UKtravelbear

1. BA could change the rules.

2. many posters on here say they only fly BA because they have to due to corporate policies.

3. Individuals taking flights for work get rewarded by being paid a salary. BA could reward corporate flyers by giving them status for lounge access and the odd op-up but not avios and TPs.

duncgor

jerub

This suggestion seems to come from the point of view that OnBusiness is a workable reward scheme, or might become one.

I would like to hear more about that, and less about your scheme for making sure business travellers book on non-oneworld airlines.

​​​​

navylad

Interesting discussion.

U do think HMRC should consider ways of seeing such ‘gifts’ as taxable, although they do already earn high amounts from APD.

Technically, I believe one is not meant to accept the avoid and TPs when flying for queen and country, nor hotel loyalty for staying in hotels, although I’m sure pedantry do as it would be impossible for MOD to check.

WorldLux

Let's just have the acronyms (namely C-W-S and DYKWIA) manage F award availability and pricing (I do have to insist on that one) on BA's behalf. Anyone in their good graces will continue to have access to seats.

I'm sure you're pleased to hear that Mrs. May is doing everything in her powers to achieve that objective within the next ____ years.

MSPeconomist

From the employer's point of view, there's no benefit from lifetime elite status, so TPs on corporate fares shouldn't count for lifetime elite status on BA, and similarly for status miles on other airlines. Similarly, the company really shouldn't want the nights and stays paid by the employer to count for lifetime status. In fact, there's an argument that status miles/points/nights/etc. earned as an employee tend to benefit a competitor when the employee changes jobs, so private employers should actively want such a change rather than feeling neutral toward it or supporting it only in exchange for lower rates on the corporate contract.

MSPeconomist

internetplumber

Whilst I'm currently on a company redemption trip, earning 0/0 for myself and spending a weekend and best part of the week away from Mrs IP, I will note the following:

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-man...anual/eim21618

GM1985

I assume with this suggestion you are targeting heavily discounted corporate fares only, rather than corporate fliers generally? Not sure how it works for others, but the price my employer pays when I book a flight for business travel via our corporate booking tool is exactly the same price available on ba.com to the general public. A little bit more in reality once the travel agent fee is added on. Although on the flip side our deal includes free seat selection from time of booking regardless of fare class or status, and a flat-fee for changes regardless of flexibility.

All She Wrote

While I'm sure the thread was made in a satirical manner, it's interesting to compare to hotels for example. Last year I spent approximately 45 nights in hotels on my companies dime, mainly in Hilton and IHG and noticed the following. One of them offered a reduced point collection rate for corporate rate booking, the other offered 0. It is a little surprising that people can accrue status with BA so easily without spending a penny of their own money. Personally not bothered by it at all but a little surprised they haven't added a minimum personal spend or something similar to the equation to keep the traffic in the lounges down a bit.

onobond

Your example of personal points earnings through two major hotel chains, when travelling on company dime, is a good example to follow. There has been many posts on the BA FT advocating earnings on BAEC should be revenue-based, instead of the present system. The term 'follow the money' has been repeated many times. Of course, BA (as other airlines) also moves in mysterious ways sometimes, and contrary to popular belief here, might not use FT as their prime source of information for any desicion making.

To let benefits follow the money would in my world of perception be exactly that. Corporate spending equals bennies in form of Avios for spending by the company, vs personal spending let the spender/traveller have the Avios and TPs. Although there are posts here and in many other threads describing how corporate travellers endure company policies restricting flying to Y class, there is also a fair amount of others declaring 75+ % of yearly TP/Avios earnings from company spending. Seemingly less F nowadays, compared to when I became member of FT, but , at least in this forum, LH travel overwhelmingly in C, compared to Y.

As a curiosity, and without any statistical significance to this discussion, let me give an example of a corporate traveller, maybe somewhat atypical. Sitting next to a man in a southern EU BA lounge. During the time waiting for a delayed incoming aircraft, among other things discussed, ways of travelling became a topic. He had been GGL for many years, was LTG, and during the 6 years before retiring, would achieve LTGGL. For the last 12 years he had made no personal spending on BA, for out of work travelling with/without his wife, always on LCCs. His respectable high seven digit Avios balance he considered an addition to a meagre pension plan.

Strenous working conditions, like repeated work LH travel in Y, low salary and/or pension plans are negotiable matters between employee/employer. It would seem illogical to demand compensation from BA for trying company travel policies or any other employment conditions.

LCY8737

Just for a second entertain the thought of 0 TP/Avios on corporate bookings. Your average business traveller would do their best to switch to another airline where they'd still get points - or to FR/U2 If the schedule works better. Even if BA could lock in a fair few of them using corporate agreements - It would trigger a significant loss in revenue.

Face it: Your personal money is not worth more than some corporate's money.

(Full disclosure - I made 15 TP last year on business trips).

percysmith

We already discussed this over in the CX forum https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cath...l#post29307214

The only way we see it working though is if you can identify/discriminate business travel managers who make booking decisions to make a soft bribe to. If you don't bribe that lot, then non-travel manager staff are going to charge business travel to their cards and claiming reimbursement from work.

flyuk

*looks for lead balloon*

duncgor

Thankfully I can’t see BA making a decision to remove TPs and Avios from corporate travellers, it would be suicide.

Take me for example. I have a relatively senior role and travel a lot in Y. Business conditions dictated the Y travel and that’s entirely fine with me, was the right decision.

Now I will hit Gold this year largely thanks to my corporate travel (Gold in a Economy is no mean feat let me assure you given the fares we take). Our corporate online travel tool policy is to take the lowest fare regardless of airline. Fortunately it throws up some crazy options with 24 hour layovers in Manchester and things for trips to 6 hour destinations etc so common sense generally dictates that I can fly BA due to the tool being almost too efficient at finding the lowest fares without making allowances for total cost of time, additional hotels etc.

now I have two personal trips coming up.

ABZ - LHR then Eurostar and returning from CDG. I have booked these all BA in CE as was reasonable value. However if I didn’t have corporate TPs I likely would have minimum flown Economy and more likely flown FlyBe to LCY and direct CDG-ABZ with AF so BA would lose out.

similarly I travel to AGP later in the year and have booked again CE through BA rather than direct with Ryanair.

So the point is because of the perk I get through my corporate travel, BA have my loyalty in my personal travel. I am likely not alone here so all that minor perk away and BA would likely lose a lot of money both through travellers using other AL’s for corporate travel where rewards are better and also going for convenience on their personal travel.