How come no one wanted to give the upgrade to the honeymooners? Am I the only one who's a sucker for this type of thing? Some really jaded travelers here. C'mon give the kids a break. ;-)

Because the oversized "handicapped" lav is in the back, and they would be better served with seats in those "special" rows traditionally blocked from preassignment.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

Does a Denver Red Carpet Club conference room count for Mile High Club credit?

I think the consensus is primarly C/E,A,C,B

I personally chose E since as an airline agent I'd rather get someone to give up something of value for the upgrade rather than 'comp' it.

I would NOT let the scammer through; heck, I'd put the scammer in a middle coach seat to teach him a lesson.

Hey, I said E for Q1... anything to reduce the company's liability http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Seriously though, remind me never to employ most of you - those who said 'pass it on to someone else, I can't be bothered' for Q3 should be ashamed http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

I consulted the Rules Committee of the MHC; not only does it qualify, but they pay reverent homage to your cunning and perserverance. Nicely done!

Man, this is a great thread. (I shouldn't say that since I started it, but don't worrry, I won't cross post it to every other thread on the board, create false identities to promote it and then claim it is the most popular thread ever... I won't, honest).

No, it is great because the answers are so inconsistent to established FT dogma, as seen on the airline boards.

"FT dogma" has never been written down, but I have extracted it from the content of posts I have been reading for two years on this board.

Question 1: FT dogma is that no fares should be non-upgradeable, especially for elites. On Delta, there are constant posts about L and U fares, and how that they cannot be upgraded, and what a crime against humanity that it. On the United forum, people are complaining that the mistake $29 fare to Paris cannot be upgraded! A number of posts over the years suggest strategies to get upgraded using non-upgradeable fares. Hounding the gate agent and bribing with chocolates seem to be popular techniques!

Question 3: FT dogma states that elites should never pay fees. On the Delta board, "Simply Good Business" (Delta's policy of no waivers, no favors) is derided daily. On United, people advise to call and call again until you get the answer you want to hear. (BTW, a former Delta agent confirmed recently that the airline does make a record of every phone call received on a PNR).

Question 4: The strategy of "bait and switch" on certs was widely touted some time back on the United board (it appears that UA is now cracking down on this). A similar tactic was also promoted on the Delta board.


Question 2: The companion policy does differ by airline. Delta never transfers status to the companion, while United does, but not for the airport wait list. There seems to be wide consensus that the companion should get the higher status. Some people think that should only apply to spouses or significant others (how is the airline supposed to figure that out?). I wonder if people seek status for their own comfort, or to "show off"? (I purposely asked the question from a "male" point of view -- sexist, I know, but I feared different answers if I made the high status flyer female.

Anyway, when the questions were asked from an airline point-of-view, it seems we (as a group) are much more strict on the rules than would be indicated otherwise on this board!


[This message has been edited by opus17 (edited 02-28-2001).]

It seems that perhaps there is no room for the old "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" philosophy where each of OUR own miles and upgrades are concerned! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

And even if it is truly destined to be the greatest thread ever, records were indeed made to be broken! Right? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

I'd venture to say that we are much more strict since we are usually the ones entitled to these services, and if they are given to the people who are not (say the honeymoon couple) one of us will be sitting in coach while they ride up front. I'm sure a sampling on the street of people without a vested interest would give much different results.

Cordelli, I disagree with your comment,

"I'm sure a sampling on the street of people without a vested interest would give much different results."

If you replace upgrade with some generic, but earned perk, I'm sure that the answers would be similar. Most people in the civilized world are willing to work within the boundaries we create for ourselves, "Laws". The more we do this the more civilized we become by definition. Perhaps this tread suggests that we are in fact civilized and not just a bunch of "upgrade me now for free or I'll never fly your airline again!!" fanatics. Or, maybe not.

Duedmon, I agree with what you are saying, what I meant was ask a group of people on the street who don't give a rats ... about flying or upgrades, where it makes no matter to them at all, and the honeymooners will get the seats all of the time. If you ask people who can be hurt by the decision you will get one answer, if you ask people who have no care one way or the other then the sob stories will probably win out.

Opus17 wrote: "… when the questions were asked from an airline point-of-view, it seems we (as a group) are much more strict on the rules than would be indicated otherwise on this board!.

I don't read the UA forum much, but as far as Delta goes, while a lot of kvetching goes on, I'm not so sure our actual posts are all that different from the replies here. If they do differ, consider that posters to this topic are a self-selected group (within our larger self-selected group). I'll chime in late:

As far as Q1, I assumed that all pax would "pay for" the upgrade with miles or certificates of some flavor. Guess I was being naïve. But without more information, C it is. While Delta fliers really hate LUser fares, I don't think most of us expect to be upgraded while flying on one. Thus the perennial popularity of the Operational Upgrade topic...

Q2: Let me be daring - and lonely - and suggest that on Delta at least, the two 50K fliers deserve consideration for the upgrades. As a purchasing entity, they represent as much value to the company as the 100K, and both of them have earned their status. The fact that LexPassenger and I are both GMs and fly together 95% of the time has nothing to do with my viewpoint, of course. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif Other airlines may have different rules. For once, I prefer Delta's approach! The honeymooners doing the PDA thing aren't likely to notice their surroundings anyway, so to coach with them. C is defensibly objective.

Q3: Opus, is the "return routing" significant? Airlines do seem to be more flexible about changes on the return. Perhaps answer C would benefit the pax, as well as getting him out of "my" hair.

Q4: If he'd be bumping people who would otherwise be ahead of him for the upgrade, he'd better produce the certificate to keep his seat. If he'd get the upgrade anyway, let him slide. We once reserved F seats with Systemwide Upgrade certificates, and then left them at home. It was absolutely unintentional, but there we were. We were prepared to have to ride in the back, but F seats were open anyway, less than 24 hours out, and we were able to use regular 800 mile points to upgrade. We certainly appreciated that the Res Agent didn't make a judgment that we were trying to "scam" the airline!

One of my mottoes is "Dealing with the Public Causes Brain Damage." We put up with our share of idiots, but I'm quite sure I couldn't do a CSA's job. Something would go *pop* after a few weeks.

It's an interesting exercise anyway!

(Trying to make this briefer...)

[This message has been edited by GG (edited 02-28-2001).]

GG -- I more or less agree with just about everything you say.

I think C is right. I didn't get into the details of the types of upgrades, but most high level elites have some sort of instrument other than miles to use for the upgrade (if they have to). The no-status flyer is willing to use miles, if that makes a difference.
I agree. But we were totally outvoted. Maybe I was with Delta for too long http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif
The only thing significant is that the rules say there is a fee. I agree with James that C is a wimp answer. I fully expected everyone to vote to waive the fee, but it turns out they sided with the airline (in this case, no other flyer suffered (as in the upgrade questions), but fairness prevailed). I agree.

This was the "line-jumping" case -- use a SWU or HK49 or whatever to pre-reserve the upgrade, and then switch. Is it clever or is it cheating? You can search for threads where people admit doing just this.

In reading many of the forums on FT, I have not come across a thorough discussion with real airline employees which addresses the question thoroughly about what discretion they really have. In other words, if I was a gate agent and I waived all change fees, would I eventually just get slapped on the wrist, or fired? What if I waived the fee for people I saw a lot flying in my airport.....slap or fired? How about not collecting upgrade certs?

My own sense is that res agents have very little discretion, and perhaps phone calls are frequently monitored, etc. It seems that airport agents, perhaps aside from Delta Airlines, have very broad discretion as to what they do.

So not having an understanding of the real environment, it is difficult to say exactly what I would do. But I do agree that top flyers should get (especially 100K) a number of waivers and rfavors, so I would do that perhaps so long as I would not get into serious trouble. And serious trouble is not, you know like, twice a year somebody just saying "hey collect more change fees." Serious trouble is like getting fired, or perhaps not getting a good raise, etc.

It also seems that local station management has a lot of discretion. I mean, the corporate headquarters might send each station some kind of waiver report, or audit results. One station manager might not care, and might be in favor of pleasing the customer. He or she might even say "I don't care what the audits find," etc. Another might really be into the rules. A similar example of this came up when my roommate worked for a consulting company. They have travel rules/policies, and if you do something wrong, an email gets sent to you and your manager. The partner in my roommates office told him "I don't care what you do, and ignore those emails," while another partner in a different office might care about the policies.

Another example? I worked in a place years ago where we had to enter a code to call long distance. Each month, the dept manager got a report of all the phone calls. You were supposed to pay for calls that were personal, etc. Some department managers openly told employees to throw the reports away, and others spent time collecting the fees. Again, a large de-centralized operation, where some regional managers could care less what corporate says, and others want to follow it.

If I am the director of an airline hub, or even a local station, and I implement customer friendly policies (like waiving a lot of change fees), my hub or station would probably score higher in customer satisfaction surveys, than other by-the-book stations. Like if world got out on the street that airline X. at Logan will "do anything for you if your top teer," that might get us some flyers from the competition. To what extent does local station management have control vs. corporate headquarters?

In another board where I post a United employee consistently posts her hassles with management about this exact issues.


My own sense is that res agents have very little discretion, and perhaps phone calls are frequently monitored, etc. It seems that airport agents, perhaps aside from Delta Airlines, have very broad discretion as to what they do.
[/B][/QUOTE]

This is generally true at least from what a couple of United employees have reported.

And serious trouble is not, you know like, twice a year somebody just saying "hey collect more change fees." Serious trouble is like getting fired, or perhaps not getting a good raise, etc.
[/B][/QUOTE]

The employee I mentioned has been written up several times for issuing upgrades when there is "no rationale" according to da rules.

It also seems that local station management has a lot of discretion. I mean, the corporate headquarters might send each station some kind of waiver report, or audit results.
[/B][/QUOTE]

THAT is very true..





------------------
"Dogs have masters, cats have staff..."

1. C

2. A

3. D

4. D -- assume that it was an accident that he/she couldn't find cert; but say that you're letting it slide