Back of the line, buddy
#31
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: YUL
Programs: AC SE (*A Gold), Bonvoy Platinum Elite, Hilton Gold, Amex Platinum / AP Reserve, NEXUS, Global Entry
Posts: 5,691
#32
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: YYZ
Programs: ACMM SE100K; *G
Posts: 1,526
What "regular security line"? I've never seen a NEXUS line in Canada with a body scanner. That includes: YEG, YYC, YVR, YUL, YOW, YYZ. So though I haven't been to all airports with one, my sample size is pretty decent.
#33
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: YUL
Programs: AC SE (*A Gold), Bonvoy Platinum Elite, Hilton Gold, Amex Platinum / AP Reserve, NEXUS, Global Entry
Posts: 5,691
And every time I connect in YYZ the NEXUS line just feeds me to the front of the regular lines. That's why I'm confused by your (and hjohnson's) statements.
#35
Join Date: Nov 2008
Programs: AC SE
Posts: 1,014
I mostly transit security at YVR, the NEXUS lane is way off to the left at domestic departures, I've never been asked to go through the nude-o-scope while in that line. (Of course, now that I've talked about this, they'll probably try to send me over there all the time now. )
#36
Join Date: Jul 2008
Programs: Via Preference Privilege, AC*A, Fairmont Plat, SPG Gold
Posts: 1,334
Now the argument is even though you thought you paid your dues with $32.50, you really need to shell out for our even higher tier if you want a security line that might be faster.
If your user fees are completely covering the cost of the service, which AFAIK they are what right does the airport authority have to collect a fee from you and take money from AMEX to speed certain people along the queue? If the airport was loss making and AMEX was some badly needed infusion of funds, I could see an argument in favor of it. When your already paying the full cost of the airport and more, I think it's in bad taste. I would count NEXUS as an exception being it $10/yr and open to everyone.
#37
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: YYZ
Programs: ACMM SE100K; *G
Posts: 1,526
A regular traveler is paying $32.50 directly to the government and the GTAA each time they use the airport.
Now the argument is even though you thought you paid your dues with $32.50, you really need to shell out for our even higher tier if you want a security line that might be faster.
If your user fees are completely covering the cost of the service, which AFAIK they are what right does the airport authority have to collect a fee from you and take money from AMEX to speed certain people along the queue? If the airport was loss making and AMEX was some badly needed infusion of funds, I could see an argument in favor of it. When your already paying the full cost of the airport and more, I think it's in bad taste. I would count NEXUS as an exception being it $10/yr and open to everyone.
Now the argument is even though you thought you paid your dues with $32.50, you really need to shell out for our even higher tier if you want a security line that might be faster.
If your user fees are completely covering the cost of the service, which AFAIK they are what right does the airport authority have to collect a fee from you and take money from AMEX to speed certain people along the queue? If the airport was loss making and AMEX was some badly needed infusion of funds, I could see an argument in favor of it. When your already paying the full cost of the airport and more, I think it's in bad taste. I would count NEXUS as an exception being it $10/yr and open to everyone.
#38
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Left
Programs: FT
Posts: 7,285
that is really up to some arbitrator of the complaintent to decide really and yours is but one side of the coin.
#39
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 7
Unfortunately, he is right
Security and customs are run by the airport / government, not the airline, so they cannot treat the airline's best customers differently. In fact, the airport is supposed to be a not-for-profit business, so it would not even make sense to grant special privileges to the airport's best customers. Each passenger pays per use and is treated the same.
Don't agree? Think about this: What if I used the airport 120 times a year (like I did last year) but flew on Sunwing. Then I'd have no status even though I use T1 all the time. So security would give me no priority, even though I deserve it as much as the SE traveller.
This just proves that airlines tell the airports what to do = not fair.
In the meantime, of course I'll use the priority line, but I don't think it's fair.
Don't agree? Think about this: What if I used the airport 120 times a year (like I did last year) but flew on Sunwing. Then I'd have no status even though I use T1 all the time. So security would give me no priority, even though I deserve it as much as the SE traveller.
This just proves that airlines tell the airports what to do = not fair.
In the meantime, of course I'll use the priority line, but I don't think it's fair.
#40
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: YUL
Programs: AC SE (*A Gold), Bonvoy Platinum Elite, Hilton Gold, Amex Platinum / AP Reserve, NEXUS, Global Entry
Posts: 5,691
IMO the point of offering priority services is not a question of "fairness," it's a question of good business sense. If I'm a vacationer, I'm happy to arrive at the airport 3 hours before my flight and stand in line with hundreds of fellow vacationers at my charter airline-of-choice's check-in counter the once or twice a year I travel. I'm excited and it's part of the process.
If I'm a business traveller, I simply can't afford to spend that much time idly. Again, as a business traveller, I'd take my business to an airline where I get the most value for my time.
#41
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: YYZ
Programs: ACMM SE100K; *G
Posts: 1,526
Security and customs are run by the airport / government, not the airline, so they cannot treat the airline's best customers differently. In fact, the airport is supposed to be a not-for-profit business, so it would not even make sense to grant special privileges to the airport's best customers. Each passenger pays per use and is treated the same.
Don't agree? Think about this: What if I used the airport 120 times a year (like I did last year) but flew on Sunwing. Then I'd have no status even though I use T1 all the time. So security would give me no priority, even though I deserve it as much as the SE traveller.
This just proves that airlines tell the airports what to do = not fair.
In the meantime, of course I'll use the priority line, but I don't think it's fair.
Don't agree? Think about this: What if I used the airport 120 times a year (like I did last year) but flew on Sunwing. Then I'd have no status even though I use T1 all the time. So security would give me no priority, even though I deserve it as much as the SE traveller.
This just proves that airlines tell the airports what to do = not fair.
In the meantime, of course I'll use the priority line, but I don't think it's fair.
- Though security is run by the government, the line up to get there is not.
- Not for profits still need revenue. AC and AMEX give them extra revenue for priority lines.
- It's your choice to use an airline with or without perks. Your Sunwing example doesn't fly.
- Airlines don't "tell the airports what to do" (at least not in this example), rather, they pay them for certain amenities, one of which is priority lines.
If you flew 120x/year on an airline with no priority services at your home base (e.g. Sunwing or others), then you'd look at options to get those priority services some other way. For example, you'd probably get an appropriate Amex card.
IMO the point of offering priority services is not a question of "fairness," it's a question of good business sense. If I'm a vacationer, I'm happy to arrive at the airport 3 hours before my flight and stand in line with hundreds of fellow vacationers at my charter airline-of-choice's check-in counter the once or twice a year I travel. I'm excited and it's part of the process.
If I'm a business traveller, I simply can't afford to spend that much time idly. Again, as a business traveller, I'd take my business to an airline where I get the most value for my time.
IMO the point of offering priority services is not a question of "fairness," it's a question of good business sense. If I'm a vacationer, I'm happy to arrive at the airport 3 hours before my flight and stand in line with hundreds of fellow vacationers at my charter airline-of-choice's check-in counter the once or twice a year I travel. I'm excited and it's part of the process.
If I'm a business traveller, I simply can't afford to spend that much time idly. Again, as a business traveller, I'd take my business to an airline where I get the most value for my time.
#42
Join Date: May 2007
Location: YYZ, but my heart is in Asia
Programs: AC-SE, CX-DM, DL-G, Hyatt-DM, Hilton-DM, Fairmont-Plt, Marriott-S, Accor-Plt, SPG-G, IHG-Plt
Posts: 4,396
#44
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: YUL
Programs: AC*E
Posts: 779
...
IMO the point of offering priority services is not a question of "fairness," it's a question of good business sense. If I'm a vacationer, I'm happy to arrive at the airport 3 hours before my flight and stand in line with hundreds of fellow vacationers at my charter airline-of-choice's check-in counter the once or twice a year I travel. I'm excited and it's part of the process.
If I'm a business traveller, I simply can't afford to spend that much time idly. Again, as a business traveller, I'd take my business to an airline where I get the most value for my time.
IMO the point of offering priority services is not a question of "fairness," it's a question of good business sense. If I'm a vacationer, I'm happy to arrive at the airport 3 hours before my flight and stand in line with hundreds of fellow vacationers at my charter airline-of-choice's check-in counter the once or twice a year I travel. I'm excited and it's part of the process.
If I'm a business traveller, I simply can't afford to spend that much time idly. Again, as a business traveller, I'd take my business to an airline where I get the most value for my time.
#45
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 415
I don't fly through YYZ often, but when I do I skip the whole priority line nonsense. Like others, I've come running to security flashing my American Express Platinum card, only to end up waiting 15 minutes in line while the "non-priority" pax waited 3 to 5 minutes.
Basically, it is just a marketing ploy. All it is is Amex's way of saying, "Hey Joe Passenger, if you were willing to pay $699 for an Amex Platinum Card you too could be lavished with all this preferential treatment!" It isn't about giving anything special to passengers; it is just a manner of selling credit cards.
Basically, it is just a marketing ploy. All it is is Amex's way of saying, "Hey Joe Passenger, if you were willing to pay $699 for an Amex Platinum Card you too could be lavished with all this preferential treatment!" It isn't about giving anything special to passengers; it is just a manner of selling credit cards.