ashill

How is a companion on a different PNR different than a companion on the same PNR (provided that the benefit only extends to one passenger -- as appears to be the case here -- or the maximum number of passengers who could be on a single PNR)? I don't understand this argument at all. My family and I sometimes travel on the same PNR and sometimes on different PNRs (the latter usually when I'm on a paid ticket and them award); I don't see why we should be treated any differently. We're taking the same number of elite seats whether or not we booked on one PNR. Fortunately, in practice, we aren't treated differently.

And at least on AA, companion upgrades don't require the companion to be on the same PNR (by written policy).

Jimgotkp

IMHO, I don't think a co-worker fits under the "companion" category compared to a family member or friend.

However, I'd rather see this person get an "elite seat" than a regular person who asks a GA at the time of boarding.

seekinghelp

Oh, sorry, forgot to tell you. He is my friend also. Guess that makes it ok.

John

Sounder

Um, yes, actually, as this is a published benefit of MVPG and MVPG 75k. Honestly, linking your reservation with another traveller should entitle your companion to all the same benefits as if they were on your same PNR. There are plenty of legitimate reasons for being on split PNRs, and you shouldn't lose out on published benefits of your status because of that. Heck, I've had Alaska split a single PNR with my companion on it into two PNRs before (to accomplish some tricky award travel changes), and it's silly that I have to lose out on benefits we would have received had AS not split the PNR in the first place.