robinsg

Unless there's something I'm misunderstanding, UA/CO has now essentially eliminated EUAs for fare classes below M. I've flown 119,000 miles this year on CO, but since August, I haven't been upgraded on one out of my last ~20 flights with the exception of one 27-minute IAH-AUS leg. That's ~5% upgrades as a Plat. Two years ago, I was upgraded on 80%-90% of my W/G/K/etc. classes as a GOLD. Even UA 1Ks get upgraded at least occasionally on lower fare classes! But not CO members who have flown 20% more than UA 1Ks. Not on UA or CO. Nowhere. The principal elite benefit is upgrades! This is complete insanity! Forget about 2012 -- why is anyone sticking with this airline for 2011? And how can they possibly justify not immediately giving CO FFs with >100,000 miles 1K status on UA so that they could at least get *occasional* upgrades on the merged carrier???

One possibility: we could all get together and sue Continental in a class action. They have unilaterally, summarily ceased almost all of the central elite upgrade benefits for lower fare classes that were clearly, unequivocally promised to members, who, relying on that promise, spent tens of thousands of dollars on their airlines. It's obviously illegal under the consumer protection law of almost any state, and it's most likely a federal crime (fraud) under interstate commerce law.

Perhaps a better possibility: we could all just bid them good riddance. Anyone who is with me, please say so here, so at least people from the airlines who are reading the forums (Scott, who once seemed like an advocate, obviously isn't anymore, for whatever reasons that well may not be his fault) will understand that customers will take their one remaining lever of power--the question of where they choose to spend their money in the future--and use it to show these crooks that we won't stand for fraud.

I've just faxed my status match to Delta, and look forward to upgrades for 2011 instead of speculations as to who jumped the line and why. I really, truly don't understand why anyone else (unless they live in Houston or Cleveland) isn't doing the same. Let's show these companies that consumers will at least *respond* when the thing that they've just spent a huge amount of money to buy over the previous year -- and, yes, these benefits are something we *buy*, in every sense of the word -- has just been taken away from them, with no refund offered.

This is total garbage, and I do not understand why people on this forum aren't angrier. I know that some people are spending their companies' money to fly CO and attain these supposed "benefits", but I, like others, have been spending tens of thousands of dollars of my own money--this is hardly peanuts--and I can't believe the brazenness of this breach of contract on the part of CO. If we have a shred of dignity, we can't stay with this airline.

sbm12

Yes, you are misunderstanding it.

No, you would not have any success with a lawsuit.

Hartmann

So one person has problems getting upgrades and we should start a class action suit?

I've had pretty good experiences with CO upgrades as a Plat. Even been upgraded IAH-EWR and vice versa (on 73Gs no less)

BigPoppaCO

I got upgraded DFW-EWR last week

njcommodore

As frustrating as it is for elites to not get upgraded but see the "tens of dollars" upgrade deals, I know a colleague who is a silver that just got EWR-IAH.

TommyC80

To the OP....upgrades happen on all fare classes, but they aren't guaranteed. If you want to fly F...buy F...period.

Frankly, my upgrade percentage has been quite good this year. Unless you're constantly flying between houston, newark and LAX I can't imagine why you have such terrible luck getting upgrades.

geeprice

"Criminal Fraud"
Get real, just because you miss a couple of upgrades does not constitute "Criminal Fraud" , Good riddance and enjoy Delta

EWR764

You have not expressly contracted with CO to provide guaranteed upgrades, and any suit in this vein would be dismissed for failure to state a claim. If you want to toss around the legal jargon, make sure you know what you're talking about.

For the record, my upgrade success this year has been better than ever, and I generally do not purchase many Y/B/M fares. Your "unequivocal" grievance sounds an awful lot like unequivocal whining to me.

robinsg

sbm12: care to elaborate?
hartmann: i did too, until august/september when they virtually eliminated the benefits for fare classes below M, unless you bought up.
bigpoppa: not saying they've eliminated them completely. as i mentioned i got upgraded IAH-AUS. but 90% to 5% is a pretty big change, and is echoed by many other comments on this forum.

it's amazing to me that a forum aimed at consumer advocacy would have so many people apologizing for CO's behavior here. what i've experienced has been echoed by dozens of people in this forum -- a literal decimation of our upgrade benefits. if you don't care about upgrade benefits, think it's petty to complain about them, or don't think they're a topic worthy of discussion or have legitimate value, then that would invalidate about 40% of the threads on this forum. just because you don't care about upgrades doesn't mean it's wrong for other people to care.

anyone who says the unilateral removal of promised benefits by a company, after customers promised these benefits have spent tens of thousands of dollars relying on those promises, isn't grounds for a lawsuit is obviously unfamiliar with the basic principles of reliance in contract law. it doesn't matter what the onepass terms say when you click "yes" online or whatever. the purpose of these common-law principles, the UCC, and consumer protection law are to help consumers when contracts have been constructively breached, even if the "terms of service" haven't -- even when the breaching party claims that the plaintiff has signed away their rights to sue in the "fine print" of some online onepass program literature.

when you make a promise, your customer spends tens of thousands of dollars relying on it, then you break that promise, you're in breach. the customer can't sign away those rights. it's understood by the law as a contract, and you've broken it. that's the whole point, and that's what the legal system is there for.

marklyon

I flew this weekend. On Friday, I was on a G fare. On Sunday, I was on an E.

I was upgraded on both legs, LGA->IAH. Both flights were packed.

robinsg

individual cases of people being upgraded is not the point. of course i know that some people still get upgraded. the point is that below some threshold, the benefit that people have been relying on, and spending money based on, has been constructively removed.

i guarantee you that continental has been dealing with its lawyers over the question of what that threshold is, because they obviously know that they've severely cut EUA benefits with the combination of $-upgrades, the change in policy over mileage upgrades, and (arguably) the UA merger, and they're obviously approaching it, although it's just a matter of legal risk -- nobody knows exactly what the threshold would be in court.

if no elite member were ever upgraded from now on, it would be obvious that the benefit had been constructively removed, even if they hadn't "guaranteed" upgrades. above zero, it's an open question what level of benefit reduction would constitute a breach. but people who don't even believe that dramatic unilateral reductions in benefits could *possibly* constitute standing for a legal claim are really not appreciating their rights as consumers to hold companies to their promises.

ijgordon

Well, besides the fact that I wasn't aware that this was a consumer advocacy forum, I guess I'm not sure what I would need to apologize for on CO's behalf.

I'm 100% for discount fare EUAs -- 10 for 10 to be specific. Not a huge sample, I'll admit, but reasonable. (FWIW, I have a lot of EUA-ineligible flights, like paid J, long-haul international and/or partner flights.)

I'm also 3 for 6 on companion upgrades at the airport -- 50%.

I guess I'm sorry that you seem to be having worse luck.

SilverShrimp0

I got an EUA as a silver on SFO-IAH last week, although I should mention that it was a saturday night/sunday morning red-eye.

United737522

Your "case" against CO is laughable at best. I would hope any judge would send you home with CO's lawyer fees and other costs for wasting their time.

There is no "breach" because there is no contract. There is no set threshold because it is impossible to guarantee any sort of space available upgrade, because it is exactly that, 'space available.'

I suggest reading the T&C's of the OnePass program, because it clearly states that you are entitled to zip.

EWR764

You contract is with Continental to provide air service as outlined in the Contract of Carriage, which necessarily makes no mention of elite status or any benefit associated therewith. The performance of the complimentary elite upgrade benefit is not an obligation contained within this contract. Even if we were to construe our relationship with the OnePass program as a contract, no consideration is paid for the upgrades, a benefit which is expressly subject to availability.

I don't think it's that obvious at all, and again, Continental reserves the right to make changes to the program at any time, without notice. There is no contractual provision that protects us as consumers (elite or not) from the company's right to manage its program in the manner it sees fit. There is no threshold issue here either, as there is no legal precedent for such a spurious claim. In fact, it is hardly legally cognizable.

You can talk about "constructive removal" of the benefit, but the reality is, we have no contractual right to it in the first place, nor are upgrades EVER guaranteed. Furthermore, there cannot be a breach of a non-contract. Our only express legal contract with Continental is the CoC, as noted, and there is no mention whatsoever of complimentary elite upgrades in that agreement.

If you want a court to construe the elite program as an implied contract with CO, that reasoning would be tenuous at best because the subjective intent of the parties clearly do not reach the proverbial "meeting of the minds". CO has never explicitly stated that it wishes to deliver guaranteed upgrades to elites, nor has it ever set forth a threshold % of elite upgrades it promises to deliver.

Finally, to your claim of "criminal fraud", well, for a court to even consider hearing your claim, you would have to plead with specificity the discrete elements of fraud, most of which would be inapplicable in this circumstance.