Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Air New Zealand | Air Points
Reload this Page >

Refused interlining at ZQN without Star Alliance Gold

Refused interlining at ZQN without Star Alliance Gold

Old Feb 27, 2024, 2:52 pm
  #16  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SIN
Programs: SQ TPP7, NZ*E, HH Diamond, SPG Plat
Posts: 84
We’re talking about seperate tickets.
My experience is QF will not interline on seperate tickets even to EK. Never tried on the codeshare, but assume they would.
SqKiwi is offline  
Old Feb 27, 2024, 4:31 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NZ
Programs: NZ*E, QF-G, EK-P
Posts: 620
They definitely interline on seperate tickets/PNRs QF to EK - well with my sample size of N=1 !!
Mwenenzi likes this.
bce1 is offline  
Old Feb 27, 2024, 9:20 pm
  #18  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: SYD
Programs: Too many golds, no plat: OZ*G, AC*G, NZ*G, VA Gold, QF Gold, HH Gold, Bonvoy Gold
Posts: 5,368
It's my understanding that QF recently tightened their rules on interlining. They used to have a rule that they would interline to any other OneWorld airline. More recently, that was updated to only interlining bags if they were on a single ticket OR if at least one of the flights to/from the point of connection was an award.

I had this rule thrown at me in December when travelling SYD-BNE on QF in paid Y and BNE-HKG-NRT on CX in paid J. Despite having status (so was at the domestic business class desk) and the connecting flight being in business our request was instantly declined, once they ascertained that the connecting flight wasn't an award.

Back to *A, UA have been great about interlining bags on separate tickets, eg to NZ. However it can be a very lengthy process as the agents don't seem to be familiar with how to do it.
mad_atta is offline  
Old Feb 27, 2024, 11:36 pm
  #19  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: MEL CHC
Posts: 21,197
off topic

Originally Posted by mad_atta
It's my understanding that QF recently tightened their rules on interlining. They used to have a rule that they would interline to any other OneWorld airline. More recently, that was updated to only interlining bags if they were on a single ticket OR if at least one of the flights to/from the point of connection was an award.

I had this rule thrown at me in December when travelling SYD-BNE on QF in paid Y and BNE-HKG-NRT on CX in paid J. Despite having status (so was at the domestic business class desk) and the connecting flight being in business our request was instantly declined, once they ascertained that the connecting flight wasn't an award.

Back to *A, UA have been great about interlining bags on separate tickets, eg to NZ. However it can be a very lengthy process as the agents don't seem to be familiar with how to do it.
In 2016 was a policy change by many oneworld airlines on bag interling on *separate* PNRs. A PNR can have 1,2 or more e-tickets. Some OW airlines refer to tickets and not PNR's.
My view is QF have not changed since 2016, as link below. (have old pdf's) If some QF checkin agents follow the policy or were/are more generous(out of policy) is another question.
https://www.qantas.com/agencyconnect...d-baggage.html
mad_atta likes this.
Mwenenzi is offline  
Old Feb 28, 2024, 2:52 am
  #20  
 
Join Date: Oct 2023
Posts: 10
Having been in the industry, there are a whole lot of other complexities when interlining bags.

For NZ, if you have a separate ticket on another carrier, the airport agent would need to add your next flight as on carriage within their DCS. When staff then perform the check-in, they are no longer just checking you in from ZQN to CHC, but from ZQN to CHC to SFO, and most likely because all carriers are *A, also printing you all boarding passes.
Now because all boarding passes have been issued by NZ and bags tagged to SFO, NZ are liable for ensuring all documentation checks are completed at ZQN, the ZQN agent would need to check and sight your ESTA/Visa for the USA (if not on a US passport), and if they made an error NZ would be liable for a hefty infringement charged by US authorities as NZ were the originating carrier.
Likewise if NZ's flight ex ZQN was delayed, they would also be liable for re-booking your onward connections, as their disrupt team would be rebooking all oncarriage, without visibility of who originally had separate tickets.

These are just a few of the reasons why if you bought a cheap ZQN/CHC domestic flight on NZ, and had separate international tickets on other carriers, NZ would be very reluctant to do any favours as the liability then sits with them.

Personally I'd prefer industry to adopt a rule where if you purchase separate tickets, on different airlines, there isn't any baggage interlining, or through checking.

Separate tickets have many hooks, create massive liability issues, and I've personally seen many people book separate tickets even though they dont meet MCT (minimum connection time), yet try to blame the originating carrier when they don't make their 40 minute inter-terminal connection that they hoped to make.
kiwiNZ is offline  
Old Feb 29, 2024, 12:52 am
  #21  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: SYD
Programs: Too many golds, no plat: OZ*G, AC*G, NZ*G, VA Gold, QF Gold, HH Gold, Bonvoy Gold
Posts: 5,368
Originally Posted by Mwenenzi
off topic
In 2016 was a policy change by many oneworld airlines on bag interling on *separate* PNRs. A PNR can have 1,2 or more e-tickets. Some OW airlines refer to tickets and not PNR's.
My view is QF have not changed since 2016, as link below. (have old pdf's) If some QF checkin agents follow the policy or were/are more generous(out of policy) is another question.
https://www.qantas.com/agencyconnect...d-baggage.html
You are no doubt correct - I certainly don't claim to be an expert on OneWorld interlining rules (or indeed any OneWorld rules, lol). I guess my broader point was that the grass isn't necessarily any greener over on the QF side of the fence.

Originally Posted by kiwiNZ
Having been in the industry, there are a whole lot of other complexities when interlining bags.

For NZ, if you have a separate ticket on another carrier, the airport agent would need to add your next flight as on carriage within their DCS. When staff then perform the check-in, they are no longer just checking you in from ZQN to CHC, but from ZQN to CHC to SFO, and most likely because all carriers are *A, also printing you all boarding passes.
Now because all boarding passes have been issued by NZ and bags tagged to SFO, NZ are liable for ensuring all documentation checks are completed at ZQN, the ZQN agent would need to check and sight your ESTA/Visa for the USA (if not on a US passport), and if they made an error NZ would be liable for a hefty infringement charged by US authorities as NZ were the originating carrier.
Likewise if NZ's flight ex ZQN was delayed, they would also be liable for re-booking your onward connections, as their disrupt team would be rebooking all oncarriage, without visibility of who originally had separate tickets.

These are just a few of the reasons why if you bought a cheap ZQN/CHC domestic flight on NZ, and had separate international tickets on other carriers, NZ would be very reluctant to do any favours as the liability then sits with them.

Personally I'd prefer industry to adopt a rule where if you purchase separate tickets, on different airlines, there isn't any baggage interlining, or through checking.

Separate tickets have many hooks, create massive liability issues, and I've personally seen many people book separate tickets even though they dont meet MCT (minimum connection time), yet try to blame the originating carrier when they don't make their 40 minute inter-terminal connection that they hoped to make.
I totally understand why carriers hesitate to interline on separate tickets, for the many reasons you outlined. And I would never expect one to interline on an unreasonable (sub-MCT) connection time. But it is a very nice benefit if/when they will do it, so when rules around it get tightened it's a loss for us (even if it is absolutely understandable/justified).

In my QF example it was mostly irrelevant - just meant we had to schlepp bags ourselves from BNE dom to Intl (and CX still managed to lose one of my bags in transit, lol - QF interlining prob would have saved us from that, as it was a CX agent in BNE who was struggling with the system). On the other hand when UA have interlined our bags to NZ it has made a huge difference - in one example, we had an 8h transit in LA so could go straight out of the airport and do stuff rather than dealing with bags and the fact that NZ's check-in wouldn't have opened for many hours. So I'm grateful when carriers like UA do still do it.
mad_atta is offline  
Old Mar 2, 2024, 12:05 pm
  #22  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BOS/EAP
Programs: UA 1K, MR LTT, HH Dia, Amex Plat
Posts: 32,539
Originally Posted by kiwiNZ
Separate tickets have many hooks, create massive liability issues, and I've personally seen many people book separate tickets even though they dont meet MCT (minimum connection time), yet try to blame the originating carrier when they don't make their 40 minute inter-terminal connection that they hoped to make.
While I agree this can be hassle, it is actually not that much work. A good agent can do it in 2 mins or less. There is also zero liability if the not-connection is missed. That is even true for 2 tickets on the same PNR - risk is with the passenger, the late delivering airline is not bound by any rules to ensure onward travel. Sure, doc checks will be needed, if BPs are being issued. This is a service for HVCs - offering this for pax on J tickets and SAG is good business practice.
cfischer is offline  
Old Mar 2, 2024, 12:24 pm
  #23  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: WLG/BKK
Programs: TG*G, NZ*GE, QF G, Accor Gold
Posts: 10,363
Originally Posted by cfischer
While I agree this can be hassle, it is actually not that much work. A good agent can do it in 2 mins or less. There is also zero liability if the not-connection is missed. That is even true for 2 tickets on the same PNR - risk is with the passenger, the late delivering airline is not bound by any rules to ensure onward travel. Sure, doc checks will be needed, if BPs are being issued. This is a service for HVCs - offering this for pax on J tickets and SAG is good business practice.
Not zero liability. There is potential cost for the first carrier if the bags are delayed by that carrier and miss the second carrier, and so the responsibility now rests on the first carrier to solve and at their expense - this was avoidable, had the only provided checked bags for the sector on the PNR they are servicing, and not an unrelated subsequent sector.

So in agreeing to interline the bags when under no obligation to do so, they do potentially expose themselves to additional cost.

Of course, and I agree, the service benefits to J & *G pax may well exceed the risk and potential cost.
Thai-Kiwi is offline  
Old Mar 5, 2024, 1:30 pm
  #24  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Programs: Air New Zealand
Posts: 81
If I recall correctly on a UA/NZ from FLL via IAH with separate PNR the UA desk were very helpful and arranged this for me. Was over a year ago and I may be Bidening this up with something else though.
kryptonjohn is offline  
Old Mar 5, 2024, 1:46 pm
  #25  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,503
Originally Posted by Thai-Kiwi
Not zero liability. There is potential cost for the first carrier if the bags are delayed by that carrier and miss the second carrier, and so the responsibility now rests on the first carrier to solve and at their expense - this was avoidable, had the only provided checked bags for the sector on the PNR they are servicing, and not an unrelated subsequent sector.

So in agreeing to interline the bags when under no obligation to do so, they do potentially expose themselves to additional cost.

Of course, and I agree, the service benefits to J & *G pax may well exceed the risk and potential cost.
Aren't lost and damaged bag claims (including delivery costs and reimbursement for items that must be purchased) the responsibility of the carrier operating the last segment of the journey? In the OP's case, it would be UA and not NZ if the bag had been checked through to the USA, even if NZ loses the bag before it gets to CHC.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Mar 5, 2024, 3:15 pm
  #26  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: WLG/BKK
Programs: TG*G, NZ*GE, QF G, Accor Gold
Posts: 10,363
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
Aren't lost and damaged bag claims (including delivery costs and reimbursement for items that must be purchased) the responsibility of the carrier operating the last segment of the journey? In the OP's case, it would be UA and not NZ if the bag had been checked through to the USA, even if NZ loses the bag before it gets to CHC.
I dont know. I just have had staff explain (some time ago) they wouldnt check thru on separate tickets due to unwillingness to accepting liability for costs in the event of IRROPS. That actually made sense to me and I took it at face value.

Itd be good to get an insiders commentary on the policy and agreements aspects on this - but I suspect opaqueness to the public is preferred!
Thai-Kiwi is offline  
Old Mar 6, 2024, 9:13 am
  #27  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,503
My understanding (about this being the last carrier's responsibility) is at least partially because the passenger could often arrive at an airport not served by the first carrier--otherwise there would be no need for an interline connection. There would be no way to report the lost or damaged bag before leaving the airport and no staff who could facilitate its return to the passenger when it does arrive at the final airport. These rules were set up before the days of google, internet, and cell phones, so it would have been very difficult (and expensive) then for the passenger to find the phone number and call the first airline from a hotel when in a foreign country where the first carrier has no presence.
MSPeconomist is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.