oneworld - Enhancement to US domestic lounge access?

Is it true that oneworld sapphire and emerald members may no longer access AA lounges when flying within the US? It was always the case for AA PLT and EXP, but new verbiage on oneworld.com appears to suggest it has been extended to all other carriers' members too.

Wow. There it is:

American Airlines AAdvantage® members and oneworld top tier status holders, regardless of their tier status, cannot access lounges when travelling solely on North American itineraries within or between the U.S., Canada, Mexico (except Mexico City), the Bahamas, Bermuda and the Caribbean.


http://www.oneworld.com/ffp/lounge-access/

Unless I'm reading it wrong.

I really hope this will not be the case. At least the wording has not appeared in http://www.aa.com/i18n/travelInformation/airportAmenities/AdmiralsLocations.jsp (under "Definition") yet.

Does this impact non-AA OW top-tiers who are on international connections? If not, it seems to me to be designed to take away an incentive for a USA-based passenger to make a non-AA program his program of choice...

I'd imagine it's primarily to stop US based flyers enjoying unlimited lounge access by being a member of another FFP, when AA members have to pay.

However, I'd have thought the upgrades would have outweighed the lounge fees if you fly AA that much.

Sucks for the rest of us, though.

Does this impact non-AA OW top-tiers who are on international connections?

No, it doesn't appear to.

If not, it seems to me to be designed to take away an incentive for a USA-based passenger to make a non-AA program his program of choice...

Precisely. Which makes it understandable. But it's still bad news for the many OW elites who take "domestic" flights during business and leisure trips to the USA. AA elites, meanwhile, can still use e.g. BA lounges in Europe.

AA elites, meanwhile, can still use e.g. BA lounges in Europe.
But so can BA elites.

This change would simply make things more consistent. Previously BA elites could access a OW lounge AA elites could not, all other things being equal. That situation no longer exists.

But so can BA elites.

This change would simply make things more consistent. Previously BA elites could access a OW lounge AA elites could not, all other things being equal. That situation no longer exists.


Isn't the previous exception denying AA elites access to North American lounges on domestic itineraries the inconsistency in the Oneworld Lounge Policy? Does involving more customers in this inconsistency make things more consistent?

I thought that AA got revenue from other carrier elites using their lounges anyway. Except for the few Flagship lounges it would be hard for the cost of a few glasses of cheap plonk and a bowl of pretzels to make this a cost burden on AA

Isn't the previous exception denying AA elites access to North American lounges on domestic itineraries the inconsistency in the Oneworld Lounge Policy? Does involving more customers in this inconsistency make things more consistent?
I know that this is how it is on SkyTeam at least. SkyTeam elites, regardless of tier, cannot access lounges on domestic itineraries. So in that sense, it would make things more consistent. I don't think it would be practical to simply allow all elites (including AA elites) in solely on domestic itineraries.

Anyhow, it looks like this may all be moot since the policy is not changing, as pointed out by HilFly in this thread:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/british-airways-executive-club/1371046-sch-gch-access-aadmirals-clubs-called-into-question.html

This seems a lot like a case of poor proofreading by the oneworld web team. I think the sentence is supposed to say something like "AAdvantage members who have top-tier oneworld status...".

Such a drastic change would not have been announced through a footnote on the oneworld website. (And anyway, it makes no sense. AA makes plenty of revenue on oneworld elites' lounge access — why would they put a stop to it?)

Sounds like it could be a way for AA-BA to reduce their costs at the expense of customers' benefits acquired (previously) via a good degree of non-AA OW "loyalty" program participation. [If that turns out to be a done-deal, then that would seem like another "positive" of governments granting AA and BA antitrust immunity as much as has already been granted. :rolleyes: ]

Thank you AA-BA if this is really a done deal. :rolleyes:

I know that this is how it is on SkyTeam at least. SkyTeam elites, regardless of tier, cannot access lounges on domestic itineraries. So in that sense, it would make things more consistent. I don't think it would be practical to simply allow all elites (including AA elites) in solely on domestic itineraries.

Anyhow, it looks like this may all be moot since the policy is not changing, as pointed out by HilFly in this thread:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/british-airways-executive-club/1371046-sch-gch-access-aadmirals-clubs-called-into-question.html

All Skyteam ElitePlus are lounge access eligible (by way of ElitePlus status) on all US-Canada and US-Mexico Skyteam trips. Can't say the same goes generally for all OW Sapphire/Emeralds flying Oneworld trips internationally within North America.

Things will still be inconsistent between Skyteam and Oneworld on intra-North America international trips.

:td:
Now that's a bummer. I chose to fly AA with a three hours connection in DFW over a nonstop SEA-MSP next week becaiuse of the tier points. If I'd knew this I would not have done it. 3 hours in DFW without lounge access? :(

If this change holds true, that's a downer.


On the other hand, Qantas Club paid membership grants access to AA lounges (except Flagships) when flying AA. I assume this will not change?

Then, just to make things more confusing, Qantas Gold and Platinum members are technically also Qantas Club members (we get our membership for free, as it were). Does this effectively render QF Golds and Platinums immune from these changes?

I know that this is how it is on SkyTeam at least. SkyTeam elites, regardless of tier, cannot access lounges on domestic itineraries.

"Domestic"? So if I'm based in Singapore, what's a "domestic" itinerary? Is Moscow to Vladivostok a domestic itinerary?

If this is true, the news has not yet reached the lounge dragons in LAX or SFO. I travelled on a AA-domestic Y itinerary yesterday, and enjoyed full access to the Flagship lounges.

It's a shame tough if this is going to happen. The lounge access is one of the few benefits that differentiates AA from it's competitors.

I have done about 20 segments within the US over the last month, I have not had any problem whatsoever, and indeed warmly invited into Flagship when there was one present.

This would be a real downer if true :(

Unless I am reading it all wrong, The Admirals Club page on AA.com doesnt seem to say anything
http://www.aa.com/i18n/travelInformation/airportAmenities/AdmiralsLocations.jsp#oneworld
(Oneworld Emerald and Sapphire: 1 guest)

However, the page for the Flagship Lounges alarmingly has:
oneworld Emerald customers** when departing on or connecting to any oneworld marketed and operated flight, regardless of cabin flown. Access is valid on a same day itinerary that includes an international* qualifying segment
(http://www.aa.com/i18n/travelInformation/airportAmenities/AAFlagshipLounges.jsp)

Doesnt' portend well for me as an Emerald (CX), who ends up buying a fair bit of 'domestic' US segments that aren't necessarily connecting/to from my CX flights.

...
Anyhow, it looks like this may all be moot since the policy is not changing, as pointed out by HilFly in this thread:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/british-airways-executive-club/1371046-sch-gch-access-aadmirals-clubs-called-into-question.html+1

Let's wait - it's not the first time there was erroneous information placed upon the oneworld website.

I know that this is how it is on SkyTeam at least. SkyTeam elites, regardless of tier, cannot access lounges on domestic itineraries.

"Domestic"? So if I'm based in Singapore, what's a "domestic" itinerary? Is Moscow to Vladivostok a domestic itinerary?

A Domestic itinerary means a flight(s) within a country without a same day international connection. Where you are based does not matter. Membership in a FFP does.

A Domestic itinerary means a flight(s) within a country without a same day international connection.

Not in AA world it doesn't!

A Domestic itinerary means a flight(s) within a country without a same day international connection. Where you are based does not matter. Membership in a FFP does.

I think that was the point of the member to whom you're responding: Skyteam elite do enjoy lounge access on purely domestic itineraries. The only exception is for flights within the US, so the difference isn't "domestic vs international" but "US-only vs every other itin".

+1

Let's wait - it's not the first time there was erroneous information placed upon the oneworld website.

Indeed.

AA's own website still reflects the "old" rules, albeit a bit more hard to find than before. Go to http://www.aa.com/i18n/travelInformation/airportAmenities/AdmiralsLocations.jsp and click on "definitions" at the bottom, then scroll down to "oneworld Emerald or Sapphire."
Members of oneworld airline frequent flyer programs with the equivalent of oneworld Emerald or Sapphire status can use any lounge offered by any oneworld airline when departing on any flight marketed and operated by any oneworld member airline*, no matter in which cabin class they are flying (* oneworld flights do not include codeshare flights with non-oneworld airlines, even those marketed by a oneworld Member but operated by a non-oneworld carrier or those operated by a oneworld Member but marketed by a non-oneworld carrier)


Emerald tier frequent flyers can use First Class, Business Class or frequent flyer lounges
Sapphire tier frequent flyers are welcome in Business Class* or frequent flyer lounges
As an Emerald or Sapphire member, your lounge access is regardless of which cabin you are flying in
Emerald and Sapphire members may invite one guest to join them in the lounge
You must be prepared to show your frequent flyer membership card, with oneworld Emerald or Sapphire status, to access a lounge
Access to First Class lounges is restricted to passengers flying in the lounge operator's First Class cabin or to cardholders with oneworld Emerald status, regardless of which oneworld airline or cabin they are flying


The following exceptions apply:

American Airlines and Qantas offer programs enabling travelers to pay to gain access to their lounges. These programs are not part of the oneworld agreement, and members of these programs are not entitled to access lounges under the oneworld agreement
American Airlines AAdvantage® members, regardless of their tier status, cannot access lounges when travelling on North American itineraries within or between the U.S., Canada, Mexico (except Mexico City), the Bahamas, Bermuda and the Caribbean
Qantas Frequent Flyer Gold members cannot access Qantas Domestic Business Lounges


Either (a) AA has told oneworld about a major change afoot before telling its own members/staff, or (b) oneworld has once again managed to muddy the waters with poor research and/or editorial skills. My bet is on...

AA just stated on their Twitter account that the policy change is a mistake and that non-AA OW elites still have access to the lounge regardless of itinerary and will be asking OW to fix the error on their website.

AA just stated on their Twitter account that the policy change is a mistake and that non-AA OW elites still have access to the lounge regardless of itinerary and will be asking OW to fix the error on their website.

Woohoo! Good news indeed.

Right then. Apologies for the unnecessary panic then :)

God that was a panic attack.

I wonder if this will happen eventually.

I guess it's off topic, but hey, I'm the moderator, so I can abuse my power if I like. :rolleyes:

Sometimes I think OW management is the gang that can't shoot straight. Inviting airlines for membership only to have them go tango uniform; rolling out an online booking tool for their most popular and important product and discovering that it's the Bug Pit of Bukhara, and not fixing it over a period of years; creating new admit policies for a key member's lounges... what's next?

C'mon, oneworld, earn your pay.

I guess it's off topic, but hey, I'm the moderator, so I can abuse my power if I like. :rolleyes:.........creating new admit policies for a key member's lounges... what's next?

C'mon, oneworld, earn your pay.

is that due to out sourcing? Of which a company just did website for sky trash manage to copy and paste the information by simply changing the name of the particular airline?

I thought it's a language thing with a poor translation from, say French, to English.

So I looked at the various language versions of the page and paragraph (note 2) in question and translated them.

The impression I arrived at was the original was indeed written in English.

AA just stated on their Twitter account that the policy change is a mistake and that non-AA OW elites still have access to the lounge regardless of itinerary and will be asking OW to fix the error on their website.

oneworld Lounge Access page also now reflects the original rules:

http://www.oneworld.com/ffp/lounge-access/

American Airlines AAdvantage® members, regardless of their tier status or class of travel, cannot access lounges when travelling solely on North American itineraries within or between the U.S., Canada, Mexico (except Mexico City), the Bahamas, Bermuda and the Caribbean. For more information, visit, http://www.aa.com/i18n/travelInformation/airportAmenities/AdmiralsClub.jsp

American Airlines AAdvantage® members and oneworld top tier status holders, regardless of their tier status, cannot access lounges when travelling solely on North American itineraries within or between the U.S., Canada, Mexico (except Mexico City), the Bahamas, Bermuda and the Caribbean.

I thought it's a language thing with a poor translation from, say French, to English.

So I looked at the various language versions of the page and paragraph (note 2) in question and translated them.

The impression I arrived at was the original was indeed written in English.

And the impression I arrive at is that you have far too much time on your hands - or behind the online identity of serfty lies the real life Sheldon Cooper ;)

I thought it's a language thing with a poor translation from, say French, to English.

So I looked at the various language versions of the page and paragraph (note 2) in question and translated them.

The impression I arrived at was the original was indeed written in English.

OW was based in YVR and now based in JFK, so I don't see any reason why any original statement was not written in English. (Also, OW seems very anglophonic compared to *A and ST when one looks at the member it has.)

The impression I arrived at was the original was indeed written in English.

I am under this impression also. As a native French speaker, I tend to land on French web pages based on the browser's preference. OW's website is translated, but sometimes whole English paragraphs ends up into the French version... It was the case for this change, for example. I can't see them deliberately putting a translated paragraphe if the original had been available.

Seems like not that much care is tended on the OW website. It doesn't list Sri Lankan as a member elect, even though that was announced almost two months ago.

Seems like not that much care is tended on the OW website.

With regards to languages, it's miles ahead of BA's (translation worse than google's) and AA's (booking engine screwed up for some fare if not using aa.com).