Originally Posted by
redtop43
I posted a thread regarding my monthly PHL-LAS trip for May, in mid-March when the schedules were changed. This involves my June trip.
On March 18 I booked Flight 726 (PHL-LAX) connecting to 2875 (LAX-LAS) for $482 (F). It departs at 4PM and there was also a 4PM nonstop for $400. I paid the extra $82 because 726 is a B787 and it's worth the extra money and travel time to get the better plane, particularly in F. At the time I was unaware of AA's practice of wholesale schedule changes.
As of today, 726 is operating an A321. There is no longer a 4PM nonstop but there is one at 6:07 (the only afternoon nonstop), flight 1585. Ironically, that's a B787, but that's not directly relevant. The fare is $673.
When an airline has to change equipment because a plane breaks, or is delayed, or even somebody charters the wrong one, or whatever, we as flyers understand. We even kind of understand wholesale schedule changes. But when a flight is changed to an inferior plane for an entire month, month after month, it's impossible to conclude that they really intended to fly that plane. "Bait and switch" is defined as offering a good or service, then attempting to substitute an inferior or higher-priced product." It's illegal, and no contract between two parties can make it legal.
I called reservations and of course was told that they would be happy to change my itin, for the fare difference. I'm not even asking for the $82 back. (Presumably if I had booked the 4PM nonstop they would have switched me to the 6:07.) I doubt that AA has an entire department devoted to "How can we swap equipment in and out to best defraud our customers." But the fact that they're not inherently evil doesn't mean they can do an evil thing. I'm not asking them to fly the plane I want at the time I want, I just want them to come as close as possible to putting me in the position I'd have been in if they had not engaged in what, regardless of their motives and regardless of the conditions of carriage, amounts to an illegal bait and switch.
What are people's opinions about what I should do? I'd make a crude joke about one solution, but after what's been happening recently, including at FedEx yesterday, stuff like that isn't close to funny. I can suck it up and pay the $189 fare difference. I can buy a ticket on 1585 and then fight it out. I can write to customer relations, but I don't want to wake up one morning and find that the $673 flight is now up to $850.
Ironically, under other circumstances this would be an incredible windfall. The Y fare on 1585 is $116, and for that I get MCE (I'm ExPlat) which is really the W seats and isn't that much worse than the F seats on the A321. I could save a bundle, but right now that's not something I want to do.
I sympathize with your situation, but you have to keep in mind that AA employs some of the least intelligent network planning and revenue management staff out there. Even before Covid they struggled with basic demand forecasting, so imagine how lost they must be now.
However, PHL LAX/SFO are routes that in the past did have at least one daily widebody service. I wouldn't say that AA is intentionally opting for a switch and bait strategy, but if they see that they can deploy a 787 on a route with stronger passenger and cargo demand, they do have the right to make the change as no airline guarantees a specific aircraft under their terms of carriage.
Have you tried calling AA and complaining about booking a 787 with flat beds and now getting a 321 with standard seats? I'm not the best person to ask because as CK AA makes all sorts of exceptions for me as a top flier, yet you may get a good supervisor who may be able to route you on a connecting flight that will have flat beds or to change you to the earlier nonstop that is currently showing widebody service.