More Changes to MP Program re: *A Miles
Apr 25, 2006 | 2:51 pm
#16
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 57
It does seem they have been getting more difficult not just about crediting but also getting *A miles to post in the first place. I've been trying to get a LH FRA-SCC flight to post for three months now and still nothing despite repeated calls to M+... and having sent the boarding pass.
Apr 25, 2006 | 2:52 pm
#17
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Pacific
Programs: UA
Posts: 1,810
Originally Posted by qasr
I don't think any *A partners (besides UA & US) allow online printing of BP's. I know LH & SQ allow online check in, but you do not print your BP and need to pick it up at the airport.
Apr 25, 2006 | 4:26 pm
#18
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,312
We've been talking back and forth with some people at United Mileage Plus throughout the day, and thought you all might be interested that, in the process, this thread came up.
Evidently, some in their marketing department have been following along and sent us an email explaining the reasoning -- they've told us it is ok to post their message in this thread, so here goes...
Hope this adds to the discussion.
Evidently, some in their marketing department have been following along and sent us an email explaining the reasoning -- they've told us it is ok to post their message in this thread, so here goes...
In the current environment the Frequent Flier program determines the validity of a retro-credit request, to ensure the request is valid carriers have requested we review the original boarding pass and a copy of the ticket.
Sarbannes-Oxley audit rules have caused airlines to audit more processes and determine accuracy in billings. Airlines have found that they are paying multiple times for mileage accrual on the same flight in what is referred to as double dipping. Now airlines, in an effort to reduce costly double-dipping are creating flight validation systems to check these requests. (as it is the operating airline that pays for the miles ).
Doing flight validation also helps improve accuracy during irregular operations.
Within Star Alliance carriers are trying to determine what flight validation systems to put in place and how to develop more customer friendly systems for the future.
Without collecting the documentation and comparing it to flight validation records the frequent flyer programs cannot accurately reconcile with the operating airlines in an audit and develop new systems.
Mileage Plus just launched an industry leading retro-credit page on United.com that allows accurate real time postings for United flights without documentation. This process is valid for all tickets issued not just United issued (016) ticket stock. Hopefully this process will be implemented with select airline partners in the near future.
Sarbannes-Oxley audit rules have caused airlines to audit more processes and determine accuracy in billings. Airlines have found that they are paying multiple times for mileage accrual on the same flight in what is referred to as double dipping. Now airlines, in an effort to reduce costly double-dipping are creating flight validation systems to check these requests. (as it is the operating airline that pays for the miles ).
Doing flight validation also helps improve accuracy during irregular operations.
Within Star Alliance carriers are trying to determine what flight validation systems to put in place and how to develop more customer friendly systems for the future.
Without collecting the documentation and comparing it to flight validation records the frequent flyer programs cannot accurately reconcile with the operating airlines in an audit and develop new systems.
Mileage Plus just launched an industry leading retro-credit page on United.com that allows accurate real time postings for United flights without documentation. This process is valid for all tickets issued not just United issued (016) ticket stock. Hopefully this process will be implemented with select airline partners in the near future.
Apr 25, 2006 | 5:20 pm
#19
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
Originally Posted by Mikel at Webflyer
We've been talking back and forth with some people at United Mileage Plus throughout the day, and thought you all might be interested that, in the process, this thread came up.
Evidently, some in their marketing department have been following along and sent us an email explaining the reasoning -- they've told us it is ok to post their message in this thread, so here goes...
Hope this adds to the discussion.
Evidently, some in their marketing department have been following along and sent us an email explaining the reasoning -- they've told us it is ok to post their message in this thread, so here goes...
Hope this adds to the discussion.
On the topic of retroactive mileage credit, that's definitely been a weak spot for many industry players (and even for many customers).
I guess this is just another item for companies to use to bash S-O compliance requirements. UAL's government relations people must be loving this (as they hate Sarbanes-Oxley requirements).
Apr 25, 2006 | 5:31 pm
#20
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,401
S/OX rules are to the corporate world what "security" is to the airline world... you can throw it up at anything as cover for any negative action you want to take. 
[j/k btw for anyone taking this too seriously!]
[j/k btw for anyone taking this too seriously!]
Apr 25, 2006 | 7:40 pm
#21
Join Date: May 2003
Location: IAH
Programs: formerly UA GS, now lowly MM lifetime gold :(
Posts: 1,205
The content of the message is total B/S since SarbOx does not apply to foreign listed companies, only those listed on US Stock exchanges.
Apr 25, 2006 | 9:41 pm
#22
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 12,375
Originally Posted by IFlyMRY
I took a TG RT BKK-CNX in March via TG e-ticket. The e-ticket but not the BP have my MP #.
For TG, successful evidence would have been the notation "UA *G" on the boarding pass stub. With this, credit should appear within 48 hours.
I've got no problem with the requirement to send in originals, (I've had to do that with LH for years), as long as they understand that subsequent communications will involve copies.
Apr 25, 2006 | 11:20 pm
#23
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2005
Programs: CX Diamond, UA 2 MM, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Platinum Premier
Posts: 162
Originally Posted by osxanalyst
The content of the message is total B/S since SarbOx does not apply to foreign listed companies, only those listed on US Stock exchanges.
UA needs to face up to the problem and not "spin it".
The Alliance carriers can and should verify the flights taken and credit the miles without additional requirements for the ffers.
Apr 25, 2006 | 11:23 pm
#24
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2005
Programs: CX Diamond, UA 2 MM, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Platinum Premier
Posts: 162
Originally Posted by transpac
The OP could have avoided any issues by double- and triple-checking with mutiple TG personnel to make sure that their UA/MP FF# was correctly entered into the potentially multiple systems that might be encountered with TG and other *A carriers.
For TG, successful evidence would have been the notation "UA *G" on the boarding pass stub. With this, credit should appear within 48 hours.
I've got no problem with the requirement to send in originals, (I've had to do that with LH for years), as long as they understand that subsequent communications will involve copies.
For TG, successful evidence would have been the notation "UA *G" on the boarding pass stub. With this, credit should appear within 48 hours.
I've got no problem with the requirement to send in originals, (I've had to do that with LH for years), as long as they understand that subsequent communications will involve copies.
My BPs have a notation "UA*" on the bottom. Do they need to have "UA*G"?
Apr 25, 2006 | 11:53 pm
#25
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 12,375
Originally Posted by IFlyMRY
Thanks for the tip transpac. I did confirm with multiple (2) TG agents that my MP # was in the account.
My BPs have a notation "UA*" on the bottom. Do they need to have "UA*G"?
My BPs have a notation "UA*" on the bottom. Do they need to have "UA*G"?
). Always hand the card to the TG agent, or have it visible to them. You can ask for a print-out of the record, in order to verify the correct FF#.
Apr 26, 2006 | 7:30 am
#26
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2005
Programs: CX Diamond, UA 2 MM, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Platinum Premier
Posts: 162
Originally Posted by transpac
Yes, it should say "BKKCS" in smallish print, and "UA*G" in larger print, at the very bottom of the boarding card stub. I'm guessing that the FF# was entered incorrectly (somebody else probably got credit for your flight; am waiting for the post "Why did I get credit for this TG flight?" ). Always hand the card to the TG agent, or have it visible to them. You can ask for a print-out of the record, in order to verify the correct FF#.
). Always hand the card to the TG agent, or have it visible to them. You can ask for a print-out of the record, in order to verify the correct FF#.I guess having or not having the "G" (perhaps meaning Gold) after the"UA*" is the indication it is or isn't entered correctly.
After reading the replies and pondering this for awhile leads me to believe that most of the problem is TGs responsibiliity. I took their flight. Their agent or automated system failed to ensure that the miles were transfered to my MP account. This is not to say that at least some of the responsibility doesn't fall on UA as TG is their partner and UA is part of SA.
UA's marketing spin doesn't help matters it just puts salt on the wound.