Oct 1, 2013, 3:03 pm
Last edit by: Ari
PLEASE READ FIRST: WIKIPOST and MODERATOR NOTE
MODERATOR NOTE:
Please note: Insensitive or attacking posts, discussion about other posters and their motives, and other off-topic posts/comments are not allowed, per FlyerTalk Rules.
--> If you have a question or comment about moderation, use the "Alert a Moderator" button
left of every post, or send a PM. Do not post such comments/questions on-thread. Thank you.
N.B. Please do not alter the above message.
--> If you have a question or comment about moderation, use the "Alert a Moderator" button
left of every post, or send a PM. Do not post such comments/questions on-thread. Thank you. N.B. Please do not alter the above message.
• • • • •
[Please post
NLY status updates and relevant Q&A here.]Plaintiff: George Lagen, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
Defendant: United Continental Holdings, Inc. and United Airlines, Inc.
Filed In The United States District Court For The Northern District Of Illinois Eastern Division
Case No. 1:12-cv-04056
Filed: 05/24/2012
Judge Harry D. Leinenweber
Magistrate Judge Young B. Kim
Proposed class: All persons, as of midnight, December 31, 2011, who were members of the Million Mile Program under United Airlines’ Mileage Plus frequent flyer program.
Filings/rulings can be found on www.pacer.gov (requires registration)
12 June 2012 - Amended Class Action Complaint filed
Spring 2013 - Court denies United's request to close case
Spring 2013 - Plaintiff files for suit to become a class action, United asks Judge before he decides if there could be limited discovery (which typically happens after case becomes class-action). Judge allows it.
August 2013 - Depositions/Limited Discovery completed and transcripts were handed over to the court.
22 October 2013 - Pursuant to an order of the Court, both sides filed cross-motions for summary judgment:
Plaintiff contends that he is a United pre-merger Million Miler, that United promised Million Miler fliers certain lifetime benefits on its web site, including two regional upgrades every year and Premier Executive status, which provided certain delineated benefits (e.g., 100% mileage bonus). Plaintiff cites deposition testimony from United stating "lifetime" means: "as long as they were really able to fly … as long as someone is coming on a plane and alive and capable of flying." Plaintiff concludes by stating that United has breached its contract with its pre-merger Million Miler fliers by reducing the lifetime benefits they were promised.
United contends in its motion that Million Miler is part of the MileagePlus program, that United reserved the right to make any changes it wishes to the MileagePlus program, and that the changes it made that plaintiff now complains of are therefore contractually permissible. United does not admit, and does not address, the "lifetime" benefit statements that it made on its website.
23 January 2014 - Judge denies Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and grants United's cross-motion for summary judgment. Judgment entered in favor of United.
The Judge begins his Opinion with a quote from Job: “The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away” and then holds that Plaintiff has not produced any evidence that UA made him an offer to participate in a separate MM program.
The Court noted that: “The sum total of his evidence is vague references to ‘electronic and written correspondence’ from United, which, in both instances postdates his qualification as a Million Mile flyer and was not directed to him; and a 1997 Newsletter from United announcing the creation of the program he could not remember receiving. However the card he did receive from United, admitting him to MililionMile Flyer Program, shows that his new status is clearly a status within the Mileage Plus Frequent Flyer Program, as does the form letters United sent to applicants advising them of their admission to the MillionMile Flyer program. In fact, Plaintiff in his Complaint alleges that the MillionMile Flyer program was part of the Mileage Plus program. He has not produced any document that comes close to substantiating that the programs were separate and distinct."
Bottom line: The Court agreed with United's position that the Plaintiff had not proved the existence of a separate contract between itself and the Million Milers.
Full decision: http://media.wandr.me/MMerOpinion.pdf
20 February 2014
Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal of the trial court's decision. The record on appeal is due by March 13, 2014.
Appeal docs available at:
- http://media.wandr.me/UAL-MM-Appeal-filed-2-20-14.pdf
- http://media.wandr.me/UAL-MM-letter-of-appeal.pdf
8 September 2014
Oral arguments were heard by a three judge panel. Links to the original MP3 of the Court's recording and also some transcription can be found around post 2350 and for several more following that.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/23496499-post2361.html
22 December 2014
Affirmed over a dissent.
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2014/D12-22/C:14-1375:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:1474449:S:0
Million Miler Sues United [Judgment for UA Jan 2014] Judgment Affirmed Dec 2014
Feb 1, 2013, 2:55 pm
#976
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,645
Wow. This thread is huge. I've only scanned it from time to time, and don't have much interest in the intense armchair lawyering that's going on. I would, however, like to propose a brief detour to consider a question that I don't think has been asked here.
Why did UA strip away the promised benefits?
And, why are they fighting so hard in court to prevail?
This is what I just don't get.
One of the main things they did was to strip away the promised RPUs.
But, RPUs don't cost them anything. And, in the current environment, they are nearly worthless anyway.
They won't allow an RPU to clear unless they've tried everything possible to sell every last seat and, then, they'll prioritize on fare class, then on status.
So, the only way a MM who doesn't otherwise have status will have a chance to use the RPU is when nobody bought the seat with cash, nobody bought the seat with miles, nobody upgraded into the seat with miles and cash, nobody with higher status or on a higher fare upgraded into it, and, then, after nobody on the entire flight chose to pay for it, at an ever declining price, despite receiving offers at time of booking, potentially more offers by email, more offers that keep changing (declining) in value on the web site over time, and then, finally, yet another offer at time of check-in.
Only after ALL OF THIS will the MM with no status on a low fare even have the chance to use his or her RPU. And, by then, it costs nothing to UA, because that seat is otherwise empty. It means they couldn't even pawn off the seat to a kettle for $29.
So, with something so worthless anyway, that costs them nothing, why did they pull it, why did they alienate and anger this community, and why are they fighting so hard to defend the decision?
Why did UA strip away the promised benefits?
And, why are they fighting so hard in court to prevail?
This is what I just don't get.
One of the main things they did was to strip away the promised RPUs.
But, RPUs don't cost them anything. And, in the current environment, they are nearly worthless anyway.
They won't allow an RPU to clear unless they've tried everything possible to sell every last seat and, then, they'll prioritize on fare class, then on status.
So, the only way a MM who doesn't otherwise have status will have a chance to use the RPU is when nobody bought the seat with cash, nobody bought the seat with miles, nobody upgraded into the seat with miles and cash, nobody with higher status or on a higher fare upgraded into it, and, then, after nobody on the entire flight chose to pay for it, at an ever declining price, despite receiving offers at time of booking, potentially more offers by email, more offers that keep changing (declining) in value on the web site over time, and then, finally, yet another offer at time of check-in.
Only after ALL OF THIS will the MM with no status on a low fare even have the chance to use his or her RPU. And, by then, it costs nothing to UA, because that seat is otherwise empty. It means they couldn't even pawn off the seat to a kettle for $29.
So, with something so worthless anyway, that costs them nothing, why did they pull it, why did they alienate and anger this community, and why are they fighting so hard to defend the decision?
Feb 1, 2013, 3:01 pm
#977
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,909
Wow. This thread is huge. I've only scanned it from time to time, and don't have much interest in the intense armchair lawyering that's going on. I would, however, like to propose a brief detour to consider a question that I don't think has been asked here.
Why did UA strip away the promised benefits?
And, why are they fighting so hard in court to prevail?
This is what I just don't get.
One of the main things they did was to strip away the promised RPUs.
But, RPUs don't cost them anything. And, in the current environment, they are nearly worthless anyway.
They won't allow an RPU to clear unless they've tried everything possible to sell every last seat and, then, they'll prioritize on fare class, then on status.
So, the only way a MM who doesn't otherwise have status will have a chance to use the RPU is when nobody bought the seat with cash, nobody bought the seat with miles, nobody upgraded into the seat with miles and cash, nobody with higher status or on a higher fare upgraded into it, and, then, after nobody on the entire flight chose to pay for it, at an ever declining price, despite receiving offers at time of booking, potentially more offers by email, more offers that keep changing (declining) in value on the web site over time, and then, finally, yet another offer at time of check-in.
Only after ALL OF THIS will the MM with no status on a low fare even have the chance to use his or her RPU. And, by then, it costs nothing to UA, because that seat is otherwise empty. It means they couldn't even pawn off the seat to a kettle for $29.
So, with something so worthless anyway, that costs them nothing, why did they pull it, why did they alienate and anger this community, and why are they fighting so hard to defend the decision?
Why did UA strip away the promised benefits?
And, why are they fighting so hard in court to prevail?
This is what I just don't get.
One of the main things they did was to strip away the promised RPUs.
But, RPUs don't cost them anything. And, in the current environment, they are nearly worthless anyway.
They won't allow an RPU to clear unless they've tried everything possible to sell every last seat and, then, they'll prioritize on fare class, then on status.
So, the only way a MM who doesn't otherwise have status will have a chance to use the RPU is when nobody bought the seat with cash, nobody bought the seat with miles, nobody upgraded into the seat with miles and cash, nobody with higher status or on a higher fare upgraded into it, and, then, after nobody on the entire flight chose to pay for it, at an ever declining price, despite receiving offers at time of booking, potentially more offers by email, more offers that keep changing (declining) in value on the web site over time, and then, finally, yet another offer at time of check-in.
Only after ALL OF THIS will the MM with no status on a low fare even have the chance to use his or her RPU. And, by then, it costs nothing to UA, because that seat is otherwise empty. It means they couldn't even pawn off the seat to a kettle for $29.
So, with something so worthless anyway, that costs them nothing, why did they pull it, why did they alienate and anger this community, and why are they fighting so hard to defend the decision?
Feb 1, 2013, 3:03 pm
#978
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,645
Sorry. My words were sloppy.
What I meant is that the MM can't beat out a GS or a 1K or a PP unless he or she pays a high fare class. So, yes, the MM has status, but is only competing at the lowest two tiers. And, let's be honest here, with all the hoops that one must go through to get a UG now, how many empty seats are left for the Gold or Silver members anyway? It's not like the MM is poaching from HVFs. The MM is, if anything, competing with a population that doesn't even have RPUs anyway and surely never sees CPUs except on the rarest of flights.
What I meant is that the MM can't beat out a GS or a 1K or a PP unless he or she pays a high fare class. So, yes, the MM has status, but is only competing at the lowest two tiers. And, let's be honest here, with all the hoops that one must go through to get a UG now, how many empty seats are left for the Gold or Silver members anyway? It's not like the MM is poaching from HVFs. The MM is, if anything, competing with a population that doesn't even have RPUs anyway and surely never sees CPUs except on the rarest of flights.
Feb 1, 2013, 3:04 pm
#979
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 60,174
You guys! The court declined UA's Motion To Dismiss! One of the three counts was accepted by the Court, which is HUGE. We are off to discovery!
The Court's ruling was very clear and that the breach of contract claim survives. We are off to discovery and the case now moves forward!
This is for all of PM MMilers who were promised LIFETIME benefits. This is HUGE and LANDMARK because the airlines hide behind their T&C's
WooHoo!
UG
The Court's ruling was very clear and that the breach of contract claim survives. We are off to discovery and the case now moves forward!
This is for all of PM MMilers who were promised LIFETIME benefits. This is HUGE and LANDMARK because the airlines hide behind their T&C's
WooHoo!
UG
Feb 1, 2013, 3:36 pm
#980
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: BUR / LAX
Programs: UA MM/Gold; WN A-list; HH something depending; Marriott Gold
Posts: 1,552
(I also think that they genuinely did not think through or understand what the reaction of pmUA flyers would be or the value of loyal frequent flyers; they showed more sensitivity to pmCO flyers, though.)
Feb 1, 2013, 3:41 pm
#981
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,909
Sorry. My words were sloppy.
What I meant is that the MM can't beat out a GS or a 1K or a PP unless he or she pays a high fare class. So, yes, the MM has status, but is only competing at the lowest two tiers. And, let's be honest here, with all the hoops that one must go through to get a UG now, how many empty seats are left for the Gold or Silver members anyway? It's not like the MM is poaching from HVFs. The MM is, if anything, competing with a population that doesn't even have RPUs anyway and surely never sees CPUs except on the rarest of flights.
What I meant is that the MM can't beat out a GS or a 1K or a PP unless he or she pays a high fare class. So, yes, the MM has status, but is only competing at the lowest two tiers. And, let's be honest here, with all the hoops that one must go through to get a UG now, how many empty seats are left for the Gold or Silver members anyway? It's not like the MM is poaching from HVFs. The MM is, if anything, competing with a population that doesn't even have RPUs anyway and surely never sees CPUs except on the rarest of flights.
Feb 1, 2013, 3:44 pm
#982
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: TPA for now. Hopefully LIS for retirement
Posts: 13,704
Hogwash, indeed!
Some people have trouble "connecting the dots" so to speak.
Of course there were specific detailed promises made to those reaching million-mile status. To deny this fact is fool hearty.
For those who have a problem believing that specific promises were made, let's revisit this one specific lifetime promise again:
Any more denials of specific lifetime promises?
-
Some people have trouble "connecting the dots" so to speak.
Of course there were specific detailed promises made to those reaching million-mile status. To deny this fact is fool hearty.
For those who have a problem believing that specific promises were made, let's revisit this one specific lifetime promise again:
Any more denials of specific lifetime promises?
-
Feb 1, 2013, 4:00 pm
#983
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago USA
Programs: *A Junkie, SQ PPS, Skywards Gold, 2 Million Mile Flyer;*wood LT Plat, BA MM
Posts: 1,762
Is it possible some people just fight for what is just? When you are told LIFETIME only to have an arrogant CEO ignore that? You are right, the 100% miles, the upgrades, etc. is watered down and not worth what it was, but still LIFETIME. And someone thought it important to fight. All the airlines and hotel loyalty programs now will see that when you promise something for a LIFETIME that's what it means.
Lawyer's email is: [email protected]
SUBJECT: UA MM Class-Action
Write: Thank you, blah, blah...I am 10/20% of the threshhold of being at a million miles. If this goes to settlement, please don't forget about us and hopefully we can be grandfathered in with the MM, it would mean so much to me!
Signed Jack Smith
He will get it. Don't put your MP account # just your email addy. They will have your email on file. How do I know this? I spoke to John Edgar myself, anyone can call him.
UG
Lawyer's email is: [email protected]
SUBJECT: UA MM Class-Action
Write: Thank you, blah, blah...I am 10/20% of the threshhold of being at a million miles. If this goes to settlement, please don't forget about us and hopefully we can be grandfathered in with the MM, it would mean so much to me!
Signed Jack Smith
He will get it. Don't put your MP account # just your email addy. They will have your email on file. How do I know this? I spoke to John Edgar myself, anyone can call him.
UG
Feb 1, 2013, 4:08 pm
#984
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ORD
Programs: 1K, MM, Marriott Plat
Posts: 427
"...Long before there was ever a class action filed, a group of us Flyertalk members repeatedly attempted to have the demotions and breach of our million-mile lifetime promises rescinded..."
Thank you for your and others efforts! 30 years of UAL flying (until 3/3) and maybe, just maybe they will be held to their word which far surpasses any legal, financial-based or marketing double speak.
Thank you for your and others efforts! 30 years of UAL flying (until 3/3) and maybe, just maybe they will be held to their word which far surpasses any legal, financial-based or marketing double speak.
Feb 1, 2013, 4:08 pm
#985
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
Feb 1, 2013, 4:09 pm
#986
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near SEA
Programs: UA MM, AS MVPG75K, Marriott Lifetime Gold
Posts: 7,969
Wow. This thread is huge. I've only scanned it from time to time, and don't have much interest in the intense armchair lawyering that's going on. I would, however, like to propose a brief detour to consider a question that I don't think has been asked here.
Why did UA strip away the promised benefits?
And, why are they fighting so hard in court to prevail?
This is what I just don't get.
One of the main things they did was to strip away the promised RPUs.
But, RPUs don't cost them anything. And, in the current environment, they are nearly worthless anyway.
They won't allow an RPU to clear unless they've tried everything possible to sell every last seat and, then, they'll prioritize on fare class, then on status.
So, the only way a MM who doesn't otherwise have status will have a chance to use the RPU is when nobody bought the seat with cash, nobody bought the seat with miles, nobody upgraded into the seat with miles and cash, nobody with higher status or on a higher fare upgraded into it, and, then, after nobody on the entire flight chose to pay for it, at an ever declining price, despite receiving offers at time of booking, potentially more offers by email, more offers that keep changing (declining) in value on the web site over time, and then, finally, yet another offer at time of check-in.
Only after ALL OF THIS will the MM with no status on a low fare even have the chance to use his or her RPU. And, by then, it costs nothing to UA, because that seat is otherwise empty. It means they couldn't even pawn off the seat to a kettle for $29.
So, with something so worthless anyway, that costs them nothing, why did they pull it, why did they alienate and anger this community, and why are they fighting so hard to defend the decision?
Why did UA strip away the promised benefits?
And, why are they fighting so hard in court to prevail?
This is what I just don't get.
One of the main things they did was to strip away the promised RPUs.
But, RPUs don't cost them anything. And, in the current environment, they are nearly worthless anyway.
They won't allow an RPU to clear unless they've tried everything possible to sell every last seat and, then, they'll prioritize on fare class, then on status.
So, the only way a MM who doesn't otherwise have status will have a chance to use the RPU is when nobody bought the seat with cash, nobody bought the seat with miles, nobody upgraded into the seat with miles and cash, nobody with higher status or on a higher fare upgraded into it, and, then, after nobody on the entire flight chose to pay for it, at an ever declining price, despite receiving offers at time of booking, potentially more offers by email, more offers that keep changing (declining) in value on the web site over time, and then, finally, yet another offer at time of check-in.
Only after ALL OF THIS will the MM with no status on a low fare even have the chance to use his or her RPU. And, by then, it costs nothing to UA, because that seat is otherwise empty. It means they couldn't even pawn off the seat to a kettle for $29.
So, with something so worthless anyway, that costs them nothing, why did they pull it, why did they alienate and anger this community, and why are they fighting so hard to defend the decision?
YMMV
I tried long ago to reason with him as well but he's intent on labeling those that disagree with him as uninformed and not entitled to talk on the subject. It's unfortunate and gives the others working hard on this initiative a bad name.
Feb 1, 2013, 4:15 pm
#987
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
I think United is in a tough spot right now - so many people on here think it is so easy to give out the CR-1's, etc - and I don't think it is that simple.
Simply settling, it almost makes it be that United cannot indeed change the program as it sees fit at any time. They may want a ruling to set a precedent moving forward. If they settle it opens up a who new set of issues.
And, jeez, doesn't anyone have a better clean screenshot - it looks like a 5 year old took it off the printer.
Simply settling, it almost makes it be that United cannot indeed change the program as it sees fit at any time. They may want a ruling to set a precedent moving forward. If they settle it opens up a who new set of issues.
And, jeez, doesn't anyone have a better clean screenshot - it looks like a 5 year old took it off the printer.
Feb 1, 2013, 4:43 pm
#988
Join Date: Oct 2007
Programs: UA 1K 1MM / AA PP, Marriott Lifetime Gold
Posts: 949
Wow. This thread is huge. I've only scanned it from time to time, and don't have much interest in the intense armchair lawyering that's going on. I would, however, like to propose a brief detour to consider a question that I don't think has been asked here.
Why did UA strip away the promised benefits?
And, why are they fighting so hard in court to prevail?
This is what I just don't get.
One of the main things they did was to strip away the promised RPUs.
But, RPUs don't cost them anything. And, in the current environment, they are nearly worthless anyway.
So, with something so worthless anyway, that costs them nothing, why did they pull it, why did they alienate and anger this community, and why are they fighting so hard to defend the decision?
Why did UA strip away the promised benefits?
And, why are they fighting so hard in court to prevail?
This is what I just don't get.
One of the main things they did was to strip away the promised RPUs.
But, RPUs don't cost them anything. And, in the current environment, they are nearly worthless anyway.
So, with something so worthless anyway, that costs them nothing, why did they pull it, why did they alienate and anger this community, and why are they fighting so hard to defend the decision?
Why not make a show of that disdain while saving a few bucks by slashing some benefits? Makes their arrogant egos feel good and they thought they could get away with it - just like every other ridiculously bad decision they've made.
They seem to want to run this airline into the ground by actively pissing off their most valuable customers (or the previously most-valuable customers - those who had an outsized impact on the company over a number of years). They're on their way - I just wonder when a board shakeup and then a senior exec shakeup happens - pre chapter 11 (again?!
) or post.p.s. for the record I am not a MM.
Last edited by Clarkcc1; Feb 1, 2013 at 5:29 pm Reason: fixed sp error, added clarification
Feb 1, 2013, 4:53 pm
#989
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,909
Is it possible some people just fight for what is just? When you are told LIFETIME only to have an arrogant CEO ignore that? You are right, the 100% miles, the upgrades, etc. is watered down and not worth what it was, but still LIFETIME. And someone thought it important to fight. All the airlines and hotel loyalty programs now will see that when you promise something for a LIFETIME that's what it means.
Lawyer's email is: [email protected]
SUBJECT: UA MM Class-Action
Write: Thank you, blah, blah...I am 10/20% of the threshhold of being at a million miles. If this goes to settlement, please don't forget about us and hopefully we can be grandfathered in with the MM, it would mean so much to me!
Signed Jack Smith
He will get it. Don't put your MP account # just your email addy. They will have your email on file. How do I know this? I spoke to John Edgar myself, anyone can call him.
UG
Lawyer's email is: [email protected]
SUBJECT: UA MM Class-Action
Write: Thank you, blah, blah...I am 10/20% of the threshhold of being at a million miles. If this goes to settlement, please don't forget about us and hopefully we can be grandfathered in with the MM, it would mean so much to me!
Signed Jack Smith
He will get it. Don't put your MP account # just your email addy. They will have your email on file. How do I know this? I spoke to John Edgar myself, anyone can call him.
UG
Feb 1, 2013, 5:09 pm
#990
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,358
If I recall correctly, you were one of the posters who repeatedly insisted that the case would never get launched and that the case was frivolous because UA has the right to change the program at any time.
I am exceedingly pleased with the outcome of the case in that UA's Motion to Dismiss was denied.
Now we must wait until the next step of the legal system. Hopefully, the breach of the million-mile program will be rescinded either by UA (willingly) or by the court (by order of the court).
-
You may not be a million-miler but your insight and good analysis presented is quite remarkable, in a good way. Thanks.
-
Last edited by dgcpaphd; Feb 1, 2013 at 5:16 pm Reason: merge