Stopped at the Gate
 

Flying ORD-LAX, 777 on flight #941. When I made the reservation about 2 weeks ago, I didn't say anything as the agent gave me seat 2A. I had used a CR1 to get me into business, but I wasn't planning on saying anything. So I make it up to Chicago on my connection, we're all standing around in the boarding area, just before boarding is to begin. Gate agent calls me to podium where they collect tickets, tells me there has been an equipment change, and hands me a BP for business class. Note, when I booked the ticket, I knew it was an int'l 777 which is why I tried to get on that flight.

On one hand, I got what I paid for, and the mistake was caught. But the plane went out with what looked like about 6 empty F Suites, and business about 60% full. I can't really imagine that there would have been any incremental cost difference, so given the loads, why wouldn't they have let it slide, particularly so close to boarding?

I think they key is, you got what you paid for. I am surprised they actually caught it after you had already checked in and received a boarding pass but apparently they reviewed all of the people in F...perhaps at the gate. At any rate, the reason they didnt let slide was they just wanted to make sure you got what you paid for. ;)

Ditto.

If you get away with it great, but having it caught and corrected before you actually boarded seems to be reasonable to me.

Just because there are empty seats I don't see why there is any entitlement. You were "entitled" to C and that's what you got. Everyone could come up with some reason why they think they should get more that they are entitled to.

Don't get me wrong, I didn't feel "entitled" to an F seat. I just am surprised that they would have caught it and then pulled it rather than let it slide. No incremental cost to them (or is there?).

The incremental cost in dollars is slim to none I would say (maybe a little better meal, and a few small things etc.).

But if they do it for you, then they should do it for the next guy because he has some reason. I guess what makes your case better than the next guys? Because they already printed out the BP? I could be delayed for an hour and say why not throw me in F because I was inconvienced for an hour. So my point is everyone has a reason so where does it end?

IMHO the incremental cost is the dilution of the product everytime you make an exception. I always upg and when I see someone moving up without "paying" for it it kind of irks me. I pay (in an upg or otherwise), so should they be diluting it by making exceptions for various reasons. Personally I don't think so. Now with that said if they printed out a BP I would do exactly what you did, but if I got caught (which yes does surprise me since the BP was already issued) I'd revert back to my previous comments and say oh well I wasn't entltled anyhow.

Not saying you felt entitled, but you're basically asking, "Why didn't they op-up me?"

Were you the only one issued a new BP, or did a bunch of people need one b/c of a different seating config? If you were the only one, I'd agree that it was probably a little odd. If not, I'd say they maybe didn't even notice that there HAD been an error. They just re-issued you a C pass b/c you needed a new one and you were in C.

As I see it, there are two possibilities here as two what happened: Either the OP misread his itinerary and/or the flight schedule, in which case there might have been an aircraft change indeed and he moved from an entitled F in an F/Y configuration to an entitled C in an F/C/Y configuration. Or, other option, the check-in agent at his point of origin wanted to do him a favor by putting him in three-class F (or made an unlikely mistake) and the gate agent in ORD back him out of it. In the latter case, though, I am wondering what the talk about an equipment change is all about. They should at least be honest about it. My personal guess: Option 2 and feeding the customer a line so as to not upset him. Which, in that case, did not work.

This also happened to my wife and I last month, out of SFO. We were both traveling on the FLY3FLY6 Fly First coupon. The rules on the coupon, is on the THREE Class equipment, one is to travel in Business Class. I had booked our flights last October on the PS 757 in BUSINESS Class, SFO/LAX/JFK. I had to use this route because on the FREE tickets, the Non-stop from SFO was not available, so from SfO to LAX, we were placed in First Class and then Business from LAX to JFK. Due to some schedule changes, the arrival time changed by more than an hour and the computer reserved us seats into LAX with a TWO plus hour layover. In addition, I lost the original seat assignments that I had chosen, 9 A/B, for the PS Service, LAX/JFK and my wife and I were seperated. I called 1K reservations and spoke to a service director, who was able to CONFIRM us, not only in FIRST CLASS, but on the NON-STOP from SFO/JFK. We were given seats 1A/B.

We checked in at SFO and were given our FIRST CLASS boarding passes. At the gate, our names were called by the gate agent, to come up to the podium. I went up and the gate agent said "an agent made a MISTAKE and gave you and your wife First Class seats, so I am correcting the mistake and here are your new boarding passes, in Business Class". I informed the agent that a service director had given us the First Class seats due to a schedule change and lost seat assignments, but the agent said that there was nothing noted in our PNR. Anyway, the agent would not budge. I then called 1K Customer relations, on my cell phone and expalined what had happened. The 1K Customer Relations agent asked to speak with the gate agent, but the gate agent said that he was too busy to talk because the flight was boarding and he was workinf on upgrades and standbys. The 1K customer relations agent heard what the gate agent said and told me that if my wife and I were each sent a voucher good for $150 would I be OK with the downgrade. Of course, I accepted the one time exception, as it was said.

This kind of change -- from int'l to dom 777 (and reverse) occurs quite frequently. When it happens, the seat map must be reviewed since there are significant differences. I'm told the system does this automatically, then it's reviewed by a CSR supervisor to ensure everything is worked out OK.

For example, a few months ago I was booked ORD-SFO on a 777, initially an int'l version with 8A reserved using a CR1. A few days before the flight, I checked the on-line seat map via a phantom booking, and saw that the seat map was unavailable. I knew something was up -- and sure enough -- the plane at the gate was a domestic version, and my 8A had been changed to a 2A when I checked in.

It sounds like the "equipment change" was an attempt at a polite way of taking away whatever error or favor had been give the OP. I think there are two basic questions in this thread, similar to the horrible experience at the SFO Int'l First lounge that RichardinSF experienced. First, "Who has the right and the responsibility to enforce the rules?" and more importantly, "When should a 'bank error in your favor' be rescinded?"

I would argue that in this case the GA has the right to check that no one is getting more than they paid for. However, does she have the responsibility to ensure that no one gets more than they paid for? I thought that the responsibility of ensuring that policies and rules are followed falls to the audit process. The GA may also not have the context for why something is the way it is. And once the GA makes a decision to reverse whatever goodwill someone else at UA had offered, it is hard to rectify after the trip has been taken.

And more importantly, I have to agree with the OP. There is no sense of entitlement here. In this case, the GA was perfectly within their rights to take this action. But I think taking away the 'bank error in your favor' costs UA much more in the long run in terms of goodwill than the cost of letting the occasional mistake go overlooked.

I agree with this. UA messed up, and I think they should have let it slide. They should also have told the OP that they had made a mistake, but they they would let it slide.

Is this flight usually a two class or three class 777? If it's usually a two class, then the GA was actually being honest.

I'm sure that the "equipment change" line was either eyewash or a presumption made by the GA.

Perhaps the GA was covering herself against a later accusation that she let a pax double upgrade. I've heard of such trouble. If so, who could blame her?

I always thought that PNRs would show who made the modifications and allowed whatever. So, unless it is the GA's responsibility to catch and rectify these things, she should not be reproached. I have had it happen now and then that a reservations agent would look at a rather convoluted and complex booking with multiple waitlists and other things and remark "you know, they should not have done xxxx but I'll leave it alone because I don't want to inconvenience you...". I would also say that, even without a sense of entitlement or the OP trying to game the system (both of which he did not), this "correction" costs more than it saved.

It wasn't a change of equipment, as they had this int'l configuration in the system when I made the reservation, which is one of the reasons I transited Chicago rather than flying N/S from MSY (also a better departure time, and I wanted to check out the EMB 170 R.J.). I didn't expect to be double upped when I purchased the ticket at the airport, but when I saw the seat assignment, nor did I point out it was a three class.