Another DEN RCC issue
Aug 7, 2008, 6:10 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlántida, Canelones, Uruguay (MVD) and rarely GNV
Programs: AV LifeMiles, CM ConnectMiles, BA Exec Club. Former:ex-ASGold, ex-UA1K, ex-COPlat, ex-NWGold.
Posts: 2,673
Another DEN RCC issue
Sitting in the DEN West RCC before the LHR flight. I'm flying C from an SWU, MrsXS is in the back (at least as far as the BPs read.) I'm not an RCC member. I am a 1K so am *G.
The gentleman at the admit desk did not want to admit MrsXS, because on an international C ticket, you don't get a guest. I said, "but I'm a UA 1K which makes me *G, and *G on an international itinerary does get a guest." He repeated his assertion and said he'd admit her as my guest as a 1-time exception. I wasn't satisfied with that answer, because I'm thinking about future trips and other customers too. He then called somebody, who he said told him the same thing, no guest. I'm trying to explain "logically this is silly - if I was in coach, you'd admit me and a guest based on my *G status and itinerary." He claimed that I was wrong and those must have been exceptions also. Actually, I remember him admitting me as a *G with a guest before.
He did give me 2 chits for me and 2 for her. I also said I'd be contacting WHQ for a clarification if they continued to insist this was the policy.I demanded he call a supervisor, and he said he'd page me upstairs.
15 minutes later got paged to the concierge desk. He was there with a trainer, apologizing that I was right. They paid me off in extra chits and asked if I still needed a supervisor; I said no, I just wanted future customers to get the right service and thanked them. We then laughed about how complex UA's profiles are. I noted that the RCC/Admit profile reads like computer code, like a complex case-structure or nested IFs. People shouldn't have to figure that out, UA needs to make it simpler for them.
It also looks like classic UA bad IT, bad requirements. From what I gather, the computer decides Admit/No Admit Guest/No Guest based on the highest qualification, without continuing down through other cases which might be lower but give more privileges. Rather than checking for all cases matching the customer/itinerary for admit # of guests and all cases for drink chits and giving the maximum from the result.
So ended well, on a friendly note, with staff education and a reasonable accommodation. But this whole RCC admission procedure seriously needs fixing.
The gentleman at the admit desk did not want to admit MrsXS, because on an international C ticket, you don't get a guest. I said, "but I'm a UA 1K which makes me *G, and *G on an international itinerary does get a guest." He repeated his assertion and said he'd admit her as my guest as a 1-time exception. I wasn't satisfied with that answer, because I'm thinking about future trips and other customers too. He then called somebody, who he said told him the same thing, no guest. I'm trying to explain "logically this is silly - if I was in coach, you'd admit me and a guest based on my *G status and itinerary." He claimed that I was wrong and those must have been exceptions also. Actually, I remember him admitting me as a *G with a guest before.
He did give me 2 chits for me and 2 for her. I also said I'd be contacting WHQ for a clarification if they continued to insist this was the policy.I demanded he call a supervisor, and he said he'd page me upstairs.
15 minutes later got paged to the concierge desk. He was there with a trainer, apologizing that I was right. They paid me off in extra chits and asked if I still needed a supervisor; I said no, I just wanted future customers to get the right service and thanked them. We then laughed about how complex UA's profiles are. I noted that the RCC/Admit profile reads like computer code, like a complex case-structure or nested IFs. People shouldn't have to figure that out, UA needs to make it simpler for them.
It also looks like classic UA bad IT, bad requirements. From what I gather, the computer decides Admit/No Admit Guest/No Guest based on the highest qualification, without continuing down through other cases which might be lower but give more privileges. Rather than checking for all cases matching the customer/itinerary for admit # of guests and all cases for drink chits and giving the maximum from the result.
So ended well, on a friendly note, with staff education and a reasonable accommodation. But this whole RCC admission procedure seriously needs fixing.
Aug 7, 2008, 6:15 pm
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 23,999
Kudos to you for sticking to your guns, you're a great person in my book!
^
BTW, I totally disagree though, don't give in to this guy. It's NOT complicated. As a customer I know the profile, and it's not even my job. Seriously, you have to know maybe five things to work the front desk at an RCC, it's NOT complicated...
^BTW, I totally disagree though, don't give in to this guy. It's NOT complicated. As a customer I know the profile, and it's not even my job. Seriously, you have to know maybe five things to work the front desk at an RCC, it's NOT complicated...
Aug 7, 2008, 6:27 pm
#3
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: DEN
Programs: UA Plat, 1MM
Posts: 2,182
Agreed that it's perhaps not overly complicated on an absolute scale.
However, hard to argue the point MarkXS makes that the profile as written is more complicated than it needs to be.
However, hard to argue the point MarkXS makes that the profile as written is more complicated than it needs to be.
Aug 13, 2008, 9:32 am
#4
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlántida, Canelones, Uruguay (MVD) and rarely GNV
Programs: AV LifeMiles, CM ConnectMiles, BA Exec Club. Former:ex-ASGold, ex-UA1K, ex-COPlat, ex-NWGold.
Posts: 2,673
Back from the trip with a couple of thoughts.
I didn't "give in" to this guy - it was my observation, not his, that it reads like computer code. I in part was attempting to allow him to save face in front of the trainer after I'd received the apology and extra chits.
I do still intend to write WHQ about the RCC policies and misunderstandings. I totally agree with Lucky that there isn't that much the agent needs to know.
However I think it's a larger-than-just-UA issue too. There are a vast amount of people in the workforce who don't have critical thinking and logic skills. Without going to OMNI territory, there's at least an entire generation (with notable exceptions of course) who don't know how to make change or think things through logically or question the computer, because they've come to rely totally on whatever "the system says". If UA's computers are programmed so badly (no, ya think?) that on RCC admission-scan they only read the "highest" level of admission qualification and treat Premium Cabin International as "higher" than Star Gold status, thus popping up "Admit 1, give chits, no guest allowed", the average American worker in a customer service job would never question it. The fact that further down in the profile is another qualification the customer meets which would have said "Admit 1, give chits, allow 1 guest" is totally outside of their thought processes.
A lot of the RCC admission and chit issues are, I believe, the intersection of UA's overly-complex policies and the general lack of critical/logical thinking capabilities in the workforce today.
Thus I don't hold out a lot of hope for this getting better.
I didn't "give in" to this guy - it was my observation, not his, that it reads like computer code. I in part was attempting to allow him to save face in front of the trainer after I'd received the apology and extra chits.
I do still intend to write WHQ about the RCC policies and misunderstandings. I totally agree with Lucky that there isn't that much the agent needs to know.
However I think it's a larger-than-just-UA issue too. There are a vast amount of people in the workforce who don't have critical thinking and logic skills. Without going to OMNI territory, there's at least an entire generation (with notable exceptions of course) who don't know how to make change or think things through logically or question the computer, because they've come to rely totally on whatever "the system says". If UA's computers are programmed so badly (no, ya think?) that on RCC admission-scan they only read the "highest" level of admission qualification and treat Premium Cabin International as "higher" than Star Gold status, thus popping up "Admit 1, give chits, no guest allowed", the average American worker in a customer service job would never question it. The fact that further down in the profile is another qualification the customer meets which would have said "Admit 1, give chits, allow 1 guest" is totally outside of their thought processes.
A lot of the RCC admission and chit issues are, I believe, the intersection of UA's overly-complex policies and the general lack of critical/logical thinking capabilities in the workforce today.
Thus I don't hold out a lot of hope for this getting better.
Aug 13, 2008, 10:56 am
#5
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Missoula, MT
Programs: United 1P
Posts: 363
When you write to WHQ, you might want to point out how expensive your time is (to explain their policy to their employees) and how embarrassing, nay humiliating it is to have to explain to your guest why you have to argue for their admittance to your club.
Aug 13, 2008, 11:08 am
#6
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Since the BoSox and ChiSox won it, now it is the Cubs turn to take the Series. Go Cubs Go!
Posts: 3,685
I would recommend carrying a copy of the RCC admit profile with you or a print out from United's Premeir Executive website page detailing how Star Golds are allowed access to the RCC with a guest on international itineraries.
Aug 13, 2008, 11:18 am
#7
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Traveling the World
Posts: 6,072
Here is how I would have handeled it
If I was a new agent working at the lounge and I was not sure about the policy I would first tell the person and their guest that they can enter the lounge and I am new to this policy. I would tell them I will ask my supervisor the right policy. I want my customers to enjoy their time and not fight. I see they are frequent fliers and they are in C class. I would give them 2 chits each and welcome them. You see I believe the customer because they fly on this itinerary many times and know the policy. If I am not sure and I did not want to get myself in trouble I would ask the member and the guest to please wait a few moments and apologize for their inconvenience.
If they are not allowed I would say I am sorry sir but I have checked with my supervisor and unfortunately we cannot admit you on this ticket. However if you want to purchase a Day pass I would be more than happy to assist you. I would then tell them to have a nice trip and thank you for choosing United and we hope to see you in our lounge very soon.
If they are not allowed I would say I am sorry sir but I have checked with my supervisor and unfortunately we cannot admit you on this ticket. However if you want to purchase a Day pass I would be more than happy to assist you. I would then tell them to have a nice trip and thank you for choosing United and we hope to see you in our lounge very soon.