Upgrade list transparancy
 

Tonight I checked in to a MIA-IAH flight. I was told at check in that there were two empty seats in F and that it "looked good" for the upgrade. I was then told at the gate (20 minutes before departure) that I was then number 3 on the waitlist. In short I saw two upgrades made at the gate and two more battlefield upgrades made after boarding. None of them was mine.

I saw this once before at LGA when a P-Club rep saw the ticket counter (or the gate) promote someone who was lower on the list. She told me as it was happening. One time I caught a gate agent doing this and embarrassed, he gave me a certificate for an upgrade.

CO needs to post its upgrade waitlists much as AA does in DFW. I understand that Delta does something similar. Miles and free tickets are not the reason this plat and soon to be exp with AA selects an airline. I don't do mileage runs just to put miles in my account. More flying on non-work time does not give me, or I suppose others who fly frequently for business, much pleasure. I seek the Elite status mainly for the ability to get into F, it makes 200K miles per year much more tolerable. Put me in steerage and game the upgrade list and I am going to another carrier.

Forget the complaint letters or calls to 1-800-we-care, these are ineffective. Just make it transparent, so we can see when buddies or those who pay gratuities are given favors.

Don't say that maybe there may be those who have Y fare who can upend an upgrade list which has been posted. If the list contains names, elite classification and fare paid there will be no questions, and more importantly no gaming of the list. This may be a good topic to cover in the next meeting at CO. What possible business reason is there for keeping the upgrade list non-transparent?

Well said. And this should be a mjor discussion for the big do. Even if GA's are going 100% by the book there is a perception of shenanigans and perception is important.

I agree.

DL does a great job of posting upgrade and standby lists on their departure monitors at each gate at ATL (and some other airports) as well as information about the number of seats in each cabin and the number of passengers that have checked in and already claimed those seats. While I don't particularly care for DL, I do like their system of informing everyone where they stand on each list in a completely transparent way.

CO should do the same. It would not be difficult to implement.

Delta
 

It would be nice to know where you stand, but I personally think Delta is one of the coldest, most customer unfriendly airlines in the sky. I've flown a couple of codeshare flights with them, and I really appreciate Continental, even with its issues and problems.

I've added something similar to the discussion list for the Jan IAH gathering...

Since CO adding monitors is pretty doubtful, add ability to check upgrade status online. This would give you the status up to a couple hours prior to the flight... more if you belong to the PC.

There's also the related issue of GAs who refuse to look at the actual list and just say, "It's checked in full" when asked. Allowing customers to somehow view the list would certainly make the agents happier.

Maybe taking the GA out of the list-clearing equation would help. If the list cleared automatically, according to the preset protocols that we all understand, and there was no way for the GA to make changes or override the system (without having to write a note in the system justifying the override, making it traceable), then no one would need to worry about who clears ahead of who.

From a technical standpoint, I dont see CO installing monitors Delta-style...no one can afford that right now...but adding list visibility to the E-Service kiosks, co.com, and the WAP service would go a long way to provide this valuable service at little cost.

There's no reason that a hard-copy list can't be printed out and posted in the boarding area for all to peruse.

This is true, but it's always changing...I doubt the agents want to keep printing out new versions as the list changes. Then there is the risk of someone pointing out they were number 1 on the list, when two pax are upgraded ahead of them who checked in with higher status after the list was printed.

Also, the actual list contains all our information, such as full names, etc. I think they need to engineer a system that either shows us our own ranking (like online or e-service), or hides the full names of the customers (like DL does).

I've flown DL quite a bit, and the gate monitors are great -- but keep in mind that may of DL's smaller stations don't have them. It does seem that DL's upgrade system is somehow more streamlined and by-the-book than CO's.

I'm not the type to stalk a GA or a Pres Club agent badgering them about an upgrade. In my experience, worrying about an upgrade rarely if ever prompts one so I'm fine sitting back and waiting for somebody to tell me to move to F. However, if I'm #1 on the list I'd like to know I'm #1 if for no other reason than I can hold off boarding and not have to fight the flow of pax if I score a battlefield upgrade (like I did this morning).

The whole "checked in full" and "look good" routines seem a little bit odd. Today they announced at the gate that F was full and that elites should take their coach seats. Two of us were then upgraded --- on a flight that was delayed an hour (eliminating missed connections). I understand agents frustration and to a degree their attitude with constantly answering the upgrade list questions, but at the same time if we've flown 25, 50 or 75k miles to earn that perk then we're certainly entitled to it. I do get the distinct impression at times that there are a lot of CO employees occupying the seats of golds and silvers that were in line for a three-hour or battlefield upgrade.

It is not that difficult
 

I am not advocating a monitor, such as those of AA at DFW. There is no need to drop funds into such an investment. The process of printing a sheet say, one hour, thirty minutes and 15 minutes before a flight takes maybe 30 seconds each time. Tape the sheet to the side wall of the wall that is behind the gate counter. Be it government or corporate culture, transparancy eliminates doubts and acusations of shenanigans. This minute and thirty seconds (if that is the time needed for three printouts) before each flight builds goodwill and reinforces confidence in the system. In the case to which I refer I did no lurking or constant questioning of the agents. I spoke once to the agent at the checkin counter and once to the agent at the gate. I and most other CO elites know better than to constantly bother the agents. I also know what I was told and what happened.

i think CO does what they do on purpose. they dont want you to know you are second, with 2 seats still open, b/c they know that if you dont end up with the seat, you're going to pitch a fit.

i honestly believe that the agents who actually dish out all the info, may be breaking the rules.

by simply telling you "it does or does not look good," it gives CO the freedom to still use those FC seats for customer service ups, or last minute higher status (and probably higher paying, b/c of timing) passengers.

CO has actually done a good job on training its agents to allow the EUA to upgrade. back in the day, if the agent liked you, they could easily up a gold before a plat. now, they simply fall back on the EUA excuse, we shut up, and the process has become standard.

interestingly though, they leave it up to the agents discretion at the last minute, where many times, i think, it may come in handy for CO customer service reasons.

sorry for the ramble....

On a recent IAH/AUS I stopped at the gate desk to see if I had cleared the upgade list. Without looking up, the agent said, "FIRST CLASS IS CHECKED-IN FULL. PLEASE TAKE YOUR SEAT IN COACH." Fine, I was in 5C and the trip is short. No big deal. However, when I boarded, there were still two empty seats in first. When the GA came on with the final manifest I walked up to the front and asked if these two seats were open. She gave me a LOOK, stomped off the plane, and returned with another printout. She proceeded to call out six names--one by one--over the pa system. All had already been upgraded. She called another who didn't even seem to be on the plane. Another name is called, and a guy walks up from coach and takes one of the seats in first. She studies the list and frowns, stomps back to 5C and says, "WELL, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE NEXT ON THE LIST, SO 1D IS YOURS IF IT REALLY MEANS THAT MUCH TO YOU." I said "thank you" and moved up. The flight attendant was totally nonplussed saying, "I don't have a clue what that was all about, but I think you deserve an apology." It's not that it MEANT THAT MUCH to me, but I think if passengers are to trust the system and take their seat in coach so that the desk won't be surrounded with battlefield hopefuls, the GAs have got to follow procedure.

There are other questions besides "Where am I on the list?"
 

DL monitors also cycle information that the average (read: majority) ask such as seatmaps, weather at the destination, in-flight food options, standby status, upgrade status, and many more items. While I agree that investing in monitors just for upgrade status would be a waste we must remember they could display other relevant information. Moreover, CO does not have to put them at every station - just the hubs. Plus they can run their damn SkyMall ad as well as their own internal commercials.

I for one, and I assume others, have no quibble with giving the seat to a higher fare passenger. Co is in business to make money. One of the examples I have in my opening message took place three years ago at the time when elite level and checkin times were the key factors. I saw one passenger in line behind me, also a Plat, and I knew without a doubt that he checked in after I did. He was on a first name basis with the gate agent who gave him an F boarding pass. When I mentioned, quite kindly as a matter of fact, to the agent that I knew that his buddy checked in after I did and that we both KNEW that the CO records would reflect that fact, the backpedaling started.

The possibility of higher fare passengers arriving prior to the flight is why I suggested the postings at 1 hour, 30 and 15 minutes. It is quite difficult to imagine in this TSA dominated age that there will be a passenger who will suddenly appear less than 15 minutes before departure and buy a fare above the Plats who are on the waitlist. How many times are we all reminded about loss of seats 10 minutes before the flight? What are the odds that a Plat or a Gold or a Silver will get to the airport less than 15 minutes before departure, get through security, check any bags he or she may have and get to the gate? The question is almost rhetorical. Even someone who is a late connect to an earlier flight is quite unlikely to arrive at the departure gate less than 15 minutes from the next scheduled departure. If he does, well then by all means post another list showing his Y fare and his bump of the others who are waiting.

I still see no business reason for lack of transparancy, but I do see why agents may like to have the flexibility to reward their "friends", despite the well advertised commitments CO makes to its elites. Who can oppose government or upgrades in the sunshine?