ursine1

I'm not sure of the plaintiffs (or their legal counsel) fully understand how WN's boarding position allocation system works. While it's very likely that they situation they describe occurred, it's because of SEB, not that the pax that boarded before them were on AT fares. (In an earlier posting, it did sound like they understood this distinction.)

texashoser

It would sound like SEB is the culprit. WN should just do away with altogether or reserve cancelled AL boarding slots for other AL passengers only. It would seem like a ridiculously simple database query/table redesign. Of course, this is WN IT we're talking about...

toomanybooks

And they may be confusing BS with AT. Anyway, how do they expect that just by paying $25, they trump people paying hundreds more for a premium fare?

Seems to me WN wins this one. All they have to do is explain the system and say that the plaintiffs were confused/ignorant about what they saw.

He said-she said at best.

uastarflyer

Someone above said the $25 trumps AT, which is also hundreds more than WGA, close to BS.

ursine1

$25 (actually $12.50) indeed trumps those paying hundreds more for AT.

IANAL, but two legitimate issues seem actionable to me: SEB and no limit on the number of EBCI's sold. Unfortunately, it's unclear if the plaintiffs or counsel here really understand how the WN system works, so their ability to effectively argue seems suspect.

nsx

Now that I think about it, EBCI will be significantly better than T-24 if your originating flight has a lot of people connecting from earlier flight. Your EBCI will beat all their T-24 check-ins.

jrjcopp

Posted by nsx November 23,2014:
That's along time to have been thinking about it!

toomanybooks

Leaving aside SEB, I read here lots of confident 100% assertions about the order in which check-in occurs.

Has this order ever been explicitly stated by WN, or is it derived from personal experience and analysis of various observations?

rsteinmetz70112

Except for the way individual A-List and A-List Preferred passengers are assigned boarding numbers, I think most of the other boarding order is actually based on what Southwest has said.

That is:

Pre-Boarders
BS in order of check-in.
A-List Preferred in some secret order.
A-List in some secret order.
EBCI in order of purchase.
Everyone else in order of check-in.

And A-List in B or C groups and families board between the A and B groups.

Is that what you mean?

ursine1

We've discussed this before. Unlike the A-List boarding order, Southwest has been clear about how EBCI works (or, is supposed to work, barring technical glitches.)

EarlyBird Check-InŽ

ursine1

One edit:

Pre-Boarders
BS in order of check-in.
A-List Preferred in some secret order.
A-List in some secret order.
AT fares with EBCI in order of purchase.
WGA fares with EBCI in order of purchase.
Everyone else in order of check-in.

Also, the SEB lottery.

nineworldseries

Um, no. The "LUV seat" is the two seats together in front of the seat you're talking about ("infinite legroom seat") on a 300 or 700. Two sets of LUV seats on an 800. It's a play on the "love seat," a smaller couch meant for two people.

Edit: slow pony, but point still stands

toomanybooks

We have not covered everything by a long shot.

By the excerpt you quote I assume they should have written "Customers who have purchased Anytime fares AND EBCI will receive priority..."

Looks like AT w/o EBCI is worst on a "bang for the buck" basis. I had not quite realized that.

Also wonder about A-List customers who are flying on a CP ticket. Does their A-List status hold for better boarding, or is that only on paid tickets?

Is there a difference on how CP tickets are treated if only BS fares are available at the time of booking? Or are all CPs created equal? Are they the same as WGA for this purpose? Where does a CP ticket fall in the ranking if that person buys EBCI? (That is allowed, right?).

Green passes? Infant fares? Senior fares w/o ECBI? Sure are a lot of gradations possible.

With some effort I am sure I can think of other weird cases like this I doubt have been fully covered here. If they have, my apologies.

ursine1

Sorry, by "We've discussed this before," I was responding to your question regarding whether the specific EBCI boarding order was known or conjecture. It's known -- Southwest's FAQ's spells it out, and we've discussed at great length here many of the variables, reaching the conclusion that the order, as Southwest states, is correct.

The situations you mention are either covered by the EBCI or A-List FAQs, or in cases of omission of specific information, through experiences reported here.

Yes. While their language could possibly be interpreted as unclear, your assumption is correct.

In most situations, A-List status generally holds, regardless of the fare type. Exceptions: A-List on BS have to manually check in -- they receive no A-List priority assignment. Also, bookings or changes less than t-36 lose A-List priority benefits. (This is more a question regarding A-List benefits than EBCI.)


A companion pass passenger receives no priority based upon the CP holders ticket -- they're completely separate. If the CP pax is also A-List, they receive their A-List benefit. If they buy EBCI they receive EBCI position based on the time stamp of the EBCI purchase, ranked among all non-AT fare EBCI purchasers for their flight.

Green passes, senior, infant, military, etc. fares are all included in the non-AT fare ranking category for EBCI.

toomanybooks

So for non-A-List, non-BS, non-AT, non-EBCI, everyone else is dumped into one giant mass, with no priority for anyone? Annual spend, annual points, lifetime numbers, TQPs, there is no distinguishing and it is just based on time of check-in?

Is this KNOWN, or just surmised?

And if someone is A-List, does ECBI put him ahead of non-ECBI-A-List pax?