United on CRJ-550: "every traveler" can carry on a roller (not really if BE)
Dec 2, 2019, 1:26 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 24
United on CRJ-550: "every traveler" can carry on a roller (not really if BE)
A United Airlines executive made a statement via the media (Chicago Tribune) that every traveler on a CRJ-550 can carry on a roller bag. It turns out not to be true.
The Chicago Tribune article is titled "Welcome aboard United's new regional jet, with fewer seats, extra space for luggage - and a snack bar in first class".
United is touting this as a benefit to passengers, without mentioning that the new CRJ-550 configuration is not for passenger benefit but because of some contractual constraints (as mentioned elsewhere on FlyerTalk, thread "Will the CRJ550 be a failure?", posts 10, 21, 23). Worse, the unqualified "every traveler" statement turns out to be false.
I am posting this only to inform my fellow travelers. Contacting United resulted only in an all-talk-no-action response (included below). This is my first post and I hope it's appropriate for the scope of this forum.
My letter to United:
To whom it may concern:
An article in the Chicago Tribune
contains the following statement from a United executive
regarding the new 50-seat CRJ-550:
"Between the overhead bins and lockers, there should be enough space
for every traveler to bring a rolling carry-on, said Sarah Murphy, senior
vice president of United Express."
That sounds great... at first. In order to confirm the above, I spoke with
Xxxxxxx in United customer service, who said that some passengers will
still be denied carrying on a roller bag, depending on what ticket they
purchased (Basic Economy being the ones who will be denied). In other
words, some passengers will be allowed to bring it on, and some will not.
That contradicts the statement from Sarah Murphy, since not "every
traveler" can bring a rolling carry-on. Some will be denied. (That's like
saying "every traveler on the CRJ-550 gets a first class seat", and later on
saying "but wait, let's see what ticket your purchased").
Furthermore, Xxxxxxx confirmed that the gate agent will refuse to allow
some passengers to carry on a roller bag even if it is confirmed that
space is available. Again, I don't see how that is consistent with what
Sarah Murphy was representing about the advantages of the CRJ-550.
Another problem is that the online process says that, for the carry-on
policy, "This restriction does not apply to MileagePlus Premier members,
primary cardmembers of qualifying MileagePlus credit cards or Star Alliance
Gold members", without saying what "qualifying" means. I have a Mileage
Plus credit card.
Xxxxxxx told me that in order to escalate this issue, I should send a
message to this email ([email protected]).
I am writing to object to the discrepancy between what United
executives represent through the media and what happens in practice.
I have been a United customer for a long time, with a half million
flight miles. In recent years, I have tended to use other airlines, partly
due to various customer service failures on United's part. Sometimes
I want to give United a chance again, but this kind of issue does not help.
I purchased a ticket (XXXXXXXXXXXXX, XXXXXX) and have not yet decided
whether I will cancel it during the 24-hour refund window. In my opinion,
I should be allowed to take a roller onto the plane, if "every traveler" on
the CRJ-550 supposedly can do that. And, if Sarah Murphy's statement
was inaccurate or misleading, then a retraction should be published.
But the better option would be for United to change its operational
procedures to match what was represented by Sarah Murphy. I'm
not confident that this can happen by Dec. 4 (the date of my flight).
I hope you understand that the time I've taken to raise this issue with
you probably benefits you far more than it benefits me, as United
apparently has areas, particularly in customer relations, that need
improvement.
Regards,
XXXX XXXXXXX
Mileage Plus number: XXXXXXXX
United's response:
We appreciate you taking time to share your thoughts about our services.
We're sorry our products didn't meet your needs, and your comments are very helpful to us in understanding how to improve your travel experience.
We look forward to working toward the suggestions you've mentioned, and to welcoming you aboard your next flight.
The Chicago Tribune article is titled "Welcome aboard United's new regional jet, with fewer seats, extra space for luggage - and a snack bar in first class".
United is touting this as a benefit to passengers, without mentioning that the new CRJ-550 configuration is not for passenger benefit but because of some contractual constraints (as mentioned elsewhere on FlyerTalk, thread "Will the CRJ550 be a failure?", posts 10, 21, 23). Worse, the unqualified "every traveler" statement turns out to be false.
I am posting this only to inform my fellow travelers. Contacting United resulted only in an all-talk-no-action response (included below). This is my first post and I hope it's appropriate for the scope of this forum.
My letter to United:
To whom it may concern:
An article in the Chicago Tribune
contains the following statement from a United executive
regarding the new 50-seat CRJ-550:
"Between the overhead bins and lockers, there should be enough space
for every traveler to bring a rolling carry-on, said Sarah Murphy, senior
vice president of United Express."
That sounds great... at first. In order to confirm the above, I spoke with
Xxxxxxx in United customer service, who said that some passengers will
still be denied carrying on a roller bag, depending on what ticket they
purchased (Basic Economy being the ones who will be denied). In other
words, some passengers will be allowed to bring it on, and some will not.
That contradicts the statement from Sarah Murphy, since not "every
traveler" can bring a rolling carry-on. Some will be denied. (That's like
saying "every traveler on the CRJ-550 gets a first class seat", and later on
saying "but wait, let's see what ticket your purchased").
Furthermore, Xxxxxxx confirmed that the gate agent will refuse to allow
some passengers to carry on a roller bag even if it is confirmed that
space is available. Again, I don't see how that is consistent with what
Sarah Murphy was representing about the advantages of the CRJ-550.
Another problem is that the online process says that, for the carry-on
policy, "This restriction does not apply to MileagePlus Premier members,
primary cardmembers of qualifying MileagePlus credit cards or Star Alliance
Gold members", without saying what "qualifying" means. I have a Mileage
Plus credit card.
Xxxxxxx told me that in order to escalate this issue, I should send a
message to this email ([email protected]).
I am writing to object to the discrepancy between what United
executives represent through the media and what happens in practice.
I have been a United customer for a long time, with a half million
flight miles. In recent years, I have tended to use other airlines, partly
due to various customer service failures on United's part. Sometimes
I want to give United a chance again, but this kind of issue does not help.
I purchased a ticket (XXXXXXXXXXXXX, XXXXXX) and have not yet decided
whether I will cancel it during the 24-hour refund window. In my opinion,
I should be allowed to take a roller onto the plane, if "every traveler" on
the CRJ-550 supposedly can do that. And, if Sarah Murphy's statement
was inaccurate or misleading, then a retraction should be published.
But the better option would be for United to change its operational
procedures to match what was represented by Sarah Murphy. I'm
not confident that this can happen by Dec. 4 (the date of my flight).
I hope you understand that the time I've taken to raise this issue with
you probably benefits you far more than it benefits me, as United
apparently has areas, particularly in customer relations, that need
improvement.
Regards,
XXXX XXXXXXX
Mileage Plus number: XXXXXXXX
We appreciate you taking time to share your thoughts about our services.
We're sorry our products didn't meet your needs, and your comments are very helpful to us in understanding how to improve your travel experience.
We look forward to working toward the suggestions you've mentioned, and to welcoming you aboard your next flight.
Dec 2, 2019, 1:38 pm
#3
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Kitchener, ON, Canada
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 1,266
Actually - I stand by United's interpretation. Every traveler CAN bring aboard a roll-aboard. Some will CHOOSE not to by buying a cheaper ticket that doesn't grant them that privilege.
But compared to a standard regional jet today - where even if you buy a 'regular' ticket you're often forced to gate-check your bag, that is no longer an issue.
Don't complain to United because you're trying to find a loophole to a basic economy ticket.
But compared to a standard regional jet today - where even if you buy a 'regular' ticket you're often forced to gate-check your bag, that is no longer an issue.
Don't complain to United because you're trying to find a loophole to a basic economy ticket.
Dec 2, 2019, 1:40 pm
#4
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 24
Since I didn't cancel during the 24-hour window, and they haven't made any concession, I'll just do it their way (pay to check my roller bag at check-in) and avoid United in the future, to the extent that I can
I don't like airlines where words and actions don't match.
I don't like airlines where words and actions don't match.
Dec 2, 2019, 1:43 pm
#5
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
Well -
"Between the overhead bins and lockers, there should be enough space
for every traveler to bring a rolling carry-on, said Sarah Murphy, senior
vice president of United Express."
I see nothing wrong with that statement. Nothing in that statement implies it overrides Basic Economy restrictions.
I'm actually more surprised they responded to your email.
"Between the overhead bins and lockers, there should be enough space
for every traveler to bring a rolling carry-on, said Sarah Murphy, senior
vice president of United Express."
I see nothing wrong with that statement. Nothing in that statement implies it overrides Basic Economy restrictions.
I'm actually more surprised they responded to your email.
Dec 2, 2019, 1:46 pm
#6
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 24
Don't complain to United because you're trying to find a loophole to a basic economy ticket.
Dec 2, 2019, 1:50 pm
#7
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,455
Since I didn't cancel during the 24-hour window, and they haven't made any concession, I'll just do it their way (pay to check my roller bag at check-in) and avoid United in the future, to the extent that I can
I don't like airlines where words and actions don't match.
I don't like airlines where words and actions don't match.
What's your objective?
The language you point to, that everyone "should" be able to bring a carry-on aboard, is a statement of probability, not of fact. It's not a warranty or promise. So, what are looking for? A guarantee that you'll definitely be able to take your unknown-sized carry-on aboard? Sorry, but none of us get that kind of assurance, even if we are totally compliant with carry-on size guidelines.
You're tilting at windmills here.
Last edited by EWR764; Dec 2, 2019 at 2:22 pm
Dec 2, 2019, 1:51 pm
#8
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Colorado
Programs: UA Gold (.85 MM), HH Diamond, SPG Platinum (LT Gold), Hertz PC, National EE
Posts: 5,663
A United Airlines executive made a statement via the media (Chicago Tribune) that every traveler on a CRJ-550 can carry on a roller bag. It turns out not to be true.
The Chicago Tribune article is titled "Welcome aboard United's new regional jet, with fewer seats, extra space for luggage - and a snack bar in first class".
United is touting this as a benefit to passengers, without mentioning that the new CRJ-550 configuration is not for passenger benefit but because of some contractual constraints (as mentioned elsewhere on FlyerTalk, thread "Will the CRJ550 be a failure?", posts 10, 21, 23). Worse, the unqualified "every traveler" statement turns out to be false.
I am posting this only to inform my fellow travelers. Contacting United resulted only in an all-talk-no-action response (included below). This is my first post and I hope it's appropriate for the scope of this forum.
My letter to United:
United's response:
The Chicago Tribune article is titled "Welcome aboard United's new regional jet, with fewer seats, extra space for luggage - and a snack bar in first class".
United is touting this as a benefit to passengers, without mentioning that the new CRJ-550 configuration is not for passenger benefit but because of some contractual constraints (as mentioned elsewhere on FlyerTalk, thread "Will the CRJ550 be a failure?", posts 10, 21, 23). Worse, the unqualified "every traveler" statement turns out to be false.
I am posting this only to inform my fellow travelers. Contacting United resulted only in an all-talk-no-action response (included below). This is my first post and I hope it's appropriate for the scope of this forum.
My letter to United:
United's response:
Dec 2, 2019, 1:51 pm
#9
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Morris County, NJ
Programs: UA 1K/*G, Avis Pres, Marriott Plat
Posts: 2,305
for every traveler to bring a rolling carry-on, said Sarah Murphy, senior
vice president of United Express."
... and there IS enough space for every traveler to bring a rolling carry-on. The fact that you purchased a ticket precluding you from doing such doesn't change the fact that the plane has enough space for every traveler to bring a rolling carry-on aboard.
It does.
And please don't be disingenuous - you're looking for a loophole and you know it.
It's complaints like this that either lead to ridiculous lawyerese around every statement, or worse -- for companies to not make statements at all.
No good deed goes unpunished.
Dec 2, 2019, 1:53 pm
#10
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
But they didn't say that and the statement from United doesn't resemble that.
Dec 2, 2019, 1:55 pm
#12
Join Date: Apr 2015
Programs: United Global Services, Amtrak Select Executive
Posts: 4,098
Since I didn't cancel during the 24-hour window, and they haven't made any concession, I'll just do it their way (pay to check my roller bag at check-in) and avoid United in the future, to the extent that I can
I don't like airlines where words and actions don't match.
I don't like airlines where words and actions don't match.
EDITED TO ADD: In the time it took me to write this, a bunch of others made the same point. I don't think this thread is going anywhere further.
Dec 2, 2019, 2:04 pm
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 19,510
Precisely. It’s analogous to the airline saying “We’ve catered as many cans of Brand X beer on this domestic flight as there are passenger seats.” You’re still not going to get a beer if you’re under age and even so it’s not going to be “free” unless you’re seated in a certain cabin, have a certain status with airline, or thought to bring chocolates for the flight attendants.
Dec 2, 2019, 2:08 pm
#15
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 24
But if we want to talk about what is disingenuous and what is not, then we should first look at why Basic Economy passengers are not allowed to carry on rollers in the first place. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume it's because the carry-on space on board the plane is space-constrained. What other reason would there be? Then, if they offer a plane that's configured to allow enough space for all passengers to carry on a roller, and they go so far as to tout that fact via the media, then it removes the original reason for not allowing the rollers, does it not? In that case, what reason remains for disallowing some passengers from carrying on the roller onto that particular configuration of plane?
And since you're quick to accuse people of being disingenuous, then should I be equally quick and suggest that the answer to my final question above is "so the airline can collect revenue on the checked-bag fee" (meaning that space-constraint is not the real reason for disallowing rollers, making United the disingenuous party in this case)?
If you have any good answers to the above questions, I'd be interested to know what they are, in all honesty.
No good deed goes unpunished.
Obviously, there is more than one point of view on this matter, and if you don't mind, I'd suggest not getting into ad hominem characterizations of the forum members.