sbm12

No, they really aren't.

There is nothing in the published benefits which says they cannot sell upgrades before CPUs. It may not be smart business, but it also isn't prohibited contractually.

Boghopper

Not in coach. In coach 10-across is going to make for some major misery. I'm going to avoid them like the plague hn I happen to fly UA in the future unless I know I'm in C.

burlax

If you mean that published benefits doesn't have the language "we will not sell ToD upgrades", then you're right. But that doesn't mean that selling ToD upgrades is not a breach. I know, it may be difficult to understand.

Boghopper

+1. They're only obligated to give out an upgrade if space is "available.". And they get to define "available".

burlax

Again, wrong. They do get to define available, but they cannot manipulate the definition so as to strip a FF of the earned benefits. You are entitled to enjoy them undiluted until your year runs out.

MaximusDamon

To all those apologizing for UA and making the elites sound like over-entitled whiners, the key here is that UA created the definition of "BEST CUSTOMERS" when they created elite levels in MP. If they don't like the rules of their own definitions, then they should change them. But as of now, UA defines it's best customers as:

GS
1K
Platinum
Gold
Silver

So, yes, based on their own definition, elites should feel they're among the best of UA's customers...and stop making us feel bad for that.

If UA wants to reorganize the program based on revenue, then go ahead and do it and a new ranking of the best customers will materialize and we'll all see where we stand.

But for now, UA itself has determined "best" is a ranking of number of miles flown with extra rewards for higher fare classes booked, and all of us elites have played by those rules to determine our value to UA.

This changing of the rules midway through the game is BS. If UA wants loyalty, then clearly define the rules so customers know what they have to do to win the game (and receive a promised set of benefits). Then UA needs to stand by that. Everything else is just noise.

A player (business) who keeps changing the rules ends up being the one no one wants to play with after a while. There are other kids on this block who will play fair.

blug

Why do I feel exactly the opposite? Many 1Ks are far from UA's best customers (and many of them know that), yet UA still offers them 1K status. They should feel grateful, rather than entitled.

What rule did UA change midway? Neither TOD nor disabling expert mode violates anything in the published elite benefits.

burlax

+1

To be more precise, UA can certainly change the rules under the terms of the MP program, but it cannot make the change effective mid-year because doing so will render the MP program meaningless, and the courts already held that FF programs are binding contracts.

Baze

The "earned" benefit never guaranteed an upgrade. Only that you had a chance if there was space available. You still have a chance, though less of one now, but still a chance. They never said you will get at least any certain percentage either. Do I like the changes? No. But as it has always been, if you want to guarantee a seat up front, buy it. I fear you are living in a dream world instead of the bad dream that has become reality. Don't like it? You can always take AA up on their status match.

burlax

The logic here is - if dilution FF benefits were ok, that would mean that MP program is not a binding contract, but a piece of paper which means nothing. The courts already held otherwise. Of course, there is always a chance that the precedent will be overturned, but generally, and specifically in this case, it is more likely that it would be upheld.

Baze

Do you honestly think the courts would tell UA they can't sell the upgrades and they have to give them away free to elites? Dream on.

burlax

You are lucky your company still employs you. So, if UA promised you 6xGPU upon qualifying for 1K, and once you did, they told you - sorry, you're not getting GPUs because we decided to change the rules, that would be ok too? Pass to me whatever you are smoking.

Baze

Your logic is so far out in left field there is no reason to discuss this with you anymore.

keisari

Actually it will be 9 across which is the same that the 777; granted the 777 is 19ft. 3 inches across and the 787 is 4 inches shorter at 18ft 11 inches.

burlax

It has nothing to do with left or right. It is basic contract law, which you seem to have never heard of. Your platitudes would have some traction if the courts haven't held that FF programs are contracts, but they have.

Also, in case of UA, if they really needed mid-year changes, there is legal process to do this properly, which they didn't do because they (correctly) surmised, that nobody's gonna waste his time on filing breach of contract suits, where you can't get punitive damages, which means that the legal fees will eat whatever benefit you could possibly recover. So, UA just went ahead and breached, since each individual benefit is too small to justify wastiung your time to run to the court. There is a chance of a class action suit here, but I doubt it will be brought. You still need to have the right plaintiffs for that.