrote: post #86

The main thing Southwest's issues show is how quickly you can burn through consumer goodwill. For years their bread and butter was being the "We're not like the other airlines" airline, and now here we are. It's almost as though all that sophisticated brand theory was a load of hogwash the whole time.

> It's almost as though all that sophisticated brand theory was a load of hogwash the whole time. I don't get it, how does them "burning through consumer goodwill" through their issues show that "sophisticated brand theory" (ie. "We're not like the other airlines") is bullshit? If anything it shows that it's working exactly as advertised. When they were "not like the other airlines" they were liked, and now they're h…

The idea was, other airlines were soulless automata that didn't care about you, but SW could be personable because they were small and perky. That's all gone now.

Re: SouthwestAirlines' Meltdown Shows How Corporations Pit Consumers Against Workers

#168

Post by ceejayoz »

phpisthebest wrote: post #93
woodruffw wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem here is that workers now want to be "paid properly" (what ever that means) and still get tips. One sensible metric is that you should be able to support yourself while living in the area you work (or an area nearby such that it isn't a significant financial hardship or timesink to commute to work). Service jobs largely fail on that metric, effectively using government money and family support structures…

I am not sure how that is a "sensible metric", how would you even begin to create a wage around that? What is "supporting yourself" even mean? Does a teenager need to make the same wage as a mother of 3? if there are 2 20yo waitstaff one is a single mother living alone, and the other is guy living in his parents basement should one be paid differently due to their life situation? This is problem with basing wages on…

All of those examples should be able to afford the basics off their wage. An apartment that isn’t three hours from work or requiring hot beds, transportation, food, healthcare, etc.

Yes, it gets complicated, but “$7.25/hr isn’t enough” is not complicated.

Re: SouthwestAirlines' Meltdown Shows How Corporations Pit Consumers Against Workers

#169

Post by Macha »

NegativeK wrote: post #148
8bitsrule wrote: post #33

>The waiter hasn’t been replaced by an iPad, they’ve been replaced by you. I've noticed as well that in grocery-store lines. Where customers are being conditioned to patiently wait in long lines to be next at the checkout machines. To wave their purchases over lasers, then pack them into each and every bag they'll pay for. Be careful what you put in the bagging area! the machines' metallic voices shriek at the custom…

Your experience with self-checkout is drastically worse than mine. I use it because it's always faster than the cashier lines unless those are empty, which they never are.

Part of the slowness of the cashier lines is based on the business deciding that delay is acceptable when deciding how many lines to open

Re: SouthwestAirlines' Meltdown Shows How Corporations Pit Consumers Against Workers

#170

Post by IIsi50MHz »

WantonQuantum wrote: post #8
subradios wrote: post #2

But automated call centers do save the customer time. 9 times out of 10 a user problem is easily remediated by pointing the user to the correct manual. If it wasn't, phone trees and other pre-tech phone routing would never save the company money at all! Customers would buy products with customer service that actually solved their problem instead. Customer service solving the customer problem in the fastest possible t…

I’ve never encountered an automated phone system that can direct me to the manual for a product. Do you have an example of this? I have, however, encountered phone systems that make it literally impossible to talk to a person.

A number of years ago, Tracfone realised it _would_ be a good thing for customers to be able to automatic'ly extend their end-of-service date rather than having to remember to buying airtime minutes they don't need (due to already having lots of unused minutes) just to prevent getting their number suspended.

Tracfone also decided it should be possible to activate this feature using just your phone number and a credit card, without having to sign into the website. There wasn't even a way for customers to sign into anything!

Years later, they added a possibility of customers signing into an online account. But doing so did not give access to payment information enter in the old no-sign-in system. The call-in help number's menu system also got changed sometime, such that it was no longer possible to talk to a person — all permutations of the menu tree, as well as fallbacks like "just press zero a few times" resulted in loops.The mandated contact number for the vendor on credit card bills also went to this menu system.

The end result was that the only way to modify or cancel a recurring payment created under the old no-sign-in system seemed to be telling the credit card company to either refuse charges from Tracfone or to close the revolving account. Doing so would cause Tracfone to cancel your service (which might not be what either you or Tracfone wanted).

And after they cancelled? The remnants of Tracfone automation would do two things: send your now-disabled phone occasional messages trying to entice you back, and keep submitting charges to the credit card company to be rejected. When the credit card's refuse-charges instruction expired after five years, Tracfone would resume taking payment, for a now unrecoverable (already reassigned) phone number, for an IMEI that had not appeared any network for years.

On the upside, I know somebody who has no problems with current Tracfone.

Post reply on HN