I certainly do support short lines for everyone, but they aren't going to happen tomorrow. There's no reason to take this away just yet except to score cheap points that make no real difference in screening time for the masses but slow things down for us.

Yet, the government has stepped in and decided the problems are magically solved by unionizing the same workers, adding chairs (that were already there, as best I can tell!), and removing the one helpful change the airlines had been able to add.

I agree, I would have expected this from the democrats and not George W, but the bureacracy doesn't change from administration to administration and is decidedly liberal.

This seems to be something even Joe Brancatelli and I agree on. His newsletter just came out today and he addresses this very same issue:

http://www.zyworld.com/brancatelli/branc.htm

While I think it's really a non-issue personally as mentioned in my opening remarks, i have no problem assisting you all with getting this the attention you deserve. A couple things - i think we might possible need to form a union. I understand there are probably a half dozen business traveler "associations" but my knowledge of them is that they tend to be private businesses with a commercial bent to them for making money. This has come up before and i've seen the attnetion to such issues as Save SkyMiles, errorplan and an assortment of other issues in the past. So, let me think a little as to the best way we can unionize our effrots for this cause. However, let's make sure that you understand the challenge. It's very easy for you all to get caught up in the little stuff - TalkBoard being an example. You either have to all be commited to the bigger picture (no flaming, no personal disagreements on others personal points of view, etc.) or else this effort will go no where.

So, what do we call this new association of passenger rights, passenger needs, traveler acknowlegement, etc.?

We need this effort for the passenger rights iniative over the last few years and while the Airline Passenger Association (not IAPA) has some media play, my question to any of you - do you belong to that organization? If not, then truly they can't be representing the right niche out there.

So, what's the word? Again, I stand by my own observation that these special lines are not necessary, but will participate and lead for the greater good of many other issues around this that i feel much more passionate about. The bigger picture right?

The Straphangers' Campaign here in NYC has long been a very effective mouthpiece for those of us who live and die by the subway and busses here in the city. For the most part, it is apolitical and represents a wide array of viewpoints while still projecting a unified voice.

We should model ourselves as something similar.

It seems to be a non-issue

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/006492.html

BUt if you're paying more money for your TICKET that doesn;t translate to more money to have the elite lines....

I would be oK w/ a FF line as long as it was along the lines of inspass where you had to absolutely prove identity, not just a "special ID" Otherwise what's the point of a special "elite" security line? Just because you fly C or Fyou are less risk?

oh please...maybe even republicans/conservatives saw that the elite lines were not the best solution...

Elite security lines are back, exactly as I suggested at the top of this thread.
The government is paid to SCREEN everyone; not to control the entire airport. Otherwise, by these egalitarian arguments, airports (which are generally city, state, county or government property) and are paid by tax dollars to run, have airport controllers monitor, the FAA inspect planes, would have to insure "Equal" access to everyone. No frequent flyer check-in lines. No elite gate boarding. No seats in first class on planes inspected equally by the government. Etc. Etc.

Bottom line: the government is paid to SCREEN people now, and no more (except other security-related services) and it's pretty hard to say why controlling lines to access the portols has anything to do with security any more than any of the other things described above that the airlines do all of the time for valued passengers (even congressmen!).

I do agree with Randy though (thanks for the help in response to the community even though you personally have a different viewpoint, which we all respect) that some more visible "union" voice for frequent flyer's positions would be very good, although the airlines seem to have realized that what's good for us is good for them and taken "our" side on this issue anyway at least at this point in time.


[This message has been edited by 1K Prof (edited 02-22-2002).]

If the airlines were paying for the security and running it, then yes, it would make sense -- and be a perfectly valid business decision -- to have "elite" security lines to reward their best customers.

However, if the government is running it...AND if everyone pays the same amount of "security surcharge" -- then the argument for elite lines is far less compelling.

If the government security model followed the airline passenger model, the "first class security" folks could choose to pay (say) $20-30 for the privilege of a very short line, and that would subsidize the other travelers, who would pay little or nothing BUT had the choice to pay more for special treatment if they wanted it. But the model is way different.

The argument for stopping the overkillish hysteric nonsense and making it more reasonable for *everyone* to fly, though, makes perfect sense.

Randy: BRAVO !

Decisions in the airline industry are influenced by many powerful lobbies, but I still have to find a powerful frequent flyers group.

I had suggested this concept in my Talkboard proposals. I think FT is the best place from which such a group (union?) can nucleate.

Aside from this specific issue of Elite lines, in the �big picture�, there are many benefits to having a group of organized flyers make their voice heard in the right places.

The big picture involves being able to influence decisions not only in the halls of Congress, but also within the airlines themselves. Changes in program rules or benefits come to mind, of course.

As far as the name, how about The Frequent Flyer Group (FFG) or The Frequent Flyer Society? I don�t think it needs to be �American�. Congratulations and let�s not lose the momentum on this. You have my full support.

Let�s put together a financial structure (you can�t do this for free and I�ll be glad to send my $50 a year ), a charter, a membership and elect representatives.

IMHO, this is the next step in the growth of FT.

Most definetly do away with the preferred parking and any other perks for members of congress at DCA (express lines for congress people or otherwise). Who do those people think they are? They are supposed to be representing the people. Get in line, then!

It becomes a perk/power thing which leads to other abuses in Washington.

The preferred parking is probably a security issue. Since congresspeople are bigger targets than the typical American, it makes sense to put all of their cars into one secure location that can be watched over and that has restricted access. If everyone has access to all of the lots, it's going to cost a LOT more more money to keep an eye on each car.

d

I'm just pointing out, on a topic that is somewhat unrelated, that before Pearl Harbor they put all the planes together for "safety" and look what happened...

Oh, and my opinion on this, even though I'm not a frequent flyer, (but I enjoy your all's posts, anyway), is that there should be short lines for everyone. A lot of people on this site are top tier members, who fly often on award tickets, why should they get to go through faster, aren't they basically flying for free anyway? The fast-track lines, just aren't fair. So you flew with them for 25,000 miles, most likely on the lowest fares you could find, from what I see in the Miliage Run forum, why do you need to be treated like a king/queen? Those machines for FF are unused a much higher time than the others, so us "regular" people should go to them, so they are in constant use all the time releaving (sp?) pressure on the other machines.

-Nick

15, but I still have some idea of what I'm talking about; sorta...

Edited due to grammatical errors, and added "stuff" I wanted to say!

Had to add a word too.

[This message has been edited by iadisgreat (edited 02-22-2002).]

Well, I was going to start this reply with all the STUPID comments made, but the list got to be so long, it would have been almost two pages by itself. �It�s not fair���It�s discrimination��and on and on ad nausea.

Look, here�s the bottom line. Elite lines are NOT the answer in the LONG TERM. But, in the interim, (remember the government is now running things, so any plan that is actually going to work in reducing the long security lines, is going to take FOREVER), ELITES LINES ARE THE SHORT TERM ANSWER!!!!

If you disincentive the frequent flyer to the point that he/she figures out that the time wasted just to get onto an airplane is greater than alternative means of getting there, they are either going to start utilizing those alternative methods, or skipping the event altogether. When this happens, the only people left in those lines will be the people that only travel infrequently. All short and commuter flights will go away. I guess that�s one way to solve the problem, now isn�t it.

I fly an average of 10 flights a week. At $2.50 a pop, that�s $25.00/week, or $1250.00/year. Yes, I think that someone paying 1250 a year vs. $10-$20 a year SHOULD be able to go through the lines quicker, because yes, he HAS paid for the privilege.

Until a better method of screening is devised, thereby shortening the time it takes to happen, the use of Elite Lines for the frequent flyer MUST HAPPEN, or the consequences will be much greater than the alternatives.


------------------
Blue Skies to you all!

Thanks for your help...we did it ourselves

Or 2 hours or more depending on day of the week and airport.