[speculation thread] ORD -> SEA family kicked off plane
Nov 29, 2017, 8:47 pm
#16
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: BLI
Programs: Alaska MVPG
Posts: 206
I wonder if this has to do with the employee positive space pass program. I believe that in some cases, you can bring others with you if you have accumulated enough special passes, BUT, the employee *has* to be with the guests traveling with them.
Buddy passes, registered guest, etc -- none of these require or mandate the employee is with them, I believe.
And UM children 12 an older are exempt from fees, if they are non-rev'ing.
Buddy passes, registered guest, etc -- none of these require or mandate the employee is with them, I believe.
And UM children 12 an older are exempt from fees, if they are non-rev'ing.
The AS employee or spouse would have to travel with them as well if they were listed as companions. Normally they would issue them guest (buddy) passes in a situation where someone is traveling without the AS employee or spouse.
Nov 29, 2017, 8:55 pm
#17
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,068
Even if the companion ticket must remain in tact, AS shouldn't really care -- the party paid for 1 person and got 1 free plus tax (or $99 plus tax), so they got at least as much money as 1 person would have paid. Why would they care and try to figure out who the paid res was and who the free one was? When you book the thing, there are two name fields, it doesn't tell you who's the paid one and who's the freebie anyway. It's just a 2-pax PNR. If one can't make it, no refund, but oh well.
Nov 29, 2017, 9:44 pm
#19
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: East Ester, Alaska
Programs: Alaska Million Miler, United Million Miler, Wyndham Rewards Diamond, Choice Hotels Diamond
Posts: 12,148
I will not assume anything.
But if it was indeed a companion fare, and the person with the benefit was not there, AS was within its rights to DB.
Although it was sad to see children were involved, the parents should have made a better decision.
Really - nothing to see here.
But if it was indeed a companion fare, and the person with the benefit was not there, AS was within its rights to DB.
Although it was sad to see children were involved, the parents should have made a better decision.
Really - nothing to see here.
Nov 29, 2017, 10:00 pm
#20
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: YYF/YLW
Programs: AA, DL, AS, VA, WS Silver
Posts: 5,951
There would be no problem with TSA or boarding; every passenger on the reservation, with their own ticket, would have their own boarding pass. There's no requirement that passengers booked together on a companion fare board or clear TSA together. (It would be virtually impossible to enforce such a requirement anyway.) There is a requirement that if the companion travels, the primary traveler on the reservation (the one who paid the full fare) travels; that can only be verified when they close out the flight. However, at that time, it's very easy to verify. The gate agent has to unload any no-show travelers, and I'm sure the system will indicate if a no-show is on a companion ticket.
Nov 29, 2017, 10:51 pm
#21
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Melbourne MEL Calgary YYC
Programs: UA1K, QF Plat, *A & Marriot Gold, OW Emerald, Hyatt Hertz PC CanPass Nexus APEC Global Entry
Posts: 468
I will not assume anything.
But if it was indeed a companion fare, and the person with the benefit was not there, AS was within its rights to DB.
Although it was sad to see children were involved, the parents should have made a better decision.
Really - nothing to see here.
But if it was indeed a companion fare, and the person with the benefit was not there, AS was within its rights to DB.
Although it was sad to see children were involved, the parents should have made a better decision.
Really - nothing to see here.
just looking at your gpu RPU cpu stats on the bottom, is 0/0 not 100% for the 2017 RPU , just sayin
Nov 30, 2017, 12:13 am
#22
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: British Columbia
Programs: AS MVPG100K, Marriott Marriott Titanium Elite, Hilton Gold
Posts: 7,263
I agree, I'm thinking the non-rev theory is more plausible.
Even if the companion ticket must remain in tact, AS shouldn't really care -- the party paid for 1 person and got 1 free plus tax (or $99 plus tax), so they got at least as much money as 1 person would have paid. Why would they care and try to figure out who the paid res was and who the free one was? When you book the thing, there are two name fields, it doesn't tell you who's the paid one and who's the freebie anyway. It's just a 2-pax PNR. If one can't make it, no refund, but oh well.
Even if the companion ticket must remain in tact, AS shouldn't really care -- the party paid for 1 person and got 1 free plus tax (or $99 plus tax), so they got at least as much money as 1 person would have paid. Why would they care and try to figure out who the paid res was and who the free one was? When you book the thing, there are two name fields, it doesn't tell you who's the paid one and who's the freebie anyway. It's just a 2-pax PNR. If one can't make it, no refund, but oh well.
Passenger 1 : Fare/Fees & Taxes/Total
Passenger 2 : Fare ($0, $99)/Fees & Taxes/Total
Grand Total for 2 PAX
Of course they know who the paying passenger is and who the companion on the certificate is. They even know who the certificate was assinged to, just like GGU's and Alaska Lounge codes.
I was the primary person on a reservation that I booked for my partner and I with my certificate. We used my Partner's GGU's to upgrade to F on PDX-SEA-MSY. The flight from PDX-SEA was downgraded from the E175 to a Q400. From SEA-MSY we sat up front. When I contacted Alaska about my disappointment on the downgrade they replenished two GGU's to my Partner's account. In their email response they asvised they had added them to the other account as that is where they originated from. I was very happy with the outcome as we still benefited from the upgrade on the longer SEA-MSY flight. I used the two new GGU's to upgrade BOS-SEA-PHX in February on a companion certificate. On the PHX-SEA-YLW portion of the itinerary I chose to waitlist for F as I didn't want to burn two additional GGU's on such a short flight. I will save them for longer journeys like I did in October, ANC-LAX-SJO - 1 GGU; SJO-LAX-SEA-SFO-PVR - 1 GGU.
James
Nov 30, 2017, 12:22 am
#23
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend, Moderator, Information Desk, Ambassador, Alaska Airlines
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: FAI
Programs: AS MVP Gold100K, AS 1MM, Maika`i Card, AGR, HH Gold, Hertz PC, Marriott Titanium LTG, CO, 7H, BA, 8E
Posts: 42,953
This is what I was getting at:
Agree further speculation will not really be that productive.
Just speculation, but it could also be a non-rev situation where Megan listed the party as her traveling companions. If Megan wasn't there they wouldn't have been allowed to travel. TSA wouldn't have been an issue, but the gate agent normally would have caught it before assigning seats and issuing a boarding pass. Who knows though.
I wonder if this has to do with the employee positive space pass program. I believe that in some cases, you can bring others with you if you have accumulated enough special passes, BUT, the employee *has* to be with the guests traveling with them.
Buddy passes, registered guest, etc -- none of these require or mandate the employee is with them, I believe.
And UM children 12 an older are exempt from fees, if they are non-rev'ing.
Buddy passes, registered guest, etc -- none of these require or mandate the employee is with them, I believe.
And UM children 12 an older are exempt from fees, if they are non-rev'ing.
Assuming Megan is an AS employee or spouse and listed them as companions and didn't show it would definitely void all the tickets. They would have to go through a completely different process of acquiring tickets which is more expensive and would give them a lower boarding priority.
Good point and you're right, it would definitely be the same with Positive Space Travel.
The AS employee or spouse would have to travel with them as well if they were listed as companions. Normally they would issue them guest (buddy) passes in a situation where someone is traveling without the AS employee or spouse.
The AS employee or spouse would have to travel with them as well if they were listed as companions. Normally they would issue them guest (buddy) passes in a situation where someone is traveling without the AS employee or spouse.
Nov 30, 2017, 5:50 am
#24
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 13,811
Nov 30, 2017, 1:22 pm
#27
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,068
But even then, it's arbitrary. I could book a ticket for me + you as companion. Or I could book the same ticket as you + me as companion. Doesn't matter. It's 2 seats to the destination. If one of us has to bail on the trip last minute, why should it matter what order it was booked in, so long as no one is claiming a credit for the second ticket?
Nov 30, 2017, 1:37 pm
#28
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle WA, USA
Programs: Hilton Diamond, Marriott LT Plat, AS Lounge
Posts: 3,478
Sure, after it's purchased.
But even then, it's arbitrary. I could book a ticket for me + you as companion. Or I could book the same ticket as you + me as companion. Doesn't matter. It's 2 seats to the destination. If one of us has to bail on the trip last minute, why should it matter what order it was booked in, so long as no one is claiming a credit for the second ticket?
But even then, it's arbitrary. I could book a ticket for me + you as companion. Or I could book the same ticket as you + me as companion. Doesn't matter. It's 2 seats to the destination. If one of us has to bail on the trip last minute, why should it matter what order it was booked in, so long as no one is claiming a credit for the second ticket?
Found it: Companion ticket question - missing the final leg
Per the ever helpful missydarlin: "The person with the full fare ticket can fly without the companion but the companion cannot fly without the full fare passenger."
Nov 30, 2017, 1:57 pm
#29
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,068
I know I've seen a comment here in this forum saying that the primary passenger can fly without the companion but not vice versa. I'm looking for it but haven't found it yet.
Found it: Companion ticket question - missing the final leg
Per the ever helpful missydarlin: "The person with the full fare ticket can fly without the companion but the companion cannot fly without the full fare passenger."
Found it: Companion ticket question - missing the final leg
Per the ever helpful missydarlin: "The person with the full fare ticket can fly without the companion but the companion cannot fly without the full fare passenger."
Nov 30, 2017, 2:23 pm
#30
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Seattle, WA
Programs: Alaska Airlines
Posts: 659
The odd thing is... you can use your companion fare on 2 different people (at least you used to).
Let's say Tom has a companion fare that is expiring... but he has no where to fly before it does.
Bill & Jane do have somewhere to fly.
Tom can buy two tickets, using his companion fare, using his Alaska credit card, for Bill & Jane. Tom doesn't have to fly with them.
The problem seems to be if Tom cannot use his fare, and only Jane wants to go somewhere. They come up with the idea that Tom will book Jane as his companion, and he'll be a no-show and not fly.
I guess the intent there would be that Tom could use his status level to get a refund as a no-show, and Jane would only fly for $99. Not sure that would even work with Alaska's changes to their no-show policy anymore.
Let's say Tom has a companion fare that is expiring... but he has no where to fly before it does.
Bill & Jane do have somewhere to fly.
Tom can buy two tickets, using his companion fare, using his Alaska credit card, for Bill & Jane. Tom doesn't have to fly with them.
The problem seems to be if Tom cannot use his fare, and only Jane wants to go somewhere. They come up with the idea that Tom will book Jane as his companion, and he'll be a no-show and not fly.
I guess the intent there would be that Tom could use his status level to get a refund as a no-show, and Jane would only fly for $99. Not sure that would even work with Alaska's changes to their no-show policy anymore.
Last edited by nearlysober; Nov 30, 2017 at 2:30 pm