Fermat

that's the newest arbitrary rule i've heard the lounge nazis come up with. Today, a gent standing next to me asked if he could pay for access to the lounge. After being refused by the desk, I offered to bring him in as my guest.

The desk nazi glared at me and said that if he wasn't on my flight, he couldn't be my guest. I then told him to show me the admission rule that specific said that. He then changed his "rule" to say that the guest had to leave when I did. ?!?!? Why do some people object to a random act of kindness???

macFlyer

I had a similar experience today too. Coming into the MLL with Mrs macFlyer a gentleman was trying to bring in two guests. He was told he could bring in one but the other would be charged a $20 entry fee. Naturally we offered to bring one of his guests in on our Elite cards.

The guardian of the desk told me that the guest had to be on the same flight as we were (which he wasn't). I just assumed they were right - but it was certainly news to me - I take it from your post that this isn't the case?

tcook052

...because they're paid to?

snert

This does not just happen when you happen to meet your "guest" for the first time in front of the MLL gatekeeper. I once tried to bring Snertette into the MLL as my guest when I was about to depart on a flight and she was leaving on a later flight. When the agent pointed out that my flight was about to leave and there wasn't much point in entering the lounge, I explained the situation. She told me that Snertette must leave when I do. I believe at this time I was even paying a $20 guest fee for her.

#10

a

Eligible Guests

Any guest of an eligible customer (International First, Star Alliance Gold card holders, and eligible paid member) must enter the designated lounge with the eligible customer. The guest must also depart on a Star Alliance carrier, but may travel on a different flight.

a

GoldFlyer

It's pretty normal procedure for most airlines. The fact that you can "sneek" in a guest is not something they can readily police apart from the situations as listed above. No big deal.

wsommerv

I never thought about this line though. If you're just meeting them at the desk, then you didn't really enter with them did you?

Edited to add: Plus I could also understand that if you're doing your job turning ineligeble people away and somebody undermines that right in front of you, it might be slighty annoying.

why fly

Well I guess this might keep the crowds down in the lounge....
No how to keep out kids

zincguy

I don't think you will get the kids out - but what I might suggest is that instead of having the useless room in Terminal One with the BMW seats, that maybe we make that a closed off area that the kids can go and we can shut the door.

I don't mind them being there - but give them somewhere where to go where they will not bother others trying to work or grab 15 minutes of quiet time. Put the Treehouse Channel on - give them a computer or two and few pieces of paper to write and colour on.

All being said, I figure most of the kids coming into the lounge with their well meaning parents are in fact bored silly being in there and end up running around causing havoc just for something to do.

AirCanada if you are listening - lets give them something to do - I'm not asking for a McPlayground - but if we keep them happy - we might also find ourself happier.

Shareholder

Well, you really are bending the definition of "travelling companion" which the free guest privilege is all about. In both cases, the individual being "sponsored" had been denied entry as they were not a member, or flying in the proper class. The lounge receptionist was quite in order to respond the way s/he did to you both.

Under normal circumstances, where one brings a guest into the lounge it is assumed you are travelling together, though when I've met a friend who I've brought in who was not travelling on the same flight, there was never an issue about when they'd have to leave. In the normal course of events, this would not have been raised as an issue, but under the specific circumstances noted in the OP and ones to follow, I have no disagreement with the practice since the person was a total stranger otherwise trying to get into the MLL under circumstances they were not permitted to.

While you may look upon it as an "act of kindness", you are technically breaching the intent of the guest privilege.

The Lev

If airlines did not have this kind of rule, technically they would not have any way of stopping you from bringing in dozens of "friends" by bringing them in one by one.

ALW

But what about this:
If the rule is that you can bring one free guest (note: not "friend") into the lounge, then you wouldn't be able to bring in dozens. They could make it explicit that "this many" is the number of free guests you can have (one, or family) in the lounge at any time, without precluding leaving your spouse there while you take an earlier flight. And since one can have as many guests as one is willing to pay $20 each for, there's no implication that you can't bring in dozens.

=aw

cur

To the OP:
they're not making up rules, they're just upset that you're circumventing them. not saying it's right, not saying it's wrong.

Fermat

show me where it says "travelling companion" anywhere on Aeroplan or AC.com. I count the word "guest" about six times when referring to the 1 guest entry. I count the words "travelling companion" about zero times.

I don't "bend definitions". The only "bending" that I can see is coming from the lounge agent and you, in your selective interpretation of the written policies to fit your own perception of "privilege".

Inquirer

Perhaps, the pride of the person who was working on the desk was wounded. He couldn't humble himself to accept the "letter" of the policy, so all sorts of "reasons" were used to make his authority felt! It's a power trip. Yet, diplomacy is needed.

Diplomacy is a hard thing these days.