BA policies vs anecdotal evidence
Jul 1, 2018, 7:13 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 756
BA policies vs anecdotal evidence
I've noticed some commonalities in a few recent threads, which I think is an interesting occurrence and possibly helpful to passengers/FT-ers negotiating the grey area between what is BA policy and what are actions by BA staff which occasionally, or even regularly, are not in line with those policies (the latter, in almost all cases, to the benefit of the passenger).
I think every passenger has their own risk tolerance in terms of planning their journey based on what can be counted on (as it is BA policy), and what might take place (on account of anecdotal evidence of actions by BA staff).
I was wondering whether collating what I would call these instances of 'mediated policy' in a thread might be useful. In recent days, I can think of three examples from FT, but there must be others:
1) Through-checking baggage on separate BA tickets. BA policy is not to do so. Anecdotal evidence suggests check-in staff might either proactively offer to through-check bags, or respond positively if asked to do so.
2) Hand baggage limits across different cabins. BA policy is that all cabins have identical hand baggage limits. Anecdotal evidence suggests passengers in higher cabins (i.e. CE/CW/First) frequently are given a certain amount of leeway in this regard.
3) (Not specific to BA) Leaving Heathrow T5, for example, to access T3 airside lounges between non-T3 inward and onward flights. Heathrow policy is that passengers must have a T3 boarding pass to access T3 airside lounges. Anecdotal evidence suggests this is not the case.
I think every passenger has their own risk tolerance in terms of planning their journey based on what can be counted on (as it is BA policy), and what might take place (on account of anecdotal evidence of actions by BA staff).
I was wondering whether collating what I would call these instances of 'mediated policy' in a thread might be useful. In recent days, I can think of three examples from FT, but there must be others:
1) Through-checking baggage on separate BA tickets. BA policy is not to do so. Anecdotal evidence suggests check-in staff might either proactively offer to through-check bags, or respond positively if asked to do so.
2) Hand baggage limits across different cabins. BA policy is that all cabins have identical hand baggage limits. Anecdotal evidence suggests passengers in higher cabins (i.e. CE/CW/First) frequently are given a certain amount of leeway in this regard.
3) (Not specific to BA) Leaving Heathrow T5, for example, to access T3 airside lounges between non-T3 inward and onward flights. Heathrow policy is that passengers must have a T3 boarding pass to access T3 airside lounges. Anecdotal evidence suggests this is not the case.
Jul 1, 2018, 7:17 am
#2
Moderator: British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: Battleaxe Alliance
Posts: 22,127
I never, ever rely on anecdotes on anything that actually matters any more (random things that don't really affect anything is excluded).
After relying on multiple anecdotes reported on FT (SQ forum to be specific) regarding being allowed to be up to 10% overweight in baggage free of charge even in economy class, I was promptly charged USD 300 (or was it more? I can't remember now) for being just under 5 kg over when I was in Suite.
What I missed was that I was allowed two fairly substantial pieces of hand luggage (written policy). I could have easily avoided the USD 300 excess baggage charge if I had familiarised myself with that, as I only had one piece of hand luggage and I had a spare bag to which I could have easily transferred the excess.
Lessons learned - read the policies properly, and only rely on policies, not anecdotes, unless the risk is worth taking.
After relying on multiple anecdotes reported on FT (SQ forum to be specific) regarding being allowed to be up to 10% overweight in baggage free of charge even in economy class, I was promptly charged USD 300 (or was it more? I can't remember now) for being just under 5 kg over when I was in Suite.
What I missed was that I was allowed two fairly substantial pieces of hand luggage (written policy). I could have easily avoided the USD 300 excess baggage charge if I had familiarised myself with that, as I only had one piece of hand luggage and I had a spare bag to which I could have easily transferred the excess.
Lessons learned - read the policies properly, and only rely on policies, not anecdotes, unless the risk is worth taking.
Jul 1, 2018, 7:23 am
#3
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 756
I think this is a perfect example of a clear level of risk tolerance on your part, which makes perfect sense. What I'm getting at, however, is that having the parameters (i.e. between what is policy and what some passengers experience when policy is modified - and if there appears to be a trend) might be useful to others with a different level of risk tolerance.
Jul 1, 2018, 7:25 am
#4
Ambassador, British Airways; FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Leeds, UK
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, GfL, HH Diamond
Posts: 42,941
On 1 the policy is clear. You can ask and you may be lucky, but the problem is you can never assume it would be allowed.
So all planning must be done on the assumption through checking will be denied, and one would be particularly ill advised to plan on it being done anecdote or no anecdote.
So all planning must be done on the assumption through checking will be denied, and one would be particularly ill advised to plan on it being done anecdote or no anecdote.
Jul 1, 2018, 7:28 am
#5
Moderator: British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: Battleaxe Alliance
Posts: 22,127
I think this is a perfect example of a clear level of risk tolerance on your part, which makes perfect sense. What I'm getting at, however, is that having the parameters (i.e. between what is policy and what passengers experience when policy is modified) might be useful to others with a different level of risk tolerance.
Service-wise, it can create (incorrect) expectations and people may get upset when their reliance on anecdotes doesn't work, which might end up being perceived as 'poor service' when someone acts according to policy rather than lenience.
Occasionally, the policy isn't communicated properly to staff as well, to your detriment, and again I can use the policy to press my point too. An example - extra baggage policy for OWE was for some reason not communicated to QF check-in staff and neither did their computer reflect it, for a while (it seems to have been sorted out some time ago). Because I had the policy to show them, I could use my extra allowance free of charge. I wouldn't have been able to argue that point with anecdotes (although I had my own anecdotes to present)!
Last edited by LTN Phobia; Jul 1, 2018 at 7:34 am
Jul 1, 2018, 7:30 am
#6
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 756
On 1 the policy is clear. You can ask and you may be lucky, but the problem is you can never assume it would be allowed.
So all planning must be done on the assumption through checking will be denied, and one would be particularly ill advised to plan on it being done anecdote or no anecdote.
So all planning must be done on the assumption through checking will be denied, and one would be particularly ill advised to plan on it being done anecdote or no anecdote.
Increasingly I assume my baggage will be checked through on separate tickets. Now I don't assume it to the point of having very tight 'connections', but I assume it to the point of packing a little more than if I were HBO. But that's my personal risk tolerance, and it's one based both on my experiences, and what I've read here on BAEC FT.
Jul 1, 2018, 7:31 am
#7
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 44
I think this is a perfect example of a clear level of risk tolerance on your part, which makes perfect sense. What I'm getting at, however, is that having the parameters (i.e. between what is policy and what some passengers experience when policy is modified - and if there appears to be a trend) might be useful to others with a different level of risk tolerance.
The key here is to know the rules, BA isn't forcing any of us to fly with them. If you ask for something that is against policy and the answer is no then accept it.
Jul 1, 2018, 7:35 am
#8
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 756
Yes, of course it can, but this arises because of what is actually happening in reality. There is a non-trivial number of data points on FT from different users to demonstrate, I hope, that my three examples are not fictitious. I think highlighting these examples might be of use, assuming it's clear that these are not endorsements, and that they are - in effect - examples of policy not being carried out.
Jul 1, 2018, 7:42 am
#9
Join Date: Jul 2014
Programs: Mucci de l'Arbitrage
Posts: 927
I agree where there is a policy no one should plan around a hope of an exception but in this forum we should at least help each other try to maximize the probability of an exception.
So what would be really helpful is advice as to how best manage a BA agent on the phone of f2f. Aside from a pleasant attitude and no DYKIAG* sense of entitlement, are there trigger words, policy quotes, reminiscence of past events or other that can help?
(* = don’t you know I am Gold?)
So what would be really helpful is advice as to how best manage a BA agent on the phone of f2f. Aside from a pleasant attitude and no DYKIAG* sense of entitlement, are there trigger words, policy quotes, reminiscence of past events or other that can help?
(* = don’t you know I am Gold?)
Jul 1, 2018, 7:46 am
#10
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 756
I agree where there is a policy no one should plan around a hope of an exception but in this forum we should at least help each other try to maximize the probability of an exception.
So what would be really helpful is advice as to how best manage a BA agent on the phone of f2f. Aside from a pleasant attitude and no DYKIAG* sense of entitlement, are there trigger words, policy quotes, reminiscence of past events or other that can help?
(* = don’t you know I am Gold?)
So what would be really helpful is advice as to how best manage a BA agent on the phone of f2f. Aside from a pleasant attitude and no DYKIAG* sense of entitlement, are there trigger words, policy quotes, reminiscence of past events or other that can help?
(* = don’t you know I am Gold?)
Jul 1, 2018, 7:49 am
#11
Moderator: British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: Battleaxe Alliance
Posts: 22,127
Yes, of course it can, but this arises because of what is actually happening in reality. There is a non-trivial number of data points on FT from different users to demonstrate, I hope, that my three examples are not fictitious. I think highlighting these examples might be of use, assuming it's clear that these are not endorsements, and that they are - in effect - examples of policy not being carried out.
In essence, my thoughts are that it's not a good idea for readers to take anecdotes as "unwritten policy" (or in some cases even mistaking it as part of the written policy) as some might do, which may well be easy to do especially when there is no mention that it is in fact not the policy in the post.
Jul 1, 2018, 7:57 am
#12
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 774
Hang on a second...
Dear BA, we have taken the liberty of providing a useful thread where you can learn where you can strengthen/reinforce your policies.
Can't we just let them and others find said suggestions from <insert random thread/post #>?
Dear BA, we have taken the liberty of providing a useful thread where you can learn where you can strengthen/reinforce your policies.
Can't we just let them and others find said suggestions from <insert random thread/post #>?
Jul 1, 2018, 7:59 am
#13
Join Date: Jul 2014
Programs: Mucci de l'Arbitrage
Posts: 927
I agree that the anecdotes are indeed useful in so far as people don't rely on it for important planning purposes, e.g. planning a tight transit on separate tickets.
In essence, my thoughts are that it's not a good idea for readers to take anecdotes as "unwritten policy" (or in some cases even mistaking it as part of the written policy) as some might do, which may well be easy to do especially when there is no mention that it is in fact not the policy in the post.
In essence, my thoughts are that it's not a good idea for readers to take anecdotes as "unwritten policy" (or in some cases even mistaking it as part of the written policy) as some might do, which may well be easy to do especially when there is no mention that it is in fact not the policy in the post.
- the BA Policy per topic
- Anecdotal evidence of their staff going outside Policy to help the traveller
- ‘try this’ word, behaviour etc suggestion to try and achieve the same
A big disclaimer to remind readers that only the policy matters and all the rest is at their own risk...
Jul 1, 2018, 8:02 am
#14
Join Date: Jul 2014
Programs: Mucci de l'Arbitrage
Posts: 927
And if they do reinforce their policies as a result and apply them consistently, that should reduce the number of complaints.
Jul 1, 2018, 8:04 am
#15
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 774