Originally Posted by Globaliser
[...snip...]
This, it seems to me, is exactly the reason why there is a capacity exception in the oneworld rules, and why BA has a justifiable reason for invoking it at MIA. BA's lounge is not primarily there to serve the hordes of AA Emeralds and Sapphires who are not flying BA; it's primarily there to serve those who are flying on BA services.
Many very good points.
Capacity is an important issue, of course, but there seem to be a fair few reports of people being denied access into a very quiet lounge. The overriding impression seemed to be that lounge staff were making rules up on the fly and denying access, in contravention of established rules, for no good reason.
At least there is a laminated card now, and the policy has been firmed. Still, I think it would behoove BA to be more transparent and up front about these 'special cases', rather than leave travellers disappointed and embarassed at the desk (and with a less favourable impression of BA, I'd imagine).
nonsoloinglese, I challenged you because the bit I quoted (and, particularly, the remark following) seemed unnecessarily flippant and unsubstantiated. Unless you're ready to give up your oneworld benefits when you're flying in the US, I don't really understand your point.