Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: WSJ Poll: 12% of Americans judge the Bush decade ‘good’ or ‘great’ Previous entry: Today’s New Terrible World-Destroying Statistic

Let’s just take it all out on the powerless!

Choads

I’m way late on this story about Chuck Schumer calling a flight attendant a “bitch”, mostly because I didn’t feel any need to point out that it’s really not so great of a man to fling that word at women to put them in their place. Like Tracy Clark-Flory pointed out, it’s hard to even get that outraged, because the word “bitch” is flung around so often that you get numb, which creates this weird irony, because when a man calls you a bitch, he usually wants it to sting really bad, and it doesn’t have that power because it’s used so much.  So, I skipped it.  But M. LeBlanc has pulled me back in with her wily blogging ways.  She’s linked to Michael Wolff, no doubt thinking he’s being daring, talking about how Schumer is some kind of hero for calling some poor woman who works shitty hours for low pay a bitch. 

Amongst his many sins against common sense, Wolff blows off the word “bitch” as a “mild epithet”, which Matt calls him out for.  Like I said before, when a man flings it at you, it’s quite clear that it’s anything but mild—-he usually wants it to hurt bad, and is less than pleased if you’re numb to it.  (Which is why “cunt” is often flung in its stead, to keep the misogyny fresh.)  But this is mild compared to some of the crazed shit that Wolff says, while pissing on those less fortunate than he. 

Among the worst things you can do in upper-middle-class, politically-correct, don’t-call-attention-to-yourself culture is insult a service person. This is counter-intuitive because one of the things that is most often done in upper-middle-class culture is complain about service.

Presumably, we are to laugh at this tendency of people to think it’s less than noble to lash out at people who make very little money to put up with your bullshit.  Because, as Wolff will explain, sometimes the help isn’t being submissive and apologetic enough for continuing to have sentience while waiting on you.

But the arrogance and entitlement of a United States senator is no more probable then the petty tyrannies, surly dismissiveness, and automaton-like manner of a flight attendant. Such contempt has only increased with 9/11-inspired laws that make looking cross-eyed at airline personnel an imprisonable offense.

And this is where he demonstrates why we need rules like, “Don’t just snap at the stewardess because she’s doing her damn job.”  Because people like Wolff are childish, and like children, will blame the person closest to them instead of the person responsible for their pain.  The flight attendant has to tell you to turn off your cell phone, asshole.  Believe you and me, she wishes more than you probably do that this wasn’t a rule, and therefore she didn’t have to enforce it on snotty people who blame her, due to their childishness.  Because you can’t tell the difference between the person responsible for the rule and the person who has to enforce it, we have have rules of etiquette to save you from yourself.

There are two points here. The smaller one has to do with the idiotic notion that cell phones might interfere with airline systems, which everybody knows (or strongly suspects) is bogus. The larger one is an odd conceit that it is somehow rude, domineering, and unnecessary, to quibble about the service you’re getting—that if you do, you are obviously way too entitled.


Except, of course, that there probably wasn’t any problem with the service.  I’m sure the flight attendant is very good at her job, and provides exactly the service that the customer pays for.  In fact, I would point out that if she did tell Schumer that his phone call was holding up the plane, she was doing a bang-up job of service.  Because there are other people on the flight, and like a good server, she was thinking of their comfort and desire to get to their destination.  For this, I commend her.  I have to fly somewhat frequently, and I always want to beat that asshole who holds up the plane for no reason about the head and shoulders. 

As for the comment about the cell phone rule, well, I’ve actually heard a flight attendant tell a passenger that the rule is mainly there so that people don’t bother their seatmates.  While I’m not happy that they lie to us about why there’s a rule, I appreciate the sentiment driving it.  If people sat on their phone during their entire airplane flights, there would be a lot more violence on airplanes.  But whether or not you agree with the rule, the point is that the flight attendant doesn’t have a choice about enforcing it.  Someone else wrote that rule, and common sense would dictate that you complain to the person in charge, not the person with no real power.  But Wolff doesn’t truck with that.  He prefers to lash out at the immediate human being.

Rather, more to the point, he’s expressing the frustration which everybody on an airplane pretty much always feels—so, logically, he should be cheered.

His excuse is that many service people are rude and incompetent.  I should point out again that the flight attendant seems to be very competent, since part of her job is facing up to the unpleasant task of making assholes behave so everyone else on the plane can arrive at their destination on time.  Since Wolff can’t tell the difference between incompetent service and someone who is enforcing a rule he finds annoying, I’ll bet he makes this mistake on service people who are helpless all the time.  After all, as M. says, most of them do the best they can.

Just a few days ago I was flying from LA back to Washington. I had a layover in Minneapolis, and I guess the airport screwed up fairly bad. We arrived on time, but our gate was occupied, and they took their sweet time reassigning us to another gate, and then we had to sit there for 15 mins while we waited for the ground crew to show up. All in all, we were about 30 minutes late, which was just enough for me to miss my flight. I was shocked at how agitated people were, and how rude to the flight attendants. I did an informal poll of the people around me, and none of them seemed to have a legitimate reason for being pissed off, beyond “I want to catch my flight.” But why? Important meeting you need to be at? Kid’s piano recital? Catching a once-a-day flight to Beijing? Nope. No one had a reason. The flight attendant was very apologetic when I told her that I was going to miss my flight. I was like “eh.” So, I waited another two hours.

I will say this: Those of us who get crabby when forced to wait around in airports are not bad people, nor are we imperious because we want to get to our destination.  I’ve definitely had reasons to be upset when my flight is delayed.  I missed a day in Amsterdam because of it once.  I’ve missed parties I planned on attending at conferences, and keynote speakers as well.  When you’re paying your money or your labor to get to events, you damn well want to get there.  And when you’re coming home and you’re tired, you want to get there, too.  So I have no problem with people being crabby.

But there’s being crabby and there’s taking it out on innocent people.  A flight attendant doing everything she can?  You should be exquisitely polite.  A customer service person whose job is to stall and distract you from the fact that they can put you on another flight?  You should be polite, but firm and insistent, making it clear you respect them as a human being, but that the distraction techniques they’re taught to use aren’t going to work and you will be getting what you stood in line for.  Remember at all times that it’s not their fault that their bosses make them play this game with you.  I often say it, to relieve them of the pressure of having to go through the steps they’ve no doubt been made to memorize.  They’re just trying to make a living.  Most of them, if they had their way, would just give you what you want straight away.

Now, that said, I won’t deny that there’s occasionally someone working any kind of job that gets on some crazy ass power trip and decides to lord it over you.  But honestly, they’re rarely the flight attendant at airports.  The rare imperious asshole I’ve met while flying tends to work security, and they enjoy rifling through people’s stuff and screaming orders at them a little too much.  Then again, theirs is not a service job, and the problem is probably that they fall too much into the adversarial role they’ve been given.  Service workers aren’t in an adversarial role, and it’s really quite rare when they act like they are.  Which is why Wolff’s paranoia really sounds off the charts here:

Everybody knows modern life is a pitched battle between the server and the served

Now that speaks more to his guilt than any of the other behaviors he sneers at, such as not berating service workers for enforcing their bosses’ rules.  Only people who feel deeply guilty about their position get into those paranoid cycles where they think people lower on the totem pole are constantly stealing from them and trying to fuck with them.  It’s the same mentality that drives racists to load up on guns and drives sexists to run around the internet screaming about the plague of false rape accusations.  When I see someone that paranoid, I wonder what kind of nastiness in their heart makes them feel so guilty.  Except in Wolff’s case, he hangs out his contempt for working people trying to scrape by right on his sleeve.

There is the view, or the rationalization, that service personnel should not be blamed for the sins of their corporate owners, which, if you think about it, makes service employees out to be a form of human shield in front of corporate management (not to mention letting the server off the hook for his or her own tyrannies and incompetence).

Of course, there was nothing tyrannical or incompetent about a flight attendant doing exactly the job she was told to do.  So, in fact, Wolff’s suggestion that we scream at service workers for enforcing rules they hate that their bosses make them enforce—-instead of, you know, actually taking up our complaints with the people responsible—-is an ugly form of cowardice.  Oh, Michael has frustrations, but he doesn’t want to take them out on someone with power!  So he’s going to lash out at someone making $10 an hour and whose job probably involves cleaning up people’s bodily fluids in some capacity.  Maybe he thinks because they deal with other people’s real shit, they should have to swallow his bullshit, too.

I hope next time he eats out, the waiter spits in his food.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 06:54 PM • (111) Comments

All I can say is that any guy who treats people like shit who handle his food where he can’t see it deserves what he gets.

Comment #1: DaveL  on  12/21  at  07:04 PM

IIRC, Schumer didn’t call the flight attendant a bitch to her face, but muttered it under his breath. Apparently, it wasn’t loud enough for her to hear, but it was loud enough for a Republican congressional aide to overhear and blog about, which started the ball rolling.

I agree that no one should be anything other than polite at all times, but sometimes frustration just gets the better of you. I know I’ve muttered things about people that I’m glad they (or anyone else) couldn’t hear.

Comment #2: Bitter Scribe  on  12/21  at  07:10 PM

whose job is to stall and distract you from the fact that they can put you on another flight?

More on this, please? It’s the first I’ve heard that this is an established practice.

Comment #3: Trystero  on  12/21  at  07:18 PM

I think my reading of the situation is more like Bitter Scribe’s—if Schumer said it under his breath you can bet he’d have said “bastard” if it had been a male steward and in either case its more a case of relieving pent up anger and agression privately than actually trying to hurt the person.  I absolutely think its unforgiveable for it to be said out loud or with intent to hurt. But I’m less certain about it if its said more or less privately. I mean, look, even Chuck Schumer (who I can’t stand for various political reasons having to do with Joe Lieberman and the DSCC’s failure to fully support Lamont) can experience frustrations related to his job, his personal life, travel, and telephone. These are all very high pressure situations for all of us and the coming together of these things in a liminal space like a plane/take off time can be very difficult for people to handle. Some people can just take the tension or it doesn’t affect them. Others get tense. I’d say this was more a case of shit stirring by the republican congressional aide than anything else.

Be that as it may the Wolff article is the last word in middle class ressentiment—what? I finally get my ticket to the middle class/upper class and I can’t even take my prestige out on the help? Then what’s the point!!

aimai

Comment #4: aimai  on  12/21  at  07:19 PM

The smaller one has to do with the idiotic notion that cell phones might interfere with airline systems, which everybody knows (or strongly suspects) is bogus.

I actually saw this on “Mythbusters” and it doesn’t appear to be completely bogus.  There is some evidence that the cell phone’s constant searching for a signal could potentially interfere with unshielded cockpit instrumentation in older aircraft, so the FAA has decided to err on the side of caution.  Which, personally, I don’t have a problem with—for something small like that, I’d really prefer the FAA to err on the side of caution rather than lose a 757 or two.

Having worked retail and customer service jobs myself, I do try to be polite even if the person I’m dealing with is rude to me because I know how much those jobs suck.  And you know what?  Even if the service person I’m dealing with starts off being rude, they generally tone it down if I respond politely.

Comment #5: Mnemosyne  on  12/21  at  07:30 PM

She’s linked to Michael Wolff, no doubt thinking he’s being daring, talking about how Schumer is some kind of hero for calling some poor woman who works shitty hours for low pay a bitch.

Ah, Michael Wolff, one of those business and media reporters who thinks he’s exactly like the powerful and wealthy people he covers. It’s adorable, in a pathetic way.

Among the worst things you can do in upper-middle-class, politically-correct, don’t-call-attention-to-yourself culture is insult a service person.

Yes, Michael, but it’s mainly because reasonable people understand that insulting a person who has little to no control over the quality of over-all service isn’t going to resolve the bloody issue. That’s what the escalation process is for.

This is counter-intuitive because one of the things that is most often done in upper-middle-class culture is complain about service.

Poor Michael, conflating the service with the service person. I complain about bad service all the time, but I recognise it as a symptom of poor training, misplaced priorities, and other dysfunctions associated with large corporations run by MBAs in line with 4th Purpose/Human Resources Culture practises.

Unless he’s bought into that crappy system himself in the name of advancement (often the case with petty bureaucrats and security types), the low-level customer service person is usually as much its victim as the aggrieved customer is.

Oh, Michael has frustrations, but he doesn’t want to take them out on someone with power!  So he’s going to lash out at someone making $10 an hour and whose job probably involves cleaning up people’s bodily fluids in some capacity.

Bingo. Wolff wouldn’t get those schweet invues with cable company and media execs and the like if he was criticising their top-down policies. But it’s no problem establishing himself as one of the boys by kicking some flight attendant or waiter.

Comment #6: Gracchus.  on  12/21  at  07:32 PM

Schumer may not have meant to hurt anyone’s feelings, but Wolff is applauding the behavior of lashing out at service people, who he loathes.  And Wolff is my main target here.

But Schumer isn’t off the hook.  We all get frustrated, but it’s on us to remember who is the source of our pain, and accept with grace when no one is really to blame.  Being upset and grumpy is one thing, but if you call someone a bitch behind her back, you have to ask yourself why your understanding of a situation is so skewed, when you know damn well how things got to be how they are.

Comment #7: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/21  at  07:50 PM

I think everyone should have to work at a service, retail, or food service job for at least three months during their lifetime.

My brother and I both spent some time working in retail, and we both try to be extremely polite to retail workers, wait staff, etc. My sister, on the other hand, worked in either professor’s offices or laboratories since college, and she’s got an occasional tendency to be rude in restaurants and elsewhere. I do think it’s because she’s never seen life from the other side of the menu or the other side of the checkout counter.

Comment #8: Scott  on  12/21  at  07:55 PM

Ironically, it’s petty tyrants like Wolff who set the policies that cause other petty tyrants like Wolff to feel justified in going off on the service workers around them.

Perhaps, if someone used a pair of pliers to pull the corncobs from their petty tyrant asses, they might not be such assholes…

Comment #9: MikeEss  on  12/21  at  07:55 PM

I used to travel a LOT for work, mostly to Europe, and I have to say that I can count on one hand the number of rude air travel employees I’ve encountered, and (as Amanda referenced) those tended to be more on the security side of things.  At least one guy in customer service in Rome was spectacularly rude, but that was one.guy.  On the other hand, I can’t even count the number of times i’ve witnessed ridiculous, overentitled passengers who throw fits the second they don’t get what they want even though they haven’t paid for it. 

Just two weeks ago, I was flying back from Houston through New Orleans, where I was given specific instructions to re-check in at the gate because I was transferring airlines as well as planes.  So I got on the line at the gate, where each of the 6 people in front of me asked about changing seats.  And to each one, the desk clerk pointed out that the plane was full so she couldn’t change seats.  And even though she said this loudly enough for me, 6 people back, to hear, no one got out of line, and proceeded to ask her the same thing.  Even after she then got on the microphone and explained, again, that there would be no seat changing because there were no more seats.  I mean, really.  This was a situation where no one was outright “rude”, but at the same time, clogging up the entire system because you think you’re somehow special and the rules don’t apply to you?  is still rude.

In any event, I’ve certainly gotten frustrated and short when I was flying constant back and forths to Europe, but even at my worst, I tried to be polite, and when I felt myself starting to lose it, I would at least try to preface any interaction by saying something like “I know you’re just trying to do your job and this isn’t your fault - I’m just frustrated with the situation”.  It’s amazing how far that acknowledgement that “it’s not you, it’s me” can get you in any sort of customer service interaction.

Comment #10: sam  on  12/21  at  07:56 PM

I actually saw this on “Mythbusters” and it doesn’t appear to be completely bogus.  There is some evidence that the cell phone’s constant searching for a signal could potentially interfere with unshielded cockpit instrumentation in older aircraft, so the FAA has decided to err on the side of caution.  Which, personally, I don’t have a problem with—for something small like that, I’d really prefer the FAA to err on the side of caution rather than lose a 757 or two.
Comment #5: Mnemosyne on 12/21 at 05:30 PM

Someone perceived cell phone radiation as a threat to navigation at some point.  It may have been real or it may have been theoretical.  It was probably at a time when not a lot of people had cell phones, so not a lot of people complained about it.  But the die is cast—now it’s forbidden. 

And because the rule exists, it has a kind of incumbent advantage.  They would have to test every possible configuration of every possible plane and phone, under every possible condition, and see no anomalies, before they could revoke the rule. 

I would guess that the reason they don’t do this exhaustive testing required to revoke it is probably because it would result in more annoyed passengers than leaving the rule in place.  And there are better ways for the FAA to spend their time and money.

Comment #11: oldfeminist  on  12/21  at  08:05 PM

Wow.  I saw Wolff on Olbermann once, and I was surprised because the once in a while I’ve read his column in Vanity Fair, I liked it.  But he was sexist on Olberman.  They were talking about Rupert Murdoch, I think Wolf worte a book on him?, and Wolff was making these blatantly sexist comments and pretty much came out and called Murdoch pussy whipped. 

But this statement here: “Everybody knows modern life is a pitched battle between the server and the served” takes the case.  It explains a lot about our society though.  I love in a condo complex and I just today found out that the board met and put raise freezes on our maintenece guys, and only gave them 150 dollars for a xmas bonus!  And the President of the board, actually said, “they’re lucky to have jobs”.

I am really through the roof on this.  I give the two who I know well because they work my section and always help me out (not that I need it that often, but when I do, they are there, and I totally trust them in my home whether I’m there by myself, or not there at all, and that’s worth something) 50 bucks each in a card.  But most don’t.  The president of the board who said that works just like most people, for someone else.  She has no power at her job.  She’s basically someone who takes phone orders.  So that’s how you act when you get a little power over someone else?  How quickly we assume the language of our overlords.  It’s disgusting, but I’m going to pass out flyers before the next board election with the title in bold “They’re lucky to have a job”, and try and get people to vote against all of the sitting board members.

Comment #12: JennyLI  on  12/21  at  08:07 PM

Oops, pressed “blaspheme” too soon.  Amanda:

As for the comment about the cell phone rule, well, I’ve actually heard a flight attendant tell a passenger that the rule is mainly there so that people don’t bother their seatmates.  While I’m not happy that they lie to us about why there’s a rule

I would be very wary of taking what you overheard a flight attendant telling a passenger about a rule as gospel. 

As I said, it’s probably a big factor in not aggressively pursuing revocation of the rule, because its unintended consequences actually are benign if not positive.  But the real reason is almost certainly a justified kind of paranoia about the flight equipment.  It’s a huge part of pilot culture.

Comment #13: oldfeminist  on  12/21  at  08:08 PM

What Wolff and the rest of the entitled douchebags that hassle service staff in airplanes, stores, hotels, restaurants, etc simply cannot handle is the fact that reality doesn’t give a single flying fuck about how badly you want something or how much of a hurry you are in, and sometimes SHIT HAPPENS. The other day I was in a line of cars waiting behind a drawbridge in the up position, and—I kid you not—this one ridiculous douchebag was beeping his motherfucking horn! As if the drawbridge gives a shit!!

I think people like Wolff and Schumer and the moron beeping his horn at the drawbridge are really just angry at themselves for not being eleventy fucktillionaires who never ever have to wait a single motherfucking second for anything at any time and never ever have to deal with people who aren’t bowing down before the magnificence of their fucktillions of dollars.

Comment #14: PhysioProf  on  12/21  at  08:11 PM

As for Schumer, I’d have to have been there.  I don’t know that the stewardess wasn’t nasty to him, and I can’t honestly say I’ve never called a woman a bitch.  I have worked to replace it with the gender-neutral asshole, but I’ve definitely used the word.  Without being there, I can’t really get that upset about it.  I think if the report was that he had said to the stewardess “you bitch” I would find it upsetting. But he said to his traveling companion “she was a bitch”?  I just don’t see that as a big deal. Schumer may be an asshole, that wouldn’t surprise me.  Having watched these Senators in action over the past couple of months with their preening bs, lies, melodrama, and faux outrage, I’d be more surprised if Schumer wasn’t an asshole.  But no one really knows what happened and in what tone the request was made.

Comment #15: JennyLI  on  12/21  at  08:13 PM

There is the view, or the rationalization, that service personnel should not be blamed for the sins of their corporate owners, which, if you think about it, makes service employees out to be a form of human shield in front of corporate management (not to mention letting the server off the hook for his or her own tyrannies and incompetence).

Apparently Wolff actually admits that service employees are a human shield between the customer and corporate management. 

And then quickly ignores that completely in favor of the idea that the server might be tyrannical and incompetent so it’s okay to assume *that’s* the problem instead.

Ass.

Comment #16: oldfeminist  on  12/21  at  08:15 PM

“I kid you not—this one ridiculous douchebag was beeping his motherfucking horn! As if the drawbridge gives a shit!! “

LMAO

Frigging lunatics.  Oh if I saw that I would whip out my flip recorder and put that up on youtube.

Comment #17: JennyLI  on  12/21  at  08:16 PM

Calling the flight attendant—or anyone else whose job it is to help you—-names is totally unacceptable.

But I do think airline employees tend to be ruder than most service employees. Most airlines couldn’t give a shit about their customers (they have a captive audience). This is why they’re happy to leave people stranded on an airplane overnight without letting them off. That is a corporate culture that I’m sure rubs off on at least some of the people who work for them.  (Just like, say Enron had a shady corporate culture that attracted dicks who were totally unethical). My own personal experience with airline employees at the airport has been utterly horrible at times. There might be 60-70% who are nice, harried people trying to do the best they can with limited means. And some people are goodhearted but are just tired of the bullshit aspects of the job (crabby people at their worst, shit pay, demoralizing treatment by their companies). But there are also a large percentage who seem to enjoy telling people that they can’t help—more than in most service jobs.

I’ve worked other service jobs, so I’m not a stranger to how shitty people can be, but am I the only one who has experienced airline attendants being downright demeaning and cruel when it’s not called for? I’ve had people lie and tell me they couldn’t put me on a flight when they were just being spiteful and trying to screw over customers of their “partner” airline, I’ve had people lie and tell me I couldn’t check in for a flight when I had a full 20 minutes before the check-in time expired, laugh at me (when I was a ten year old) when I cried because I missed my flight, etc. etc. etc.

My point being that yes, it’s shitty to be mean to people who are just there to help you, (and in Schumer’s case that seems like what happened), but I think there is a deep-seated resentment of the airlines, and, by extension, airline employees, that is at least partially justified.

Comment #18: t-ster  on  12/21  at  08:22 PM

the Wolff article is the last word in middle class ressentiment—what? I finally get my ticket to the middle class/upper class and I can’t even take my prestige out on the help? Then what’s the point!!

We have a winner.  aimai’s right in as much as the “epithet” is as much or more about class than it is about gender.

He’s a senator, and she’s a stewardess, and he resented being told what to do by the likes of a mere plebian.  As if his telephone call with Mr. Reid was a matter of such urgency and importance that the flight attendant couldn’t possibly understand.

Newsflash, senators:  The only reason us plebs don’t do your jobs already is because the business of America is business, and we’re too busy making sure the businesses are running and doing things like making sure flights are taking off on time.  Were it not for us having to do the actual intellectual work of making sure the U.S. economy continues to operate, we would have very little use for the privileged, entitled classes who make up the majority of the national and state legislatures.  In fact, if campaigns were financed differently, what would stop legislators from being elected the same as union officers?  The only difference between us, as people, is that most senators come from economically advantaged backgrounds. It’s not that they are smarter or more hardworking than average Americans.  They just happened to have the luck to be born to wealthy families and likely inherited their means, or just married into families where they could (John Kerry and John McCain, I’m looking at you).

What they seem to forget is that us peons’ taxes pay their salaries, and if they’re not careful, they’ll be some of the first ones to get dragged out of their penthouses to be beheaded if they don’t start showing a more respectful attitude toward the proles. 

One day, it’s a senator name-calling under his breath.  The next day, that same guy could very well be banned from certain airlines for refusing to obey crewmember instructions.  All because we gave a little man a little power and he suddenly thought it made him powerful.

Comment #19: Mezosub  on  12/21  at  08:28 PM

Everybody knows modern life is a pitched battle between the server and the served

Would it be rude of me to point out that he’s doing MY job of stocking the fires of class warfare?

Comment #20: BlackBloc  on  12/21  at  08:33 PM

I think people like Wolff and Schumer and the moron beeping his horn at the drawbridge are really just angry at themselves for not being eleventy fucktillionaires who never ever have to wait a single motherfucking second for anything at any time and never ever have to deal with people who aren’t bowing down before the magnificence of their fucktillions of dollars.

Back when I worked at the paper, we’d occasionally get to overhear the office receptionist get calls from belligerently angry people. Often about late delivery, but there were all kinds of reasons. Some of them would start out cartoonishly angry, screaming, swearing, demanding not to be put on hold (but also demanding to be transferred), and just treating her like the punching bag for their miserable, failed lives.

This would go on for a bit until she’d say, “Let me transfer you to our publisher.” Then it was an immediate “No, no, no” and click. It stopped being fun when they couldn’t abuse the help anymore.

Comment #21: Scott  on  12/21  at  09:12 PM

Quibbling with service: “Excuse me, but we’ve been seated about 15 minutes and no one has come by to take our order.”
Yelling and using offensive language isn’t quibbling, it’s acting like an over-entitled jackass who likes stomping on the little people.

Comment #22: Samantha Vimes  on  12/21  at  09:13 PM

I recognise it as a symptom of poor training, misplaced priorities, and other dysfunctions associated with large corporations run by MBAs in line with 4th Purpose/Human Resources Culture practises.

Some of it is also a lack of options.  Now that we have a service economy, anyone who lacks education, training, or experience has to take a service job out of necessity.  And many people just aren’t good at customer service.  They don’t like people, have short tempers, aren’t good at juggling tasks or troubleshooting.  Fifty years ago, they would’ve been working on an assembly line, but now they’re forced to work with the public, which is almost always a thankless task.

Comment #23: keshmeshi  on  12/21  at  09:27 PM

It seems that as patriarchy continues to go on drawing its dying breaths, cowardice in all its forms is being enshrined as bravery.  You have to be really audacacious to go against the grain of political correctness and slap the bitch around, goes the typical sentiment.  Hey, show her what you’re made of!  You’re a man, not a mosquito, and there’s no reason you should have to risk anything in this world, or confront any painful home truths, because that is not your responsibility, being a male.  Why, you need your comfort, your armchair, no interruptions to your solipsism, just to be let be.  And then along comes a bitch, entering your space, and making your feel like you have to engage with the real world again.  Nobody should have to endure that!

Comment #24: scratchy888  on  12/21  at  09:32 PM

There are two points here. The smaller one has to do with the idiotic notion that cell phones might interfere with airline systems, which everybody knows (or strongly suspects) is bogus.

Given that there are no cell towers at 30,000 feet I do have to ask who the hell you think you’ll be calling.

Sometimes rules exist for real, honest to god, full blow legitimate reasons.  But because you can’t wrap your tiny little head around why seat belts might save you in a car accident or how sitting too close to the TV is bad for your vision - fuck it all, it must be a conspiracy to deprive me of an infinitesimal amount of happiness.

Conspiracy nut is nutty.

Comment #25: Zifnab  on  12/21  at  09:35 PM

Scott—for years I worked in an insurance company as a clerk who ended up being made the ‘opt-out’ for the phone system. We had a huge number of people who would rant at us, but refuse when we asked if they’d like to speak to their agent’s manager. I was baffled by their choice to be ineffective, but I don’t think I ever looked at it that way.

Comment #26: Samantha Vimes  on  12/21  at  09:35 PM

Assholes like Schumer take politeness as an invitation to negotiate, so stewardi have to be hardasses to get their job done.

Perhaps the Schumers of this world could hire their own sycophants, to gently tickle their balls in times when they cant get their own way.

Comment #27: Hector B.  on  12/21  at  09:35 PM

They just happened to have the luck to be born to wealthy families and likely inherited their means, or just married into families where they could (John Kerry and John McCain, I’m looking at you).

That’s a lot of the Senate, and the remainder are self-made millionaires like Mark Warner or Jon Corzine (which also has an element of luck).

Though McCain was from a powerful naval family even before he married into wealth—his father and grandfather were Admirals, IIRC. He may not have had as much money in his family as a Budweiser distributor heiress, but the McCains were basically military nobility.

Comment #28: Ben D.  on  12/21  at  09:42 PM

“Some of it is also a lack of options.  Now that we have a service economy, anyone who lacks education, training, or experience has to take a service job out of necessity.  And many people just aren’t good at customer service.  They don’t like people, have short tempers, aren’t good at juggling tasks or troubleshooting.  Fifty years ago, they would’ve been working on an assembly line, but now they’re forced to work with the public, which is almost always a thankless task. “

Those are really good points.

Comment #29: JennyLI  on  12/21  at  09:45 PM

“He may not have had as much money in his family as a Budweiser distributor heiress, but the McCains were basically military nobility. “

True but, they probably knew how many houses they owned, you know?  Let’s face it, marrying her put him onto a completey rarified level.  He didn’t know how many houses he owned, and she actually said in an interview that small private plane was really the only way to get around Arizona.

Comment #30: JennyLI  on  12/21  at  09:46 PM

What’s really ironic about McCain’s wealth is that his wife got her family’s wealth through beer distributing—which is an entirely unnecessary industry that would not exist if not for government intervention in the market (something Republicans supposedly decry). There is no reason to have distributors, none, they’re just a middleman mandated into law to stand between the alcohol maker and store. They would not exist if not for obsolete ABC laws.

Comment #31: Ben D.  on  12/21  at  09:56 PM

And many people just aren’t good at customer service.  They don’t like people, have short tempers, aren’t good at juggling tasks or troubleshooting.

This!

Customer service is a huge field for unskilled workers.  And good customer service is a skill.  It’s damn hard.  It’s especially hard because you usually don’t have the power to fix most problems but you are expected to make every customer feel as though the non-solutions you’ve presented to them will help them out. 

In my job, there are some things I can fix, and some things I know I can relay to another department to get fixed, and then there are some things that I know SOMEONE can fix, but I can’t, and I’ll get in trouble if suggest it to the customer, because I’m supposed to convince them to settle for something less.  And I hate dealing with that.  I hate talking to a customer who has a problem I know can be solved if only that customer insisted on speaking to a supervisor!  But this is how a lot of customer service is structured.  Offer the customer the bare minimum unless they kick up a fuss.

In my perfect world, customers with problems should be given the highest level of service UNLESS they are loud assholes, in which case they should be told to take their business elsewhere.  Can we really blame customers who get irate and abusive, when getting irate and abusive is the fastest way to get your issue resolved?

Comment #32: Denise  on  12/21  at  09:58 PM

Sorry, this is not your best work Amanda though I agree with what I see as your main point.

Conflating flight attendants with $10 an hour people is a bit of a reach.  As “service” jobs go that of flight attendant is better than most.

Above someone said something about almost never having bad contacts with flight attendants.  Wow, I want to know what airlines they frequent so I can try them.  I used to fly a lot.  In the last few years not so much, partly because of work and partly because I avoid it all costs.  That flying has become a trying experience isn’t the fault of flight attendants, I just see them piling on a lot more than they used to.  Whether or not it’s well deserved revenge doesn’t make it any prettier.  Of course I’m not writing any of this to justify being an asshole.  I’m just saying that I’m seeing a picture of the flying experience that doesn’t connect with that I’ve seen and I would put flight attendants way down on the list of service people who need defending.

There’s another thing, and it’s not directly connected to this topic but it came up in this discussion.  People that are paid to lie to you.  I don’t think it’s acceptable.  Yes, there are times when working in the service industry a small lie or truth avoiding isn’t a bad thing.  But then there are the institutional liars and while I don’t begrudge anyone their job, I don’t have to respect someone who accepts lying as a condition of employment.  If you’re lying to me then I don’t have to smile and blithely take your bullshit.  That’s not license to be an asshole (as I said above).

Comment #33: ice weasel  on  12/21  at  10:18 PM

Scott—for years I worked in an insurance company as a clerk who ended up being made the ‘opt-out’ for the phone system. We had a huge number of people who would rant at us, but refuse when we asked if they’d like to speak to their agent’s manager. I was baffled by their choice to be ineffective, but I don’t think I ever looked at it that way.

Once we realized what they were doing, it cleared up all kinds of questions for us about what kind of assholes called us.

There was another job I’d worked at years ago where one particular guy would call and abuse the two women who’d usually answer the phones first. But when they were busy with other calls, I’d answer pick up the phone when Line 3 lit up. And every single time I talked to that guy, he was sweet as sugar. That’s because I have a deep, scary voice*, and he wasn’t interested in trying to soothe his fragile ego by bellowing at a man.

So yeah, part of it is class, because what Schumer and Wolff want to do is abuse a peon. But a lot of it sexism, because they get more of an ego-boost about screaming at women than men.

* I had another job where I was the go-to guy for dealing with difficult professors, because I sounded like I was eight feet tall, reptilian, and carnivorous, and no professor wants to anger a dinosaur. But that’s neither here nor there…  smile

Comment #34: Scott  on  12/21  at  10:19 PM

I hate talking to a customer who has a problem I know can be solved if only that customer insisted on speaking to a supervisor!

Hee.  I learned that trick by working phone customer service myself.  Now I always politely but firmly insist on speaking to a supervisor when needed, and it’s pretty rare that I get stonewalled.

Comment #35: Mnemosyne  on  12/21  at  10:24 PM

Assholes like Schumer take politeness as an invitation to negotiate, so stewardi have to be hardasses to get their job done.
Comment #27: Hector B.  on 12/21 at 07:35 PM

Especially since they’re women, and therefore must negotiate *everything*.

Comment #36: oldfeminist  on  12/21  at  10:26 PM

Oh, and I will agree with the people pointing out that it seems like 90 percent of the people working the gate are assholes who enjoy being assholes.  I rarely have trouble with the flight attendants, but the gate attendants are almost always jerks.  I’ve had better experiences being patted down by TSA than I have with gate attendants.

Comment #37: Mnemosyne  on  12/21  at  10:33 PM

Flying just sucks period. That’s why I always take the train unless, of course, there’s a big ocean in the way.

Sure, Amtrak seems slower, but when you take into account how early you have to get to the airport now with security concerns, the amount of time it takes to go through security, and the drive to and from the airport (which is usually 20-40 mins from downtown) it really isn’t that much of an advantage, especially in the Northeast.

Meanwhile with Amtrak the station is almost always right downtown, you can get there 10 minutes before the train leaves, the seats are more comfortable and the journey seems much more relaxed all around.

Comment #38: Ben D.  on  12/21  at  10:46 PM

My experience with all levels of service staff in all sorts of enterprises—airlines, restaurants, stores, etc—is that they develop an excellent “radar” for people who do not look at them as fellow human beings and thus as undeserving of human dignity. These are the people who seem to always get “bad service” no matter where they go and what they do.

Conversely, those who make it clear through their words and actions that they consider service staff as fellow human beings and this as deserving of human dignity almost always receive excellent service. Yes, there is a very small fraction of service staff who treat everyone like shit, but my experience is that it is very, very rare.

Gate agents are in a particularly shitty situation, because every single fucking yahoo in line thinks they deserve special treatment like exit-row seats and first-class upgrades. Once PhysioWife and I showed up for a coast-to-coast flight on the wrong fucking day! We didn’t even realize it until we were at the gate.

We explained to the gate agent that we fucked up and asked if there was anything she could do to help us, and she said she’d see what she could do, to please sit down and wait.

The flight was overbooked, and people were going apeshit at the gate agent, screaming and getting in her face and leaning over the counter, etc. This went on for a good solid half hour, while we just sat patiently waiting. About 15 minutes before the flight was to scheduled to leave, and the pitch of outraged entitlement was continuing at a maximum, the gate agent came over to us, handed us boarding passes for seats 1A and 1B, and wished us a pleasant flight.

I really don’t understand where people get the cockamamie idea that “the squeaky wheel gets the grease”. If you act like an impatient squeaky asshole, service staff affirmatively want to not help you. If you behave patiently and otherwise with dignity, service staff want to give you good service, and almost always do.

Comment #39: PhysioProf  on  12/21  at  10:51 PM

You guys are just now figuring out that Chuckie is a total jerk?  The man seems to really believe that he is the center of the universe.

Comment #40: tomonthebay  on  12/21  at  10:57 PM

I think people may be missing something in Wolff’s screed: when he describes “upper-middle-class, politically-correct, don’t-call-attention-to-yourself culture”, he’s calling everyone who doesn’t insult servers as a bunch of effete, elitist wimps. He, like Schumer, is the real man, who can call an underpaid woman a bitch just loud enough so that all his friends hear, but she’s supposed to act like she didn’t.

Oh, and a couple other things:

1) yet another reason for turning off cell phones on planes: your phone can see anywhere from half a dozen to 100+ cells (over a city) at the same time, with similar signal strengths at each. It will pass through those cells ate a rate somewhere between 2 and 50 cells a minute, taking up channel capacity and handoff bandwidth as it goes. No cell company wants to design its systems to handle that kind of weirdness reliably, and they don’t want to deal with all the complaints about dropped calls and excessive roaming charges from East Flyover Communications, said complaints coming from exactly the kind of people who would want to use their phones on a plane.

2) Starting salaries for flights attendants are in fact close enough to $20K a year as makes no difference. (It’s not $10 an hour because the booked hours are weird, but that doesn’t help earnings.)

Comment #41: paul  on  12/21  at  11:43 PM

As someone with airline experience I gotta say that physioprof is right about the loudest people not getting the help.  It was actually policy where I was because problem customers make EVERYONE unhappy.  If anyone threatens to not use the carrier anymore the appropriate response is to immediately offer to cancel their frequent flyer account, which usually shut them up.

Also, with regards to the gate guards being difficult, there is something you have to understand about their jobs.  You know how to stop people from skirting the technical limits of the rules the FAA does not let passengers know what all of the rules they are supposed to obey?  To keep that information from becoming public the security personnel you deal with at the airport are not allowed to know the rules they are supposed to enforce either.  All they know is there are frequent surprise inspections and they can be fired on the spot for failing to enforce the rules they do not know.

Comment #42: Beyla  on  12/21  at  11:47 PM

@ Ben D.:  I agree that Amtrak can save time, or at least be reasonable, in the Northeast (specifically the Accela Boston-NYC-DC trains).  Outside of that, though, my experience has been that the train is much slower than flying, even after incorporating ground transportation and other waiting times.  For instance, the train from LA to San Francisco takes 11 hours.  One could start at LA Union Station and end up at Oakland-Jack London Sq in 3-4 hours if one flies.  (Cab to Burbank airport 30 min, 1 hour at Burbank airport,  1 hour flight on Southwest, 30 min cab to the Oakland station.  Add an extra hour if one prefers to use public transport at both ends.)  In fact, when I lived in LA, I did a day trip to Berkeley a couple of times, which is literally impossible on the train, even though LA and SF are only 360 miles apart…

Comment #43: topometropolis  on  12/21  at  11:53 PM

Can’t cell phones be used to set off explosive devices? Or has TV lied to me again?

Comment #44: maurinsky  on  12/21  at  11:58 PM

topometropolis , I’m surprised California trains are that slow! I figured they would be in the deep south and midwest, but I thought California-Oregon-Washington would be almost as good as the Northeast.

Who owns the tracks in Cali, do you know?

Comment #45: Ben D.  on  12/21  at  11:58 PM

I would have loved to have seen the look on Schumer"s face if she had reported him for failing to follow flight crew instructions. Isn’t that the sort of thing they arrest you in these post 9/11 days? If he were a peon, I’m sure they would have done so.

Comment #46: Therealhellkitty  on  12/22  at  12:00 AM

I figured they would be in the deep south and midwest

There are trains in the mid-west?  There certainly weren’t any to be found in Ohio.

Comment #47: laterose  on  12/22  at  12:04 AM

In defense of the passengers in the story , way upthread, of the “jerks” who got into line and each and every one of them asked to have their seat reassigned? Despite the fact that they’d just heard the stewardess explain that the flight was full? All of them were told by the person who checked their bags that they *must* ask to have their seats changed by the boarding stewardess. Most of them were probably travelling with small children—this happens to us all the time. The airlines refuse to even try to seat a family of four together—no matter how young the children are. They assure you that “something” will be done for you when you get to the gate.  And what happens if its not? Which of those businessmen really wants to sit next to my puking child? Or, one day, my elderly parent?  It used to be that you could block your seats when you bought them. Now, no more.  If you don’t fight for it right then you get separated from your kids and sometimes they aren’t ready for that. Its at the gate, or once you are on board and the stewardess is frantically begging everyone to sit down.

aimai

Comment #48: aimai  on  12/22  at  12:09 AM

Then you weren’t looking hard enough, laterose, Every state except South Dakota, Wyoming, and Hawaii has Amtrak service. Alaska has rail inter-city rail service too but they call it something else.

Comment #49: Ben D.  on  12/22  at  12:10 AM

I think you are all missing the point when you call flight attendants Service Workers. Sure the flight attendant will serve you drinks and go get you a pillow but that is not why they are on-board that aircraft. Their real job has nothing to do with making you comfortable and everything to do with keeping you safe. Flight attendants are there because the FAA says they have to be there. Do you really think in an era of cost-cutting the airlines would continue to have flight attendants if they weren’t mandated by the FAA?

When Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger successfully ditched his A320 in the Hudson we were all amazed and impressed by his piloting. Rightfully so as that was a remarkable feat of flying. The Captain, however was not alone and getting the passengers off the aircraft was the duty of the Flight Attendants. When the Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators gave a Master’s Award for the incident they gave it to the entire crew of Flight 1549, including the flight attendants.

Some of the FAA mandated duties of a Flight Attendant:
Safety briefings
Compliance checks of seat belt fastening
Conducting passenger briefings
Assuring passenger compliance with stowage of the food and beverage tray
Assuring passenger compliance with the seat belt and no smoking placards/lights
Checking for the proper stowage of carry-on baggage
Attending distressed passengers
Responding to emergency situations

Now I have worked service jobs before and my current job might be classified as such so i do not mean to demean service employees. However not many wait people or bartenders have “evacuate 100+ passengers from a burning or sinking aircraft” in their job description.

Think about it the next time the flight attendant isn’t prompt enough in response to your hitting the call button. If things go bad he or she could save your life.

Comment #50: Colorado Dave  on  12/22  at  12:32 AM

laterose: if you’re content to ride along the northern border of Ohio, or from Cinci to Indy or DC, there are trains in Ohio.

Comment #51: Hector B.  on  12/22  at  12:41 AM

Colorado Dave, the only way I can get my ass on a plane is if I’m floating on a cocktail of Jack and Xanax and after doing a few days’ worth of checking all the plane crashes in the past few years and what the determined cause was.  So although I hate flying more than is justifiable for someone who flies as often as I do, I know full well that flight attendants are little more than glorified waiters/waitresses 10,000 miles in the sky because the odds that they have to respond to an emergency situation are very, very slim. 

Unless we’re calling it an “emergency situation” every time a drunk asshole yells at the flight attendant and causes the plane to make an emergency landing.  Which really doesn’t fit that bill either since not only am I sure the servers at your local Applebee’s would call a manager/the cops if a customer was being an abusive asshole, but I’ve been on two such flights and the flight attendants didn’t do shit out of the ordinary but maybe fill out additional paperwork.

Really, though, I’m just cranky about the existence of drink carts on planes.  I’d rather pay 3 bucks less for a plane ticket and not have them bother me unless there’s an emergency beyond someone’s thirst.

Comment #52: Rachel,II  on  12/22  at  01:01 AM

@ Ben D.: Who owns the tracks in Cali, do you know?

The freight companies, I believe—- my understanding is that the Acela NE Corridor is the only place in the US where Amtrak actually owns and controls the track.  It’s also the case that the train from LA to SF takes the scenic route along the coast rather than going through the Central Valley, which contributes to the length of the trip.

There are some very useful trains in CA, e.g. the Surfliner from SLO -> LA -> San Deigo and the Capital Corridor train from San Jose -> Berkeley -> Sacramento.

Comment #53: topometropolis  on  12/22  at  01:04 AM

I stand corrected Ben D.  They just for some reason decided to by-pass the center of the state.  I’m generally not going to drive for a couple hours just to get to the train. 

I should note that I do agree that trains are more pleasant than other forms of transportation.  Even when they’re pretty slow.  The trains have been my favorite thing about California.  I’m just wishing my home state didn’t do away with most of them long ago.  All that’s left of the old Union Station in the capitol is an arch in a new shopping district.

Comment #54: laterose  on  12/22  at  01:08 AM

In continuing my tradition of having back-to-back posts.

I have encountered so few rude airline employees that I can’t remember an instance. Part of this might have to do with how much I love to fly. The first time I was on an airplane was 42 years ago when I was 5. I have loved to fly ever since. No matter what my mood when I start approaching the airport and see the planes landing and taking off I feel like a little kid again.

So, when I deal with gate agents or flight attendants or even TSA I’m in a good mood. I guess my mood shows as I can get through an airport pretty quickly. I fly enough that I know how to navigate an airport. I can take the Black Diamond Expert Line through security. I always carry my US Passport as ID. And these days, being of swarthy Mediterranean stock, I always make sure I shave before heading out.

My pleasant demeanor pays off when trouble arises. I had a 5am flight out of La Guardia once. I was taking advantage of time zones in that I can leave La Guardia at 5am and still get to work on time. It makes for a nice weekend jaunt. Well this time it didn’t work. All flights out of LGA were canceled. A storm had prevented night flights from arriving so there were no planes. After waiting in line for re-booking I finally got to the ticket agent. The first words out of my mouth were “I’m going to be the nicest person you see all morning” We exchanged pleasantries for awhile before I asked “when can I get back to Denver?” She poked around on her computer and seated me in First Class (business actually it was a 2 class flight) on the first flight to Denver. Being nice to people pays.

For those defending trains. I love trains. I’ve been to Europe enough to know how efficient trains can be. They don’t, however, replace planes. I live in Denver. I can get off work on a Thursday and catch a 6:30 pm flight to La Guardia. I can be at my Midtown Hotel 9 hours later. I can catch a late afternoon flight back and thanks to the time zones be home in time for dinner (I don’t try the early morning thing anymore). Even if we had more than 2 trains a day (one East the other West) nine hours after leaving Denver I’d be in Omaha.

Comment #55: Colorado Dave  on  12/22  at  01:10 AM

Rachel,

I don’t like to drink on planes. I’m used to the altitude so it is not an issue for me but planes are pressurized to 5,000 feet. If you aren’t used to the altitude you can get pretty loopy. Also the air is dry in the cabin, even drier than Denver. Contrary to popular belief alcohol is not a thirst quencher, it dries you out. Combine that with the lack of humidity on a plane and flying while drinking can be pretty miserable.

Me, once I get past security I buy a big bottle of water, I have the sandwich I made in advance for a snack and I am engrossed by the window marveling in the fact that I’m at 45,000 feet.

Heck maybe the fact that planes are pressurized to a high altitude (5,280) might explain some peoples disdain for flying (a feeling I cannot understand). If you’re not used to the altitude one or two beers, even if they were drunk on the concourse, can get you a little more riled up than you are used to.

Comment #56: Colorado Dave  on  12/22  at  01:24 AM

As for the comment about the cell phone rule, well, I’ve actually heard a flight attendant tell a passenger that the rule is mainly there so that people don’t bother their seatmates.

Actually, I’ve heard that it’s so that you’re not distracted by anything during takeoff. Same kind of thing, but a bit more important - if something starts to go wrong, they want people to be alert, so it’s a safety issue.

But - if I’m reading the story right, he didn’t speak to the flight attendant, he muttered to himself.

If the flight attendant didn’t hear it, and wasn’t intended to hear it, I think this is making a big deal over nothing.

Comment #57: LongHairedWeirdo  on  12/22  at  01:25 AM

Even in the Midwest, the train is pretty slow, e.g. Chicago to Minneapolis is 8 hours whereas it’s just a 1.5 hour flight from Midway airport which is only a 30 minute ride from the loop on the Orange line.  So again you’d be looking at 4 hours via air vs. 8 for the train.  Amtrak starts to become more competitive on a shorter trip like Chicago to St. Louis which is 5.5 hours by train and 1 hour by air.  Especially as one needs to go out of O’Hare to get a nonstop, which adds 15-30 minutes to the schedule.

Out of Chicago, Amtrak is probably faster than flying for distances under 200 miles (assuming you’re starting in the Loop) but beyond that flying wins out timewise (though not in terms of hassle, or, typically, cost).  Of course, part of the problem is that except maybe in the NE corridor, there isn’t an Amtrak train that’s faster than just driving…

Comment #58: topometropolis  on  12/22  at  01:27 AM

Topometropolis,

Thanks to Denver’s lack of public transportation the hardest part about getting from the Chicago Loop to my home in Capital Hill Denver is getting from DIA to my home. You can get to Midway from the Loop in about 15 minutes.

Comment #59: Colorado Dave  on  12/22  at  01:42 AM

There’s a very good chance that one cell phone might not cause meaningful interference to an airplane’s equipment.  However, I suspect there’s also a good chance that 50 of them will.

Comment #60: sacundim  on  12/22  at  01:55 AM

The longest train trip I’ve taken is from Richmond, VA to northern Vermont (with a brief stopover in Washington). It was around 12-14 hours, but still felt more relaxing than the plane trips from Richmond to NYC, even though the latter only takes about three hours including the travel to and from the airports and security.

The Amtrak trains in Virginia are OK even though the freight companies own them as long as you take the right number train! Some of the trains stop at every fucking telephone pole in Prince William and Fairfax Counties, while the better ones do the straight Petersburg-Richmond-Fredericksburg-Alexandria route. The latter are far, far better.

Comment #61: Ben D.  on  12/22  at  02:02 AM

Driving is still possibly more or equal to the hassle (depending on your fear of heights, and how much you like going through security) of flying, and most of the time more of a hassle than the train due to traffic.

If you’re not in a hurry, the train wins for trips of 200-500 miles.

If we got real, European-style high speed rail with dedicated tracks in this country it would be even better (ESPECIALLY for places like Dallas-San Antonio-Houston and San Francisco-Los Angeles-San Diego) but I’m not holding my breath on that.

Comment #62: Ben D.  on  12/22  at  02:12 AM

If we got real, European-style high speed rail with dedicated tracks in this country it would be even better (ESPECIALLY for places like Dallas-San Antonio-Houston and San Francisco-Los Angeles-San Diego) but I’m not holding my breath on that.

Yeah, but then dark-skinned people of modest means could quickly get from the city to the rural heartland, and we’d have to upgrade a bunch of our infrastructure for everyone’s benefit and OMG SOCIALISM

Comment #63: Sour Kraut  on  12/22  at  03:19 AM

Always be nice to service people, especially airline service people.  They have the most thankless jobs in the world, dealing with unhappy people most of the time.

Re: high-speed rail, this interesting map came out last summer:
High-Speed Rail Corridor Descriptions

Notice how Dallas and Houston are NOT connected by a “designated corridor.”  I call this the “Southwest Airlines Gap.”  Southwest does a lot of business between Dallas and Houston and I’m sure they lobbied against such a corridor.

Comment #64: liberalrob  on  12/22  at  04:20 AM

And even though she said this loudly enough for me, 6 people back, to hear, no one got out of line, and proceeded to ask her the same thing. 

This I blame on the airlines.  If they didn’t teach their employees to distract and lie to customers right away, then there wouldn’t be a need to push.  Sometimes the answer changes if you hang in long enough.  Probably not on seat changes, but definitely when it comes to get on other flights.

Comment #65: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/22  at  09:44 AM

I would be very wary of taking what you overheard a flight attendant telling a passenger about a rule as gospel.

I didn’t take it as “gospel”.  I’m open to further evidence.  That’s my general rule.  But I trust that people in the industry know better than I do, I’ve heard that from newspaper sources that have more social esteem, and it makes a lot of sense.  So, when reliable evidence comes in, I’m willing to listen, but I don’t as a general rule discount what service workers say.  Having been one, I know they are often very sharp people.

Comment #66: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/22  at  09:54 AM

Aimai:

Most of them were probably travelling with small children—this happens to us all the time. The airlines refuse to even try to seat a family of four together—no matter how young the children are.

As the person who was there, I can tell you with 100% certainty that this was not the case in this particular situation, although I’m sure that this happens all the time (and boo on the airlines for making family travel that much more complicated).  In this situation, it was a collection of “pairs” of adults who wanted to sit together, along with 2 “singles” who wanted to switch from middle seats. 

The gate agent was actually incredibly patient in explaining the situation over and over again, but you’d think after, say, persistent but fruitless customer number 3, people would get the idea.

Comment #67: sam  on  12/22  at  10:08 AM

but I think there is a deep-seated resentment of the airlines, and, by extension, airline employees, that is at least partially justified.

You’re making the same mistake as Wolff—-assuming ill intent because someone is telling you something you don’t like to hear (that your flight is delayed, etc).  It’s important for all human beings living in the H.R. culture to understand that service employees are forced, against their will, to cover for the bosses.  When I find myself wanting to be impatient with a service employee, I remember, “They had to pee in a cup to get this job.”  They are being routinely humiliated by the same people making the rules.  They aren’t against you. You’re on the same side, oppressed by the invisible bosses.

Comment #68: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/22  at  10:08 AM

I don’t understand why anyone is even discussing the point of the no cell phones rule.  It doesn’t matter if cell phones interfere with signals or not, because the flight attendants can’t change that rule no matter how much you insult them.  It doesn’t matter if the rule is bogus or completely legitimate or somewhere in between, because the flight attendants can’t do a damn thing about it either way.

Comment #69: bananacat  on  12/22  at  10:10 AM

I couldn’t get my dander up too much on this because of the “pampered senator acts like entitled jerk, what a surprise” angle.  I’m getting too cynical.

Comment #70: Geeno  on  12/22  at  10:22 AM

But then there are the institutional liars and while I don’t begrudge anyone their job, I don’t have to respect someone who accepts lying as a condition of employment.

Now this is a really good situation to point out that someone is blinded by privilege.  Someone who has never been broke, never been desperate, never actually wondered where the rent money is coming from could say this.  Anyone who has ever actually had to wait for the next paycheck to pay rent?  Would never, ever say this. 

They have to pee in cups.  That’s the job market for 90% of Americans, ice.  There is no opting out, unless you are willing to starve.  If your boss says, “Lie for me,” then you say, “Every other job requires this or worse.” 

Do you think they should live on the streets?  Or are you willing to start blaming the real bad guys, the ones who make the rules?

Comment #71: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/22  at  10:35 AM

Perhaps the Schumers of this world could hire their own sycophants

I thought that’s what a Senator’s staff is for.

Comment #72: Tyro  on  12/22  at  10:45 AM

paul @ #41 - that’s the actual reason for the no-cell-phones rule. at 35k+feet, an active cell phone is in range of several thousand cells. and at 600+ mph, that phone is popping in and out of range of those cells too fast for them to handle efficiently. the interference thing was totally post-hoc.

which isn’t to say that it’s bogus. put a blackberry near a speakerphone - i’m sure everyone by now is familiar with that “rat-ta-ta-tat-ta-ta-tat” that it causes through interference. pilots don’t like anything that can interfere with their instruments during ascent and descent.

the cell phone rule isn’t the only example of misunderstood or misapplied rules on airplanes. my personal favorite is the recent rule, implemented by most airlines, that prohibits you from putting laptops, books, or other things in the seatback pocket. the actual origin of this rule is straightforward - someone at an airline (i think it was southwest) came up with the idea to reduce the cost of repairing ripped seatback pockets. no safety concern, just saving a few pennies. but it didn’t take long to the invent the myth of laptops flying all over the cabin.

sam @ #10 - there is more to the desire to stay in line hoping for a seat in spite of all evidence that none will appear than irrational hope or elitist attitudes. sure, many people won’t believe it unless told in person, and some people think their (real or imagined) status with the airline entitles them to special dispensation.  but the absence of seats is sadly often not the result of an absence of unoccupied seats. some seats are held for passengers on delayed arriving flights who are making a connection. some seats are held for “deadheading” employees of that airline (who are allowed to fly free if space is available). some seats are actually not sold by the airline, and are held for assignment at the gate agent’s discretion - and the gate agent, out of exhaustion, confusion, or spite, might simply have not released those seats.

wolff’s comment about being laid over for 2 hours in minneapolis is interesting. he “polls” his fellow passengers, and according to him, none came up with “a legitimate reason” for being upset at being delayed. personally, being delayed is a perfectly valid reason to be upset. clearly, wolff has no family he’s waiting to see or who will be inconvenienced at the change in schedule to pick him up. being stuck in an airport is a breeze for someone who can expense his food, water, and (if necessary) overnight lodging. not to mention the fact that he probably flies enough that he’s an elite on northwest airlines (the LA-DC trip with stop in minneapolis gives it away), and treated far better by the airline than most of the passengers.

Comment #73: cj  on  12/22  at  11:15 AM

They aren’t against you. You’re on the same side, oppressed by the invisible bosses.

If you keep this up I’ll have to break into a French rendition of the Internationale.

Comment #74: BlackBloc  on  12/22  at  11:20 AM

From #71

Someone who has never been broke, never been desperate, never actually wondered where the rent money is coming from could say this.  Anyone who has ever actually had to wait for the next paycheck to pay rent?  Would never, ever say this. 

They have to pee in cups.  That’s the job market for 90% of Americans, ice.  There is no opting out, unless you are willing to starve.  If your boss says, “Lie for me,” then you say, “Every other job requires this or worse.”

What really brings it home for you is when you find yourself fighting with other employees, whom you have nothing against personally, to try and look good to your superiors. This is when you realize that you are scared.

Comment #75: atheist  on  12/22  at  11:46 AM

sam @ #10 - there is more to the desire to stay in line hoping for a seat in spite of all evidence that none will appear than irrational hope or elitist attitudes. sure, many people won’t believe it unless told in person, and some people think their (real or imagined) status with the airline entitles them to special dispensation.  but the absence of seats is sadly often not the result of an absence of unoccupied seats. some seats are held for passengers on delayed arriving flights who are making a connection. some seats are held for “deadheading” employees of that airline (who are allowed to fly free if space is available). some seats are actually not sold by the airline, and are held for assignment at the gate agent’s discretion - and the gate agent, out of exhaustion, confusion, or spite, might simply have not released those seats.

cj - not disagreeing with you on this, but I’d also like to point out that the particular trip I’m talking about was the Sunday after Thanksgiving.  Otherwise known as one of the busiest travel days of the year, and every flight I was on was not just full but oversold.  Quite frankly, given my short connection times and having to change terminals (and go through security again) at New Orleans, I was just thankful they hadn’t given away MY seat!  But, given that this is widely known as one of the worst travel days of the year, I was generally inclined to believe the gate agent when she said repeatedly that there were no seats.  Why my friend thought getting married in Houston on Thanksgiving weekend was a good idea, I’ll never know.  smile

Comment #76: sam  on  12/22  at  11:49 AM

Actually, old cell phone technology and old air navigation & communication technology could interfer; so no, it is not strictly a lie.  Most current technologies don’t have many demonstartable issues.  You want to take a chance? 
Even if it were, what the hell is a Senator doing making a call, presumably so important it can’t wait,  on a cell phone in so insanely public a place as an airplane?

Okay, back to the rest of the post.

Comment #77: helen w. h.  on  12/22  at  12:42 PM

libralrob,
More likely American than Southwest.  AA traditionally has had a strangle hold on Texas.

Comment #78: helen w. h.  on  12/22  at  01:14 PM

Um, peeing in cups is not that degrading. I mean, I don’t think we should do mandatory drug testing anywhere, but I’ve had to do it for a number of jobs and I don’t think it’s a hallmark of our indentured servitude or anything. The hallmark? Shitty bosses yelling at you, thinking you’re stupid or deliberately jerking you around just because you’re there subordinate. 

And having a beef with lying isn’t necessarily a sign of privilege?  Look, needing to pay the rent certainly changes your opinion of what jobs you’re willing to take, but everyone has standards even when broke, and it’s okay if someone thinks lying is one of them.  My friend grew up kicked around between different shitty, abusive relatives, never had two cents to rub together, and has worked several utterly horrible jobs. She’s still paying down debt from a semester of college 12 years ago, she often hasn’t had money for rent—but she still won’t take certain types of jobs—ones that involve deceiving customers or peddling things that are actively bad for them. That’s not to say that everyone has to have such stringent ethics about jobs, but I think it’s legitimate for some people to feel strongly about it, and it’s not necessarily a sign of privilege.

And to people who say “I love airports, I go all the time and never have bad service, and if you do it’s because you’re some kind of jerk” or the people who are saying “I’ve had tons of shitty service”: the sample size of airport encounters for most people is much smaller than for other things. People go shopping, buy food, etc. much more frequently than they take a plane.  So it’s much more likely that each person is forming an impression based on a smaller number of encounters that may not be representative of air travel as a whole.

Also, behaving like a dick in the airport is very likely to result in a shitty encounter, but it doesn’t follow that just because someone had a bad experience they were behaving like a boor to the flight attendants. And just because you have great experiences doesn’t mean you were behaving like pure sunshine and light.

Comment #79: t-ster  on  12/22  at  01:31 PM

service =/= servile

It’s amazing how many people don’t get this, or don’t want to.

Comment #80: seeker6079  on  12/22  at  01:34 PM

I don’t fly that often, but I’ve honestly never had a bad experience with either gate or flight personnel.  The security check people, yes.*  Oh yes.  But never with anyone else.  Then again, I tend to polite to a fault with service staff, because I’ve done that type of job and I know how fucking thankless it is, and how many jerks will use your inability to tell them to get bent as an excuse to work off their shitty day on you. 

Henry Rollins has a term for this.  It’s called “bullshit decorating.”  Where you just fling your bullshit all over everyone in reach, because you can.

Honestly, I agree that everyone should have to work service industry for at least six months, just so they know what that waitress who might be a little snappy at you has been going through.  Dealing with the public sucks, a lot.  Because several of them, not even most but they do tend to stick out in your memory, have the manners of poo-flinging monkeys, and it only takes one to ruin your whole day.

*Oh, I can tell you stories about security check people.

Comment #81: GeekGirlsRule  on  12/22  at  02:15 PM

“Meanwhile with Amtrak the station is almost always right downtown, you can get there 10 minutes before the train leaves, the seats are more comfortable and the journey seems much more relaxed all around.”

My wife and I actually took the Amtrak from Kalamazoo, MI, to Dallas for a wedding this fall. It’s just a nice way to travel, though it ended up being slightly more expensive than flying. Definately longer, something like 22 hours, but we sprung for a sleeper. The pitfall of that is our friends were having their wedding in some godforsaken suburb and there wasn’t a good way to get from Union Station to the hotel. But it was a nice trip. The other pitfall is that the most scenic part of the trip was supposed to be going through the Ozarks (it was Chicago, Springfield, St. Louis, Little Rock, Dallas and vice versa) and both coming and going we went through them in the dark. Got to see plenty of small Illinois towns and soy beans, though. One word of warning, even with the sleeper, we both had trouble sleeping with the motion and whistling.

However, the rudest customer service person I’ve ever dealt with worked at Union Station in Dallas. And it wasn’t that we were being demanding, unless slightly clueless checking in for our train was demanding. But I wasn’t an asshole back, mostly because I just wanted to be away from this woman ASAP. Other than her, Amtrak people were really nice.

Comment #82: witless chum  on  12/22  at  03:02 PM

I can’t stand the lines and annoyances of the airport as much as the next guy, but the last thing I’m going to do is spend 8 hours on a train when the alternative is a 1-1.5 hour plane ride. I get few vacation days as it is—I’m not going to burn any more simply on getting to abd returning from someplace if I don’t have to.

Once you travel by plane enough, you figure put the groove and patterns of getting in and out of airports quickly.

Comment #83: Tyro  on  12/22  at  03:48 PM

@79 t-ster

Um, peeing in cups is not that degrading.

I actually registered just to reply to this.

If you can say that, clearly you’ve never spent several hours in the lab drinking gallons of water just to be able to pee at all, and clearly you’ve never gotten pee on your hands from trying to hold a teensy cup under you. Peeing in a cup as a woman? Totally degrading. Bad enough when it’s for actual medical purposes, let alone stupid mandatory drug testing for every pissant job everywhere.

Comment #84: semperfiona  on  12/22  at  04:20 PM

I would be very wary of taking what you overheard a flight attendant telling a passenger about a rule as gospel.

I didn’t take it as “gospel”.  I’m open to further evidence.  That’s my general rule.  But I trust that people in the industry know better than I do, I’ve heard that from newspaper sources that have more social esteem, and it makes a lot of sense.  So, when reliable evidence comes in, I’m willing to listen, but I don’t as a general rule discount what service workers say.  Having been one, I know they are often very sharp people.
Comment #66: Amanda Marcotte on 12/22 at 07:54 AM

I wasn’t disparaging the intelligence of service workers.  I was questioning whether they got accurate information in the first place.  You came up through alt.folklore.urban, so you know just how reliable these n-th party stories are.

Not to mention that saying “it’s so we don’t have everyone on the phone annoying everyone else” is easier to defend than the interference claim.  When you’re dealing with an asshat who thinks he can convince you scientifically that there’s no interference with a printout of something he Googled up and therefore will be allowed to use his phone because he’s so smart, reframing it as a social rule puts it outside the arguable.

Comment #85: oldfeminist  on  12/22  at  04:58 PM

semperfiona,
I am a woman. I have to pee in a cup frequently, for lab tests. I went through a period where I peed in a cup every single month. In the past, I had to take urine tests for jobs, not all of them minimum wage. I have gotten pee on my hands. To me, this is only slightly annoying.  I just don’t think it’s that gross or degrading.

What’s annoying about it is the idea that they care about whether you have done drugs or not, and that somehow this is a piece of information employers have a right to sniff out.  But I don’t think it’s even remotely near the most demeaning thing about low-wage jobs.

Comment #86: t-ster  on  12/22  at  05:08 PM

  But I don’t think it’s even remotely near the most demeaning thing about low-wage jobs.

I have to agree. Peeing in cups for drug testing is unpleasant, but not nearly as humiliating as having to wear ill-fitting polyester polo shirts, plastic aprons, hair nets, or baseball caps/visors as a grown woman. Having to be supervised while counting the cash drawer is pretty humiliating too.

Comment #87: jessilikewhoa  on  12/22  at  05:13 PM

jessilikewhoa,
I totally agree. I hated working at a clothing store, having people hover over your shoulder watching the count at the end of the night.

Also super annoying? You could tell a manager weeks in advance about being off for a few days for a vacation/medical/family thing, and they’d still schedule you during that time, then scream at you when you couldn’t show up or fire you.

Or how you find out that someone else (usually male) is making 75 cents more an hour with less experience. And how 75 cents actually matters when you’re making minimum wage.

Comment #88: t-ster  on  12/22  at  05:20 PM

Honestly, I agree that everyone should have to work service industry for at least six months, just so they know what that waitress who might be a little snappy at you has been going through.  Dealing with the public sucks, a lot.  Because several of them, not even most but they do tend to stick out in your memory, have the manners of poo-flinging monkeys, and it only takes one to ruin your whole day.

A-MEN, GeekGirlsRule.
I have so many stories about the bookstore (major chain one too) and how many just outright strange people came in there on a daily basis that you become numb to most regular bullshit so it takes someone that’s a flaming mega-watt a-hole to really bring it home.
Getting stuck in the cafe section and dealing with people who just can’t deal with their options who want you to create a food item that doesn’t exist for them without them paying for it is one of them.
I don’t get paid to create a new food item for you madam. Much less hand you free food since doubtless you have friends who you will tell about it and they are going to come in expecting free shit and where does that end?
It’s amazing how freaking entitled people are.

Also, book scammers trying to tell you they bought 15-20 year old books at your store yesterday. There’s Half-Price Books but apparently they’ve been banned from there one would imagine. LOL
Of course, they’re upset with you because their scam won’t work since stores make money by not giving it out for free.

One thing I used to *love* is when you are adhering to the rules and the customer raises such a stink that the manager comes over, gives them what they want and the sh*t head (sorry I mean customer) gives YOU the dirty look. Thanks, Managers for backing your ground crew up. That’s really awesome when you do that.

Anyhow. Sorry venting a bit there.

Comment #89: Danica Lefse Queen  on  12/22  at  05:37 PM

I have never had any bad experience with a flight attendant.  I only fly Southwest, if that’s a useful data point.  And Pan Am when I was a kid. 

I have had other airport personnel be assholes by ommission, failing to tell my deaf grandmother her departure gate was changed, failing to provide wheelchairs, etc.  And Homeland Security people have been horrifically abusive to people I care about, possibly out of fatphobia or homophobia or general-purpose psychopathy. 

But flight attendants?  Never.

Comment #90: lonespark  on  12/22  at  06:17 PM

@Danica Lefse Queen

I worked in a small independent bookstore, so I totally feel your pain.  Although I do still laugh at the, “You had this book in the window last month that I wanted to get… it was green.”  No idea what it was about or who by.  It was green. 

I did figure that one out.  But damn…

I also spent four years working in a craft store.  Paint, beads, feathers, yeah…  We once had someone let their toddler pull down a whole wall of frames by climbing on the fixtures.  Thankfully the child wasn’t hurt, but I got to spend half an hour sweeping up glass, and then hours re-cutting and replacing glass in the frames.

Comment #91: GeekGirlsRule  on  12/22  at  07:06 PM

Since when is urine drug testing exclusive to minimum-wage jobs?  I’ve had to take drug tests before starting every job I’ve ever had, except the minimum-wage part-time job I had in high school.  My current job pays pretty well and I had to take a drug test before starting, and I didn’t think anything of it.  Even my coworkers with Ph.D.s that make six figures had to do it.

Comment #92: bananacat  on  12/22  at  08:09 PM

“I’ve had to take drug tests before starting every job I’ve ever had, except the minimum-wage part-time job I had in high school.”

The only time I’ve ever had to take a drug test to get a job, it was the sort of job where you could get maimed by doing one ill-advised thing.  It’s definitely not common for middle- or upper-tier jobs, especially since the driving force tends to be insurance companies.

Comment #93: preying mantis  on  12/22  at  10:58 PM

t-ster wrote:

Um, peeing in cups is not that degrading. I mean, I don’t think we should do mandatory drug testing anywhere, but I’ve had to do it for a number of jobs and I don’t think it’s a hallmark of our indentured servitude or anything.

For some positions, pre-employment and ongoing random drug testing is required by federal law.  If your job requires a commercial driver’s license, then your employer has to require the drug test, period.  The places in which I’ve worked since CDLs were put into effect (1987 or 1988, can’t remember which) went ahead and tested everyone, so that the drivers—and in one case, the Teamsters Union—could not claim that they were being singled out.

Comment #94: Dana  on  12/22  at  11:04 PM

I also spent four years working in a craft store.  Paint, beads, feathers, yeah… We once had someone let their toddler pull down a whole wall of frames by climbing on the fixtures.  Thankfully the child wasn’t hurt, but I got to spend half an hour sweeping up glass, and then hours re-cutting and replacing glass in the frames.

When I used to work retail in high school/college, I worked at the world of science, which was a nature company-type store but with more chemistry equipment.  Also lots of toys.  So parents seemed to think that we were day care.  Mall security got very used to having to track down wayward parents who would dump their five year olds among our glass chemistry equipment, rock and fossil samples (small enough to swallow) and tall bookshelves.  That was fun.

Comment #95: sam  on  12/23  at  01:21 AM

Peeing in cups when you are not in some kind of front-line safety position is degrading: it’s an invasion of privacy demanding that you prove something that is not related to your ability to perform your job.

But I was offered lots of money in exchange for being willing to pee in a cup, so I did it.

Comment #96: Tyro  on  12/23  at  01:44 AM

http://goddesscassandra.blogspot.com/2009/12/glamorous-day-in-glamorous-life-of.html#links

Just so people can kind of get an idea of what it’s like to be a flight attendant.

Comment #97: Antigone  on  12/23  at  02:06 AM

Tyro is absolutely right.  The humiliating part about peeing in a cup is the invasion of privacy.  I have two jobs that require me to submit to random drug testing and both are essentially independent contracting positions that I work at for 8-20 hours a month.  I don’t drive heavy machinery or work with kids.  It’s ridiculous, insulting, and violating.  One of these jobs even requires a hair sample in addition to peeing in a cup.  Corporate power run amok.

Comment #98: Sidewriter  on  12/23  at  03:40 AM

Ugh, I work in service, and it’s just this sort of entitledness that makes my job the living hell that it is. How do these people not get that being nice makes me want to help you more, the nicer a customer is the more likely I will go out of my way to sort an issue out for them. Rude customers get the bare mimium, with a smile and an apolgy, I’m good at my job after all but you screaming at me is not going to make me want help you at all.

“One thing I used to *love* is when you are adhering to the rules and the customer raises such a stink that the manager comes over, gives them what they want and the sh*t head (sorry I mean customer) gives YOU the dirty look. Thanks, Managers for backing your ground crew up. That’s really awesome when you do that.”

oh god this, this makes me want to punch somebody.

Comment #99: Leah Jaclyn  on  12/23  at  04:42 AM

Oh, and the bonus suck to mandatory pre-employment urinalysis is that you’d need a serious whistleblower to tell if the company were to, say, also test the samples for diabetes or pregnancy and make employment decisions based on the results.

Comment #100: preying mantis  on  12/23  at  10:10 AM

Sorry, but a piss test for ANY repeat ANY job that doesn’t involve public safety is a gross infringement on a person’s dignity, an insult, a phenomenal risk of a mistake (do you have any idea how many false positives there are) and grossly slimy, a testament to paranoia and hysteria.

Comment #101: seeker6079  on  12/23  at  02:02 PM

Yeah, if I’m operating heavy machinery, a jet, a bus, hell yes, drug-testing, fine.  No problem.  Except it doesn’t test for booze which is probably the most common contributor to serious accidents. 

If I’m shuffling papers that don’t decide whether someone lives or dies… drug testing is an invasion of privacy.  Thankfully, even though they CAN, my employers don’t random drug-test.  Not that it would matter, I don’t have the time to do drugs anyore.

Comment #102: GeekGirlsRule  on  12/23  at  02:18 PM

What seeker and GeekGirlsRule said.
I’m a bit surprised by the number of people here who seem *not* to define as invasive, humiliating, and totally unacceptable any drugs testing at all for anything other than health-and-safety-related positions. 
(And even with those kinds of jobs, I wonder if there isn’t some better way to ensure protection of the populace w/o compromising what someone chooses to do on their own time.  There’s substance use, and there’s substance abuse.  I don’t see how prudent use—including abstaining long enough before having to be on duty as to ensure unimpaired job performance—of whatever chemical entertainment one engages in is the business of anyone at all in a person’s place of employment, let alone one’s “superiors.”) 
It’s especially ironic to see such acceptance of privacy-invasion and insult (it’s not “degrading” unless you allow yourself to be “degraded”—but it is an assault of sorts on both person and privacy) at a time when the decriminalization and legalization movements are beginning to get real traction in the polity.
I apologize if I sound judgemental about it; I certainly don’t mean to imply any criticism at all of such a stance.  It is completely consistent with an ethos that generally says a person can do with (or to) their own body whatever they wish to do as long as it doesn’t infringe on the rights of others.

Comment #103: smartalek  on  12/23  at  05:04 PM

Seeker wrote:

Sorry, but a piss test for ANY repeat ANY job that doesn’t involve public safety is a gross infringement on a person’s dignity, an insult, a phenomenal risk of a mistake (do you have any idea how many false positives there are) and grossly slimy, a testament to paranoia and hysteria.

Yet I’ve seen the Teamsters protest that they were being singled out—by law, not the company—for drug screens, and insist that if they had to take the test, then everybody else ought to as well.  The dispatchers took it, I took it (of course, I sometimes operate heavy equipment), the office personnel took it.  At one company, the owner’s wife worked in the office, and she took it.

As far as public safety is concerned, only the test for alcohol tests for current intoxication; all of the other tests are for the metabolites from past usage.  If you hadn’t smoked pot for at least two months, heard that you were going to have to pee and immediately burned two doobies, and were tested right away, you’d pass the test; you’d only fail if you waited long enough that you might not be stoned anymore.  But, if you have an accident, and you test positive, there’s a standard assumption that you were under the influence when you had the accident.

Comment #104: Dana  on  12/23  at  05:12 PM

GGR wrote:

Yeah, if I’m operating heavy machinery, a jet, a bus, hell yes, drug-testing, fine.  No problem.  Except it doesn’t test for booze which is probably the most common contributor to serious accidents.

At least for commercial; drivers, there is random alcohol testing along with the randon urine drug screen.  I’ve seen drivers have to take the drug screen only, the breath test only, or both, just depending on how the testing nit.

Comment #105: Dana  on  12/23  at  05:15 PM

Oh yes, Michael “post-sexual” Wolff. Isn’t he Vanity Fair’s go-to guy for misogyny whenever Christopher Hitchens is not available?

Comment #106: Nancy  on  12/23  at  11:07 PM

Someone above mentioned that the Schumer incident, in which he’s supposed to have called the flight attendant a bitch under his breath, was observed by a Republican legislative aid who blogged about it.

Am I the only one who’s suspicious that it even happened at all?  Is it so hard to imagine that a young and eager GOP staffer, looking to make his/her bones with the bosses, might be, you know, lying in order to embarass a prominent Democrat?  It’s not like the Republicans up on the Hill are so well known for their commitment to truth.

I’m perfectly willing to believe that Schumer’s an asshole; he’s a freakin’ Senator, so I’ll assume it.  I’m not so quick to accept any Republican’s gossip as evidence.

Comment #107: Chocolate Covered Cotton  on  12/24  at  01:56 AM

sam (10):

This was a situation where no one was outright “rude”, but at the same time, clogging up the entire system because you think you’re somehow special and the rules don’t apply to you?  is still rude.

One could make the case that most overt rudeness that transpires across a (real or metaphorical) service desk is a result of the customer thining the rules don’t apply to him/her.

Ben (28):

McCain was from a powerful naval family even before he married into wealth—his father and grandfather were Admirals, IIRC. He may not have had as much money in his family as a Budweiser distributor heiress, but the McCains were basically military nobility.

Nobility marrying money: a story as old as the Intustrial Revolution.

AnglScarlett (30):

she actually said in an interview that small private plane was really the only way to get around Arizona.

That actually squares with my understanding of Arizona.

Rob (108):

Am I the only one who’s suspicious that it even happened at all?

It does sound like some Midwestern Republican’s idea of a New Yorker, but it also sounds like Chuck Schumer’s idea of a New Yorker.

Comment #108: Hershele Ostropoler  on  12/24  at  02:06 AM

I work for a co in the MIC.  The drug test before hiring was only the 2nd I’d ever had.  The other had been for an internship with a city.  Both were for engineering jobs. 
As a clerk in a grocery?  No.  As a clerk and a waitress in a restaurant/sandwich shop? No.  As verious levels of clerk for a public higher education institution?  No, though they did have a policy that allowed for it.
Sensative info jobs, manufacturing jobs and construction jobs require a certain level of testing to keep people from being easily blackmailed/otherwise compromised or causing acidents, respectively.

Comment #109: helen w. h.  on  12/25  at  05:04 PM

Sensitive info jobs, manufacturing jobs and construction jobs require a certain level of testing to keep people from being easily blackmailed/otherwise compromised or causing acidents, respectively.

Not to derail, but the blackmail issue is a direct result of the War On Drug Use By The Poor And Non-White, and accidents are only an issue if someone is stoned or otherwise incapacitated during business hours. So “require” is a little strong.

Comment #110: Hershele Ostropoler  on  12/26  at  04:39 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.