Air France Frequence Plus - Invol Downgrade on Premium Voyageur Booking - What Would You Do?

I'd love your reaction and advice here.

I booked SEA-CDG-OSL-CDG-JFK in AF/PV next month. The intra-Europe segments booked as "PremEco" in W bucket, front cabin of the E190 with gratis food and drink, and on the outbound via CDG I would have had lounge access.

I was notified this weekend that AF has withdrawn its morning CDG-OSL flight on my travel day and rebooked me on an SK service operating 90+ minutes later than planned... in T bucket, lowest class of service / economy. This means:



Unwieldy T2 -> T1 transfer at CDG, chances of my interlined checked bag making it slim to nil
Back of the bus on an SK 737; no advance seat selection means last pickings, likely middle seat
"Food for purchase" only onboard
No lounge access at CDG
Late to OSL


I rang the AF call center and said I thought I ought to be rebooked into a class of service at least equivalent to my original specification. They refused. They said I could pay them another $300 to upgrade to SK Business on CDG-OSL, or apply for an unspecified, vague refund after the trip is over. This rather contradicts the experience of FTer cityflyer369, who posted in another thread that when he's been forcibly rebooked on a PV ticket he's been given the benefit of the doubt and upgraded:

Yes, you fly Prem Eco on AF (within Europe). Yes, Prem Eco is Business without middle seat blocked. (Though, given the quality of AF's European Business product, it's probably more realistic to say that Business is Prem Eco with middle seat blocked.) I don't know what the official rule for KL flights is, but on the 3 occassions I had to be rebooked from AF to KL (due to flight delay), they put me in Business.

I don't like my new CDG transfer at all. I think my options are to:


Call AF back and try again for SK Business with different supervisor, which would at least give me lounge access in T1
Request SEA-AMS-OSL rebook on DL/KL, in "Economy Comfort" on the DL-operated long bit, with commensurate large refund due now
Cancel the whole shooting match, which I can do with full refund as AF disrupted the itin, and start over with another carrier - BA will do an equally useful itin with WT+ on the long bits for $400 less than I paid AF, or LH has a better, smoother routing for $880 in Y


Can't decide. What would you do? Or is there another option I haven't considered? I should note I have no FD status.

Thanks

#1 and if unsuccessful #3. The BA board indicates WT+ has a new, better menu; intra-Europe WT+ books as WT, not Club.

In statutory terms, according to EU rules, AF has the right to cancel without penalty because you were given over two weeks notice and they do not have to offer an upgraded alternative such as SK business and most certainly won't. However, you have several options which they should offer and/or which you can request. They include:

- Cancelling your itinerary and get a full refund. No question, no delay and certainly no way they can ask you to wait till after your itinerary would have taken place. Then as you suggest, you can rebook something different that suits you (I personally find BA WT+ a miserable experience but that's another matter)

- Another rerouting with AF that would suit you. For instance, you could ask to be put on a later CDG-OSL with AF, or to have your whole itinerary moved to another day if that suits.

- Accepting the downgrade on the short CDG-OSL segment, and write to customer service afterwards asking for a gesture of good will as compensation.

Personally, my choice would depend on the timings available but it's really for you to decide.

In statutory terms, according to EU rules, AF has the right to cancel without penalty because you were given over two weeks notice and they do not have to offer an upgraded alternative such as SK business and most certainly won't. However, you have several options which they should offer and/or which you can request. They include:

- Cancelling your itinerary and get a full refund. No question, no delay and certainly no way they can ask you to wait till after your itinerary would have taken place. Then as you suggest, you can rebook something different that suits you (I personally find BA WT+ a miserable experience but that's another matter)

- Another rerouting with AF that would suit you. For instance, you could ask to be put on a later CDG-OSL with AF, or to have your whole itinerary moved to another day if that suits.

- Accepting the downgrade on the short CDG-OSL segment, and write to customer service afterwards asking for a gesture of good will as compensation.

Personally, my choice would depend on the timings available but it's really for you to decide.
AF are still under a statutory obligation under Reg 261/2004 to offer rerouting "under comparable conditions" even if they do not have to pay the set statutory compensation if outside the 14 days window.

Rerouting in economy when booking was in premium economy is not rebooking under comparable conditions. Arguably economy extra on SK (rather than business) could arguably constitute comparable conditions (although this does not give lounge access) but not plain 'punishment class' economy. This would constitute a downgrade in relation to which the OP would be entitled to downgrade compensation. That said, if the downgrading is only only one intra European segment in an intercontinental itinerary, the downgrade compensation is likely to be small if they prorate by reference to length of segment in overall itinerary.

If I were in the OP's shoes, I would go for 3 (unless he manages 1 but that seems to me unlikely) or, as orbitmic suggests, a suitable alternative itinerary on AF.

AF are still under a statutory obligation under Reg 261/2004 to offer rerouting "under comparable conditions"... Rerouting in economy when booking was in premium economy is not rebooking under comparable conditions.

That was how I saw things too, NickB. But the second AF agent I just spoke with disagreed ferociously. "We are NOT putting you in business class!" she said, voice slightly raised. She said my PNR showed they had initially figured an eight-hour layover for me at CDG, waiting around for the late-afternoon AF service to OSL. They thought they were doing me a favor sticking me way down the back of a midday SAS flight though I paid the PV / PremEco tariff.

So I said I wanted to dump the whole booking. AF happily processed a full refund on the spot, no arguments.

While on hold I found a LH/LX itin via FRA and ZRH with mostly open/unbooked TATL A330s for < $800 all in... with empty seats next to me it should approximate the comfort of AF PV at half the price.

Odd that they willingly kissed off a nearly $2k booking over such a small point... on which I think they are technically wrong.

This rather contradicts the experience of FTer cityflyer369, who posted in another thread that when he's been forcibly rebooked on a PV ticket he's been given the benefit of the doubt and upgraded:


You cannot compare the situation of AF booking you on a KL flight with AF booking you on a competitor's flight. Also it might have mattered that I am a Plat customer.

You cannot compare the situation of AF booking you on a KL flight with AF booking you on a competitor's flight. Also it might have mattered that I am a Plat customer. Indeed it might have mattered. But at the end of the day, whether I am Plat, Gold, Tinfoil or Pine, I will not be bullied into flying crap class segments and foregoing promised benefits while paying the full PV whack. When AF blows up a booking the customer is IMO owed the benefit of the doubt, not additional disadvantages and stonewalling.

As for the involvement of a competitor, note the concurrent thread on here started by the guy en route to HKG in AF J whose CDG transfer went pear-shaped owing to irrops. He was reaccommodated in CX J, not Y and told to try complaining after he got home.

I took my business to LH.

I understand your point and am surprised that they did not offer Economy Extra on SK, which is somewhat comparable to PE on AF. You would have lost the lounge but got a similar non-exciting meal. No way that they would upgrade you to Biz.
I guess that they offered you the choices that they could: PE on a later AF flight, E on SK,... or refund. I do not see how a reservation agent could start negotiating about fares even if you threaten to refund. they just follow policies about rerouting fare classes on other (expensive) airlines.
LH is cheaper than PV, but it is "crap class" all the way...

I understand your point and am surprised that they did not offer Economy Extra on SK, which is somewhat comparable to PE on AF. That was really all I was angling for -- biz would have been an appropriate gesture for my inconvenience, but not an outright demand of mine. (We could've talked later about lost lounge access.) Nothing doing, though. What tore it for me was their defiant You paid for W but you'll fly T and like it, buddy attitude.
LH is cheaper than PV, but it is "crap class" all the way... You bet, but I'm getting great value for money plus a shot at buying up to J on SWISS at the gate or onboard. LH not as bad as DL or UA/CO, either.

Premium Economy to Economy is not a "downgrade" per se imho, as PE is not a separate and different cabin on medium/short haul. On the long-haul, it clearly is however.

I fully agree with those who suggest that SK economy extra would have been the rebooking option that would have made most sense. I think the mention of business might have been a bit confusing. I'm not specialist but I think that we are still missing much experience of how courts deal with customer/airline disagreement on early cancellation and how they construe both 'similar conditions' and 'earliest possible opportunity' (although again, I may have missed the plot here and some cases may well have been judged without my realising). It is still a bit unclear to me whether a court would rule that an airline is compelled to offer transfer on another airline or would be within its right to offer transfer on the earliest opportunity on its own flights. I also fear the day when airlines choose to get around the problem by giving mutliple own codes to its flights like some North American airlines used to do (in this context by saying - I cancel AF 1234 at 9.40 but add the extra code AF 1234 to AF 5678 of 13.40).

The other difficulty is about the status of Premium Economy. It does get complicated because it seems to me that there is no unified definition of what it is as a class across the industry. Notably, AF is having a very deceptive double language regarding Premium Economy in Europe. When it feels like tempting buyers, it happily markets it as a separate area of the plane etc. When it wants to reassure companies with restrictive travel policies, however, it very conveniently describes it as full fare economy. In many ways, the service corresponding to 'Premium Economy' (so the European class) varies a hell of a lot. I have been on many a flight when AF will happily sell you 'Premium Economy' and give you a boarding card with the same but all you get is the 'basic' voyageur service (including virtually all flights to/from LYS). Indeed, in some cases, if you are on the relevant codeshare (for instance UX), you will explicitly be holding a Premium Economy ticket and boarding card but will be treated to the same 'buy on board' service as the OP was unpleasantly facing. So this is a genuine question. What happens if AF replaces its 'multi class multi service' 320 on a given route by a multi class single service E90? Would a court decide that we are entitled to refund or that AF is entitled to changing flight equipment from one plane to the other and that there is no unified service associated to PE anyway? PV (long haul) would be much harder for them to argue I believe because it is a specific cabin with a specific product and is not sold on flights not equiped with it. Of course the same issue applies to other airlines, such as KLM which can sell you full fare C on an 'economy only' plane, including, for instance, on an EI codeshare where you will have to buy your own food and drink on board! And of course, people who have flown an expensive LX ticket on a Blue1 flight also know what I'm talking about.

In my opinion, at the moment, the issue of how travel classes 'translate' across airlines is a problematic one. For instance, on another thread on the BA forum, some people explained that with their Openskies flight cancelled, passengers (apart from a few opups) were rebooked on BA World Traveller Plus which is nowhere near EC bizseat. In that case, that was not an early cancellation but a last minute one, meaning that the 'victims' did not even have a realistic choice of refunding and rebooking. My guess is that at this stage, all airlines are considering that they can do whatever they want when rerouting you on another carrier (indeed, they seem to consider they are doing you a favour).

Personally, I would have probably made the same choice as the OP (even though I'm biased because I find AF PV on long haul totally uninteresting!). When there is an early cancellation/change and I have alternative options, I won't really fight the airline but decide what in my view would constitute acceptable rerouting conditions for me personally, and if they can't offer that, they can just go find themselves another customer.

Premium Economy to Economy is not a "downgrade" per se imho, as PE is not a separate and different cabin on medium/short haul. On the long-haul, it clearly is however.Well, if premium is not a distinct cabin, then it must be regarded as business rather than economy: according to the AF website, there are two cabins within Europe: Premium and Voyageur. within the premium cabin, premium affaires pax seat at the front whereas premium eco seat in the next rows of the premium cabin.
A dedicated cabin at the front of the aircraft
The cabin’s first rows each comprise 4 seats (a tray table replaces the middle seat), reserved for Premium Affaires customers. These seats provide ample comfort for work or relaxation.
Premium Eco customers are seated in the next rows within the cabin, containing 6 seats per row.

I frankly cannot see how AF can possibly argue that premium eco is not a distinct cabin to voyageur when its marketing accentuates (rightly , imo) that the key distinction is between premium (including PA and PE) and voyageur, and not between affaires and eco.

Well, if premium is not a distinct cabin, then it must be regarded as business rather than economy: according to the AF website, there are two cabins within Europe: Premium and Voyageur. within the premium cabin, premium affaires pax seat at the front whereas premium eco seat in the next rows of the premium cabin.


I frankly cannot see how AF can possibly argue that premium eco is not a distinct cabin to voyageur when its marketing accentuates (rightly , imo) that the key distinction is between premium (including PA and PE) and voyageur, and not between affaires and eco.

I agree with NickB - as mentioned in my earlier post, I do think that AF is having a curious double discourse about PE - 'it's business without the free middle seat and lounge access outside CDG' when it wants people to pay for it, 'it's just economy with a few extra perks' when it doesn't want to compensate people for putting them in basic economy. I think it is dodgy in general, but as pointed out by NickB and brunos it is particularly odd in this case because SK has the same weird system as AF so that an almost exact equivalent existed. It seems hard to me to justify going for lower or higher than that.

...The other difficulty is about the status of Premium Economy. It does get complicated because it seems to me that there is no unified definition of what it is as a class across the industry. Notably, AF is having a very deceptive double language regarding Premium Economy in Europe... In many ways, the service corresponding to 'Premium Economy' (so the European class) varies a hell of a lot.

At least within Europe the majors' "business class" products conform, more or less, to an apples-to-apples test from one carrier to the next. And they're basically economy products with a little mustard on them, not a unique / wider seat or anything. Because of this I frankly didn't see what the fuss was about asking for business on the SK rebook, especially as on AF you sit in the back of the front cabin, not the rear cabin. (I thought the first agent's demand for a $300 copay to sit in marginally better circumstances CDG-OSL was outrageous.) My request was taken as major cheek, however. So was asking for economy extra. The problem as you say is that there is no apples-to-apples equivalent to PV on SK or with anyone else, and AF complicates things mightily by representing PV in different ways at different times. When they are collecting your money, it's a premium product; when they are trying to stash you in 22B on SK where you buy your own sandwich box, it's suddenly nothing. I still hold that "equivalent or better" should be the rule of thumb in a rebook scenario, and when there is no practical equivalent they should have to look one tier higher, not insist PV is meaningless despite the higher price paid.

The apples-to-apples problem is even more glaring on longhaul of course. The idea of PE is anything but fixed across the industry. It ranges from pretty sumptuous on NZ, to moderately comfortable on AF, BA, VS, etc., to nothing but a couple of inches' extra legroom and a free drink on DL and KL. What happens when an AF longhaul goes mech and PV customers are booked over to KL/DL? That puzzle makes mine look simple. Full J would be too much to expect, but those carriers' "Economy Comfort" would be totally inadequate IMO. Under irrops / rebook circumstances, if AF were to suddenly argue I was entitled to nothing more than 39E on a Delta flight, I'd hit the roof.

At least within Europe the majors' "business class" products conform, more or less, to an apples-to-apples test from one carrier to the next. And they're basically economy products with a little mustard on them, not a unique / wider seat or anything. Because of this I frankly didn't see what the fuss was about asking for business on the SK rebook, especially as on AF you sit in the back of the front cabin, not the rear cabin. (I thought the first agent's demand for a $300 copay to sit in marginally better circumstances CDG-OSL was outrageous.) My request was taken as major cheek, however. So was asking for economy extra. The problem as you say is that there is no apples-to-apples equivalent to PV on SK or with anyone else, and AF complicates things mightily by representing PV in different ways at different times. When they are collecting your money, it's a premium product; when they are trying to stash you in 22B on SK where you buy your own sandwich box, it's suddenly nothing. I still hold that "equivalent or better" should be the rule of thumb in a rebook scenario, and when there is no practical equivalent they should have to look one tier higher, not insist PV is meaningless despite the higher price paid.


I am afraid that it is all a question of pricing. As you are aware, the SEA-CDG-OSL RT is priced at or below the USA-CDG RT. So the pricing of your OSL-CDG segment is very low. AF has to buy that segment from SK. It is likely that SK prices very high that segment in Biz. So there is no way that AF will put you in Biz on SK. If it was an irrops and were able to come up with an alternaive on their AFKl metal, they might be a bit more accommodating and upgrade you to biz as it would be almost costless for them. Bbut this is apparently a long time before your flight and they have to pay a lot of money and they offered you the next AF flight.
it comes a time when a pax has to make a business decision and you made it by switching airline and downgrading to Y; it makes sense. But AF also has to make a business decision and they probably made the right one.
BTW: I fail to understand why you make so much fuss about paying for the lunch box. The AF PE "free" alternative is very poor.

The apples-to-apples problem is even more glaring on longhaul of course. The idea of PE is anything but fixed across the industry. It ranges from pretty sumptuous on NZ, to moderately comfortable on AF, BA, VS, etc., to nothing but a couple of inches' extra legroom and a free drink on DL and KL. What happens when an AF longhaul goes mech and PV customers are booked over to KL/DL? That puzzle makes mine look simple. Full J would be too much to expect, but those carriers' "Economy Comfort" would be totally inadequate IMO. Under irrops / rebook circumstances, if AF were to suddenly argue I was entitled to nothing more than 39E on a Delta flight, I'd hit the roof.

I very much agree with you on this. I would never accept to be rebooked from PV to economy, and indeed, there are multiple occurrences when people have mentioned it exactly what happened to them (both with AF and with BA). I understand your point that commercially, airlines should aim for 'equivalent or better' but I don't think that's the way the industry is behaving right now especially when rebooking you on another airline. My guess is that the almost certain reason is that they don't want to foot the bill for the extra cost (inter-airline coupons for irrops are cheaper than what we pay when we buy a ticket but still not negligible and SK would have charged AF a lot for a C seat). I'm not saying it's right or wrong but probably partly answers your question of why they might have preferred to see you cancel than to upgrade you on the SK flight. If we are talking about commercial sense rather than 'typical practice', my suggestion is that if AF had any sense, assuming that for whatever reason they did not have coupon that would have made you fly eco extra on SK (which again would have been the sensible option in my view), they should have pro-actively offered you a letter of explaination and a €100 coupon or an upgrade to business class on one of your other segments on their own metal to compensate the downgrade to 'plain Y' on the CDG-OSL portion of your trip. My guess is that you would have probably accepted and it would have maintained a reasonable cost for them.

I fail to understand why you make so much fuss about paying for the lunch box. The AF PE "free" alternative is very poor. I know. Principle of the thing. :)

...if AF had any sense, assuming that for whatever reason they did not have coupon that would have made you fly eco extra on SK (which again would have been the sensible option in my view), they should have pro-actively offered you a letter of explaination and a €100 coupon or an upgrade to business class on one of your other segments on their own metal to compensate the downgrade to 'plain Y' on the CDG-OSL portion of your trip. My guess is that you would have probably accepted and it would have maintained a reasonable cost for them.

You are absolutely right.

As for the involvement of a competitor, note the concurrent thread on here started by the guy en route to HKG in AF J whose CDG transfer went pear-shaped owing to irrops. He was reaccommodated in CX J, not Y and told to try complaining after he got home.

AF rerouted an AF J passenger to CX J? where is there anything to complain about? I would rather send a lot of thanks to AF customer relations department, for providing a real flat bed, direct access to aisle for all, service minded FA that listen to customers and do their best :)

I would have fought against them, it is not correct the way they handled the case. Example of acceptable solutions:
- get SK economy extra in whatever booking class
- keep the SK T seat and ask for the fare difference between AF W (641.50 EUR) and SK T (53.50 EUR) on half round trip basis for CDG OSL
- ask to pay the fare difference between AF W and SK D (653 EUR) on CDG OSL (which is actually 11.50 EUR!) to get rebooked in business
- ask to get a refund between AF W half round trip and AF lowest round trip fare in economy on CDG OSL (641.50-7.50 EUR = 634 EUR)

In 2005, I got my ARN MXP cancelled on AZ. They rebooked me on SK to FRA and then OA to ATH. SK has pay-for-water service in economy. So even if I was in eco, it was kind of a downgrade... In FRA, I enquired about possible lounge access as I had just silver status. In lieu, the AZ manager/handler gave me a 30 EUR voucher valid at any restaurant... My grilled-to-order fillet of beef, weissbier and other stuffs were far more valuable than the awful dry AZ sandwich and their table wine, or any business class meal I have ever had within Europe!

I would have fought against them, it is not correct the way they handled the case. Example of acceptable solutions:
- get SK economy extra in whatever booking class
- keep the SK T seat and ask for the fare difference between AF W (641.50 EUR) and SK T (53.50 EUR) on half round trip basis for CDG OSL
- ask to pay the fare difference between AF W and SK D (653 EUR) on CDG OSL (which is actually 11.50 EUR!) to get rebooked in business
- ask to get a refund between AF W half round trip and AF lowest round trip fare in economy on CDG OSL (641.50-7.50 EUR = 634 EUR)



I agree that these are reasonable solutions, except the last one maybe, where I would have suggested a refund between AF W and AF lowest Economy fare that was available at the time of booking (on a half round-trip basis).

you will never know a posteriori what was available at time of booking, except the flights you have actually booked and ticketed.

I agree. Nevertheless I think my suggestion is more reasonable. Why should AF be willing to refund money on the basis of the lowest economy fare?

and no wonder they are making a loss after another. they should have at least put the pax in Economy Extra on SAS. Maybe not Business but Eco Extra PLUS compensation in form of miles for example is the way to go, regardless of how convenient SK is in terms of schedule. Pax paid for a service, and he's entitled to it. Full stop. SK economy horrid class not only doesn't give any access to lounge, increases chances of NOT delivering luggage (they're champion for that in CDG) but gives hardly any miles on a Star alliance rewards program (about 125 miles or so) so no, and pax did well by cancelling the whole thing, good for them.
Now, flying Economy with LH has probably absolutely nothing to do with AF which is way better even in Economy on TATL segments.

The apples-to-apples problem is even more glaring on longhaul of course. The idea of PE is anything but fixed across the industry. It ranges from pretty sumptuous on NZ, to moderately comfortable on AF, BA, VS, etc., to nothing but a couple of inches' extra legroom and a free drink on DL and KL. What happens when an AF longhaul goes mech and PV customers are booked over to KL/DL? That puzzle makes mine look simple. Full J would be too much to expect, but those carriers' "Economy Comfort" would be totally inadequate IMO. Under irrops / rebook circumstances, if AF were to suddenly argue I was entitled to nothing more than 39E on a Delta flight, I'd hit the roof.

That's an excellent point! I guess the bottom line is that airlines are coming up with all these things to maximize profits, but when it comes to customers getting screwed they could care less. Examples:
- the complicated pricing scheme
- lucrative partnerships with other airlines that do not provide a streamlined customer experience
- new ways of generating revenues (various "premium" economy alternatives - PV / EC / etc. - a la carte meals and all that)
- elite benefits that do not extend well to partners (and there's nobody to be held accountable for that)

...all these have been implemented in an effort to maximize profits with very little consideration to the customer. IROPS do happen. "You're SOL" is not an appropriate response. They really should have a set of procedures in place to deal with various situations, including flights with PV being canceled and pax needing to be rebooked on other airlines.

Full stop. SK economy horrid class [...] gives hardly any miles on a Star alliance rewards program (about 125 miles or so) so no, and pax did well by cancelling the whole thing, good for them.
Now, flying Economy with LH has probably absolutely nothing to do with AF which is way better even in Economy on TATL segments.

The miles are not important here. If you are involuntarily rerouted, you are entitled to get the FB miles for the routing and fare class you originally booked.

I do not fully understand your last sentence are you claiming that AF is better than LH in TATL economy, or the other way round? (I personally clearly prefer AF over LH.)