andrzej

BA uses different terminal.

jordyn

So it's still not clear in the particular circumstances outlined above what the OP should have done differently. Do you have any constructive suggestions in this regard? Is there a place at the airport where you can consistently find out whether the flight you are on is delayed (before you check-in) more accurately than by asking the TA?

gemac

It should be quite clear what I think the OP should have done differently, if you have read my posts:
1. Instead of off-loading the responsibility for choosing his flights onto a telephone AAgent who rarely flies, he should have selected his flights himself, and booked them online or called to request those flights. This way, he would not have ended up with a connection which he admits was too tight.
2. Once he had bypassed #1, he realized that his connection was too tight. He should have called, explained that he would prefer a more realistic connection, and ask to be booked on the earlier flight.
3. Having not availed himself of #1 or #2, he should have shown up at the airport early to stand by for the earlier flight. The fact that it was cancelled should have been a clue that something might be going on in ORD.
4. Having not done #1, #2, or #3, and being concerned because of his tight connection, he might have taken a peek at the departures screen on his way to check-in. We know that he did not do this, because if he had, and if it had shown an on-time departure, he would surely have included that in his rant (damn stupid lying departure screen).
5. Having neglected #1, #2, #3, and #4, he might have chosen to reflect on what he could have done differently to minimize the chances of a repeat in the future. Instead, he chose to post a rant on an internet board blaming others (the telephone agent and the damn stupid lying check-in agent) for his dilemma. While I'm sure this helps relieve the frustration he was feeling, it does not help prevent future occurances.

Agreeing with his rant, that there was nothing he could have done, dooms him to future frustration. I don't know why anyone would want to see him go through this, over and over, in his future travels. Assuming responsibility for his own travel arrangements (as virtually all Flyertalkers do) is not iron-clad, but will minimize problems, and when things do go wrong, as they inevitably will eventually, at least you have the solace of knowing that you did what was reasonable to do, and the gods were just against you today.

Steve M

But you did make the connection, right?

I think that's very wise advice and a good observation. There's been a lot of talk on this thread about how things should be. I'd make the comparison with me hypothetically saying that I should not have to lock my front door, or firewall my network. It's certainly true that I shouldn't have to do these things if the world were as it should be. But if I take it one step further and actually don't do these things, then I have at least partial responsibility for what happens. And the key thing is, it's not particularly difficult to do them, just like it's not particularly difficult to take steps that greatly reduce the chances of missed connections.

I make it a point to book the "1 flight earlier" connection on outbound int'l journeys for just this reason - I want to reduce the chances of me or my baggage misconnecting, especially when the int'l segment likely has only 1 flight a day on that route. And yes, we all get that in this particular situation, it would not have helped because of the cancellation, but it's part of an overall pattern of not doing what you need to do in order to minimize the chances of a misconnect.

One other thing I wanted to comment on. It's been my experience in my years at FT that when a post contains the words "lying" or "promise," that overall a very particular point of view will be expressed in it. I want what I think most of us want for the OP: that he have as few misconnects and other problems in his future travels. But this isn't going to happen IMHO if he continues to hold the belief that airline personnel are deliberately out to feed him false information and as a result, ignores what he can do on his part.

jordyn

I'm not sure why the "how things are" and "how things should be" conversations are somehow deemed to be mutually exclusive. Certainly it's reasonable to have an understanding of how things are and plan accordingly. (On the other hand, folks here seem very unforgiving when travelers have their own set of "how things are" circumstances and can't be as flexible about scheduling or other arrangements as might be ideal.)

While constructive suggestions about how to avoid such problems in the future are certainly a reasonable topic for discussion, it seems that discussions of how things should be are reasonable and useful as well. (To use Steve's analogy, if we all just accepted that hackers or criminals were trying to steal from us all of the time and tried to take reasonable, the problem would probably be a lot worse than if we sometimes complained to law enforcement or did some log analysis to try and resolve the underlying problem.)

Two other observations:

1) It seems odd to me that people note that the OP didn't really have a problem because he actually made his flight, and yet still scold him for not booking an earlier flight when the result would likely have been that he wouldn't have made his flight due to cancellation. If all we care about is end result, then we'd conclude the OP did the right thing by booking the flight he did. If we care about how things should be, then yes he should have booked a longer connection and at the same time the TA should have been more diligent in verifying the flight's status at the time she checked him in.

2) Sometimes airline employees do intentionally lie. This is not the primary source of misinformation we receive, but it's certainly the most frustrating one.

gemac

The "how the world should be" discussions are useful, but not in improving the flying experience of the OP in the short run. Further, such discussions are probably not best suited to the AA forum, whose purpose is to spread information on how the AA system works so that you can secure for yourself the best flying experience. Omni, perhaps?

To use your referenced analogy, if we went on a website devoted to measures that we might take to protect ourselves from hackers and criminals, and ranted that we should not have to do so, that hackers and criminals should just stop it, we would probably be considered somewhat off topic.

I have never said that the OP really didn't have a problem because he actually made his flight. I think you are conjoining two different groups of posters.

The OP certainly did the right thing if he knew in advance that the earlier flight would be cancelled. Are you advising that people always book tight connections to the last international flight of the day, because they are less likely to be cancelled than earlier flights?

Of course, the TA should have been more diligent, but she was not. Those of us who fly enough know that they are often rushed and harried, and a day with flight cancellations due to weather exacerbates that situation.

Of course they do (although my guess is that this is not one of those situations). We have two choices, it seems to me. We can whine that "it's all their fault", or we can try to accumulate as much correct information as possible, so that we know when they are lying (or just incorrect). Personally, I have chosen the second path, but I know that some will prefer the first path.

edwin_p_morales

It seems to you.

There are more than two possible topics or points of view that can be expressed. Perhaps it's possible that a discussion forum could incorporate two points of view, or even more. Just a thought.

brp

For example?

Sometimes, but not always, the choices are binary. Here, the choices are either to do something about it ourselves, or expect others to do it. What are the other realistic options here?

Cheers.

edwin_p_morales

People can complain about and find fault with unhelpful customer service, and compare stories with others to see if their experience is common, discuss ways to try to remedy or report bad service, or just share their frustration with others as catharsis. People can also strategize about ways to avoid or circumvent known customer service problems.

All of these things can be expressed in a single forum, or thread. Personally I think most don't think of it as an either-or. They are frustrated by things that don't work properly and want to complain about them, and justifiably feel that they shouldn't have to constantly second guess what they're being told by employees they interact with. They also want to be practical about avoiding bad situations as well. This doesn't seem controversial.

Though it may be old hat to constantly talk about it, being given straight up misinformation is frustrating. Some people like to complain about misinformation being handed out over and over and over again even when it's clear that it will have no effect. Perhaps some other posters here besides the OP have complained about misinformation again and again in a different context. I'm sympathetic to both points of view, and they both have their place. IMHO of course.

SimonsMiles

Gemac, I disagree with your point of view but you're welcome to have it. I have just one comment:
Actually this is what I tried to do - that's why I was at the airport so early. I asked if I can change, I was told that there's no space currently on the earlier flight, so I checked in for mine and went over to try and get on the standby list only to find that it had just been cancelled. Sorry, I should have explained more clearly.

-simon

brp

This is why I included "realistic". I don't disagree with you, but I don't think that options like "catharsis" are realistic in solving the problem. And it seems that that is the primary function of FT- learning how to solve the problem. Right now, it seems the way to solve the problem (in the short term) is simply to know enough. Ideal? Surely not...but it works. Hoping for correct answers probably works 80% of the time. I'd rather shoot for a higher percentage.

Cheers.

jordyn

I would imagine that a discussion of how the AA system works should also include how we'd like it to work, or how it can be improved. Also, it obviously includes discussions about the ways in which it doesn't work, which I think was the main point of the OP.

I was actually just trying to be efficient and respond to various points that people had made in one post. For example, Steve M made the point I was referring to. This is why I wrote "people note" instead of "gemac notes". Sorry if that was confusing.

In this same vein of responding to various different points in the same message, brp wonders what the point of complaining about bad service is. Catharsis may be one, but I think a much more important function is to help people make educated buying decisions. Just like reviews on Amazon or epinions help me decide what product I'd like, reading about people's experiences (both good and bad) here at Flyertalk helps me choose which airline to book. This is one of the ways that the Internet has empowered consumers, and I certainly think that it's part of the value of Flyertalk. Over time, I would hope if everyone agrees a certain airline is particularly poor others will realize this and stop flying on that airline; if this happens, either the airline will go out of business (in which case we won't have to worry about them anymore), improve their service, or change their pricing scheme to make the suffering worthwhile. All of these would count as change that results from the sharing of information about problems experienced by travelers.

jragosta

Presumably because 'How things are' and 'How things should be' are not always the same and one should plan for things as they are rather than how one wishes them to be when there's a discrepancy?

Why is that so difficult to understand?

jordyn

The only thing that's hard to understand is how you think that what you wrote is responsive to my point.

Of course when making plans we should consider and plan around the reality of the situation. However, that doesn't prevent us from also discussing how the situation could be improved, or how we are disappointed when things stray from the ideal.

This concept is so simple that I can provide examples that do it all in one sentence:

"It would be nice if ground beef e. coli in it, and if you grind your own you can vastly reduce the chances; if you buy prepackaged ground beef, though, be sure to cook it to 160 degrees so you don't get sick."

"It would be nice if I was rich and had my own Gulfstream V, but since I don't American seems to have the best schedule for me."

So it seems the fact that the "how things should be" and "how things are" conversations can easily exist side-by-side.