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 3, 2013, 6:29 pm
#1066
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.99MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,772
The reduced status, reduce RDMs bonus for 1MMers and lost RPUs for all existing MM seem more of a retroactive change in benefits if a contract is deemed to have existed.
The suggestion of Plat status as an alternative is more of a remedy that fits the existing program versus creating a complicated fix. Not a prefect remedy but one I think most would accept it. The idea of a 2K level is a bit of a red herring since an 2K individual would have been at least an 1K and of higher priority anyways than PMUA 1MMers.
The suggestion of the choice of RPUs or companion match is to address the fact that for some one is better and for some the other is preferred.
Feb 3, 2013, 8:44 pm
#1067
Join Date: Nov 2012
Programs: MileagePlus
Posts: 190
United really messed this up. But there have been a lot of great comments and points made but it comes down to the leadership of the company and these guys are so disconnected from the GA that they don't know whats going on. They don't care they care about the short term and making money and not keeping customers.
Feb 3, 2013, 9:25 pm
#1068
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,358
United really messed this up. But there have been a lot of great comments and points made but it comes down to the leadership of the company and these guys are so disconnected from the GA that they don't know whats going on. They don't care they care about the short term and making money and not keeping customers.
-
How can we (the customers) get that message to Smisek and his regime?
Little by little, Smisek and his crew have destroyed a major element of goodwill of UA. It took years to build that goodwill.
With a series of stupid decisions, a mass exodus of customers occurred and left UA for other airlines, Furthermore, the operational and financial results of 2012 went into the tank. The blame for these events can be directly attributed to Smisek and his decisions.
Didn't the UA management learn anything from the 2012 terrible financial and operational results that were released last week?
Oh, if Robert Burns were here, he would have a word to say to them (the power to see yourself as others see you) - that Robert Burns.
What does it take to get through to people who have such enormous egos they cannot see what others so freely see?
-
Feb 4, 2013, 8:54 am
#1069
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chicago: ORD, MDW
Programs: United Million Mile Flyer, Hilton Silver, Marriott Gold, DL, AA WN
Posts: 514
I agree that the original United did a lot to earn my loyalty through Mileage Plus, thus becoming an original United Million Miler. Their efforts convinced me to stick with United instead of with Delta (whith whom I have over 600,000 miles flown) and American - each with equally good (or bad) routes and service.
Let's not forget, though, that all was not "perfect" at United before the merger and before, during, and after bankruptcy. In retrospect, however, the pre-merger United was able to maintain my loyalty:
Upgrades were usually in reach - even at discounted fares.
The boarding process was acceptable. Membership had its privileges.
Now, it seems that my "loyalty" is no longer important - unless I pay full fare.
Feb 4, 2013, 11:11 am
#1070
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SJC, SFO, YYC
Programs: AA-EXP, AA-0.41MM, UA-Gold, Ex UA-1K (2006 thru 2015), PMUA-0.95MM, COUA-1.5MM-lite, AF-Silver
Posts: 13,437
Whereas if UA settles without admitting wrong doing, no legal precedent is set.
Much simpler to hand out the CR1s to pmUA MMers, let them board in group 1, give them 100% RDM bonus, and upgrade / standby priority equal to plats.
I brought up this concept in March 2011 here:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...l#post16054726
Of course the names of the various status levels have changed since then but the concept remains viable. I'd probably alter the metrics a bit based on the current reality of MP status levels to look more like this:
Add together and track all lifetime BiS miles from PMUA and PMCO flights. Also add and track all lifetime EQMs from PMUA and PMCO flights. Continue to track both metrics going forward for merged UA flights. Then:
1MM EQM: Lifetime Silver
2MM EQM OR 1MM BiS: Lifetime Gold, 3 GPU's (one time only), 2 RPU's per year. 100% RDM bonus on paid UA/UX/Copa metal flights, Platinum level priority for upgrades etc.
3MM EQM OR 2MM BiS: Lifetime Platinum, Lifetime RCC membership, 4 GPUs's (one time only), 2 RPU's per year, 100% RDM bonus on paid UA/UX/Copa metal flights
3MM BiS OR 4MM EQM: Lifetime 1K, with lifetime benefits as currently offered.
Alternatively you could simply take the lifetime miles number that we all have now and apply it against the BiS thresholds above which would simplify things.
This essentially overlays the legacy UA and CO MM program benefits so that nobody loses anything that was promised by the legacy airlines or by the current incarnation of the MM program. There has been some discussion that the pre merger BiS miles data for PMCO flights might not exist, but in that case the EQM thresholds should do the job nicely.
The overlay system can continue to be fully functional for ALL fliers of both pre-merger airlines. It would also provide the same benefits that all PMCO and PMUA fliers expected under each airline's legacy MM systems. Some fliers may benefit more from BIS while others might benefit more from EQM based status. None of this matters in an overlay system. Just proceed as described and nobody gets shafted and everybody can reach the levels they've been striving striving regardless of which legacy airline they flew or of the mix of PMUA and PMCO miles they had when the MM programs merged.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...l#post16054726
Of course the names of the various status levels have changed since then but the concept remains viable. I'd probably alter the metrics a bit based on the current reality of MP status levels to look more like this:
Add together and track all lifetime BiS miles from PMUA and PMCO flights. Also add and track all lifetime EQMs from PMUA and PMCO flights. Continue to track both metrics going forward for merged UA flights. Then:
1MM EQM: Lifetime Silver
2MM EQM OR 1MM BiS: Lifetime Gold, 3 GPU's (one time only), 2 RPU's per year. 100% RDM bonus on paid UA/UX/Copa metal flights, Platinum level priority for upgrades etc.
3MM EQM OR 2MM BiS: Lifetime Platinum, Lifetime RCC membership, 4 GPUs's (one time only), 2 RPU's per year, 100% RDM bonus on paid UA/UX/Copa metal flights
3MM BiS OR 4MM EQM: Lifetime 1K, with lifetime benefits as currently offered.
Alternatively you could simply take the lifetime miles number that we all have now and apply it against the BiS thresholds above which would simplify things.
This essentially overlays the legacy UA and CO MM program benefits so that nobody loses anything that was promised by the legacy airlines or by the current incarnation of the MM program. There has been some discussion that the pre merger BiS miles data for PMCO flights might not exist, but in that case the EQM thresholds should do the job nicely.
The overlay system can continue to be fully functional for ALL fliers of both pre-merger airlines. It would also provide the same benefits that all PMCO and PMUA fliers expected under each airline's legacy MM systems. Some fliers may benefit more from BIS while others might benefit more from EQM based status. None of this matters in an overlay system. Just proceed as described and nobody gets shafted and everybody can reach the levels they've been striving striving regardless of which legacy airline they flew or of the mix of PMUA and PMCO miles they had when the MM programs merged.
However, given the new posts since Feb 1 in other threads from people who lost status because they unaware of the 4 segment UA metal rule for re-qualifying for elite status, it is pretty clear UA needs to aim for the simplest program.
UA just needs to rationally deal with the people who were under 2MM BIS in order to provide the PMUA MM and 2MM benefits those people were working toward. If UA could construct a plan for Infinite Elites it can do so for pmua MM and near MM/2MMers.
Last edited by mre5765; Feb 4, 2013 at 11:40 am
Feb 4, 2013, 5:27 pm
#1071
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: ORD
Programs: United Plat 2MM, Hilton Gold
Posts: 2,727
I think they are playing a dangerous game as well. People are focusing on the lawerly aspects of this, but as I mentioned a few days ago, I doubt United reallys want an exec to walk into court, raise his right hand and say "We promised two CR-1's, decided not to honor that promise, and indeed, continued to promise it even after we decided not to honor it. Because of superior lawyering, however, we believe we can get away with it. Indeed, the reason that we're fighting so hard is so we can establish the legal right do it again to someone else - maybe all you corporations out there thinking about travel contracts. You're next!"
If they settle, this will cost them maybe 20,000 CR-1's (I'm guessing 10K MM's) so the net effect will be to shaft 20,000 Golds out of a CPU. Doesn't cost United a dime.
This would be like putting blood in the water for the media - and stock analysts.
If they settle, this will cost them maybe 20,000 CR-1's (I'm guessing 10K MM's) so the net effect will be to shaft 20,000 Golds out of a CPU. Doesn't cost United a dime.
This would be like putting blood in the water for the media - and stock analysts.
Feb 4, 2013, 6:29 pm
#1072
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,358
I think they are playing a dangerous game as well. People are focusing on the lawyerly aspects of this, but as I mentioned a few days ago, I doubt United really wants an exec to walk into court, raise his right hand and say "We promised two CR-1's, decided not to honor that promise, and indeed, continued to promise it even after we decided not to honor it. Because of superior lawyering, however, we believe we can get away with it. Indeed, the reason that we're fighting so hard is so we can establish the legal right do it again to someone else - maybe all you corporations out there thinking about travel contracts. You're next!"
If they settle, this will cost them maybe 20,000 CR-1's (I'm guessing 10K MM's) so the net effect will be to shaft 20,000 Golds out of a CPU. Doesn't cost United a dime.
The other promise shown in the FAQs and answers was:
"What will happen to my Million Miler Program lifetime status
and Continental Infinite Elite status benefits? Will I continue
to receive them in the future?
You will continue to receive your benefits as you always have."
No, there is no logical reason for UA to have reneged on the million-milers considering the written material that was posted to the official interface between UA and the public, united.com.
-
Feb 4, 2013, 7:35 pm
#1073
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
There is, you just choose to ignore it. Just because you don't agree with something, doesn't make it irrational, illogical, or unworthy of consideration.
Feb 4, 2013, 7:42 pm
#1074
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SJC, SFO, YYC
Programs: AA-EXP, AA-0.41MM, UA-Gold, Ex UA-1K (2006 thru 2015), PMUA-0.95MM, COUA-1.5MM-lite, AF-Silver
Posts: 13,437
Platinum level boarding, standby and upgrade priority cost UA nothing.
Logic.
Feb 4, 2013, 9:56 pm
#1075
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: US
Programs: AA/UA/DL
Posts: 2,773
You just choose to ignore many things. Just because you don't get your 4 miles tickets you don't think MMers should get their benefits.
Last edited by pigx5; Feb 4, 2013 at 10:09 pm
Feb 5, 2013, 6:18 am
#1076
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
There's no logical reason, because CR-1s, extra RDMs are just loose change. UA can easily minimize exposure by limiting upgrade and award inventory to compensate. "Here sucker, here are the RPUs we promised you; good luck trying to use them".
Platinum level boarding, standby and upgrade priority cost UA nothing.
Logic.
Platinum level boarding, standby and upgrade priority cost UA nothing.
Logic.
It was on face illogical for people to believe there were not going to be changes to the program.
logic.
make up whatever you like, I have ignored nothing. I am not sure what your obsession with the irrelevant HKG tickets is. I have already explained my position and I would suggest you read it.
Feb 5, 2013, 9:55 am
#1077
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: US
Programs: AA/UA/DL
Posts: 2,773
You ignored many things and fact and you just want to against other people
simply because it's not your benefits.
I would suggest you read your own posts.
Feb 5, 2013, 10:37 am
#1078
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
Hmm I posted back in September that I thought there was a claim here. Then I posted that the way the plaintiff's could get relief is by pleading around the MP terms and conditions.
both of those have come true. So I have been completely right about the progression of the lawsuit so far.
I guess I am not sure what I "made up."
Yes I believe that CO Million Milers lost more than UA million milers. That is my belief and that is just as valid as yours. What concerns me is the refusal to address my statement that whatever the final program ended being, the large differences between the two programs dictated that the final program would be substantially different than the either of the two original programs.
Put it to you this way, if dgcpaphd got everything he wants, it would leave co million milers out in the cold. That's pretty unacceptable. It's not about what is best for you or me or the plaintiff, it's about what is best for everyone.
You ignored many things and fact and you just want to against other people simply because it's not your benefits.
Now if you want to discuss the 4miler tickets, the merits of the co program v the ua program, or my ignorance feel free to pm me or take the discussion to the relevant thread. I am going to continue discussing the lawsuit here.
cheers.
Feb 5, 2013, 10:44 am
#1079
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Chicago
Programs: AA EXP, UA former 1K (1.9MM and gone), Marriott LT Plat, Hilton Diamond, SPG Plat
Posts: 1,111
I'm scratching my head over this one. While I can see certain cases where CO MMs did lose something, like the ability to earn unlimited MM "miles" without flying, on the whole the changes seem like they would have been far more positive compared with UA MMs. What exactly do you mean by this statement?
Feb 5, 2013, 10:50 am
#1080
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
I'm scratching my head over this one. While I can see certain cases where CO MMs did lose something, like the ability to earn unlimited MM "miles" without flying, on the whole the changes seem like they would have been far more positive compared with UA MMs. What exactly do you mean by this statement?