Text Size:
A|
A|
A
Email
PrintUS Airways made problems by stripping our hub status
It is a shame that the executives at US Airways chose not to have Pittsburgh as a hub because it was too expensive to operate a large number of flights out of our airport.
It's a shame that they didn't realize that the employees of our area have a strong work ethic. We are the children and grandchildren of steel workers. We make decent wages, and know that. Our baggage handlers showed for work over the holiday weekend ("US Airways Problems Bedevil Travelers," Dec. 26) because they take pride in their jobs and care about the customers.
It's a shame that the executives at US Airways did not think about the fact that Philadelphia has a baggage system that is 30 years old. It is hardly efficient when trying to keep up with a busy holiday, handicapped by a shortage of employees. When a breakdown occurs, the parts for that system are very difficult to find. The Pittsburgh airport has a new, sophisticated baggage system that is rarely used to capacity since US Airways made Pittsburgh a "focus" city instead of a hub.
Thousands of dollars were spent on overtime for employees because of the baggage mess. In addition, there was compensation to customers for clothing, toiletries, etc., and delivery charges for bags to be delivered to customers.
I wonder if Chief Executive Officer Bruce Lakefield and Chairman David Bronner have ever heard the phrase "you get what you pay for."
It's just a shame.
LORI V. BARR
Upper St. Clair
Editor's note: The writer is an employee of US Airways.
Pluses and minuses
I have mixed feelings about the type of impact Southwest Airlines will have in the Pittsburgh area ("Airport Lands Low-Cost Leader Southwest Airlines," Jan. 6). On one hand, it can be an obvious plus: adding to the list of flights from Pittsburgh that US Airways had once flown but terminated and guaranteeing some flights out of Pittsburgh if and probably when US Airways bows out, as well as cheaper rates and better service.
The negative impact can be that Southwest flies only the best routes that US Airways flies, creating competition. It could lead the already troubled airline to close up shop in Pittsburgh leading to a much heavier reduction in flights compared to what Southwest will offer.
Southwest is a much different model of an airline than US Airways, one that keeps its costs down and can choose the routes that it wants to serve and not feel liable to make flights that are not profitable, unlike US Airways, which is now depended on to do so in order to maintain both good customer and government relations.
GARY BONACCI
Collier
Uncaring society
As 2004 faded, the approach of the new year foreshadowed a totally uncaring society.
Our president's "compassionate conservatism" of pre-election time left only "passionate" feelings ("Bush Promises Stronger Dollar, Weaker Lawyers," Dec. 16) against people's right to sue big business. Our administration no longer cares about common folks.
Never mind Social Security as a safety net for wage earners for their retirement years. The financial institutions will make big bucks investing "Social Security" money in the stock market. Is there no memory of 1987 and 1929? The security of Social Security just got lost, because supposedly in 2052 it will run out of money.
That seems to be the only concern our president has for the future of our grandchildren, whom he already saddled with an overwhelming debt. He demands more weapons, already obsolete, like missile defense systems, "usable" nuclear weapons, while our soldiers are fighting a guerilla war.
There seems to be no concern for the environment in 2052. And never mind education; just build more prisons. Never mind the thousands who die for lack of health care. Never mind the people throughout the world dying of AIDS and preventable diseases and lack of clean water. There seems to be no care that 30,000 children are dying every day.
It's getting to be a very mean world, controlled in the United States by a more and more authoritarian government. But a better world is possible, where human needs are more important than profits. Happy New Year!
EDITH BELL
Highland Park
Moral imperatives
President Bush's nominee for attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, holds that the protections of the Geneva Conventions do not apply to al-Qaida prisoners because "they weren't a signatory to the convention." This kind of thinking is so legalistic that it forgets that undergirding the formal written agreements are prior moral imperatives that should determine our behavior. Whether we have a legal agreement with al-Qaida should have nothing at all to do with the demand that we treat prisoners humanely.
Gonzales wrote that opposition to terrorism "renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions." But those agreed limitations were presumably for protection from prisoner abuse. So disparaging those rules would obviously open the door to prisoner abuse, and that is exactly what happened.
In Gonzales' legal opinion we see the true morality of our nation's top leadership exposing itself -- love your enemies, but only the ones we have written agreements with. Agree or disagree with this approach -- but at least be honest and admit the truth about it.
JAMES R. JOHNSON
Brentwood
Unacceptable choice
The president is now asking the Senate to approve his nomination of Alberto Gonzales for the office of attorney general. I'm sorry, Mr. Bush, but making Gonzales responsible for our nation's conduct is like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse.
This is the man whose counsel was sought in regard to the ethics of torture and who determined that, after 9/11, the rules of the Geneva Conventions no longer applied. This is the man whose opinion shaped a policy that opened the flood gates for the atrocities that took place in Abu Ghraib prison and the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, cited by the Red Cross as "tantamount to torture."
Are we to accept this man as the head of our Justice Department? The Bush administration has asked me to swallow a lot -- but I'm gagging on this one.
ROSE MARIE WALCH
Emsworth
Believe him
This is in response to Tim Haberman ("RINO [Republican In Name Only] Watch," Jan. 3 letters), who seems to be a self-appointed judge on who is and who isn't a Republican.
In 1991, my brother, Ken Heiss ("City Republicans," Dec. 28 letters), ran for a seat on Pittsburgh City Council against Democratic candidate Bob O'Connor. Ken, a successful inner-city businessman, ran against a politically savvy Bob O'Connor, who had a large organization behind him and, of course, a huge advantage in the number of Democratic voters in that district. Ken landed telling blows in a face-to-face debate with Bob. Many of the dire predictions he made for our city are now coming home to roost. Ken worked hard and garnered many more votes than his opponents expected.
If Ken Heiss tells you you need more empathy with city residents to gain their support, you had better believe him, Mr. Haberman, because he knows a tad more about the subject than you do.
It is a lot easier to stand with a large crowd like you do in Butler than to talk sense to a majority in Pittsburgh who do not agree with you. Men like Ken persist because they believe in time-tested conservative principles, and while they endure a certain amount of heat for their views, they persist, because they believe that the people of Pittsburgh really need to hear what they are saying.
IAN HEISS
Greenfield
Our jury system is strengthened when every citizen answers the call
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer recently answered a summons and appeared in court in Massachusetts as a potential juror ("Breyer on Jury Duty," Jan. 5). Only when all citizens, regardless of race, gender, religion, socioeconomic status or profession, have the opportunity to serve and answer the call when summoned, can we achieve the ideal of providing a jury of one's peers.
Justice Breyer recognized that not even his membership on the highest court of the land exempted him from his civic duty. This was a lesson Sen. Rick Santorum grudgingly learned after finally reporting for jury duty last November, following several postponements and a failure to respond to an earlier summons. Even then, Sen. Santorum complained about his service: "If this is what people think is a good use of their United States senator's time ..." ("Senator and Wife Are Jury Pool Washouts: Santorums Show Up But Aren't Chosen," Nov. 24).
Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts believes that citizens who want a fair, functioning judicial system will agree that jury duty is an obligation and a privilege we all share. We hope their service will inspire Justice Breyer, Sen. Santorum and their colleagues in leadership positions throughout the country to improve the jury system and honor the citizen jurors who serve every day.
LYNN A. MARKS
Executive Director
SHIRA J. GOODMAN
Associate Director
Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts
Philadelphia
