cerealmarketer

While lots of news about AA not paying Delta's new, higher interline rates, ending rebooking of delayed AA pax on DL flights and vice versa....

UA and DL were able to come to agreement in August according to Bloomberg.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...rs-is-grounded

"United, which has been sending more passengers to Delta than American does, agreed to those terms in August, Delta spokesman Anthony Black said Friday."

AA had been sending passengers to Delta at a 5 to 1 rate, so not a light user either. Will be a lot tougher at JFK and LGA to deal with IRROPS on AA.

Rest of the big hubs they're probably fine.

Kacee

I wonder if UA's rate was also in the 5:1 range?

In any event, this is good news. UA wins this comparison with AA by not making a cheap, customer unfriendly move.

transportprof

Does this mean that AA will push more pax onto UA flights during IRROPS?

If so, it could yield more op-ups and VDBS/IDBs for UA pax.

nerdbirdsjc

United also sent its agents a memo on September 10th, which reads, in relevant part:

"Other airline rebooking policy

Our irregular operations policy for rebooking on other airlines (OA) provides flexibility when there are no options on United. Settlement rates vary between OA carriers and preference should be given to rebooking first on United, then Joint Venture (JV), followed by other Star Alliance carriers before considering other interline airlines.

Although our OA rebooking policy has not changed, Delta (DL) should only be considered when all other options have been exhausted as our settlement rate with DL is significantly higher than with most carriers.

As a reminder:

 OA may be used if the United rebooking option is not acceptable to the customer and does not get the customer to their final destination within four hours of their originally scheduled arrival.

 Always offer options on United first, followed in order of preference by JV partners, then other Star Alliance carriers. Use DL only as a last resort.

 Make every attempt to book long-haul portions on United and consider using a United connection before offering a non-stop flight on an OA.

 Avoid rebooking on DL and other interline airlines, as their settlement rates are higher."

transportprof

So UA extended its interline agreement with DL, but will do its best never to rebook on them.

Sounds like a 'Project Quality' strategy to appear to offer something, like drinks in the United Club, or nuts in First Class, but then deliver the cheapest possible alternative instead.

LarkSFO

So you would prefer AA's strategy? No DL at all? Got it.

Although it appears that many people's purpose of coming to FT UA is to brag about not flying UA, and complain anyway even though they are not actually experiencing flying on UA, this exact topic (interlining) is something I learned a lot about on FT.

Irrops happen
Do your own research and find what works best for you
Go in to your first conversation with UA strongly advocating on your own behalf - don't just take what they give you
And now we know, agents are empowered(!) to put you on an interline DL flight
As a flyer, if DL is the best alternative - don't take no for an answer - you know they can put you on the DL flight

An uneducated (non FT) flyer will be much less prepared, will not know their options, and will be in a worse negotiating position on options for rebooking.

This, in essence, is the value of FT for me. Unfortunately, a shadow of the value it had just a few years ago when people came here to learn and help (and not complain about the CEO's compensation package, etc., ad nauseum).

spin88

The article says that UA's rate is WORSE, meaning higher than 5:1. Delta is also quoted (correctly I might add) as saying that they were effectively "backstoping" OALs crappy operations.

This is another example of how having good opperations is benificial (it allows DL to raise its rates) and how an airline with bad OPPs (United) can't really say no. So yes, its customer friendly, but if UA is offloading folks to DL at a higher then 5:1 ratio, they really had no option but to pay what DL is demanding, the other option was to make these folks sit for a day or two for a UA flight, or go the IDB route, both of which would have further hurt them.

dmurphynj

Actually, it's very sound business.

It'd be plain stupid to say "Offer the most expensive option first."

Common sense and logic.... the folks here at FT read way too far into things like this. It's just being sensible and reasonable.

"We have the agreement with Delta for when we need it... but really, try to use the lower cost options first" is all this says.

Which is EXACTLY what I'd say if I ran United.

cerealmarketer

The article says nothing about UA's ratio - just that total volume from UA to DL was higher than AA to DL.

The 5:1 is an acceptance rate. Remember, the other airline doesn't have to accept the rebook.

Someone on Gary Leff's blog is saying AA was refusing a fair amount of irrops accommodation from Delta passengers, and the ratio of asks was not so imbalanced.

Perhaps DL wanted some commitment to reciprocation that AA didn't want to play along with. Or it tried charging AA a higher rate than UA for being short sighted.

Either way IRROPS at LGA and JFK just lost a valuable backstop where the two of them had a lot of nonstop route overlap. Neither of them interlines with JetBlue.

BOS and DCA are also big losers now that I think about share there.

Delta can have a more reliable operation, but it's not even close to 100% - especially in delay prone NYC where it's fighting for share and you yourself have noted no one can run a reliable operation at LGA.

No customer wins with this non-agreement - short sighted by AA and DL.

transportprof

I agree that it would be stupid to say "Offer the most expensive options first."

But I think that your interpretation of "Avoid rebooking on Delta and other interline airlines...." reads plenty into United's own guidance to arrive at the suggestion that "We have the agreement with Delta, but really try to use the lower cost options first..."

There have been many reports in this forum of pax being told that rebooking on OALs during IRROPS is not possible. I don't think people are making this up, and I think such a denial that interline alternatives exist is more consistent with the "Avoid rebooking on Delta and other interline airlines" instruction.

I also agree with LarkSFO that FTers who are well informed and equipped can stick up for their preferred interline alternatives and stand a better chance of getting what they want after much agitation. But this turns what could be a 'flyer friendly' IRROPS moment of UA helping its customer out of a mess into another episode of UA grudgingly giving a remedy for their own under-performance in maintenance and crew scheduling.

Maybe it is sub-optimal to have an interline agreement in place and then discourage using it to the point that customers walk away angry at UA's customer care even after the expense of an interline rebooking has been incurred?

blueman2

I think this is GREAT news for any UA flier. DL has become my other primary airline, so I could not be happier. This is an actual 'flier friendly' move by UA!^^

Also, thanks nerdbirdsjc for providing those details. It will definitely help when negotiating with UA during irrops to know the rules! This is what FT is really all about.

Indelaware

Yes, AA will send more passengers to UA as they will not, after September 15 be sending them to DL. Likewise, DL will send more passengers to UA as they will not be sending them to AA.

But that sadly doesn't mean that the UA passenger will be any more luckier in scoring DBs as it is very seldom that a receiving airline will overbook a flight in order to accommodate an OAL passenger -- at least not in IRROPS.

ChinaShrek

Since Air Canada is a JV partner, does this mean that I can be ask to fly Air Canada if my United flight within the United States is cancelled? For example, can I request BOS-YYZ-SFO if my flight to San Francisco is cancelled? If so, this would be great!

Indelaware

Only if one (or more) of those flights is operated by a US carrier. I used to regularly fly BOS-YYZ-CLE all on US metal.

UAL4life

While it is possible to Oversale with passengers by another airline, it is practice to send passengers back to said airline and/or fix the Oversale by removing and placing the passengers on standby. It's unlikely(not impossible though) UA would pay VDB or even worse, cash in IDB comp for AAs perils.