Good lord, the crux of it is "did the agent follow the correct procedure? Or did she incorrectly put someone else onto the flight?"

Regardless of SYD vs. LAX, 1K vs. GM, 4 seats vs. 1, confirmed vs. standby or whatever, that's the underlying question. Once you answer that, the other things don't matter.

As I said, this has now become a work 'night' and well, I can't exactly do work while on the phone w/ UA agents.

Except... they really didn't. Between the supervisor at SFO last night, the baggage service director today, and the 1K CR, i'm pretty sure they have it figured out.

Once again, following policy to the letter is not always the most practical, customer-friendly, or even (dare I say it?) moral/ethical way of handling things.

Alright! Now we're getting somewhere. So since we have recognized that this wasn't following policy, we get back to my original question. What kind of fair compensation could be expected? And... we've come full circle, but unfortunately, the point is moot and 1K CR already issued the travel cert.

My opinion is that United WAS following policy.

UA allows CSRs to rebook passengers on oversold flights when their situation is serious. This is up to the CSR's discretion.

As seen in this thread a HUGE majority believe that 4 pax missing a SYD connection is serious, and most think that a missed SFO-LAX connection is a lot easier pill to swallow.

What the CSR did is certainly not against policy as policy allows them to make a judgement call in this case.

You were #1 on the standby list, and policy was followed in that case. No standbys trumped you, only disserviced pax (this is up to the CSR/GA to define).

Popular opinion here seems to dictate that UA's judgement call was the correct one.

Yes. They have the discretion to sort these things out to cause the least amount of disservice. That's what they did.

just because the policy isn't followed, doesn't mean you desesrve compensation. imho, you deserve nothing, yet you got something anyway. why do you deserve nothing? because you lost nothing that you were entitled to or paid for. you were on standby and didn't confirm. you were delayed because of weather. yet you are ranting and raving about it because of your important meeting. if it was that impoortant, and you couldn't reroute on AS to lax, bur, ont, sna or any of the gazillions of flights they have from seattle to southern cali every day, you could have bought a ticket on wn, but you didn't.

i also don't understand how a person of your importance could afford to spend this whole morning with ua regarding your lost bag. ime, when they've lost my bag...which is many times (or so it seems, perhaps it's an exageration here), you fill out the form at the airport and eventually it shows up at your doorstep, but spending time on the phone with them doesn't really help the situation, other than to waste one's time and UA agent's time.

No, "we" have not recognized any such thing. My statement said merely that following policy explicitly and without deviation is not always the "correct" thing to do; I did not state whether or not, in this case, policy was followed. All that I stated or implied in the previous post was that following policy to the letter is not necessarily the right thing to do, irrespective of whether or not policy was followed in your particular case. Gate agents are given leeway to deviate from standard operating procedure when they deem it necessary or beneficial; they are given such leeway for a reason. That leeway is granted by policy which supersedes other policy, so....

As I answered the first time around, none. Even if policy was not followed (and I am not stating that it wasn't), you did not lose anything to which you were guaranteed or entitled; you flew on your originally-ticketed itinerary, which was delayed due to circumstances outside of UA's control. Hence, "fair" compensation would be: nothing. IMHO.

Most of the posters think United followed procedure. No standbys cleared ahead of you. A few posters think United didn't follow procedure but still did the correct thing. I don't think any posters thought you should have cleared. You decided to book a less expensive routing.

Compensation should be however much grease it takes to stop your squeaking. You should not confuse compensation give to you shut you up as admission of wrong.

I specifically asked the 1K CR if this was normal and just bad luck/timing and I was sol (mainly due to the responses here), and they said no, and offered comp

Good god, how many people did you already talk to about this "problem"? Did the RCC bathroom attendant and the Red Roof Inn check-in staff also agree with you? Maybe I don't understand job roles at UA right, but the SFO baggage services director chiming in on standby handling at SEA has very little value to me. But I am beginning to understand why your luggage hasn't arrived! J/K... I think.

So, to answer your original question, since you came here for advice: I think fair compensation would be $0.

Pax could have been coming from YVR, YYC, PSC, or any number of other airports

Seems as though you're the one that should have had a direct flight into LAX instead of transiting through SFO.

Using that logic, shouldn't you have booked a NS from SEA to LAX?

Quote:
Originally Posted by shazbot
A) its an easy assumption since SFO would be the gateway, and they'd have direct flights into SFO instead of transiting through SEA

I value my status. But I don't think it should extend to my standby flight bumping off a confirmed passenger.

Breaking it down.

There was no improper processing of standby list
Compensation due: $0

You did not clear standby on a full flight
Compensation due: $0

You were overnighted in SFO due to a weather delay
Compensation due to <1K: $0
Compensation due to 1K/GS: Hotel & meal

Delayed bag
Compensation due: Bag delivery

Seems that you got what you deserved already.

Eight hours of FT education: priceless