Very simple. Pay the fee and change the flight. If it wasn't important enough to him to spend the money to change, then play by the rules and either go standby or take the original flight.

He said that he wanted the concierge to waive the fee to confirm him on the nonstop flight. That IMHO, is an unacceptable use of the concierge service to get a favour in a situation where there was a clearly spelled out policy already existing. YMMV.

Why on earth are you making a major issue out of this? I simply think he was out of line to ask for the favor. He asked for opinions, I gave him one. Stop trying to argue the minutae because that isn't what this thread is about.


[This message has been edited by B747-437B (edited Mar 13, 2004).]

So next time you're running late for your flight on a discounted fare because you were stuck in traffic, don't pick up that cell phone. Miss the flight, forfeit the ticket and pay for a new one.

Selfish comment IMO.

And if you thought that was out of line, you don't think it was out of line to ask them to check you in for a flight because you would miss the cut off because of your own reasons? I have no problem with them doing both (and I think it's great that they do that) but it's the fact that you claimed what he asked for was out of line yet what you asked for was perfectly fine, selfish IMO.

I've never been late for a flight due to traffic in well over 2 million flown miles, but I'll take note of your advice on the rare possibility that I might need it in the future.

Once again, selfish comment IMHO. You said that a concierge is suitable to help with out of box situation such as when you weren't going to make the check in cutoff time. There is a 'clearly spelled out policy' already existing (as per your wording) about when you should arrive at the airport and when you should be checked in. So why is that fine? Why shouldn't they be forced to forfeit their ticket because it was a discounted one and forced to buy a new one? Double standard? As I said, I think it's great that they are willing to help out but for you to say what FatBoyYVR asked for shouldn't be done because there was a 'clearly written policy'; that doesn't sound right to me (when there's a clearly written policy about check in cut off time as well).

I don't care whether you've missed a flight before. It's the fact that you made that comment and so assured that what FatboyYVR asked for isn't right because there's an existing policy about that yet the so called 'out of box' situations that you came up with are perfectly fine.

Well Empress, since you are really in the mood to keep beating this poor dead horse, I'll explain to you why I think that way.

If someone arrived late for a flight, missed the checkin deadline and as a result forfeited the ticket - for them to ask the concierge to waive the related fees to rebook on the next flight would be an equally unacceptable use of the concierge.

However, if the person were able to proactively reach the concierge prior to the checkin deadline and get them to complete the checkin procedure over the telephone, there is no question of there being any fees involved and correspondingly no waiver of the fees being asked for. There was simply the request for a service that the concierge was able to provide without either loss of revenue to the airline or inconvenience to the passenger. That, IMHO, is what the concierge program should be about. Again, YMMV.

I don't think it is the extra services they provide, but rather the fact they provide a more dedicated service to the SEs

Guessing that the concierge number around 100 worldwide....

100 x 50k (salary) = $5,000,000 plus all the support, those little office they hide away in, uniform etc etc...you could double that.

so are they worth $10,000,000 a year?

Could that 10 mil be spent on a website that SE's could book award travel from, confirm upgardes on...a return of PTO...

Do you really need them in Canada??

Is it money well spent when clearly most things here could be done by an any agent or the SE desk...??

Just throwing it out there...

Oh right, is that written down somewhere? Or is it because you said it was fine? And that's not waiving the rules? So FatboyYVR proactively asking to put a nonstop flight (perfectly doable and allowed FYI) is not fine? Which one is more out of the line? Based on your theory, should AC open a 'late check in phone hotline' since there's no loss of revenue? Wouldn't AC make more revenue if everyone was forced to follow the rules - so if someone don't show up, their ticket is forfeited so they have to buy a new one. Isn't that more revenue? Once again, you're bending the facts just to make your so called "out of the box" situation sounds fine. And how is asking to be put on a nonstop flight (when J is wide open and going on standby will get him on for sure) = loss of revenue?

I thinking calling a conceirge because you are stuck in traffic is an abuse of the service...

If you can't organize yourself to be at the airport being an SE you need to give your head a shake...
I am sure you plan your travel, so why can't you make arrangements to be at the airport on time?...

Plan stupid and very rude on your behalf...

Because you are sellfish, somebody that might have really needed a concierge for something misses out...

I think it's fine and great for them to help out in situations like that but for someone like B747-437B to come in and say that's fine but asking to get on a nonstop flight on the same day is not, that is what I considered as selfish. (Both cases have clear rules about what the procedures should be. In fact, the same day standby rules are quite relaxed.)

Standy was not given to me as option, except still paying the change fee, so I now learn I was given incorrect information. This part I will follow up with AC. You are right, it wasn't important enough to me to pay AC more $$, as a simple matter of principle - especially after being lectured on the subject of revenue protection. From your post, and others, "favours" or "rule bending" or whatever you want to call it is something that concierges do and that people (exactly as you did when you call) hope they will do - in certain circumstances. I think this is reasonable, but as Empress has said there is NO difference at all between your requests and mine - both are "outside the box". In my situation, I think that wide-open flights would make it an appropriate gesture, and to tell an SE about revenue is simply insulting, inappropriate and stupid. But if $200 matters more than a years worth of revenue, then I am happy to fly someone else and make sure have one less SE to worry about next year.

Absolutely. There is no difference and those are situations that I think it's appropiate for the concierges to help out (in fact, for the SBY case, what you asked for is closely related to what the rules allowed). He has still failed to provide a clear case on why what you asked for is criminal yet what he asked was for perfectly fine simply because he was 'proactive'. In fact, AC would make far more than the $200 change fee if someone were to forfeit their ticket because they are late and have to buy a new one. He referred to me as beating a dead horse but it seems like he can't come up with a clear case so he just pronounced the horse dead as he sees fit.

I'm not sure who this is directed to but I will agree that bad planning on anyone's part is waste of people's time no matter what the situation. I am pretty a--l about getting to the airport early and have little sympathy for my co-workers who can't be.

My "stuck in traffic" experiences relate to times where I have no control over the situation like a thunderstorms blowing into town creating flash floods that close freeways and cause one to take long detours. Another case was where a person jumped in front the blue line train preceding mine in ORD. Situations like these I consider to be reasonable requests to make of the concierges.