CW Defective Seat Compo
Apr 9, 2019, 3:41 pm
#46
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Home: East Mids UK - Work (Base): Accra, Ghana.
Programs: BAEC: Silver - Marriott: Titanium
Posts: 12,086
And, as for forgetting to record it... I was stood with her in the CSD office under the stairs when she wrote it in the AML/Cabin Tech Log.
Apr 10, 2019, 2:48 am
#48
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Home: East Mids UK - Work (Base): Accra, Ghana.
Programs: BAEC: Silver - Marriott: Titanium
Posts: 12,086
Apr 10, 2019, 3:03 am
#49
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,401
I think this is unfair regarding obsession. What I'm doing is contributing to an interesting debate (as are you). What value is ascribed to various elements of a flight's overall package? You say the seat is the fundamental upon which the rest is built, but that could be equally said about the safe transportation from A to B, or the personal space offered or indeed the cabin crew service. Isn't it valuable to explore this and see what comes to light from each of our opinions? For me, what has come to light is that I agree 2500 is too low, however I disagree that the compensation awarded should be based all about the seat element, and the others disregarded.
The whole point of biz class is the flat bed. That's the product differential over PEY or Y. If you can't use it, there should be full compensation, otherwise I might as well have been in the main cabin. (In other words... would you pay Ł1000 extra just for the CW meal?)
Apr 10, 2019, 3:17 am
#50
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 5,380
Transporting us - in safety - is a given assumption. So that doesn't count for 'value' here. The 'upgraded' food and beverage doesn't count either because it's not the reaon I fly premium. I can manage perfectly well with an economy meal (I do whenever I eat out at a cheap place for lunch or dinner).
The whole point of biz class is the flat bed. That's the product differential over PEY or Y. If you can't use it, there should be full compensation, otherwise I might as well have been in the main cabin. (In other words... would you pay Ł1000 extra just for the CW meal?)
The whole point of biz class is the flat bed. That's the product differential over PEY or Y. If you can't use it, there should be full compensation, otherwise I might as well have been in the main cabin. (In other words... would you pay Ł1000 extra just for the CW meal?)
If you are making an argument that say the compensation should be partly based upon the difference between CW and WTP, less some allowance for the extras over and above WTP that CW allows, then this may be more reasonable. After all, the seat that BingBongBoy received was arguably close to a WTP product, except with more privacy, space, lounge access, better food etc So maybe as a base point, take the Avios difference between the CW and WTP fares, adjust for other CW elements not provided by WTP and go from there?
Apr 10, 2019, 3:50 am
#52
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,401
After all, the seat that BingBongBoy received was arguably close to a WTP product, except with more privacy, space, lounge access, better food etc So maybe as a base point, take the Avios difference between the CW and WTP fares, adjust for other CW elements not provided by WTP and go from there?
Apr 10, 2019, 4:01 am
#53
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 5,380
Except that possibly, like me, the OP may not have chosen WTP if they weren't going to get the flat bed. They might have been just as happy with WT as the extra cost for a wider seat and a bit of extra legroom is rarely a good value-for-money proposition. (If you are going to be forced to downgrade, why accept a product you might not buy anyway?)
As I see it, the OP pretty much received a CW product in its entirety except that instead of a fully flat bed he received a bed in the Z configuration. I understand that this was not what was paid for, and not what he would have chosen. So the question comes down to what is reasonable compensation here? This is what BingBongBoy asked for, our opinions given his concerns about the compensation culture and presumably wanting to be fair in his expectations. You seem to be saying it should be the Avios difference between Y and CW, but I think that is an excessive expectation in this case.
Apr 10, 2019, 4:12 am
#54
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,401
Fair point, although here you are applying as a yardstick for compensation how the customer values the product. I am not sure (not being legally trained) that this is a basis for reasonable compensation calculation.
As I see it, the OP pretty much received a CW product in its entirety except that instead of a fully flat bed he received a bed in the Z configuration. I understand that this was not what was paid for, and not what he would have chosen. So the question comes down to what is reasonable compensation here? This is what BingBongBoy asked for, our opinions given his concerns about the compensation culture and presumably wanting to be fair in his expectations. You seem to be saying it should be the Avios difference between Y and CW, but I think that is an excessive expectation in this case.
As I see it, the OP pretty much received a CW product in its entirety except that instead of a fully flat bed he received a bed in the Z configuration. I understand that this was not what was paid for, and not what he would have chosen. So the question comes down to what is reasonable compensation here? This is what BingBongBoy asked for, our opinions given his concerns about the compensation culture and presumably wanting to be fair in his expectations. You seem to be saying it should be the Avios difference between Y and CW, but I think that is an excessive expectation in this case.
I think it's fair to say long haul biz class these days is all about the flat bed. I think the first thing most people look for is the flat bed. Meals and everything else then differentiates between airlines. (I for example would take an airline with a flat bed and an economy meal over an airline with angled beds but a 5-course meal.)
Apr 10, 2019, 4:58 am
#55
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London
Programs: BA Silver Seigneur des Horaires des Mucci.
Posts: 2,046
one thing that struck me about this thread; @BingBongBoy can’t you pull rank as an ex-employee?
Last edited by allturnleft; Apr 10, 2019 at 7:44 am
Apr 10, 2019, 7:20 am
#56
Join Date: Jan 2017
Programs: BA GGL. Marriott Platinum, Hilton Diamond, Starwood Gold
Posts: 46
As a point of reference, there were approximately 15 broken CW and First seats on the flight from Bridgetown to Gatwick last night and each passenger was offered 80,000 avios compensation.
Apr 10, 2019, 10:04 am
#57
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Home: East Mids UK - Work (Base): Accra, Ghana.
Programs: BAEC: Silver - Marriott: Titanium
Posts: 12,086
one thing that struck me about this thread; @BingBongBoy can’t you pull rank as an ex-employee?
Apr 10, 2019, 10:05 am
#58
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Home: East Mids UK - Work (Base): Accra, Ghana.
Programs: BAEC: Silver - Marriott: Titanium
Posts: 12,086
Apr 10, 2019, 1:46 pm
#59
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: PHL
Programs: AAdvantage Platinum, Hilton HHonors Diamond
Posts: 1,201
Fair point, although here you are applying as a yardstick for compensation how the customer values the product. I am not sure (not being legally trained) that this is a basis for reasonable compensation calculation.
As I see it, the OP pretty much received a CW product in its entirety except that instead of a fully flat bed he received a bed in the Z configuration. I understand that this was not what was paid for, and not what he would have chosen. So the question comes down to what is reasonable compensation here? This is what BingBongBoy asked for, our opinions given his concerns about the compensation culture and presumably wanting to be fair in his expectations. You seem to be saying it should be the Avios difference between Y and CW, but I think that is an excessive expectation in this case.
As I see it, the OP pretty much received a CW product in its entirety except that instead of a fully flat bed he received a bed in the Z configuration. I understand that this was not what was paid for, and not what he would have chosen. So the question comes down to what is reasonable compensation here? This is what BingBongBoy asked for, our opinions given his concerns about the compensation culture and presumably wanting to be fair in his expectations. You seem to be saying it should be the Avios difference between Y and CW, but I think that is an excessive expectation in this case.
Yes, it really does.
I don't know the correct number for compensation, but I do know it isn't 2,500 Avios.
Apr 15, 2019, 11:05 am
#60
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Home: East Mids UK - Work (Base): Accra, Ghana.
Programs: BAEC: Silver - Marriott: Titanium
Posts: 12,086
Well, my case has come to a close...
77,500 Avios have been credited to my account, along with an apology from someone else in customer relations for the issue with the seat, and it having not been properly dealt with in the first lot of communication.
77,500 is more like it...
Thanks for the advice all.
77,500 Avios have been credited to my account, along with an apology from someone else in customer relations for the issue with the seat, and it having not been properly dealt with in the first lot of communication.
77,500 is more like it...
Thanks for the advice all.
