turbodriver
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2005
- Posts
- 395
continued....
[FONT=Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif]Friday Sept 30, 2005
I help the Lady and Her Cat.
Friday October 7th (one week later)
I walk into the Medford Station Manager’s office and discuss the events of the 30th.
She asks me if I have any ulterior motives.
Friday October 7th (later in the evening)
Captain Larry tells me that Mr. Hahn informed him and Bill Rainey that I was being investigated regarding a serious matter, although not “the big one.” Mr. Hahn would not indicate to them just exactly what the problem was, and when Captain Larry asked Mr. Hahn if I had been contacted during the course of the investigation, Mr. Hahn indicated that I would be at some point in time in the “investigation.” I share with Larry my story of the Lady and Her Cat, whereupon Larry says I screwed up. Larry indicates that first I showed compassion and then I followed it up with integrity. Larry says we can not do this a Horizon.
Wednesday October 12th
My First Officer during the Medford Cat incident receives a call from Spike “the Hammer” Mckinsey asking about the Medford incident. In addition he asks about another incident involving my apparent use of colorful language with a Medford ground agent regarding what the airplane might smell like if we didn’t receive lav service when it was required.
Wednesday October 12th (later in the day)
I open a voice mail from Haugaard, which basically contains the following elements;
Hi John, hey this is LaMar.
Hey, I was wondering if you could stop by before your next trip for a chat about what happened in Medford the other day…I think you know what I am talking about.
There is no discipline… at this time, just a chat.
There will be a lady here from personnel…just to scratch down some notes.
You are sure welcome to bring someone from the Union…that would be swell.
Thanks John,
Wednesday October 12th (yet later in the day)
I immediately begin coordinating Union representation for a future meeting. (Definitely the right thing to do.)
Nevertheless, I am deeply concerned with the message and share it with many of my fellow pilots. Many are as disgusted as I am, when I tell them my story about the Lady and Her Cat and they then listen to Haugaard’s message. I share my opinion that an outstanding Pilot group like ours deserves a first class Chief Pilot.
Tuesday October 18th
I receive a phone call from Haugaard as I am waiting for a flight home. He says that none of this is really any big deal and he asks me, if given the lady from personnel was not at the meeting, would I be willing to stop by and tell him what happened in Medford? I state that I would be willing to tell him the story over the phone if he would like, as I have a few minutes. He says “Really”
I explain to him my belief that a Chief Pilot should be able to call a Line Captain and ask him what happened in Medford the other day. He agrees.
( Oops …there I go with that integrity thing again)
I tell him that it will be just a moment, as I am near some passengers and I will need to step away to find a more private area. When I return to the phone conversation his audio quality is now very different as it sounds to me that he is on a speaker phone. He makes no indication that anyone else is in the room with him. While I am a bit skeptical, I do not ask him about the speaker phone as I feel very strongly about my advocacy for my passengers and that I have done the right thing. All Pilots I have shared the story with also agree…(except for Larry with that compassion and integrity thing.)
I now share the story of the Lady and Her Cat with Haugaard. In addition to the narrative, I provide the following matter of philosophy. I state that each extension of customer service, whether it be a handshake, a smile, announcing points of interest, turning off the seatbelt sign, or going out of ones way to do something special entails a certain amount of personal risk. Risk of rejection or perhaps the risk of being wrote up because of a perceived error. Accordingly, it is imperative that we are supported at the highest level when we as employees take the risk of doing something special for our customers. Southwest Airlines knows this. He says that he basically agrees with this philosophy and asks if I would put my Medford story in writing and send it to him. I agree.
(Oh but wait…there is more.)
He then indicates that he another matter to discuss. He explains that an Arcadia Load Coordinator has indicated that perhaps I made her feel bad when we were engaged in the weight and balance verification procedures. I stated to Mr. Haugaard that it was not my intent to make her feel bad, and that while my official role was not one of station trainer, I find that I spent a lot of time working with our load coordinators to enable them to do the procedure as we all have been directed. As I recalled, this particular agent was not allowing me to say “checked” to each load compartment verification and was rushing through the procedure. I had therefore stopped the process and had explained the importance of us slowing down and following the procedure as outlined. I further explained to Mr. Haugaard, that as it was not my intent to hurt anybody’s feelings, I would be happy to apologize to the agent if it was necessary. I also stated that I was very proud of the fact that I had worked closely with many of our Load Coordinators in learning the new procedure over the last few months, and that system wide it appears that we now have a high percentage of agents who can do it correctly. Haugaard says he appreciates my efforts and we leave this topic.
(and oh, by the way...)
Haugaard then states that he has also received a report from a Medford Agent about my apparent use of colorful language in describing the effects associated with not getting a lav service. I Explain to Haugaard that I have been know to use colorful language on the flight deck, but that I would not use it in front of any passengers. Haugaard says that perhaps there is an indication that a passenger may have heard something. I ask Haugaard if he has received any passenger complaints. He says he has not. I say well then, there you are. He drops the subject. The Phone conversation is concluded.
Thursday October 20th
As requested, I send the complete narrative about the Lady and Her Cat to Haugaard.
(I then hear nothing more from Haugaard until...)
Wednesday November 23, 2005
I receive a Letter of Warning from Haugaard via certified mail.
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif] (Received via certified mail)
November 23, 2005
Captain Kangas:
This Letter of Warning formally documents our discussions of three separate incidents occurring on 30 September. In ACV, your demeanor and tone was perceived as intimidating and demeaning by a young ramp employee during the load verification process. A short time later, two more incidents were reported during your stopover in MFR: First, you usurped the stations authority and delayed your departure by demanding that a late arriving passenger be boarded. Second, you used extremely profane and offensive language with the MFR ramp personnel during a discussion on the availability and need for lavatory servicing.
I have reviewed your written response to these reports, and carefully considered your comments during our lengthy phone conversation. And I do appreciate your cooperation in offering your perspectives on the matter and working with me on discussing the issues. Moreover, I can certainly appreciate the sincerity of your motivation to take charge of situations you felt you could resolve and thought was the right thing to do. As I understand your explanation, your actions in ACV were only intended to slow down the load verification process to ensure accuracy. You did not intend to offend. Later in MFR, you wrote and stated that you felt it was your duty to assist a distressed and delayed passenger, and also ensure that your aircraft’s lavatory was properly serviced and sanitized for your passenger’s convenience. To be sure, all are honorable intentions. Your opinion is valuable and you are welcome to raise issues to the appropriate station leader on duty, but the ultimate decision resides with that individual, not you.
Regrettably, John, while your motivations are greatly appreciated, your methods were clearly improper. The results of your actions speak for themselves. The young ramp employee in ACV was greatly offended by your perceived mocking and rudeness. I insist that you offer her an apology at your earliest convenience. In MFR, your actions to assist the passenger and delay your departure clearly defied the stations authority and responsibility to manage passenger status while the aircraft is on the ground. However well-intentioned your motivation may have been, you clearly and inappropriately usurped the stations’ authority. In this situation, you had no such authority to interfere with station passenger boarding issues. Finally, you use of crude and profane language in dealing with the lavatory issue is not what I expect from a highly experienced and professional Captain for our airline. It is simply unacceptable and will not be tolerated.
I urge you to consider my comments and suggestions carefully. I know you to operate our aircraft professionally and safely. However, I need you to understand the importance of treating your fellow employees with respect and dignity at all times. And you must let the stations manage their operations without interfering. Failure to do so will only result in even more conflict and possible serious disciplinary action. This letter will be placed in your permanent records.
Very Respectfully,
LaMar Haugaard
Chief Pilot
Oh, and I almost forgot about: [/FONT]http://www.oalj.dol.gov/public/wblower/decsn/02air08a.htm
[FONT=Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif]Friday Sept 30, 2005
I help the Lady and Her Cat.
Friday October 7th (one week later)
I walk into the Medford Station Manager’s office and discuss the events of the 30th.
She asks me if I have any ulterior motives.
Friday October 7th (later in the evening)
Captain Larry tells me that Mr. Hahn informed him and Bill Rainey that I was being investigated regarding a serious matter, although not “the big one.” Mr. Hahn would not indicate to them just exactly what the problem was, and when Captain Larry asked Mr. Hahn if I had been contacted during the course of the investigation, Mr. Hahn indicated that I would be at some point in time in the “investigation.” I share with Larry my story of the Lady and Her Cat, whereupon Larry says I screwed up. Larry indicates that first I showed compassion and then I followed it up with integrity. Larry says we can not do this a Horizon.
Wednesday October 12th
My First Officer during the Medford Cat incident receives a call from Spike “the Hammer” Mckinsey asking about the Medford incident. In addition he asks about another incident involving my apparent use of colorful language with a Medford ground agent regarding what the airplane might smell like if we didn’t receive lav service when it was required.
Wednesday October 12th (later in the day)
I open a voice mail from Haugaard, which basically contains the following elements;
Hi John, hey this is LaMar.
Hey, I was wondering if you could stop by before your next trip for a chat about what happened in Medford the other day…I think you know what I am talking about.
There is no discipline… at this time, just a chat.
There will be a lady here from personnel…just to scratch down some notes.
You are sure welcome to bring someone from the Union…that would be swell.
Thanks John,
Wednesday October 12th (yet later in the day)
I immediately begin coordinating Union representation for a future meeting. (Definitely the right thing to do.)
Nevertheless, I am deeply concerned with the message and share it with many of my fellow pilots. Many are as disgusted as I am, when I tell them my story about the Lady and Her Cat and they then listen to Haugaard’s message. I share my opinion that an outstanding Pilot group like ours deserves a first class Chief Pilot.
Tuesday October 18th
I receive a phone call from Haugaard as I am waiting for a flight home. He says that none of this is really any big deal and he asks me, if given the lady from personnel was not at the meeting, would I be willing to stop by and tell him what happened in Medford? I state that I would be willing to tell him the story over the phone if he would like, as I have a few minutes. He says “Really”
I explain to him my belief that a Chief Pilot should be able to call a Line Captain and ask him what happened in Medford the other day. He agrees.
( Oops …there I go with that integrity thing again)
I tell him that it will be just a moment, as I am near some passengers and I will need to step away to find a more private area. When I return to the phone conversation his audio quality is now very different as it sounds to me that he is on a speaker phone. He makes no indication that anyone else is in the room with him. While I am a bit skeptical, I do not ask him about the speaker phone as I feel very strongly about my advocacy for my passengers and that I have done the right thing. All Pilots I have shared the story with also agree…(except for Larry with that compassion and integrity thing.)
I now share the story of the Lady and Her Cat with Haugaard. In addition to the narrative, I provide the following matter of philosophy. I state that each extension of customer service, whether it be a handshake, a smile, announcing points of interest, turning off the seatbelt sign, or going out of ones way to do something special entails a certain amount of personal risk. Risk of rejection or perhaps the risk of being wrote up because of a perceived error. Accordingly, it is imperative that we are supported at the highest level when we as employees take the risk of doing something special for our customers. Southwest Airlines knows this. He says that he basically agrees with this philosophy and asks if I would put my Medford story in writing and send it to him. I agree.
(Oh but wait…there is more.)
He then indicates that he another matter to discuss. He explains that an Arcadia Load Coordinator has indicated that perhaps I made her feel bad when we were engaged in the weight and balance verification procedures. I stated to Mr. Haugaard that it was not my intent to make her feel bad, and that while my official role was not one of station trainer, I find that I spent a lot of time working with our load coordinators to enable them to do the procedure as we all have been directed. As I recalled, this particular agent was not allowing me to say “checked” to each load compartment verification and was rushing through the procedure. I had therefore stopped the process and had explained the importance of us slowing down and following the procedure as outlined. I further explained to Mr. Haugaard, that as it was not my intent to hurt anybody’s feelings, I would be happy to apologize to the agent if it was necessary. I also stated that I was very proud of the fact that I had worked closely with many of our Load Coordinators in learning the new procedure over the last few months, and that system wide it appears that we now have a high percentage of agents who can do it correctly. Haugaard says he appreciates my efforts and we leave this topic.
(and oh, by the way...)
Haugaard then states that he has also received a report from a Medford Agent about my apparent use of colorful language in describing the effects associated with not getting a lav service. I Explain to Haugaard that I have been know to use colorful language on the flight deck, but that I would not use it in front of any passengers. Haugaard says that perhaps there is an indication that a passenger may have heard something. I ask Haugaard if he has received any passenger complaints. He says he has not. I say well then, there you are. He drops the subject. The Phone conversation is concluded.
Thursday October 20th
As requested, I send the complete narrative about the Lady and Her Cat to Haugaard.
(I then hear nothing more from Haugaard until...)
Wednesday November 23, 2005
I receive a Letter of Warning from Haugaard via certified mail.
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif] (Received via certified mail)
November 23, 2005
Captain Kangas:
This Letter of Warning formally documents our discussions of three separate incidents occurring on 30 September. In ACV, your demeanor and tone was perceived as intimidating and demeaning by a young ramp employee during the load verification process. A short time later, two more incidents were reported during your stopover in MFR: First, you usurped the stations authority and delayed your departure by demanding that a late arriving passenger be boarded. Second, you used extremely profane and offensive language with the MFR ramp personnel during a discussion on the availability and need for lavatory servicing.
I have reviewed your written response to these reports, and carefully considered your comments during our lengthy phone conversation. And I do appreciate your cooperation in offering your perspectives on the matter and working with me on discussing the issues. Moreover, I can certainly appreciate the sincerity of your motivation to take charge of situations you felt you could resolve and thought was the right thing to do. As I understand your explanation, your actions in ACV were only intended to slow down the load verification process to ensure accuracy. You did not intend to offend. Later in MFR, you wrote and stated that you felt it was your duty to assist a distressed and delayed passenger, and also ensure that your aircraft’s lavatory was properly serviced and sanitized for your passenger’s convenience. To be sure, all are honorable intentions. Your opinion is valuable and you are welcome to raise issues to the appropriate station leader on duty, but the ultimate decision resides with that individual, not you.
Regrettably, John, while your motivations are greatly appreciated, your methods were clearly improper. The results of your actions speak for themselves. The young ramp employee in ACV was greatly offended by your perceived mocking and rudeness. I insist that you offer her an apology at your earliest convenience. In MFR, your actions to assist the passenger and delay your departure clearly defied the stations authority and responsibility to manage passenger status while the aircraft is on the ground. However well-intentioned your motivation may have been, you clearly and inappropriately usurped the stations’ authority. In this situation, you had no such authority to interfere with station passenger boarding issues. Finally, you use of crude and profane language in dealing with the lavatory issue is not what I expect from a highly experienced and professional Captain for our airline. It is simply unacceptable and will not be tolerated.
I urge you to consider my comments and suggestions carefully. I know you to operate our aircraft professionally and safely. However, I need you to understand the importance of treating your fellow employees with respect and dignity at all times. And you must let the stations manage their operations without interfering. Failure to do so will only result in even more conflict and possible serious disciplinary action. This letter will be placed in your permanent records.
Very Respectfully,
LaMar Haugaard
Chief Pilot
Oh, and I almost forgot about: [/FONT]http://www.oalj.dol.gov/public/wblower/decsn/02air08a.htm
Last edited:
