IN THE COMMENTS: Balfegor said:
This is Korea! When the royal family of one of the Hanjin chaebol wants something done you do it without asking questions or you'll never work in this country again.
Or you can go protest, I suppose. But a Korean-style protest, where you're just protesting (even if violently), as opposed to American-style protesting, which is simultaneously an opportunity for idle performance artists to inflict their performance art on the public for the benefit of news crews, and for criminals to bash in store windows and steal whatever isn't locked down.
ALL THAT SAID -- I kind of agree with the princess's attitude here. Korean Air distinguishes itself with its high standard of customer service -- better than the international standard. This incident was in the first class cabin (which I have never flown -- I've only flown business and economy on KAL), but their cabin attendants are excellent even in economy class. It's a real asset for their brand, particularly given that Korea in general has a real problem with poor customer service. Even in luxury hotels, I've found that the attitude/competence of the staff are hugely variable. Despite the extraordinary attention paid to minute distinctions of rank and displays of deference, that culture of customer service towards the average customer just hasn't developed. Powerful people get excellent service in Korea, of course (which is why not getting top class service if you think you ought to be treated as a powerful person is like a double insult). But for the average consumer, the service is really more miss than hit in my experience. Chaebol punishing their peons when they fail to give good service to customers (i.e. us) is the kind of thing that needs to happen if Korea wants to distinguish itself in the service sector.
Posts
20 comments:
But she apologized later, so it all went away.
Wow. I came across Althouse through "worm-hole" googling (I think it is really called that) wedding dresses thru the ages. Found a post from 2005 about the appropriateness of big weddings for couples who have been living together. Clicked the title bar to see whether you are still around. You are. Bravo.
"she apologized later"
Yeah, I meant to link to today's story. The first thing I saw was in the NYT which didn't specify the problem (nuts in a bag, not on a plate).
I went to Fox and say the plate/bag problem and ended up with a BBC link, because it just feels more neutral, but that was yesterday's news. Before the resignation.
I changed the link.
@Nancy Wilschke
Thanks for visiting that old post. Fascinating that you went from dresses to hangers. Too apt!
Anyway, Meade and I were just talking about that old post. It's one of my most controversial posts, and I not only continue to blog, I continue to agree with myself.
The old post is: "Living together, having a big wedding."
"Am I the only one who thinks a big wedding is inappropriate for two people who have been living together? I think it would be tasteful to have the wedding performed privately, down at City Hall some day, and then announce the news in an invitation to a big party that occurs on another day and that specifies no gifts. There is no new household being set up, and you should be glad people want to take the time and make the effort to attend a party celebrating an existing relationship.
"It seems to me that the idea of a big wedding ought to be about the beginning of the couple's life together. In fact, the really cool thing about a wedding back in the old days or for traditionalists these days is that the couple has not yet consummated the relationship. When that is the situation, there is an excitement and the reception takes on a wonderful glow: look, they're finally able to have sex and yet they are hanging out, dancing here with us! If this is not the case, how can the couple imagine they're putting on a show that justifies everyone watching and celebrating them for hours?"
So your own solution to the big wedding question was to not invite anyone, including being your own officiants. Bravo!
Obviously CRIMINAL negligence.
[T]he company said the decision to disembark the crew member was made by the flight's captain.
As if he had a choice.
We got married after 20 years together. We had a friend officiate after becoming ordained online, and two more friends for witnesses. Dr. Seuss vows.
Yes, I'll love her if we're rich,
And I will love her in a ditch,
I'll love her through good times and bad,
Whether we are happy or sad,
Yes, I will have, and I will hold
(I could have sworn this has been told!)
I promise to love all my life
This woman, as my lawful wife!
For my wife and I, it was our third marriage for each of us. We went to the adjunct courthouse and were married by a court clerk.
Then we each went to work, it being Thursday morning.
Wilbur said...
For my wife and I, it was our third marriage for each of us. We went to the adjunct courthouse and were married by a court clerk.
Then we each went to work, it being Thursday morning.
12/9/14, 7:02 PM"
Wow! Thats cold. Why not have waited and gotten married Friday morning and the both of you taken a long weekend?
This is Korea! When the royal family of one of the Hanjin chaebol wants something done you do it without asking questions or you'll never work in this country again.
Or you can go protest, I suppose. But a Korean-style protest, where you're just protesting (even if violently), as opposed to American-style protesting, which is simultaneously an opportunity for idle performance artists to inflict their performance art on the public for the benefit of news crews, and for criminals to bash in store windows and steal whatever isn't locked down.
ALL THAT SAID -- I kind of agree with the princess's attitude here. Korean Air distinguishes itself with its high standard of customer service -- better than the international standard. This incident was in the first class cabin (which I have never flown -- I've only flown business and economy on KAL), but their cabin attendants are excellent even in economy class. It's a real asset for their brand, particularly given that Korea in general has a real problem with poor customer service. Even in luxury hotels, I've found that the attitude/competence of the staff are hugely variable. Despite the extraordinary attention paid to minute distinctions of rank and displays of deference, that culture of customer service towards the average customer just hasn't developed. Powerful people get excellent service in Korea, of course (which is why not getting top class service if you think you ought to be treated as a powerful person is like a double insult). But for the average consumer, the service is really more miss than hit in my experience. Chaebol punishing their peons when they fail to give good service to customers (i.e. us) is the kind of thing that needs to happen if Korea wants to distinguish itself in the service sector.
Balfegor's post was the same reaction I had- powerful executive making sure people do their jobs.
What's wrong with that?
Korean Air distinguishes itself with its high standard of customer service -- better than the international standard.
Now, if only they can do more with their pilots (such as instilling the value of flying by the seat of one's pants instead of relying so much on automation).
I agree that if I noticed my family-owned business falling short in some way, I'd make sure this got to management so that standards are maintained. If I noticed something, I'm sure other customers would too. So I have no problem with her lodging a complaint.
But didn't she hold up the flight over this? Causing a big stir (and frankly, getting a lot of media attention over this) is counterproductive, as a delayed flight does far worse than putting nuts in the wrong container. Plus, being inconsiderate of passengers who have somewhere to be doesn't make your family look good, either.
There's only one solution here. Ritual self-disemboweling.
Reminds me of Leona Helmsley, as described in the book "Rhymes With Rich."
Ann Althouse said... Chaebol punishing their peons when they fail to give good service to customers (i.e. us) is the kind of thing that needs to happen if Korea wants to distinguish itself in the service sector.
If that were all that happened in this case you'd be right, but the problem is that her chosen form of punishment for the attendant (kicking them off the plane) meant the other passengers were also punished for the infraction against only the executive. In effect she herself committed a punishable infraction by putting her own pique (or more accurately her need to exact the precise punishment she wanted) over the needs of the airline's other customers, giving all of the plane bad service. It's good to have standards and it's good to enforce the rules to uphold those standards, but it's bad to chose an enforcement mechanism that serves your customers more poorly than the infraction you're punishing would (esp. when the impetus for that punishment will be interpreted as a personal slight against you).
More succinctly: I don't have a problem with her punishing the employee. I have a problem with the way she chose to punish the employee since it inconvenienced everyone else on the plane and caused poor customer service (which is, after all, what she was trying to punish).
Sorry, Althouse was quoting Balfegor in my excerpt above; my misattribution there.
Or you can go protest, I suppose.
And have some chaebol whack you a bunch of times with a bat and then toss a check at you.
Re: HoodlumDoodum:
More succinctly: I don't have a problem with her punishing the employee. I have a problem with the way she chose to punish the employee since it inconvenienced everyone else on the plane and caused poor customer service (which is, after all, what she was trying to punish).
It's a little murky who did what -- it sounds from some news reports like the pilot is supposed to have made the decision to return to the gate to disembark the employee, rather than the daughter of the Chaebol. But in all honesty, that's probably a "turbulent priest" situation where even if there was no explicit command, the pilot's first thought was naturally to dispose of the colleague who had displeased HH, and she did nothing to stop him. Ultimately, regardless of whatever the chain of command was on paper, I agree she was responsible, and that allowing the plane to return to the gate was a poor move. I don't think that's what people are complaining about though -- they're complaining because she abusively scolded an employee who fell short in some respect.
Post a Comment