Strange/Alarming reminder from UA on China flights when ticket was booked by miles
 

Got both a text message and an email about my trip to Shanghai this Friday, where the ticket is booked using award miles. Does this sound alarming that they might bump me off the flight as a non-revenue customer? Called 1K line and the agent said no worries as this might be a blanket statement to all customers on the flight and the flight currently is booked to capacity.

Anyone else got this type of reminder before?

================================================== ======================
Important information about your upcoming trip

Unfortunately, due to imposed government regulations, our flight to PVG can only be boarded to a maximum 75% total aircraft capacity. For the B777-300 aircraft, this is a total of 263 revenue and non-revenue customers. As a non-revenue customer, please be mindful of this restriction when making travel plans. Thank you for your patience during this challenging time.

Confirmation Number: XXXXXX
================================================== =======================

An award ticket is not a non-revenue customer. That message makes no sense as written.

The involuntary denied boarding list is supposed to be processed first by status and then by fare class. Assuming they follow the process correctly, you'd be IDB'd before any other 1Ks or GSes, but after any general members, Silver, Gold, or Platinum members.

They'll also ask for volunteers, although I suspect even a $10K voucher might not be compelling to many people trying to get to China right now.

Covid IDBs?
 

Hmm. Is this IDB? I guess the answer is yes. I haven't seen any reports of US airlines thinning the herd so to speak.

But are pax entitled to compensation? According to the letter of the law, yes. But the intent of the law was to exempt airlines from paying due to unforeseen circumstances. Of course, they could choose to sell fewer tickets in anticipation of govt regulation. I suppose the shrewd move would be to cancel these flights 1 day out and rebook most pax onto a new flight number. How has UA been handling this (if at all?).

By the literal letter of the law yes, and admittedly I am not a lawyer but I can definitely see a court interpreting "(b) The flight for which the passenger holds confirmed reserved spaceis unable to accommodate that passenger because of substitution of equipment of lesser capacity when required by operational or safety reasons;..." although the aircraft has not been substituted the lesser capacity is definitely for "operational or safety reasons" (and possibly, under the COC's "refusal to transport when it would violate a government requirement" escape hatch)

That said I can't imagine UA would actually allow a flight to be booked >75% knowing that that's a limit; revenue management would have to be insane to authorize >75% of seats for sale (plus, perhaps some small oversell margin)

And I agree the message makes no sense since MP tickets are not non-revenue tickets for NRPS/NRSB purposes... I'm guessing someone clicked the wrong checkboxes when applying that waring to specific fare classes/reservation statuses.

I don't think there's any question that UA would follow the VDB procedure in this case in order to try to cause the fewest headaches. When that fails, I agree that there's a possibility that they would attempt to IDB without compensation; whether or not that would hold up under scrutiny, I don't know. I'd certainly file a complaint if I were IDB'ed and not given compensation. I don't think that this would fall under the substitution of a smaller aircraft or weight & balance clauses.

Good points. And howdy! Hope you're enjoying Brazil. Just had a zoom with someone there. Hypothetically RM might be selling full capacity for 11 months. China pulls this policy out of their behind tomorrow. Then what? You can't unsell those tickets! Altho in this bizarro world, it wouldn't surprise me.
Yes I agree. In fact, UA is likely bound by the CoC regardless of what the law says. So it sounds like this is brand new territory? Exciting!!!!!

That flight has more than 263 confirmed pax right now, so let us know what happens.

Thanks! Wish things were more "normal" for my first time here (and I had time for sight-seeing), but honestly the places I've been both in Sao Paulo and Rio feel a bit safer than at home.

Fair point re: an 11 month schedule. I wonder what % load factor at say T-90 UA would have under normal circumstances... given that Chinese traffic tanked early and we're 7ish months into this at this point is that (being booked >75% of true capacity, let alone significantly >75%) really something that is happening? Admittedly I haven't looked and reduced supply probably drives loads on individual flights higher but I do wonder. On the other hand if UA didnt' think this was a potential problem they wouldn't throw the flag up.

That said having "insider" friends sharing load details with me in the past I do know that employees can see all of the details (capacity, authorized for sale, booked, standby, etc.) so sticking with the "this was an accident for OP" theory it would make sense for NRSBs -- "Oh, this aircraft can seat 400 people but revenue management has only authorized 300 for sale... slam dunk I'm on this flight" and the notice would serve as the "no there's a reason it's only authorized to 300, don't get your hopes up" backstop

Capacity to/from China remains extremely limited; as a result, airfares remain very high and planes remain full. UA is charging -- and, I believe, getting -- $7K+ RT for Y and $20K for J.

OP, China has been restricting inbound flights to 75% of capacity since some time in March, so United cannot say it is a new or unforeseen restriction. China has also severely reduced the number of inbound flights and with demand to China far higher than what is available prices are really high. Regardless, as jsloan pointed out you should not be getting communication addressing you as a non-rev passenger if you paid by miles. If reservations says you are OK as a 1K you should make this flight even it is slightly oversold.

Thanks everyone for sharing your thoughts and suggestions. I will try to arrive at SFO early this Friday and report back on the final outcome. Fingers crossed!

Maybe they build some slack in for people not having the correct tests/failing the test before the flight. That said I can’t imagine how upset I’d be if after paying through the nose for the rapid Covid tests within 48 hours and getting all the docs in order, they denied me boarding.

You won’t have any problem to make the trip.
The ticket price is insane due to outbound (SFO-PVG) demand. There are plenty of saver economy tickets available for inbound PVG-SFO. No Chinese wants to come to the COVID-19 epic center.
Safe travel!

OP seems to be traveling to PVG, not from PVG, according to the OP of this threat ("to Shanghai").

This might be a new regulation from China, I just got out of quarantine in Shanghai and my flight (SFO-PVG) was 100% full. Cases started spiking shortly after I flew though, and I believe Chinese visas are now being revoked from Europe for that reason. I dont think they started revoking US visas yet but I could be wrong.