Originally Posted by
pigx5
If you can't use a benefit, then, it's not a benefit for you.
Therefore, since I don't find the SWUs to be a benefit UA should eliminate them. It is the same logic.
Originally Posted by
STS-134
UA never promised anything! The ONLY thing that UA promised, is that they can change the terms and conditions of their FFP at any time, for any reason, or for no reason at all. Joke's on the Plaintiff for expecting those conditions to never change when the contract says something completely contrary to those expectations. The ONLY thing I ever accumulate EQM for, is for benefits for this year and next year. I'd never buy a UA ticket over a *A Partner ticket just to accumulate lifetime miles, if the *A Partner has better service or prices. Hell, we've even seen airlines come and go over time periods of decades -- there's no guarantee that UA will even be around 15-20 years from now.
Lets assume two facts
1) all the plaintiff wants is the program to go back to the way it was.
and
2) UA has knowledge of fact 1.
Since UA has taken no action in light of those two facts we can derive one of two things
1) fact number one is in fact false, and the Plaintiff wants more than the restoration of previous benefits. or
2) UA has no intention of restoring the previous benefits and is willing to fight for that.