GA covered BP reader with her hand and looked up my name for preboarding
Apr 5, 2019, 6:40 pm
#76
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,125
That's true, but to come back on topic, this problem affects F pax more if they, by policy, have to board after a subset of Y pax, as there is a well-known practice of Y pax storing their bags in F bins on UA. And while that is convenient for a Y pax who can just pick it up when he leaves, it's not convenient for the F pax, who has to wait till everyone got off to get his bag, potentially missing connections.
One pax gaining a small benefit at the cost of a huge inconvenience for another pax is a practice that should not be acceptable in any class - no matter who paid what - and is a sure way to generate customer dissatisfaction, as anecdotal evidence on this forum has shown.
Anyway, points are made. In an ideal world, no one should want to board first.
One pax gaining a small benefit at the cost of a huge inconvenience for another pax is a practice that should not be acceptable in any class - no matter who paid what - and is a sure way to generate customer dissatisfaction, as anecdotal evidence on this forum has shown.
Anyway, points are made. In an ideal world, no one should want to board first.
I rarely see F passengers having to go well behind their row to find an open bin. Sure it happens but not that often (from what I've seen).
Lastly, there are plenty of 1Ks who don't get upgrades ( I should know, I'm one of them) and don't put the bag in an F bin. They automatically have the space right above them due to pre-boarding.
Apr 5, 2019, 6:44 pm
#77
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,115
Apr 5, 2019, 9:15 pm
#78
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Boston MA
Posts: 127
I do wish that passengers -- with or without status -- would make better use of the space beneath their seat. Non-bulkhead passengers should never put two bags up, but they frequently do, and only rarely does the flight attendant say anything. I'm also of the opinion that someone who only has a personal item should put that beneath their seat even if they don't have a carry-on, out of consideration for others, but I've taken enough flames for that here that I'd rather not get into it again.
I hate some of the BE philosophy at UA but actually like the no carry on aspect - mainly bc I have *G so it doesn't apply to me (but that also means I usually upfare to something else to maintain that status). I feel like by charging for checked bags they're incentivizing the battle for overhead space. For leisure travel many people would prefer to check. For business, that time at baggage claim is valuable and they'd rather be on the road already.
Apr 5, 2019, 9:24 pm
#79
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: New York / Hawaii
Programs: UA Global Services, HH Diamond
Posts: 5,178
There's also nothing UA has in its system whether or not a passenger can pre-board due to "needing extra assistance." So if a person wasn't on the "list" and went to pre-board with other "disabled" people, UA can't legally ask them to disclose the medical reason why they need to preboard. With so many people faking the system with fake emotional support animals (at least prior to the crackdown) I'm surprised more aren't gaming the system by asking to be pre-boarded before everyone else.
Apr 5, 2019, 9:33 pm
#80
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: USA
Programs: UA Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 1,195
I agree most passengers seek to put their carry-on in the bin above their seats but I've seen plenty of early boarders who just dump at the first available bin and keep offloading stuff so they don't have to put anything under the seat in front of them. The tendency to take up bin space forward of their actual seats seems to increase on the planes with the most limited overhead space.
Apr 6, 2019, 9:24 am
#81
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 2,531
I still don't believe that Y 1K and GS pax boarding before Group 1 (when there is TOOOOONS of space in the economy bins) are chucking their bags in the F bins as they pass through, or that this is happening with any material frequency.
Apr 7, 2019, 4:41 pm
#82
Join Date: Apr 2015
Programs: United Global Services, Amtrak Select Executive
Posts: 4,098
With the current fare structure and domestic F fares coded as F-type fares, I do believe that "paid F" has a meaning. I see the differential nothing more as a means to an end to avoid F from ever being cheaper than Y. But I agree with the gist of what you're saying, current price levels for domestic F-type fares are way too low, and I understand this contributes to some of the thoughts displayed in this thread. If "paid F" was literally at least five times more expensive than the corresponding Y-fare, more people would support the case of the F pax. However, the prices are decided by UA, so there's no point in victimizing the "paid F" pax. As both an UA status pax and a regular "paid F" pax, I wish the prices for paid F would go up. Way up.
That being said, don't forget about non-status INTL J/F pax who connect domestic on UA and end up in BG1 as well. They are most likely traveling on non-differential genuine J/F fares.
Right, the paid F pax could have paid $100 or $10000 (or even more) for his ticket, and both are treated equally on-board. Something needs to be fixed here, but only UA can do that.
I would be interested to see those statistics if they have been compiled.[/LEFT]
That being said, don't forget about non-status INTL J/F pax who connect domestic on UA and end up in BG1 as well. They are most likely traveling on non-differential genuine J/F fares.
Right, the paid F pax could have paid $100 or $10000 (or even more) for his ticket, and both are treated equally on-board. Something needs to be fixed here, but only UA can do that.
I would be interested to see those statistics if they have been compiled.[/LEFT]
Apr 7, 2019, 5:58 pm
#83
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: SAN
Programs: 1K (since 2008), *G (since 1990), 1MM
Posts: 3,219