Did I do something wrong?
 

To achieve gold by the end of August, I made a MR on NW by flying BWI-MSP-MEM-MKE-DTW-MSP-BWI a few days ago. I got upgraded in the silver window for all segments but MKE-DTW (A319, tuesday morning). However at MKE when I checked in, the agent looked at my record for a few minutes then asked, "You are flying to DTW, then to MSP, then to BWI?" I said "Yes". Then she said with a strange expression on her face,"Why are you doing this?" I said "for a few more miles to hit gold elite status". Then she said,"sorry, sir, but I have to discuss with the supervisor to give you boarding passes". She then went back to the office and spent a few minutes and then gave me the boarding passes and said "Have a nice day". Is it really worth her to discussing it with her supervisor? Is my itinearry so unnormal? I wasn't asked when I checked in at BWI for BWI-MSP-MEM-MKE.

What happened later is that my luggage didn't arrive at BWI on the flight I was on due to short connection time (51 minutes in DTW or 30 minutes in MSP). When I filed a claim for my mishandled luggage, the luggage agent refused to give me a travel voucher saying that this is not their fault because the connection time is too short. Is this right? I didn't say anything but said I would like to pick my luggage up when it arrived. Later when I picked my luggage, I told the other luggage agent that I did not get a travel voucher for this; she said "I could give you one" and handled me a PD800 for $25 off for any >$75 fare.

You did nothing wrong. You checked in for an itinerary that the company had sold you. If anything that agent was on a power trip.

You could have told her that if she didn't like the itinerary, she was welcome to re-route you through Anchorage. :D

If it's a legal routing and NW issued you a ticket , then they shouldn't hassle you!
 

You did nothing wrong!

You bought as ticket on a legal routing (albeit, not a routing someone would take that was short on time) and you were just checking in for your flights.

I wouldn't worry about the agent.

The agent should not of challenged you about your routing.

RC

Almost all of the NW people at MKE are pretty cool. There's one or two who conduct themselves as refugees from Aeroflot.

You have to admit that it was an odd itinerary and it was bound to raise eyebrows. In fairness to NW, it is hard to ensure efficient baggage transfers from nonstandard connection points. With NW adding flights to MKE, we've seen a lot of strain on the NW baggage handling here.

There is nothing wrong with doing this as long as it is a legal routing and within the allowable connections per the fare rule.

On a triple connection you are almost guaranteeing that if you check luggage it will be lost. It is best on these types of itineraries to not check luggage.

There has been some speculation on the board that the lost luggage rate on triple connections is the reason that NW limited the number of connections on low fares to one or two. Fewer connections = fewer chances to misconnect the luggage.

Basically it boils down to the fact that if you followed the rules of the fare then you are perfectly in your right to book that route and to fly it with out scrutiny by the agents. Most agents are under a lot of pressure to minimize "revenue leakage" so they are checking with supervisors more often when they are unfamiliar with something.

It could be just a MKE thing...last year I did a few MR for segments to get CO Gold to MKE. I flew Saturday mornings BWI-CLE-DTW-MKE-DTW-CLE-BWI on a cimbination of NW and CO (before CO changed their program). I would have to get my return boarding passes in MKE and I was questioned a few times but nothing more. Like your experience, I told the truth that I was doing it to get a higher elite status...

On the other hand the BWI agents who checked me in thought it was amusing that I was doing...never any questions or concerns.

The agent may have been concerned about "security," e.g., you did not fit the normal traveler profile who likes to go from
A to B with as few connections as possible, and perhaps she wanted to check on the legitimacy of your reason for doing something different.

Maybe it had to do with the topic of this thread.

I believe that's outside the scope of her job. She is supposed to check in the passenger, check the luggage, and print boarding passes.

"Security" is allegedly checked by the TSA at the checkpoint.

Security should be everyone's business -- I've got to disagree there.

That said, I don't think this had anything to do with "security."

I'm surprised they even blinked. This kind of bizarre routing just isn't THAT uncommon even if you aren't looking for miles -- sometimes it's just the lowest fare.

Steve

Clearly it shouldn't be, as this incident points out that not everyone is properly trained in what constitutes a risk or threat. The original poster was taking the long way home, on a ticket sold to him by the company, in an attempt to rack up points in the loyalty program created by the same company. What "threat" to security is that?

And, if there indeed were some correlation between routings and security risk, then the company would have flagged the itin at the time of purchase, or sometime before checkin. They spend millions of dollars on information systems, and certainly can flag something if there is a bona fide threat if it meets whatever criteria are established. Again, that would be the responsibility of someone who sets the risk algorithm in the computer, not some power-hungry agent in Milwaukee who happens to look out for anything she personally doesn't think is "normal."

A chuckle or comment by the agent? No problem. A curious question? Fine. But scrutinizing the ticket that her very own company sold him is nonsense. To do so under some belief that doing so will somehow increase safety or "security" is even a bigger load of crap.

Keep in mind, MKE has several new agents. I am guessing that is she is a new employee, she thought it weird to see a routing like that and didn't want to make a mistake. I will give her the benifit od the doubt untill I see more facts to think otherwise.

You couldn't be much more wrong. It is always the job of airline employees, from the captain on down, to worry about security on that airline. Asking about a very strange routing, and double-checking with a supervisor to determine if she needed to follow up on any concerns, is exactly what an agent checking you in should have done. She returned and gave him his boarding passes. Sounds like a perfect job to me.

I agree with you. Spending days looking at routings A to B to C a routing like this one must really stand out. That's a flag for all sort of things, not only security. If it wasn't none of us would have funny looks when we do a MR. This agent saw something out of the ordinary and double checked. I would expect the same from the people that work for me. Since you were allowed to proceed without further delay I do not see what the issue is.

BTW, MKE-DTW-MSP-BWI is not a usual routing!

But where do you draw the line using this approach? If someone wearing a Hawaiian shirt and shorts in Buffalo in December wants to get on a plane, should the employee ask a supervisor if it's ok to let him board? It's certainly out of the ordinary to wear that kind of clothing in Buffalo, let alone in December, but that doesn't make him a risk.

He has a ticket for the flight. He wasn't saying anything that would make someone believe he's a risk, he wasn't carrying anything that could be harmful. The only thing you have against him is the route he's taking home to earn a few more freaking miles? You got nothing.

This mentality where anything "out of the ordinary" is a potential act of terrorism and should be questioned is simply ridiculous, and it goes against the fundamentals of this country.

Wherever the line is drawn, I can tell you that an MKE-DTW-MSP-BWI routing is on one side of it, and wearing summer clothes in Buffalo in the winter is on the other.

I disagree completely.

It is none of the airline employees' goddamn business why one has routed themselves all over the planet.

Agent: I see you are doing AAA-VVV-XXX-YYY-XXX-PPP-VVV-AAA

Customer: Yes, that is what I want to do

Agent: Ok, no mistake was made, have a nice day and thanks for giving us your money.

End of discussion!

I politely answer inquiries as to why I am doing something out of the ordinary with "I have friends in XXX and PPP I want to have lunch with or I am delivering some documents in YYY and getting them signed in VVV", but that's out of politeness only.

You seem to be confusing the airline with the government. The airline should have a right to ask you whatever they hell they want to ask you about your routing -- after all, it's their product. The government, no -- only for security reasons we as a society have agreed on.

I once saw a colleague of mine in line at the grocery story at 6:30 a.m., buying what must have been every carton of yogurt in the entire store. Seriously, 100+ cartons of yogurt. And he wasn't buying it for us folks at work. And I knew he was a young guy who lived alone. Out of curiosity, I asked him what was with all the yogurt, and his simple (and elegant) reply was, "I like yogurt."

Now, if the checker in line had asked him the same question (say, suppose it was cold medicine instead of yogurt, and she was obligated to ask him that question because of meth), I don't think there is anything wrong with that. He can always go buy his yogurt elsewhere.

And you can always go take your mile searches elsewhere, too.

Lets see, who would you hire:

Employee A: As the initiative to ensure that proper protocols are followed and checks with supervisor if he/she has any doudts. If all is fine continues with his/heer work. Believes that it is his/her responsibility that you get the right product without mistakes entering in the process.

Employee B: Checks you in without questioning the process.

OP: Funny you mention MKE. This is the one place I had a standby request questioned, as noted here.

Your mileage may always vary, but general thinking is if it priced and you paid, you're fine.

Hey, I am that shorts and Hawaiian shirt wearing guy! Winter, spring, summer or fall that is my preferred travel garb. I also have long hair and wear really dark glasses. Let me say that I completely agree with the previous views of both channa and Spiff.

In fairness, let's just say that Mary Eagle Eye counter person did the right thing in delaying the issuance of boarding passes. What if Mary's quest to find the omnipotent supervisor took longer than anticipated. What if UA vs NW got the boarding passes, but arrives at the gate to find that the door has been shut.

What does the airline do now? Does it make good on UA vs NW's lost mileage? Does it provide appropriate amenitites and alternative travel options. Or, does it simply fold its arms and say, "Too bad.".

Properly ticketed and paid for itinerary should not create a secondary screening at the counter.

So many comments up to this point.

Lets see:

DeltaHog: NO the airline does not have any RIGHT to ask you anything about your destinations and why you are going there. They can look in the computer and see if it is a valid fare and if the proper fees were paid. Of course they CAN ask you anything they want and you CAN or CAN NOT answer any of the questions you want to. But they do not have a RIGHT to ask you about something that is already bought and paid for. An airline is basically public transportation in the sky. Does a bus driver have the RIGHT to ask you why you are going to stop such and such? I don't think so!

Channa & Spiff, My feelings exactly, I will comment on the statement that every airline employee should be concerned about security. I agree they are all concerned about security, that would be JOB SECURITY of which like terorism security THERE IS NONE!!

I really don't even think the questioning was based on Security related issues, but then again neither are most of the new "regulations" we live under. "Security" reasons has become the biggest EXCUSE to make a new policy whether it has anything to do with security or not.

On a ticket with 3 stops several years ago the agent "offered" to "fix" my itinerary and route me more directly with only one stop. I had to stop her and tell her that was how it was bought, that is how I want to fly it. The agent in MKE might have been trying to "help" you by giving you a more direct flight like MKE-DTW- BWI

Like it or not...
 

Whether the NW agent should have scrutinized the ticket is a subject for debate, but let's get one thing clear: Northwest HAS the right to screen passengers and deny transport if they refuse to comply, period. While the government cannot limit your rights (generally speaking), private enterprises generally can, all the more so if a compelling interest can be shown to do so. In this case, the passenger had a nonstandard itinerary that could not be readily justified -- IMHO, a reasonable basis for extra attention.

Wrong!
 

NW does have the final authority as to who enters their planes, but they do not have the RIGHT to question a legal valid published fare. Air travel is a highly govt regulated commodity, and many people confuse what is mandated and what is voluntary, where your rights end due to "security" and where the airline is trying to increase profitiability. However, under the terms of the contract of carriage which is a legally binding agreement between you and the airline they would have an EXTREMELY hard time (and very expensive after court rulings) of denying you boarding after you bought a routing that they published and sold you under the terms of the contract of carriage.

Yes you did something wrong
 

With an itinerary like this, you never should have checked luggage. If this was a mileage run, what were you carrying that couldn't have been brought onboard? Plus, checking luggage sometimes removes some options otherwise available when things go wrong.

Most domestic tickets allow 4 segments per routing in the Conditions of carriage
 

Lets cut to the chase, NW has a contract with the pax whenever a person buys a tickets.

Each routing has different fare designators which go from fully unrestricted (Y Fare) to deeply discounted/heavily restricted V, L, T, K fares (depending on market) which require advance purchase, Saturday night stay, specific routings (on some fares) etc. etc.

If NW issued a published fare ticket then it meets the NW Conditions of Carriage and is within the guidelines NW allows for routing.

There is no reason for a CSR or GA to question your routing.

RC

Since I assume that I might have to run in MSP (about 30 minutes connection time)--which I actually did (G2 to C14), I don't want to run with my carry-on case which contains several heavy books. That is why I checked in my carry-on bag. Next time I will definitely not check in bags for a routing like this.

Your analogy raises an interesting and salient point. Even if NWA is justified inquiring about one's routing (and I still think they should not!), the time to do so was at the time of purchase, not the time of use.

With your grocery store analogy, the employee could follow you home and check up on your yogurt consumption, or knock on your door and ask how those 100 containers were going down. That's none of their business and neither is someone's routing once a ticket has been sold to them!

Inappropriate language!
 

Spiff, I don't think you're profanity is necessary or appropriate and probably violates the terms and conditions for FT. I would appreciate if you would edit them out of your posts.

The others in this forum that need to use explicitives should edit them also.

Thank you!