FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - AA Devaluation: Why is This Legal?
View Single Post
Old Jan 6, 2003 | 10:30 am
  #72  
Djlawman
Original Member
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,343
Efrem is entirely right that the ASSUMPTION that you will be able to get awards at the same level as were in effect when you earned the awards is UNJUSTIFIED. Certainly you cannot blame AA for that assumption. From the AAdvantage terms and conditions:

"American Airlines may, in its discretion, change the AAdvantage program rules, regulations, travel awards, and special offers at any time with or without notice. This means that the accumulation of mileage credit does not entitle members to any vested rights with respect to such mileage credits, awards or program benefits. In accumulating mileage or awards, members may not rely upon the continued availability of any award or award level, and members may not be able to obtain all offered awards for all destinations or on all flights. Any award may be withdrawn or subject to increased mileage requirements or new restrictions at any time.

American Airlines may, among other things, (i) withdraw, limit, modify, or cancel any award; (ii) change program benefits, mileage levels, participant affiliations, conditions of participation, rules for earning, redeeming, retaining or forfeiting mileage credit, or rules for the use of travel awards; or (iii) add travel embargo dates, limit the number of seats available for award travel (including, but not limited to, allocating no seats on certain flights) or otherwise restrict the continued availability of travel awards or special offers. American Airlines may make any one or more of these changes at any time even though such changes may affect your ability to use the mileage credit or awards that you have already accumulated. "


Thus, if anyone believes they are entitled to "vest" in a current award structure, it is not an expectation which AA has created, but rather wishful thinking on their part.

Djlawman

[This message has been edited by Djlawman (edited 01-06-2003).]
Djlawman is offline