findark

Yes.

Looks like there was a last minute downgauge to a 73G; this is probably what caused the oversell.

sexykitten7

Cool! Didn't realize you could cablepick in the past!
Correct! 1AB were occupied by the pilots on all legs and 2AB weren't used obviously. In fact, IIRC F was full the whole way. So it looks like a true oversale as I suspected. I was sitting in F so couldn't see coach. For those who don't know, this flight is part of the famous Island Hopper.
Funny you should say that. I met a nice woman on one of the islands who said she was bumped out of first or one or more segments due to the crew seats. At the time I thought that was odd since those are blocked from the get go but I'll bet she was really bumped due to the downgauge. I'm glad I picked 2F!

AugustusM

Watched this happen while in BG1 flying CVG-EWR this past week.

Offers start going out for an oversold beginning at $200. Climbs tp $1,000 and there is one taker and one more required. Two guys, obviously travelling together but not on the same PNR, head to the counter. Both are connecting on to Europe that evening and both want the voucher. First guy gets a favorable reschedule, leaving CVG the next morning, and GA gives him the voucher to fill out.

Second guy still wants a voucher but GA explains they don't need anyone else. He then says he doesn't want to travel alone and asks to be rescheduled for the same flight as his friend. GA makes it clear he gets no comp. He agrees and they change his flight. GA then calls over first guy, who has just finished filling out his info, and tell him due to his friend volunteering to VDB for free they no longer need him to do the same and take his voucher. He is then instructed to get on line.

First guy is obviously not happy and instead decides to overnight with his friend. GA then clears one more standby for free.

BThumme

Wouldn't the GA have cleared the original volunteer (before the group of 2) before a standby?

Anyways, GA's are pushed to give out as little as possible, and when a customer agreed to nothing, well...that's a messy situation indeed.

I've always wondered when I've traveled with my SO, if they only needed one volunteer and offered $500, if we could volunteer together with only one of us getting comp. Good to know that if I found myself in that situation, and one of us said we would take nothing, that the GA might say they're only going to rebook one of us for free with no comp. If it's obvious you're traveling together, I would hope the GA would make an effort not to split.

AugustusM

The first person who took the $1,00 was when they needed two volunteers. When it went to $1,200 is when these two guys travelling together hosed themselves. Then they both VDB's to the next day opening up a third seat for another standby.

BThumme

I get that, but UA should have boarded the original 1000 as that persons seat was no longer needed instead of boarding a standby. Then UA wouldn't have had to pay out anyone.

AugustusM

From what I could tell the GA signed off on the $1,000 but the second person was still filling out their form.

sexykitten7

I really don't understand your story at all since it seems to involve 2 people called "first guy".

There was one solo traveller A and two companions B and C. A volunteered. When B and C volunteered, B got the voucher ripped out of their hands and A decided to stay in town? Is that correct?

Since 3 people volunteered, the flight ended up under by 1 so they cleared the next SBY. Did anyone get to keep their comp?

I would be livid if someone grabbed an ETC from me. Either wait to the end of boarding to issue it or write it off.

Edit: And while I agree B and C effectively hosed themselves, I wouldn't be so quick to judge. 1. They probably didn't think the single voucher would be revoked and 2. Even if it "cost" $1200, I'd rather fly with a friend v.s. alone. Recently did a 2.5 day MR (did not leave airports) so I know how business travelers must feel!

AugustusM

Correct.

A already had his voucher signed off on. B was filling his out when C decided to VDB for free and take the same flight as B. When B came back he was told they no longer needed his services and took the uncompleted voucher.A got $1,000.

jjmoore

B should have completed the voucher 100% before C switched flights. For such a short flight, I would fly alone for $1000 ... even if it was my significant other (she would kick my butt for not taking the voucher just so we could stay together). Situations like this feel very rushed... trust me, I know. I have volunteered before when 1 was needed under the agreement that I would be comped even though I want my wife to switch with me, which would create an open seat. I have never been denied this. B and C should have at least approached this situation as such... comp for one person, but both people move flights. UA got a gift in this scenario.

Lesson here:

Never make a change in a situation like this without guaranteed compensation. The gate agent took advantage of this situation and B and C both got hosed.

BThumme

In this scenario, the ideal outcome would have been the GA using B (for $1000) and C (for free) and making A board. That is "only" 1k, whereas A+ B or A+B+C would be at least 2,000. If the GA did actually print a voucher and make a change (that is very, very, very, very rare) for A, well, that's United's issue. Usually when you volunteer, you aren't getting the voucher amount until the door is shut and usually then they still have to finish everything else.

jjmoore

Of course... the ideal situation for UA. They needed 2 ppl, so A beat B and C to the desk to get the voucher. Somehow, B and C dropped the ball and agreed to voluntarily change without compensation (this is beyond belief, but as I said, the situation was rapid and fluid, and they received the short end of the stick). Ideally, A would have been comped first. Then B and C approach the gate offering to volunteer their seats for the $1000 comp needed for the second seat, and as a part of the deal, C would be moved to the same protection flight as B. If the GA didn't agree to that, I would argue that B and C should board and force the GA to find another volunteer (likely costing them more $$) or IDB someone.

Anyway, it was a more than ideal outcome for UA, as they only gave half of what was originally anticipated, and were able to take a SBY pax (even bigger winner if that pax was revenue vs nonrev).

txaggiemiles

In your opinion was the GA devious here and purposefully trying to "trick" the two travelers or did s/he not understand that they were together?

This story is shocking to me.

jjmoore

Hard to say without actually witnessing the situation. It probably happened very quickly... and both parties likely didn't understand the significance until after... though I wouldn't doubt the GA took advantage of the situation.

Bottom line is that passengers MUST understand that this is a negotiation process.... UA should still have compensated 2 people in this situation where 2 people were needed.... regardless of how many people voluntarily offloaded the aircraft.... I don't think there was malicious intent by the gate agent here... but wouldn't be surprised if that GA was consciously avoiding giving a compensation. If the pax simply asked to be compensated or both pax would board the aircraft, the GA likely would have compensated the second passenger and that would have been the end of it. As I stated, it would be tough to know the true dynamics of the situation without actually witnessing it.

joe_miami

The GA probably thought B and C were playing games.