For the gate, this sorting has always been true -- the key question is the sorting order before DM.

Exactly. Status has always been everything @ the gate. Need more data points about any chg in ranking prior to DM....

I've always understood the PA waitlist is displayed to agents in alphabetical order, but maybe that is really old information?

Interesting that the sponsoree gets on the PA waitlist, but is not adjacent to the sponsor. Maybe the sponsoree is really at the top of the PB waitlist?

It seems like more people are suggesting the PA waitlist clears, when NC/NF inventory becomes available, by status then fare class but what is the final tiebreaker? Date and time added to the PA waitlist? Is that what the OP is seeing when they identify themselves at position #4?

I don't think it is safe assumption to assume there are always elites on the waitlist. Only specific, relatively high fare classes qualify for upgrades. There could be plenty of elites that don't meet the upgrade requirements. I've met plenty of 1Ks that seem annoyed that many of the flights they book (lowest fare available) aren't eligible for SWUs. I think this will change once miles+copay are available for all fares. Of course, this will make it VERY hard for lower level elites to upgrade unless they can confirm in advance or travel on low-elite travel days. Booking 9 months in advance has no advantage if NC space doesn't open until a week before the flight and N-number of people had the opportunity to jump ahead of you.

Dear United (and @UnitedPR)

I don't understand why you just don't tell us _exactly_ how the upgrade waitlist system works. If your concern is your elites "gaming" the system, relax: that's a constant consideration unaffected by divulging the rules.

By opening the kimono on this process, you would be revealing nothing proprietary, but would allow MP members to rest more easily knowing how their upgrades are supposed to clear. Everyone would be calmer and satisfaction would rise.

If you're testing various upgrade schemes to see what the results are (some kind of A/B test), you can also tell us that. We're grownups (well, most of us at least), and we understand you might need to test some stuff out. I'd think you could simulate it based on historical data, but I'm just trying to cover the bases.

In summary: please just be clear with us how this works. It's better for everyone.

-G

I think UA's upgrade policies are more than clear. As much as I'd like to know the edge cases, I understand why UA won't really tell us. Upgrades aren't "supposed to clear". UA as a business doesn't want to upgrade somebody until they have exhausted every other opportunity to make higher revenue off the same seat. UA doesn't want to incentivize folks to purchase a lower-fare likely to get an upgrade over a confirmed seat in the higher cabin. Our status/fare paid/upgrade certs give us an opportunity for something that would otherwise go unused and most others don't have access.

The business reality is that UA has no reason to clear upgrade space in advance unless its for an operational reason (e.g.; make space in the current cabin to sell more seats). I would expect more and more flights to go battlefield or at minimum not expecting to clear until a day or two before the flight to minimize GA work and jeopardizing ontime departures.

denverhockeyguy:

Not sure if you misunderstood me or were being rhetorical, but just for clarity: I'm not suggesting upgrades are supposed to clear, I am suggesting that there is a process by which they are supposed to clear.

It is transparency in the process I am asking United to provide. Not a guarantee of further upgrades, nor any additional leverage. Merely a clearly articulated process explanation. It would calm everyone down, create a sense of fairness and predictability.

Not sure what you do for a living, but as anyone who deals with queue theory can tell you, you can make queue members readily stand in line for hours providing they know what to expect from the queue. If the process by which the queue moves forward (and an estimated wait time) is completely variable, all hell breaks loose.

This isn't my conjecture, incidentally - it's fact. United has a queue process which we can join, but we are unclear as to exactly how the queue works. This creates FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) - as the dozens of threads clearly illustrate. While United in unlikely to please everyone by illuminating the queue process (in fact, some people will probably get quite irritated), it will - in general - promote peace and stability among frequent travelers. In short, it's a cheap CS win for UA.

-G

PS - another thing that would help is if we had confidence in UA's tech team to write good, clear code.

There's the rub...

You're right. It's snowing and I'm have already broken into the holiday cocktail stash. Writing code is the scary part! Even if they have requirements and a documented process, it may or may not take into account all edge cases and short of talking to the developer(s), the people at UA that would respond to us probably don't even know. It could easily be that this is our "process" BUT there are these 10 exceptions, but the cost/benefit to fix (having to make adjustments in other parts of the system) are not worth sorting out. Short of reading the requirements doc and infrastructure comments you wouldn't know. Fine line between "bug" and undocumented feature sometimes ;-).

That said, I kind of like the changes and would prefer UA wait until as late as possible to clear upgrades. Most of my travel is for work (usually not more than 10 days notice). This tends to be put me as a 1K on high fares. I've been pretty successful on upgrades this year. It actually works to my advantage to sort the list based on status/fare, no companions, etc.

Now, when traveling with my 3P SO... the opposite is true. I'd be happy with NC9 and C=0