Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Cathay Pacific | Marco Polo Club
Reload this Page >

CX 882 medical diversion causing misconception to AS who is responsible on rebooking?

CX 882 medical diversion causing misconception to AS who is responsible on rebooking?

Reply

Old Sep 8, 17, 9:12 pm
  #1  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,085
CX 882 medical diversion causing misconception to AS who is responsible on rebooking?

This is an Ad Hoc question for future reference. I hope the CX experts here could provide answers on how normally this type of misconceptions is handled by CX.

Here is the incident.

On Sept 6th I flew CX 882 HKG to LAX in F, scheduled to depart HKG at 4:35pm arrive LAX at 2:55 pm, then connected to AS 457 LAX to SEA departing at 5:55. All booked as a single ticket as an AS award.

The flight had a 35 min delay at Hong Kong as they could not find the captain or the captain was late to show up. It was quite chaotic due to there was a secondary security check on carry on items with several tables staged in the boarding area, and the gate agents were letting passengers move to the secondary checking area as table is open up. All of a sudden everything came to a screeching halt. Me and a few biz class passengers were told to go back to the lounge as the flight would be delayed. I asked if it was mechanical, was told no but also no idea how long it would be. Lounge staff had no idea but found out about captain missing. Then we heard the PA about the flight would delay till 5pm.

Luckily they resume boarding around 5pm and we were on our way... Or so I thought.

Unfortunately at around 1:20 left to LAX, there was PA requesting anyone had a blood pressure machine on board. Same request was made again 10 min later. I was shock that CX did not carry some basic med devices onboard. Then shortly after that the captain announced we would divert to SFO for medical emergency. At SFO the plane was directed to an outlying area where there were a doz or so different discipline personnel arrived in different dept vehicles. Took a very long time before the medics got onboard to take the sick passenger who in my untrained eyes, did not look sick as he was sitting up on the gurney, seem to be fully conscious, can move his upper body and both arms and his head. (His legs were tied to the gurney)
What was even more strange was, while his personal belongings incl a big transparent plastic bag contains his shoes and clothes, and a black plastic bag with stuff inside were taken to the gangway by a lady, she and another 2 ladies only watched the guy being taken down the gangway but none accompanying the patient. The 3 ladies went back to their seats at the back.

Then we waited some more, the captain addressed the PA we needed to refill in order to resume our flight to LAX. In order to do that we needed to get to the gate and we had to wait for a UA 747 (there were 2) to vacate a gate so we can get in that slot.

We finall resumed our flight to LAX about 10 or 15 min to 5pm. During the whole while the CX FAs incl the ISM did not have a clue on how to assist passengers who sure would miss their connections. The Japanese male FA suggested he could send a message (to CX ground crew) but they don't always reply?! Anyway I gave him my 2 AS connected flights AS 457 LAX to SEA and AS 966 SEA to SLC the next day. I emphasize I need to be in SEA tonight as my husband is on the CX 884? HKG to LAX departed at 12:55pm already. We are supposedly on the same AS 457 to SEA where I already booked the Radisson across SEA for the night. I was to give the FA my AS PNR but he said no need.

As we were approaching LAX, the FA came back with the news that CX ground crew called AS and AS had already rebooked me LAX to SLC. He also assured me AS had a transfer desk at TBIT in the area where you rede posit your cleared luggage. I was skepticle but he insisted AS had a desk there. This misinformation costed me 10 to 15 min. I should have trusted my own knowledge and headed to T6 right away.

Later when I was at AS counter at LAX T6 , both the counter agent and AS reservation agent could NOT seen any such booking under my PNR. So I have no idea if said booking is actually made or because it is for the next day the AS agents looking on the 6th could not see it... In any case AS reservation insisted there was no LAX to SLC rebooked for me, that my itinerary was not changed (despite my F seat was already given away understandably as it was almost 6pm by now.)

I wish I have not gotten the "rebooking" info from the CX FA as that has caused some confusion and costed me some precious minutes to catch the original flight which had a delay of 55 min.

Miraculously while I was shown as no show on the AS 457 (husband told me his seat mate was a businessman) but my SEA-SLC was still in the system. The AS agent said 457 was closed so he could not put me on but he could put me on the 7:55 flight. I asked what about the 6:55? Should there be a 6:55 flight? He said there was no more F. If you give me permission to book coach... Sure, it is a 2hrish flight if I can get on, far better to wait from 6:15 now for the 7:55 flight. He printed both BPs and told me to get to the gate immediately. Thanks to TSA pre check I was quickly thru and rushed to the gate 67. As I walked pass gate 65b, I noticed AS 457 was still boarding, and agent was making final calls! I rushed back to the counter and asked if I could get on. Unfortunately the flight was 100% full and my new flight was boarding now. Rushed to gate 67, checked with gate agent if I can get an aisle seat as the counter agent gave me a 10B. The gate agent found me 19D instead. It turned out my flight had several rows in the midsection only had one passenger in them.

The most irony thing was, when I opened the hotel room door my husband was surprised I was only 20 min later than him as his flight delayed till 6:45 to depart while mine left around 7:10 from the scheduled 6:55.

So at the end I was able to get back my itinerary without too much interruption but the frustration and the tiredness from fast walking with carryon from TBIT to T6 were there. Frustration is because the only help CX offered was to give misconnected passengers the orange Express Connection slips at the exit ramp from the plane. I don't know what else they would help but in my case I was the person who helped myself thanks to the knowledge I had.

At the end I really want to know if CX has any responsibility in situation like this, when all segments under a single ticket albeit issued by AS. What if the customer had a forced overnight at LAX due to CX delay, would CX on the hook for the hotel?

Final tidbits about CX F - while the seat remains very comfortable I start to resend the lack of unlimited adjustment of the seat. I really like QR's seats and some other airlines' lie flat seats that allow you unlimited adjustment of each separate parts individually, i.e. the back, the seat, the leg support and the foot rest - all can be adjusted individually. CX F seat feels outdated now. I also notice the video selections are noticeable less than my flights in Feb and last Sept. Wines continuously their old status that is, mediocre. Tea selection is less now as there are only Jasmine and Iron Budha for Chine tea. Luckily the Chine meal on this flight was a steamed Sea Bass which was fresh and tasty. The baby bok choi was also cooked enough to be tender.
Husband was the only passenger in F on his flight. He said at one point there were 6 FAs congregated in the cabin though they were not noisy unlike someone's experiences reported earlier in this forum. But husband did say that the FAs became much more casual when they had only one passenger who was not gwai lou. Human nature I guess.
Happy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 17, 9:28 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 249
Happy, I was on the same flight in premium economy.

The casualness of the cabin crew was obvious there once the medical emergency two rows behind me had been handled. Initially there was lots of running about and activity, which was understandable though did not create a sense of calm. But once the passenger and family left at SFO, the cabin crew in my line of sight did nothing. A couple of them were at the back of business class, continually chatting and joking around with what I took to be a colleague or family member (?) seated there, and stayed there for almost the duration to LAX. There was a sense of relief in the air, as if handling the incident and diversion meant that they were now more or less off duty.

As to how ill the passenger was, I think it is hard for us to speculate without medical expertise. Being seated on a gurney does not mean that it was not an emergency.

Last edited by HarbourGent; Sep 8, 17 at 9:33 pm
HarbourGent is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 17, 10:06 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,448
Originally Posted by Happy View Post
But husband did say that the FAs became much more casual when they had only one passenger who was not gwai lou. Human nature I guess.
...interesting post, but is it really necessary to casually toss race elements into it? What do your biases about how CX staff treat "gwai lou" have absolutely anything to do with the rest of it?
QRC3288 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 17, 10:50 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YVR, KUL
Programs: MH, AC, AS
Posts: 1,610
Originally Posted by Happy View Post
We finall resumed our flight to LAX about 10 or 15 min to 5pm. During the whole while the CX FAs incl the ISM did not have a clue on how to assist passengers who sure would miss their connections. The Japanese male FA suggested he could send a message (to CX ground crew) but they don't always reply?! Anyway I gave him my 2 AS connected flights AS 457 LAX to SEA and AS 966 SEA to SLC the next day. I emphasize I need to be in SEA tonight as my husband is on the CX 884? HKG to LAX departed at 12:55pm already. We are supposedly on the same AS 457 to SEA where I already booked the Radisson across SEA for the night. I was to give the FA my AS PNR but he said no need.
Bombarding FAs with questions about misconnections/rebooking is useless. This is not within their purview, as they don't have access to the airline's reservation system to help you with anything.

IMO it sounds like you got a reasonable response from the FAs who couldn't do much more than listen and apologise.

Final tidbits about CX F - while the seat remains very comfortable I start to resend the lack of unlimited adjustment of the seat. I really like QR's seats and some other airlines' lie flat seats that allow you unlimited adjustment of each separate parts individually, i.e. the back, the seat, the leg support and the foot rest - all can be adjusted individually. CX F seat feels outdated now. I also notice the video selections are noticeable less than my flights in Feb and last Sept. Wines continuously their old status that is, mediocre. Tea selection is less now as there are only Jasmine and Iron Budha for Chine tea. Luckily the Chine meal on this flight was a steamed Sea Bass which was fresh and tasty ... But husband did say that the FAs became much more casual when they had only one passenger who was not gwai lou. Human nature I guess.
CX F awards booked by AS are already frowned upon by the CX regulars here. Telling people that you travelled on CX F with an AS award - and complaining about it thereafter - is probably not the best thing to do when seeking advice from the regulars.
SilverChris is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 17, 12:53 am
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,085
Originally Posted by HarbourGent View Post
Happy, I was on the same flight in premium economy.

The casualness of the cabin crew was obvious there once the medical emergency two rows behind me had been handled. Initially there was lots of running about and activity, which was understandable though did not create a sense of calm. But once the passenger and family left at SFO, the cabin crew in my line of sight did nothing. A couple of them were at the back of business class, continually chatting and joking around with what I took to be a colleague or family member (?) seated there, and stayed there for almost the duration to LAX. There was a sense of relief in the air, as if handling the incident and diversion meant that they were now more or less off duty.

As to how ill the passenger was, I think it is hard for us to speculate without medical expertise. Being seated on a gurney does not mean that it was not an emergency.
The FAs told me the passenger suffered a stroke.

I was surprised by a few things :

1) CX does not have a basic blood pressure measuring device on board.
2) The sick passenger deplaned but his travel companions did not. We in the F could see everything both onboard and on the ground as the front door was used for this event. The 3 ladies walked to upfront with one carried the sick passenger's personal belongings did NOT deplane. They went back to the back side of the plane. If the sick passenger was so sick that required an emergency diversion, why none of his travel companions accompanying him to get medical treatment at SFO? Instead they continued their trip to LAX. It just doesn't make much sense.
3) CX did not have any extra fuel to spare for the extra 46 min needed to LAX.

On the other hand, the cabin crew in F cabin resumed their duties because both me and another passenger were just started our breakfasts right before the diversion and the quick landing that followed. So as soon as we resumed our flight to LAX, they rushed to serve an abreviated breakfast to me and the other passenger.
The casualness is referred to the CX 884 that my husband was the only passenger in F. The FAs became really casual, comparing in other times when the cabin has westerners. Though he said the FAs did not talk loud or made jokes like having a party as reported here by a poster who started a thread on his experience on this. There were quite a few debates on whether such behaviors should be reported to the management.

Originally Posted by QRC3288 View Post
...interesting post, but is it really necessary to casually toss race elements into it? What do your biases about how CX staff treat "gwai lou" have absolutely anything to do with the rest of it?
The comment is related to my husband's flight. It is his observation. He is a very low maintenance passenger yet even him noticed the demonstration of professionalism often hinged on whether there are "gwai Lou" in presence.

May be you prefer me to start a new thread on this topic? How about mainlanders complained about they get different treatments based on the languages they chose to use for communication?

Why avoid addressing the truth? That the cabin crews would be much more formal or "professional-like" when there are "gwai Lou" in the cabin? That has been a well known and well talked about fact if not enough here but on many Chinese forums. I would call it a Spade a Spade instead of trying to be political correct.

Originally Posted by SilverChris View Post
Bombarding FAs with questions about misconnections/rebooking is useless. This is not within their purview, as they don't have access to the airline's reservation system to help you with anything.

IMO it sounds like you got a reasonable response from the FAs who couldn't do much more than listen and apologise.


CX F awards booked by AS are already frowned upon by the CX regulars here. Telling people that you travelled on CX F with an AS award - and complaining about it thereafter - is probably not the best thing to do when seeking advice from the regulars.
First of all where did you get the idea that I bombarded the cabin crew on the issue of misconnection?
The Japanese male FA made a suggestion about sending a message. I was highly skeptical about this but he insisted. Unfortunately all the info given by him was wrong. I would never know if the CX ground crew lied to the FA or not but the fact is, he did get a message back (he came back with a thermo paper print out but never showed me the content) but AS insisted they never rebooked me. So who knows what really happened. The suggestion to go to connecting passenger area after custom is a kind gesture but unfortunately not a correct suggestion as AS has no presence in that area. Like I said I should trust my own knowledge. I know there are 3 LAX-SEA flights after the missed 5:55 departure, 6:55, 7:55 and 11:55 off the top of my head so I definitely would get to SEA the same day. Since the FA insisted CX might be able to get the rebooking done while we were still in the air, I decided to let him try.

Bottom line question is, in a delay like this, would CX be responsible on the extra costs incurred by misconnection, even they may not be able to help on the rebooking?
Or, put it more technically so to take out the bias caused by emotion - when all segments are booked under same ticket, the delay by the first segment's operator caused a domino effect of travel disruption, would the operator that caused the interruption be responsible for anything despite it indeed brought you to the "destination" of its own flight?

As for AS or AA redemption, those who resent such can continue to resent. Nothing they can change it if that is what CX chooses to do. Those who frown upon AS/AA redemption totally forgot the fact that CX only releases UNSOLD seats whether as a revenue ticket or an Asiamiles redemption to the partners. Asiamiles and MP members get priority access to award seats as well as op ups for MP elites. So I fail to see why they frown upon partner redemption? It is not like partner redemption takes away the seats CX can sell or the CX regulars themselves want to redeem.

The way I see it, CX at least can get some money back from partner redemption and it is far better to fly an empty F cabin. Same concept applies to J redemption.

As the products CX offered, there are enough complaints here on the poor quality of the F&B comparing to its competitors. It is a no deniable fact. I was in the camp that I can tolerate the mediocre F&B, but the seat is still one of the most comfortable. Sadly it is no longer the case when the design has been many years old and there are definitely better hard products offered by its competitors. CX can no longer pretend it is still a premium airline that can charge a not insignificant premium on its flights of similar routes.

BTW the food on our JNB-HKG flight was bordering to inedible. I once again got another food poisoning like volmits after eating the meal. I had this happened on a LAX-HKG flight in J last Sept and another LAX-HKG flight in F this past Jan. I did not bother to post here because that might be just me who had some intolerance on some ingredients. Though I have never had such reaction on other airlines flew in the past 12 months, incl QR, AY, 9W, AF, KL, TG, TK, OZ, SK and LOT, in both J and Y cabins. So again who knows what is wrong.

As for the advice, that is an Ad Hoc idea so if the CX forum regulars are truly knowledgeable and without the prejudice they should be able to offer up their opinions / experiences on such matter. If they don't feel like to offer their knowledge, no big deal.

Last edited by Happy; Sep 9, 17 at 1:15 am
Happy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 17, 1:46 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: SYD | HGH
Programs: CX DM, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton DM, Marriott Plat
Posts: 1,905
Originally Posted by Happy View Post
The FAs told me the passenger suffered a stroke.

I was surprised by a few things :

1) CX does not have a basic blood pressure measuring device on board.
2) The sick passenger deplaned but his travel companions did not. We in the F could see everything both onboard and on the ground as the front door was used for this event. The 3 ladies walked to upfront with one carried the sick passenger's personal belongings did NOT deplane. They went back to the back side of the plane. If the sick passenger was so sick that required an emergency diversion, why none of his travel companions accompanying him to get medical treatment at SFO? Instead they continued their trip to LAX. It just doesn't make much sense.
3) CX did not have any extra fuel to spare for the extra 46 min needed to LAX.

On the other hand, the cabin crew in F cabin resumed their duties because both me and another passenger were just started our breakfasts right before the diversion and the quick landing that followed. So as soon as we resumed our flight to LAX, they rushed to serve an abreviated breakfast to me and the other passenger.
The casualness is referred to the CX 884 that my husband was the only passenger in F. The FAs became really casual, comparing in other times when the cabin has westerners. Though he said the FAs did not talk loud or made jokes like having a party as reported here by a poster who started a thread on his experience on this. There were quite a few debates on whether such behaviors should be reported to the management.



The comment is related to my husband's flight. It is his observation. He is a very low maintenance passenger yet even him noticed the demonstration of professionalism often hinged on whether there are "gwai Lou" in presence.

May be you prefer me to start a new thread on this topic? How about mainlanders complained about they get different treatments based on the languages they chose to use for communication?

Why avoid addressing the truth? That the cabin crews would be much more formal or "professional-like" when there are "gwai Lou" in the cabin? That has been a well known and well talked about fact if not enough here but on many Chinese forums. I would call it a Spade a Spade instead of trying to be political correct.



First of all where did you get the idea that I bombarded the cabin crew on the issue of misconnection?
The Japanese male FA made a suggestion about sending a message. I was highly skeptical about this but he insisted. Unfortunately all the info given by him was wrong. I would never know if the CX ground crew lied to the FA or not but the fact is, he did get a message back (he came back with a thermo paper print out but never showed me the content) but AS insisted they never rebooked me. So who knows what really happened. The suggestion to go to connecting passenger area after custom is a kind gesture but unfortunately not a correct suggestion as AS has no presence in that area. Like I said I should trust my own knowledge. I know there are 3 LAX-SEA flights after the missed 5:55 departure, 6:55, 7:55 and 11:55 off the top of my head so I definitely would get to SEA the same day. Since the FA insisted CX might be able to get the rebooking done while we were still in the air, I decided to let him try.

Bottom line question is, in a delay like this, would CX be responsible on the extra costs incurred by misconnection, even they may not be able to help on the rebooking?
Or, put it more technically so to take out the bias caused by emotion - when all segments are booked under same ticket, the delay by the first segment's operator caused a domino effect of travel disruption, would the operator that caused the interruption be responsible for anything despite it indeed brought you to the "destination" of its own flight?

As for AS or AA redemption, those who resent such can continue to resent. Nothing they can change it if that is what CX chooses to do. Those who frown upon AS/AA redemption totally forgot the fact that CX only releases UNSOLD seats whether as a revenue ticket or an Asiamiles redemption to the partners. Asiamiles and MP members get priority access to award seats as well as op ups for MP elites. So I fail to see why they frown upon partner redemption? It is not like partner redemption takes away the seats CX can sell or the CX regulars themselves want to redeem.

The way I see it, CX at least can get some money back from partner redemption and it is far better to fly an empty F cabin. Same concept applies to J redemption.

As the products CX offered, there are enough complaints here on the poor quality of the F&B comparing to its competitors. It is a no deniable fact. I was in the camp that I can tolerate the mediocre F&B, but the seat is still one of the most comfortable. Sadly it is no longer the case when the design has been many years old and there are definitely better hard products offered by its competitors. CX can no longer pretend it is still a premium airline that can charge a not insignificant premium on its flights of similar routes.

BTW the food on our JNB-HKG flight was bordering to inedible. I once again got another food poisoning like volmits after eating the meal. I had this happened on a LAX-HKG flight in J last Sept and another LAX-HKG flight in F this past Jan. I did not bother to post here because that might be just me who had some intolerance on some ingredients. Though I have never had such reaction on other airlines flew in the past 12 months, incl QR, AY, 9W, AF, KL, TG, TK, OZ, SK and LOT, in both J and Y cabins. So again who knows what is wrong.

As for the advice, that is an Ad Hoc idea so if the CX forum regulars are truly knowledgeable and without the prejudice they should be able to offer up their opinions / experiences on such matter. If they don't feel like to offer their knowledge, no big deal.

Since you don't like CX, you better of book with someone else with your AS miles next time.
ashsong likes this.
Ausriver is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 17, 2:00 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: HK
Programs: QF Emerald. CX Nobody
Posts: 2,646
the other thing is writing a PhD thesis length post wont get you much attention. you should get to point... in a nutshell summary "i missed my connection who is responsible?" instead or your 15k word essay about you life.

i believe AS is your eventual responsible agent as they issued ticket on their stock. CX is mere agent operating on AS's behalf here?
fakecd is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 17, 3:44 am
  #8  
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ORD + HKG
Programs: CX Diamond, AA ExPlat, BAEC Gold, HH Diamond, Hyatt Explorist, Starriott Gold, GE
Posts: 2,765
Since getting this product for like what $1.5k per way still does not satisfy you, please please please move away from CX. I'm absolutely sure there are better airlines out there. Maybe if there were no more grASbbing and cheapening of this once-glorious cabin we can finally see improvements aided by customers such as QRC3288 and his team reverting to willingness to pay full freight when that happens.

I'd rather F awards be banned from partners and the service improves. Yes the seat goes empty, SO WHAT???

By the way, I am anything but gwai lo, but yes I still find CX service to be WAY better than QR, JL, anywhere you name it...
G-CIVC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 17, 4:11 am
  #9  
Hilton Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Programs: Oneworld, *A; Hilton, SPG
Posts: 488
Were there no medical personnel on board? I'm surprised - I remember reading somewhere that on average there are usually 2 (?) on board...
Anyway, I was just thinking that perhaps it's not so much about them not having a BP machine on board, but sometimes if the readings are so abnormal (as can be the case in someone with a stroke), it would be preferable to double check with another machine to rule out measurement errors due to machine malfunction...
But of course, I wasn't there, so I wouldn't know.
jdtravels is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 17, 4:25 am
  #10  
Hilton Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Programs: Oneworld, *A; Hilton, SPG
Posts: 488
Originally Posted by G-CIVC View Post
By the way, I am anything but gwai lo, but yes I still find CX service to be WAY better than QR, JL, anywhere you name it...
I also agree that, being Asian, I've never experienced lack of "professionalism" from CX crew despite there being no "gwai lo" in the cabin, albeit in J rather than F.

That said, I'm not sure whether it's just (generalising here, I know) Asian habit to always portray themselves as being subject to some form of racism, demeaning behaviour or something. I've heard people complaining that staff would refuse to speak to them in English, or that they would speak slowly rather than at the normal pace - but all that is from their experience, and I'm sure in goodwill just in case this Asian doesn't speak English well or something, rather than out of "racist" behaviour as such.

At the end of the day, they make the flight more comfortable (and as the American airlines always emphasise - safer) than what it would have been without their presence, and that's already professional behaviour. The whole "Mr. X, Ms. Y" thing, bowing, etc. is just over and above their duty; and other than cultural (e.g. the Japanese tradition of bowing to basically everyone), I'd be rather uncomfortable if they were all too formal.
jdtravels is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 17, 1:08 pm
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Programs: CX
Posts: 211
Seems like everytime Happy have something to post about CX, she's always unHappy about it. Yet, she and her husband still continue grASbbing CX F ticket at LCC pricing, while expecting to be treated like a queen.

Anyways, to answer your question OP. Since it was all on one ticket, if the misconnection caused you to miss your flight, and it's the last one of the day. Yes, CX put you in a hotel at LAX, and fly you out the next day.

Originally Posted by Happy View Post
As for AS or AA redemption, those who resent such can continue to resent. Nothing they can change it if that is what CX chooses to do. Those who frown upon AS/AA redemption totally forgot the fact that CX only releases UNSOLD seats whether as a revenue ticket or an Asiamiles redemption to the partners. Asiamiles and MP members get priority access to award seats as well as op ups for MP elites. So I fail to see why they frown upon partner redemption? It is not like partner redemption takes away the seats CX can sell or the CX regulars themselves want to redeem.

The way I see it, CX at least can get some money back from partner redemption and it is far better to fly an empty F cabin. Same concept applies to J redemption.
That's not true, and its been deeply debated in other threads. AS/AA redemption does indeed take away spaces that could have otherwise went to revenue or MPC redemptions.
nolounge is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 17, 7:44 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: HKG WUH BNE
Programs: CX JL QR LH | Hilton SPG/Marriot
Posts: 316
Oh boy, I giggled so much while reading this post. I had no idea that AS redemption was really frowned upon like this on FT haha.

That said, I feel sorry about Happy's experience stemming from the medical emergency.

The race / choice of language for communication thing could be relevant. Then again, they are too pervasive to be examining from a mere cabin service perspective. My experience on that is so long as folks practice common sense and strive to be reasonable, desired outcomes are often likely. I'd rather have someone with an authentic attitude than a plastic smile.

On a separate issue, (without too much knowledge about AS) are they the ones awarding miles regardless of sub-class of booking, solely based on distance travelled?
ashsong is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 17, 9:37 pm
  #13  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 41,313
OP has found fault with every aspect of the flight. It is quite clear that CX is not up to his standards.

That is apparently doubly so because in his professional opinion, the diversion was not necessary because the "sick" passenger was sitting up on the gurney when offloaded.

The sole issue here is what happens when a misconnect (OP may want to correct the odd misspelling in his thread title !) caused by a delayed arrival. The answer is simply. It is CX's responsibility as the late delivering carrier. Has nothing to do with fault, simply an allocation of risk.

Bugging the crew was not necessary as there is nothing to be done. CX staff on the ground will handle rebooking and it is best to leave it at that.

Conversely, the whiners who don't like it that one can fly in CX on AS miles which one can purchase quite cheaply, should stop whining. That is a business decision taken by CX. AS and CX both know the situation, permit it and that is the end of it.
Often1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 10, 17, 2:26 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Programs: AAdvantage Asia Miles Air China
Posts: 581
Oh, poor Happy, how terribly inconvenienced because someone has a potentially life threatening problem that caused such major disruption to Happy’s life.

Perhaps the Captain should have continued the journey to make sure Happy stays Happy, and sod the poor sod, especially given Happy’s obviously extensive medical knowledge.
And after all it is the sick guy’s fault that Happy is Unhappy.

Selfish, selfish, selfish.

Old Chinese saying ‘The World is Round’.
Nicc HK is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 10, 17, 3:44 am
  #15  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.8MM, Marriott PLT, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 9,779
Originally Posted by Happy View Post
At the end I really want to know if CX has any responsibility in situation like this, when all segments under a single ticket albeit issued by AS.
No. It is a clear case that beyond CX's control.

Originally Posted by Happy View Post
What if the customer had a forced overnight at LAX due to CX delay, would CX on the hook for the hotel?
CX could pay for the hotel, although CX is not obligated to do so.

(OTOH - the pax suffering medical emergency could potentially on the hook for all the bills due to the diversion.)

Originally Posted by Happy View Post
1) CX does not have a basic blood pressure measuring device on board.
CX's B77W is not AF1. Beside a BP Monitor is not really a critical medical device (when you compare with AED).

Originally Posted by Happy View Post
2) The sick passenger deplaned but his travel companions did not.
CBP is your reason.

The sick pax offloaded is transported to a hospital immediately due to medical emergency, which CBP can make exception to delay the immigration and customs process.

However, the companion did not have CBP's approval.

Originally Posted by Happy View Post
3) CX did not have any extra fuel to spare for the extra 46 min needed to LAX.
When all commercial flights have spare fuel in case of holding, the spare fuel are not usually designed for 2 take-off/landing.

Let's say the flight ends up at TPE rather than SFO, the airplane will need to be refueled anyway.

Originally Posted by Happy View Post
Bottom line question is, in a delay like this, would CX be responsible on the extra costs incurred by misconnection, even they may not be able to help on the rebooking?
Again - no. This diversion is not caused by CX.

Originally Posted by Happy View Post
As the products CX offered, there are enough complaints here on the poor quality of the F&B comparing to its competitors...
FWIW - while what you have said is true (at least in your perspective), it is clearly OT from what you have asked.
kaka, fairhsa and percysmith like this.
garykung is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread