Supreme Court Tosses Lawsuit by Disgruntled Frequent Flier
Aug 16, 2011, 8:24 am
#76
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Finally back in Boston after escaping from New York
Posts: 13,644
Since jetta2.0t has declined to answer your question, I would suggest you read his posts on the following thread: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/delta...employees.html
There should be enough information there to form an opinion.
There should be enough information there to form an opinion.
Big difference between being anti-semitic and speaking the truth about a certain group of passengers. I fly NYC-South Florida from time to time. Frankly, Jewish or not, this grouping of passengers are amongst the most obnoxious, demanding, rude and most foul mouthed i've ever experienced. Out of curiosity I asked a F/A once if she enjoyed working these particular flights. NO NO NO was her response, and I didn't need her elaborating why, because I already knew the answer. My solution, BOSE headsets easily drown out Rochelle screaming at Morton on volume 10.
Yes, which is why I said "Jewish or not". New York Jews are MUCH different than Kansas City Jews, the religion has very little to do with the foul behaviors I mentioned. BUT, it can't be overlooked that these flights attract a very large Jewish following. That said, I can understand the GAs comments, and would certainly not call him anti-semitic. The GA probably could have said "rude, cheap, obnoxious, demanding, foul mouthed", and that could (and does) apply to many groups of New Yorkers.
Sep 16, 2011, 10:14 am
#77
Suspended
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,621
MSP Guy
I wonder what the facts are in this case. As we all know, there are rules and terms of service with FF programs, and there are several reasons why a passenger can have his FF program membership revoked.
(Also, remember the FF program merger was done first - almost a year before the airline merger itself was completed. Some dormant accounts undoubtedly expired during the transfer despite "several tractor-trailer loads of paper mail to members" to advise them of the program merger. Presumably that isn't the issue here.)
This short article states the plaintiff alleges his membership was revoked for complaining too much. If indeed his membership was revoked, I would presume NW (now DL) had a better reason. And, does the article state he can pursue a "class action" suit? How many "revokees" are there out there? Do those who opt-in to this suit get paid in Skymiles?
If complaining too much is reason for dismissal, could you imagine how many FTers would be out?
And there's always Option 4.
The article does not imply Chisholm CSRs revoked his membership, but Chisholm, MN was indeed the address-of-record for Worldperks.
I suspect it won't be necessary but if Chisholm or Bob Soukup need to be defended in court, I hope that court is ready for what will result.
(Also, remember the FF program merger was done first - almost a year before the airline merger itself was completed. Some dormant accounts undoubtedly expired during the transfer despite "several tractor-trailer loads of paper mail to members" to advise them of the program merger. Presumably that isn't the issue here.)
This short article states the plaintiff alleges his membership was revoked for complaining too much. If indeed his membership was revoked, I would presume NW (now DL) had a better reason. And, does the article state he can pursue a "class action" suit? How many "revokees" are there out there? Do those who opt-in to this suit get paid in Skymiles?
If complaining too much is reason for dismissal, could you imagine how many FTers would be out?
And there's always Option 4.
The article does not imply Chisholm CSRs revoked his membership, but Chisholm, MN was indeed the address-of-record for Worldperks.
I suspect it won't be necessary but if Chisholm or Bob Soukup need to be defended in court, I hope that court is ready for what will result.
Sep 16, 2011, 4:04 pm
#78
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,423
referring to made 24 complaints in the past eight months, including nine incidents of his bag arriving late at the luggage carousel, according to court papers.
"You have continually asked for compensation over and above our guidelines. We have awarded you $1,925.00 in travel credit vouchers, 78,500 WorldPerks bonus miles, a voucher extension for your son, and $491.00 in cash reimbursements," the letter states, according to court papers. If I were Northwest, I would have not revoked his WorldPerks membership. Why not warn him then ban him from the airline but allow him to redeem his miles?
Either that or just let him complain and send regret letters each time?
"You have continually asked for compensation over and above our guidelines. We have awarded you $1,925.00 in travel credit vouchers, 78,500 WorldPerks bonus miles, a voucher extension for your son, and $491.00 in cash reimbursements," the letter states, according to court papers. If I were Northwest, I would have not revoked his WorldPerks membership. Why not warn him then ban him from the airline but allow him to redeem his miles?
Either that or just let him complain and send regret letters each time?
Sep 16, 2011, 4:14 pm
#79
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: TPA
Programs: United - PG, Marriott Silver
Posts: 1,625
Anyone have any idea why this story is currently sitting on the front page of CNN.com? The story says updated at 3:59pm today, but I can't tell what information is new.
It also happens to be the most popular story on the site currently.
Guess people just love reading about people taking on airlines.
It also happens to be the most popular story on the site currently.
Guess people just love reading about people taking on airlines.
Sep 16, 2011, 4:18 pm
#80
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,106
He must have been a frequent traveler to Detroit...domestic bags routinely take about an hour to arrive on any DTW carousel. Instead of complaining, I just go chill in the SkyClub for at least a half hour after my flight offloads.
Sep 16, 2011, 5:31 pm
#81
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CHS
Programs: DL PM
Posts: 508
(Sorry if someone has already commented on that; I haven't read through the whole thread yet)
Sep 16, 2011, 7:01 pm
#82
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Bye Delta
Programs: AA EXP, HH Diamond, IHG Plat, Hyatt Plat, Marriott Plat, Nat'l Exec Elite, Avis Presidents Club
Posts: 16,278
+1 to your last suggestion... he asked for compensation repeatedly and NW went along with it. A two letter word - NO - will suffice. After a couple of declined compensation requests, the guy will quit trying to milk the cow. No need to revoke his PM status and his SC membership. While the guy is seemingly an excessive complainer, NW/DL is at fault for letting it get out of hand.
Sep 16, 2011, 8:03 pm
#83
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: HNL
Programs: DL PM/1MM, BW DE (lifetime), HH DE, Marriott PE (lifetime), National Emerald Executive
Posts: 7,205
+1 to your last suggestion... he asked for compensation repeatedly and NW went along with it. A two letter word - NO - will suffice. After a couple of declined compensation requests, the guy will quit trying to milk the cow. No need to revoke his PM status and his SC membership. While the guy is seemingly an excessive complainer, NW/DL is at fault for letting it get out of hand.
By being too accommodating (NW always did have the best, truly superb, CS; luckily, DL kept that and axed the horrendous anti-customer DL CS, and now DL also has generally excellent CS, as I so often keep saying, the best part about the airline - most of the time, that is) NW did indeed create the problem. But, it was all through good intentions: keeping the customer happy. I found that NW always was firm yet polite, keeping the very fine line balance between accommodating its customers and recognizing mistakes, while also being fair to the company bottom line; however, if one repeatedly kept pushing, then that balance could, and here did, get distored, and what was true one-time exceptions this guy started to accept as the norm. And, therein lies the problem.
There are whole seminars and courses on analyzing a business and finding the unprofitable (money losing) customers and how to best and quietly get rid of them (obviously not the way that DL is doing this, if T-72 is such an attempt). So, it is certainly not wrong of NW/DL to have said no to a customer. After all, any business has a right "TO REFUSE SERVICE TO ANYONE FOR ANY REASON," as some establishments even post within.
Ultimately here this guy created the problem by pushing and pushing way above and beyound, until finally there was no further to push and he had really went way over any reasonable or acceptable limits. Yes, NW did allow it to happen. But, I don't know about others, but I'd rather (as a customer) always rather have a business err on the side of making a customer happy (or less unhappy, through some service recovery), vs. totally alientating and losing a customer. (And as a businessman also, often this is better, vs. to alienate the customer, given the damage just one determined person can cause via social media, and, in the US, even frivolous lawsuits, as this case demonstrates.)
Sep 17, 2011, 10:38 am
#84
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 143
Delta (Northwest) Kicks Out FF and Voids Miles
From http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/16/travel...html?hpt=tr_c2
Can complaining too much get you booted from a frequent flier program?
It's one of the questions at the heart of a lawsuit filed against Northwest -- now owned by Delta Air Lines -- by S. Binyomin Ginsberg, a rabbi who lives in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and frequently travels to lecture and teach.
Ginsberg joined Northwest's WorldPerks frequent flier program in 1999 and reached Platinum Elite status in 2005.
But in June of 2008, Ginsberg said a Northwest representative called him and told him his status was being revoked "on the ground that he had 'abused' the program," according to court papers.
Ginsberg said the airline also took away the hundreds of thousands of miles accumulated in his account.
"It didn't make sense. Initially, when they contacted me on the phone I thought it was a prank call," Ginsberg said.
"When I pushed for a reason and clarification, they told me it was because I was complaining too much."
In July 2008, Northwest sent the rabbi a letter noting that he had made 24 complaints in the past eight months, including nine incidents of his bag arriving late at the luggage carousel, according to court papers.
"You have continually asked for compensation over and above our guidelines. We have awarded you $1,925.00 in travel credit vouchers, 78,500 WorldPerks bonus miles, a voucher extension for your son, and $491.00 in cash reimbursements," the letter states, according to court papers.
"Due to our past generosity, we must respectfully advise that we will no longer be awarding you compensation each time you contact us."
Ginsberg's lawyers countered that the rabbi and his wife had been averaging about 75 flights on Northwest each year, and that Ginsberg estimated that only about 10% of the trips had resulted in a call to Northwest's customer care.
"I don't think I was a frequent complainer," Ginsberg said.
"They should have taken their time and analyzed: Were my complaints legitimate? Should they be doing something to improve their service and quality of product? Instead of worrying, we've got to shut up somebody who is complaining too much."
In November of 2008, Northwest sent Ginsberg an e-mail, in which the airline quoted a paragraph from the fine print of the WorldPerks Program.
It stated that Northwest could determine "in its sole judgment" whether a passenger has abused the program, and that abuse "may result in cancellation of the member's account and future disqualification from program participation, forfeiture of all mileage accrued and cancellation of previously issued but unused awards."
Ginsberg sued for breach of contract in January of 2009, but a California district court dismissed the class action suit, agreeing with Northwest that the Airline Deregulation Act preempted his claim. The act prohibits parties from bringing state law claims against airlines that relate to a "price, route, or service" of the carrier, according to court documents.
The airline's lawyers also argued that the WorldPerks general terms and conditions did not require Northwest to provide frequent fliers with lengthy explanations or reasons for its decision to terminate or demote a member's status in the program.
But last month, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's decision and ordered it to reconsider Ginsberg's claims. It said that when Congress passed the Airline Deregulation Act, it did not intend to "immunize the airline industry from liability for common law contract claims."
Delta did not respond to a request for comment, but the airline has requested a re-hearing in the case.
Ginsberg -- who is still a frequent flier, but is no longer loyal to any one airline -- said he is hoping to get his miles back, have his status reinstated and get fair compensation for what he's gone through.
"To me, it's outright fraud. You can't take somebody's mileage away when they've accumulated it," he said.
"We live in a country that was built on freedom and this to me is a tremendous abuse of freedom."
Can complaining too much get you booted from a frequent flier program?
It's one of the questions at the heart of a lawsuit filed against Northwest -- now owned by Delta Air Lines -- by S. Binyomin Ginsberg, a rabbi who lives in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and frequently travels to lecture and teach.
Ginsberg joined Northwest's WorldPerks frequent flier program in 1999 and reached Platinum Elite status in 2005.
But in June of 2008, Ginsberg said a Northwest representative called him and told him his status was being revoked "on the ground that he had 'abused' the program," according to court papers.
Ginsberg said the airline also took away the hundreds of thousands of miles accumulated in his account.
"It didn't make sense. Initially, when they contacted me on the phone I thought it was a prank call," Ginsberg said.
"When I pushed for a reason and clarification, they told me it was because I was complaining too much."
In July 2008, Northwest sent the rabbi a letter noting that he had made 24 complaints in the past eight months, including nine incidents of his bag arriving late at the luggage carousel, according to court papers.
"You have continually asked for compensation over and above our guidelines. We have awarded you $1,925.00 in travel credit vouchers, 78,500 WorldPerks bonus miles, a voucher extension for your son, and $491.00 in cash reimbursements," the letter states, according to court papers.
"Due to our past generosity, we must respectfully advise that we will no longer be awarding you compensation each time you contact us."
Ginsberg's lawyers countered that the rabbi and his wife had been averaging about 75 flights on Northwest each year, and that Ginsberg estimated that only about 10% of the trips had resulted in a call to Northwest's customer care.
"I don't think I was a frequent complainer," Ginsberg said.
"They should have taken their time and analyzed: Were my complaints legitimate? Should they be doing something to improve their service and quality of product? Instead of worrying, we've got to shut up somebody who is complaining too much."
In November of 2008, Northwest sent Ginsberg an e-mail, in which the airline quoted a paragraph from the fine print of the WorldPerks Program.
It stated that Northwest could determine "in its sole judgment" whether a passenger has abused the program, and that abuse "may result in cancellation of the member's account and future disqualification from program participation, forfeiture of all mileage accrued and cancellation of previously issued but unused awards."
Ginsberg sued for breach of contract in January of 2009, but a California district court dismissed the class action suit, agreeing with Northwest that the Airline Deregulation Act preempted his claim. The act prohibits parties from bringing state law claims against airlines that relate to a "price, route, or service" of the carrier, according to court documents.
The airline's lawyers also argued that the WorldPerks general terms and conditions did not require Northwest to provide frequent fliers with lengthy explanations or reasons for its decision to terminate or demote a member's status in the program.
But last month, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's decision and ordered it to reconsider Ginsberg's claims. It said that when Congress passed the Airline Deregulation Act, it did not intend to "immunize the airline industry from liability for common law contract claims."
Delta did not respond to a request for comment, but the airline has requested a re-hearing in the case.
Ginsberg -- who is still a frequent flier, but is no longer loyal to any one airline -- said he is hoping to get his miles back, have his status reinstated and get fair compensation for what he's gone through.
"To me, it's outright fraud. You can't take somebody's mileage away when they've accumulated it," he said.
"We live in a country that was built on freedom and this to me is a tremendous abuse of freedom."
Sep 17, 2011, 10:42 am
#85
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Programs: DL MM Gold
Posts: 1,676
Sep 17, 2011, 11:02 am
#86
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 839
Sep 17, 2011, 11:56 am
#88
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Bye Delta
Programs: AA EXP, HH Diamond, IHG Plat, Hyatt Plat, Marriott Plat, Nat'l Exec Elite, Avis Presidents Club
Posts: 16,278
I know the prevailing sentiment around here is that this guy did complain excessively. I believe so too.
But to be perfectly honest, I'd be super ticked off if Delta provided compensation for my complaints without saying anything like "no, you've been compensated enough", only to call me out of the blue one day and decide they had compensated me too much in the past and would be revoking my status and SC membership.
I don't blame them for wanting to draw a line. Clearly their CRM indicated he was not a desirable customer. But they should have said no to the compensation requests first. If he kept complaining excessively, then by all means continue with the more substantial measures.
But to be perfectly honest, I'd be super ticked off if Delta provided compensation for my complaints without saying anything like "no, you've been compensated enough", only to call me out of the blue one day and decide they had compensated me too much in the past and would be revoking my status and SC membership.
I don't blame them for wanting to draw a line. Clearly their CRM indicated he was not a desirable customer. But they should have said no to the compensation requests first. If he kept complaining excessively, then by all means continue with the more substantial measures.
Sep 17, 2011, 2:19 pm
#89
Join Date: Oct 2006
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 1,635
But to be perfectly honest, I'd be super ticked off if Delta provided compensation for my complaints without saying anything like "no, you've been compensated enough", only to call me out of the blue one day and decide they had compensated me too much in the past and would be revoking my status and SC membership.
Sep 17, 2011, 2:21 pm
#90
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: HNL
Programs: DL PM/1MM, BW DE (lifetime), HH DE, Marriott PE (lifetime), National Emerald Executive
Posts: 7,205
I know the prevailing sentiment around here is that this guy did complain excessively. I believe so too.
But to be perfectly honest, I'd be super ticked off if Delta provided compensation for my complaints without saying anything like "no, you've been compensated enough", only to call me out of the blue one day and decide they had compensated me too much in the past and would be revoking my status and SC membership.
I don't blame them for wanting to draw a line. Clearly their CRM indicated he was not a desirable customer. But they should have said no to the compensation requests first. If he kept complaining excessively, then by all means continue with the more substantial measures.
But to be perfectly honest, I'd be super ticked off if Delta provided compensation for my complaints without saying anything like "no, you've been compensated enough", only to call me out of the blue one day and decide they had compensated me too much in the past and would be revoking my status and SC membership.
I don't blame them for wanting to draw a line. Clearly their CRM indicated he was not a desirable customer. But they should have said no to the compensation requests first. If he kept complaining excessively, then by all means continue with the more substantial measures.