Global321

Interesting to note... the 15-minute cut-off was specifically noted for seat assignments, NOT for denying boarding. Therefore irrelevant.

As to note... "you will not be allowed to board once the doors close". Again, if he was truly in line and the door was not shut, he should have been allowed to board.

And remember - any ambiguity in the contract goes to the person who did not write the contract. In this case, the passenger.

In theory, if he was in line and if the person in front of him was boarding as well, and if he had video of it, I believe OP could claim denied boarding compensation.
(Note the many if's in the statement.)

tom911

AA can reassign your seat at the 15 min mark if you're not present at the gate. We don't know if announcements were made for volunteers in the period before this. They have a very detailed policy to follow in those situations, also spelled out in the conditions of carriage.

If the conditions of carriage were violated, a DOT complaint is in order, but we still don't know "when" the passenger arrived at the gate.

VegasGambler

I don't really understand this. The airline sets the MCT. They can set it to whatever they want. How are they not responsible if the time is too short? They can set it to 5 minutes if they want to. If they can just put you on whatever future flight they want (which costs them nothing) and not give you accommodations while you wait, then how are they incentivized to set reasonable MCTs?

NWIFlyer

Because it’s not a terribly efficient way to run an airline in terms of staff time and costs in having to constantly re-book people, not to mention that if you constantly caused people to miss flights then your customer base might just disappear rather quickly.

So what happens is they set it at a period which 98% of people will make 98% of the time, and then they deal with the 4% that don’t because something unusual happens. That suits the travelling public and it suits the airlines.

It’s essentially a business transaction, under which - EC261 implications aside - you wouldn’t expect either side to be responsible for something outside their control.

GUWonder

tom911

At what point do BA/AA recognize that, though, and add 30-60 mins or more onto the MCT? Imagine they already have some data on arriving international passengers that they're rebooking because they're not at the gate in time.

Is ORD being hit with CBP reassignments to the southern border? Can't imagine AA or BA planned for that.

From April 12:
Mexican border crisis affects customs staffing at airports
https://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-...ng-at-airports

duvin

GUWonder

NWIFlyer

Trying to stay vaguely on topic, my guess is the system assumes a certain percentage will get stuck in immigration, a further percentage will be held up at security, and so on through various stages from arrival to boarding the next flight. In my world, that’s called rolled throughput yield (i.e. the number of people completing the process that started it) and using that calculation it would indeed be 4% (or more accurately, 96% success).

Don’t ya just love statistics?

madfish

MSPeconomist

Global321

At the end of the day, OP's husband needs to take some responsibility.

Like many of you, I fly a ton. And when I am going to a new airport/city/country, I do some research and determine the correct time I need to get through the formalities. I would NEVER count on the MCT if I have never done it before, or if I have only done it a few times.

Quick example - just recently I was making my first INT to DOM connection at HAN. After reading up on the connection - and the need to take a bus to the domestic terminal that was far away - no way would I consider doing it at MCT. I took a later connecting flight. As it turned out we would have made it, but only because everything fell into place.

A 90-minute MCT at ORD is very short. I have GE and Pre-check... and I would not book a 90-minute connection with the train out.

While I feel for OP's husband, I do think there is a fair amount of blame on the misconnect is his to own.

Geordie405

While we’re on the subject or ORD it’s probably worth pointing out that they also seem to be having issues with the airside bus that runs to T5 for passengers connecting to international flights.

I was connecting through ORD on Sunday and my flight from LAS arrived at K19 which was perfect for the bus which departs from K20. Unfortunately there was only a single bus operating! The poor agent was totally overwhelmed by the situation and didn’t seem to know what to do other than to make repeated phone calls for a supervisor who never showed up!

The upshot of this was that when the bus did arrive only a small handful of the 80+ passengers waiting for it managed to get on board. The remainder were left at T3 and the majority of those were, like me, connecting to the BA294 to London.

It’s probably worth checking with the agent when checking in for the bus whether there are any issues and, if so, and you have sufficient time exiting arrivals and taking the landslide shuttle to T5 although that does mean clearing security again!

The only positive to this story is that I was upgraded from W to J and had an excellent flight to LHR.

nk15

That T5 at ORD is a disaster, long lines, mediocre lounges, bad connections with T3, just a hassle all around...Not that T3 is any better, overcrowded, dirty, no PP lounges (nowhere in T1-4), only the flagship lounge is good if you fly international...

It actually makes me realize that all the North American Oneworld connecting hubs to Europe are bad: ORD is a mess, JFK not very convenient and you may have to connect to LGA, PHL sucks, MIA is a mess and no good lounges, CLT is a minor connecting hub, LAX is too far away, probably DFW is the best overall, but they don't have a flagship lounge, lol.... embarrassing stuff...

golfmad

"Coming soon..."