Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

UA is just asking for trouble with its new mileage accrual policies

UA is just asking for trouble with its new mileage accrual policies

Old Mar 4, 13, 11:10 am
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: MYF/CMA/SAN/YYZ/YKF
Programs: COdbaUA 1K, AA EXP, Bonbon Gold, Omni Black, Hertz PC, NEXUS and GE
Posts: 5,427
UA is just asking for trouble with its new mileage accrual policies

Take a look at the language in this:

http://www.united.com/CMS/en-US/mark...spx?ItemId=317

"Mileage accrual is subject to the rules of the United MileagePlus program and, as provided therein, mileage will be credited in accordance with the terms and conditions of the MileagePlus Program in effect at the time of travel, not at the time air travel is purchased, booked or reserved, and accordingly miles may not be awarded for some tickets or miles may be awarded in an amount fewer than shown."

They are setting themselves up for all kinds of pain here.

Any comment UAInsider? Why so hostile toward frequent fliers? You would think that after all the attacks on FFers, they wouldn't be pulling stuff like this.
N1120A is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:14 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: IAD
Programs: UA 1K, Marriott Platinum
Posts: 292
That really does suck, and is one of the biggest reasons why I avoid partner air travel whenever possible. Even closely knit programs like LH have dropped earnings for low-fares, and after the SAA and Turkish cuts last month I have no desire to find out that a trip that I bought is no longer going to earn miles. Only time I travel on partners now is when there is no other choice or I'm on an award ticket.
IADOrange is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:16 am
  #3  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Northern California
Programs: I want to be free! Free!
Posts: 2,959
Originally Posted by N1120A View Post
Take a look at the language in this:

http://www.united.com/CMS/en-US/mark...spx?ItemId=317

"Mileage accrual is subject to the rules of the United MileagePlus program and, as provided therein, mileage will be credited in accordance with the terms and conditions of the MileagePlus Program in effect at the time of travel, not at the time air travel is purchased, booked or reserved, and accordingly miles may not be awarded for some tickets or miles may be awarded in an amount fewer than shown."

They are setting themselves up for all kinds of pain here.

Any comment UAInsider? Why so hostile toward frequent fliers? You would think that after all the attacks on FFers, they wouldn't be pulling stuff like this.
That is atrocious.

This kind of shenanigans is incredibly anti-consumer - no two ways about it.
aCavalierInCoach is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:16 am
  #4  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 69,156
This is not new. It was the policy, both for sUA and sCO. It may be more explicit now, but it was the rule for a long, long time.
sbm12 is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:16 am
  #5  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: MCO, DCA, IAD
Programs: UA GS 1MM, Marriott Platinum Premier, Starwood Platinum, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 2,114
Originally Posted by N1120A View Post
Take a look at the language in this:

http://www.united.com/CMS/en-US/mark...spx?ItemId=317

"Mileage accrual is subject to the rules of the United MileagePlus program and, as provided therein, mileage will be credited in accordance with the terms and conditions of the MileagePlus Program in effect at the time of travel, not at the time air travel is purchased, booked or reserved, and accordingly miles may not be awarded for some tickets or miles may be awarded in an amount fewer than shown."

They are setting themselves up for all kinds of pain here.

Any comment UAInsider? Why so hostile toward frequent fliers? You would think that after all the attacks on FFers, they wouldn't be pulling stuff like this.
This is for mileage accrual on *A partners. UA cannot control what other airlines do so I don't see a problem with that.
sammyindc is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:17 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 697
Originally Posted by N1120A View Post
Take a look at the language in this:

http://www.united.com/CMS/en-US/mark...spx?ItemId=317

"Mileage accrual is subject to the rules of the United MileagePlus program and, as provided therein, mileage will be credited in accordance with the terms and conditions of the MileagePlus Program in effect at the time of travel, not at the time air travel is purchased, booked or reserved, and accordingly miles may not be awarded for some tickets or miles may be awarded in an amount fewer than shown."

They are setting themselves up for all kinds of pain here.

Any comment UAInsider? Why so hostile toward frequent fliers? You would think that after all the attacks on FFers, they wouldn't be pulling stuff like this.
I could be wrong but I think this has been the policy for quite some time especially when it comes to partner airlines.

If this is new or just newly added wording to the website then I would expect a change in mileage accrual rates very soon and could be quite drastic. That is just the doomsdayist in me
PHLyer82 is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:18 am
  #7  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 85,354
Will DOT let them do this? When some carrier tried to change the free bag allowance after tickets had been purchased, DOT took the side of consumers and said that the rules in effect when tickets were purchased must be honored. However, DOT seems more likely to protect kettles than FFers.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:19 am
  #8  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold, UA Nobody, Hilton Gold
Posts: 2,310
Is this even lawful? In UK law this may fall foul of the unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations, and I'd be surprise if it didn't in certain US jurisdictions too. Essentially UA is saying that they can unilaterally change the terms of their agreement even after you've entered into a purchase, that seems very anti-consumer to me.

Originally Posted by sammyindc View Post
This is for mileage accrual on *A partners. UA cannot control what other airlines do so I don't see a problem with that.
Could someone clarify who actually sets the earning rules for partners, is it UA or the partner (or is it a joint agreement)? I know that UA state that TK (or whomever) have "denied your request", but usually its been pretty clear that its a UA IT cock-up in misreading the fare class.
alex_b is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:23 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,643
Originally Posted by alex_b View Post
Is this even lawful? In UK law this may fall foul of the unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations, and I'd be surprise if it didn't in certain US jurisdictions too. Essentially UA is saying that they can unilaterally change the terms of their agreement even after you've entered into a purchase, that seems very anti-consumer to me.
In any other industry, this is called "bait and switch" and it's not only unethical, but usually illegal too. UA probably tries to make it legal by putting it into the terms and conditions. Not sure how enforceable it is. This is no different from all the other shenanigans they have been pulling on the overall war against elites, no different from all the promised benefits they pulled away after taking control, no different from the misleading upgrade promises, and so forth. Same story, just another variation.
FlyWorld is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:25 am
  #10  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: MCO, DCA, IAD
Programs: UA GS 1MM, Marriott Platinum Premier, Starwood Platinum, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 2,114
Originally Posted by mitchmu View Post
In any other industry, this is called "bait and switch" and it's not only unethical, but usually illegal too. UA probably tries to make it legal by putting it into the terms and conditions. Not sure how enforceable it is. This is no different from all the other shenanigans they have been pulling on the overall war against elites, no different from all the promised benefits they pulled away after taking control, no different from the misleading upgrade promises, and so forth. Same story, just another variation.
It would be illegal if it was for UA operated flights but not for foreign accriers operated flights like this is the case.
It's just a way for UA to pretect itself if other *A carriers decided to change the miles earnings for some fares.
sammyindc is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:28 am
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold, UA Nobody, Hilton Gold
Posts: 2,310
Originally Posted by sammyindc View Post
It would be illegal if it was for UA operated flights but not for foreign accriers operated flights like this is the case.
It's just a way for UA to pretect itself if other *A carriers decided to change the miles earnings for some fares.
But do the other *A carriers actually set the accruals and have the ability to unilaterally change them? It's often stated here as if it's established fact, but I've never seen anything that says that's the case.
alex_b is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:29 am
  #12  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: SIN/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP
Posts: 30,655
Originally Posted by sammyindc View Post
This is for mileage accrual on *A partners. UA cannot control what other airlines do so I don't see a problem with that.
CO alone decides what tjhey credit to MP for a flight you take with a *A partner.

The actions of alliance partners is merely an excuse to decline responsibility for what they do with the program.
Originally Posted by PHLyer82 View Post
I could be wrong but I think this has been the policy for quite some time especially when it comes to partner airlines..
I ran into the trap twice when CO was still UA .. and upon both occasions a short note to 1K Voice had me original credit granted.

So if it was a policy it was certainly not enforced.
weero is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:34 am
  #13  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Jersey Shore/YYZ
Programs: UA 1K, Marriott Gold, National Exec, Hertz PC
Posts: 12,362
Originally Posted by aCavalierInCoach View Post
That is atrocious.

This kind of shenanigans is incredibly anti-consumer - no two ways about it.
Definitely a few ways about it.

It's been this way for a long time - not new. And is in line with all other *A carriers.

I've never had it enforced, though, as a quick call to MP fixes it.

I laugh at concept of "bait and switch", when the caveat is clearly disclosed.
aacharya is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:35 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: SIN/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP
Posts: 30,655
Originally Posted by mitchmu View Post
In any other industry, this is called "bait and switch" and it's not only unethical, but usually illegal too. UA probably tries to make it legal by putting it into the terms and conditions..
Indeed. And while I lack experience with the all-new-CO, long exposure to LH which barreled down that hole years earlier taught me that they give a rat's fart about the law. The law only exists unilaterally for the passenger when they are supposed to follow wanton instructions issued by airline employees.

Compensation according to EU 261? Hotel nights during MX or WX? No way - just pull a silly excuse why that cannot be offered...
weero is offline  
Old Mar 4, 13, 11:42 am
  #15  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold, UA Nobody, Hilton Gold
Posts: 2,310
Originally Posted by aacharya View Post
I laugh at concept of "bait and switch", when the caveat is clearly disclosed.
So if a mail order company said "two day shipping", provided they disclaimed that with "shipping times can change as we see fit" and then didn't send it for three weeks, you'd be happy with that? If United don't want to promise partner miles then fine, I'll move my business to AA/One World but to be half-pregnant with this weasel wording is unacceptable.
alex_b is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread