NY-FLA

Ummmm, OK, but if straight is what you want, you'd have to try again. Use of the dimunitive first name form is the polar opposite of "random." For example, Tom, Tommy, Thomas should all be accepted as equivalent, and, indeed are, outside of the world of the UA MP service center. There is "0" (zero) randomness in that equivalence. The term " sh&@s and giggles" or " sh&@s and grins " is a perhaps local euphemism for "lets try and see". Just as the vernacular seems to have escaped you, so did the point. When it's to UA's benefit to complete the transaction, all first name versions are acceptable, the objection to different versions of the same name only appears when UA needs to complete something for the flyer's benefit. And where did you draw the conclusion that the automatic systems can't pick this up? IF flights proceed per normal, the auto systems do fine. Irrops or itinerary change they typically don't, because the systems can't match the flights. Then it's the humans that decide that not(Tom=Tommy) in my above example.

The name on my US tickets matches that in my US profile, because that's what autogenerates from the US web-site. Why would anyone think that this needs to be changed? Would that be required so that the MP service center can't find a reason for denial of credit?
As for the quote below; In >1000 Airport security interactions over 25 years, and several dozen international flights, the difference in the two versions of the same first name has never been an issue... NEVER!!! This has been true with DL, NW, CO, Eastern, FL and US, with TSA, McNeil Security, Asian, Central American, European passport authorities. Even the Canadians don't object!

Yes, I can see the NYT headlines now; "US Citizen stranded in Paris, two characters missing from first name on ticket. Timetable for repatriation remains uncertain."

NY-FLA

Well, the old and venerable FT advice paid its usual dividends today. Call and recall unitl you get the answer you want.

1st Call to MP service center today; reiteration of what is obviously scripted policy "original BP's must be mailed". "We know what names are the same but the data is entered off shore and non-native speakers can't understand what's the same" (ICC strikes again. )

Wait until normal working hours; SD time: "original BP's must be mailed" I ask well, if you OLCI which is the original BP.
Answer: It must be the stub from the card stock BP.
Me: What if you OLCI? US or UA the OLCI pax never gets or sees card stock; it's always standard sheets of paper, and so, how do you or I know which is original?
Answer: Even if you checked in from home, you'd still check at the gate to get your seat assigned , it has to be the little stub to get credit.
Me: Thanks, can I talk to a service director, please?
SD: Comes on, laughs at all recounted previous objections, reviews file and states "Everything needed to give credit is here. Your segments will post shortly."
And so they did.


Here's the litany of "reasoning" provided for these bizarre limitations:

1) Some FF"s are not honest and try and double credit flights. Me: well how does you having an original boarding pass negate that possibility? Answer:

2) The computer maps the name change and can't handle the different first name variations. Me: well 3 of 4 legs credited OK, why did the computer mapping work OK there? Answer:

3) Re name difference; ICC can't handle first name variations. Me: UA made and stands by that decision, now I must futz around to accomodate this incompetence? Answer: Um, yeah!

4) The agreement with our partner airlines requires that we have the original BP to process to them for credit.

Summary from my experience;
Call when the "A" team of service directors are there, probably 9-4 Mountain time. And take magiciansampras advice: "You just need to get someone on the phone and don't hang up until you get them to post the miles."

KathyWdrf

Probably good advice for many, many situations, not just MP, not just airlines. Oftentimes I am reluctant to call during "off-hours" for certain types of customer service problems, even though I know the phone is staffed 24/7.

CarlTheWebmaster

As another poster pointed out, automated systems are likely not to know all of the 'common' forms of names, particularly when the initials are different. You can cling to your fun and games if you want, but it's probably simpler to ensure that all FF registrations, tickets, and ID are using consistent names. Perhaps it's worth it to you to deal with the issues that result from the inconsistency, or perhaps not: your call.

No need to get all snippy. You seem proud that you use different names for fun -- and that's great, have all the fun you want. Just don't rant when that (inevitably) precludes the use of automated systems.


Great! Hope your luck holds on that. I'd argue that post 9/11 is a different world and that approach will catch up to you, but perhaps not.


How about this for a headline, but on the NY-FLA blog, not the NYT: "Vacation ruined due to denied entry into tropical paradise." Maybe risking that is worth it to you. It's not worth it to me.

Anyway, good luck with your miles, and attitude.

BenjaminNYC

Right. ^

A business actually SEEKING business; not one pushing it away.

violist

Why cause inconvenience to yourself and others by an inconsistency that
you see yourself entitled to but certainly isn't recognized everywhere?

I figure if you are going to use varying versions of your first name
at will, you deserve to spend the rest of your life flying Edward.