Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Discontinued Programs/Partners > United Mileage Plus (Pre-Merger)
Reload this Page >

Acceptable Comp for Improper Processing of Standby?

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Acceptable Comp for Improper Processing of Standby?

 
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 5, 2009 | 4:43 pm
  #106  
30 Countries Visited
3M
100 Nights
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near SEA
Programs: UA MM, AS MVPG75K, Marriott Lifetime Gold
Posts: 7,990
Originally Posted by notquiteaff
Eight hours of FT education: priceless
<bow>
bmvaughn is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 4:46 pm
  #107  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 93
Originally Posted by bmvaughn
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.
i believe wx hotel is >=1p

delayed bags don't get comp?
flyboiboeing is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 4:48 pm
  #108  
30 Countries Visited
3M
100 Nights
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near SEA
Programs: UA MM, AS MVPG75K, Marriott Lifetime Gold
Posts: 7,990
Originally Posted by flyboiboeing
i believe wx hotel is >=1p

delayed bags don't get comp?
I believe that if it's your outbound flight, UA will occassionally reimburse the reasonable cost of clothing until the bag is delivered... but no official policy exists here I am aware of.
bmvaughn is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 4:55 pm
  #109  
30 Countries Visited
2M
100 Nights
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: PHL
Programs: AA EXP MM, HHonors Lifetime Diamond, Marriott Lifetime Ti, UA Silver
Posts: 5,216
Originally Posted by shazbot
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.
Originally Posted by cepheid
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....
I'll not take sides in all of this since I see points that sway for the OP, the SYD pax, and for UA's handling of this. Clearly, some oddball things happened...

I still can't fathom why a UA agent faced with one or two extra pax, one of them a 1K, all under irrops, and all with a dire need to fly didn't simply overbook the flight by one more and then get VDBs to clear space? That way everyone is happy: The SYD pax make it to their vacation, the OP gets to his meetings, and 2 volunteers that can spare the delay get VDB compensation.
PHLGovFlyer is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 4:57 pm
  #110  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 93
Originally Posted by PHLGovFlyer
I'll not take sides in all of this since I see points that sway for the OP, the SYD pax, and for UA's handling of this. Clearly, some oddball things happened...

I still can't fathom why a UA agent faced with one or two extra pax, one of them a 1K, all under irrops, and all with a dire need to fly didn't simply overbook the flight by one more and then get VDBs to clear space? That way everyone is happy: The SYD pax make it to their vacation, the OP gets to his meetings, and 2 volunteers that can spare the delay get VDB compensation.
it was weather related. why should ua pay $400 or whatever for a vdb? gosh, wouldn't it be ironic if the OP who seems to mostly be after compensation got confirmed, then vdb'd himself...
flyboiboeing is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 5:02 pm
  #111  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,123
I really see no issue here. You were standby, so why would there be compensation for not getting on that flight. Your original flight was delayed due to weather, again, not due compensation. United took care of 4 international passengers over one local standby passenger. They did it right in my view.

Sorry for your delay, but it happens sometimes when there are weather issues.

AD
aluminumdriver is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 5:17 pm
  #112  
30 Countries Visited
2M
100 Nights
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: PHL
Programs: AA EXP MM, HHonors Lifetime Diamond, Marriott Lifetime Ti, UA Silver
Posts: 5,216
Originally Posted by flyboiboeing
it was weather related. why should ua pay $400 or whatever for a vdb? gosh, wouldn't it be ironic if the OP who seems to mostly be after compensation got confirmed, then vdb'd himself...
Sure, I understand the reason. However, it seems like the agent was already pushing/bending the system pretty hard to get the 4 SYD pax on-board. In that case, why not go the extra mile and also take care of a 1k pax that you just flat out told had to standby? In the end you probably only need to offer the DBCFREE to get the volunteers and the net cost of those is pretty minimal, especially considering breakage.
PHLGovFlyer is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 5:23 pm
  #113  
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
Programs: UA, AA, WN; HH, MR, IHG
Posts: 7,055
Originally Posted by PHLGovFlyer
However, it seems like the agent was already pushing/bending the system pretty hard to get the 4 SYD pax on-board.
The UA agent worked pretty hard. The OP was working with the UX agent, not the UA agent.

Originally Posted by PHLGovFlyer
In that case, why not go the extra mile and also take care of a 1k pax that you just flat out told had to standby?
And if they got zero volunteers, they would then need to IDB someone, and how is that any better than simply leaving the OP as a standby? At least that way there was no actual IDB (a statistic which has to be reported to DOT) and nobody having to be removed from their originally-ticketed, confirmed itinerary. We also don't know how many minutes prior to departure this whole event took place... if it was too close to boarding time, the UX agent wouldn't have wanted to delay departure in order to ask for volunteers.
cepheid is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 5:32 pm
  #114  
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Phoenix
Programs: UA1k;HH Gold;MR Gold
Posts: 6,112
Glad you got some cash. Still think you were wrong. Still dont understand why you have not answered why you did not ask for a reroute on another airline.

As I said earlier, I have voluntarily reliqueshed my confirmed seat in a similar instance. ( and yes I am a 1K ).

What goes around, comes around
jan_az is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 9:06 pm
  #115  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
Originally Posted by shazbot
Umm, I wouldn't be bringing the issue up had I not had an overnight delay. As it stands, EVERYONE involved was going to be stranded overnight, and yes, I spent the night at the lovely Red Roof Inn SFO...
There are two issues here.

1) Did UA break the rules? Yes (apparently) they did. UA put non-status pax ahead of status pax.

1.5) As UA broke their own rules did they compensate the status pax fairly. From the quote above it looks like they did. UA provided a hotel room during a WX delay. I call that fair.

Issue 2

2) Did the GA and by implication do anything wrong? This answer is no both on a rules level and on a moral level. MP belongs to UA and they can do whatever they want. Morally when the agent decided to monkey with the list did the right thing as well.

If the OP was that unhappy with his room, he could have rented a car and driven to LAX. (Gmaps says it is a 6hr drive) There is no similar alternative to SYD (despite the fact that Gmaps gives directions from Sydney to Los Angeles).

Good luck with your compensation fight.
colpuck is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 9:56 pm
  #116  
Moderator: Midwest, Las Vegas & Dining Buzz
10 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 18,093
Originally Posted by colpuck
There are two issues here.

1) Did UA break the rules? Yes (apparently) they did. UA put non-status pax ahead of status pax.

1.5) As UA broke their own rules did they compensate the status pax fairly. From the quote above it looks like they did. UA provided a hotel room during a WX delay. I call that fair.
1) Nah. You are wrong. They did not break the rules. It's simila to being on the BP5 standby list. I was at ORD one time and the weather was making all connections invalid. I asked to be put on a flight that would get me to my connecting city on time. Sure, no problem. "The good news, Mr. luv, is that you are first on the BP5B list. The bad news is that you are over 100 pax on the BP5A list ahead of you." Why? Because they were disserviced pax. I was jut trying to get to my city as a standby. And guess what? THis all happened in the GS room at ORD, and as a GS, the sea did not part for me. Was I pissed? Nah. I understand what's going on. Did I get to my final destination? Yup. About nine hours after scheduled. Stuff happens.

1.5) Compensation? I hope not. I really hope not.

Agents are given latitude to do whatever is in the best interest of the company and pax taking everything into consideration. I won't bother rehashing the "once a day SYD flight" argument.

How about VDB's? Sometimes the agent gives you F on the flight they confirm you on. Did the pax originally have F? Of course not. So now F goes from F6 to F0. And you were first on the waitlist for F for that flight. Got a gripe? I think not.
iluv2fly is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 10:21 pm
  #117  
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,721
I love this tread.

Everyone seems to always know what we (CSRs) can and can't do, yet noone really knows...except us.

People post BP priorities from the shuttle days, and other people quote it.

People say that a CSR can sell a flight to Y-1 (nope, a CSR can't)

There are MANY ways to get people on a flight. Some of them will tick off your co-workers, some of them won't.

I'm not gonna get into what was supposed to be done, what wasn't...blah blah, but I am laughing at you guys/gals here (in a fun way, not in a evil way) at how everyone seems to KNOW the correct course of action. I really don't believe there is "A" correct course for many situations.

Based on the 1 sided story (none of us, including the OP) know what really happened to the other party, or how it was done. I can think of plenty of ways. In all of those ways, I would have had to talk to the CSRs at the departing gate, as all of the ways would screw with their numbers, if they were not aware of it. I would have wanted their consent as well. (My rule #1 is NEVER screw with a flight that someone else is working without their knowledge and consent.)

I think the vast majority of posters on this thread think like human beings. A few think like his status somehow guarantees him the universe, some kind of all powerful being.

As much as airlines flaunt status to you all, you are all still bound by the same rules that whatever deity made for you. And you are all bound by the rules of the CoC and your fare. And we know that UA has broken rules for you as a 1k. Guess what...they may have broken some rules for you b4 u were a 1k. And maybe, just maybe they broke them for 4 trans-pac passengers.

And tomorrow, the sun will rise, and UA will be in business, and the people will be in SYD, and the OP will have gotten to Cali, and the sun will set, and most of us will still be fine.
fastair is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 10:31 pm
  #118  
10 Countries Visited20 Countries Visited30 Countries Visited15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 408
Originally Posted by fastair
...As much as airlines flaunt status to you all, you are all still bound by the same rules that whatever deity made for you. And you are all bound by the rules of the CoC and your fare. And we know that UA has broken rules for you as a 1k. Guess what...they may have broken some rules for you b4 u were a 1k. And maybe, just maybe they broke them for 4 trans-pac passengers.

And tomorrow, the sun will rise, and UA will be in business, and the people will be in SYD, and the OP will have gotten to Cali, and the sun will set, and most of us will still be fine.
Absolutely gorgeous post!

And is it just me, but am I the only one here who has read this entire thread and smell something really fishy regarding the accuracy/truthfulness in their story? I don't believe the OP is being completely forthright.
nyctravis is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 10:44 pm
  #119  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Programs: UA 1K, AA Plat, SPG Platinum, National Executive
Posts: 1,970
Originally Posted by shazbot
That doesn't make any sense. Basically, you're saying that I got screwed b/c I got an agent that wasn't willing to bend the rules and confirm me outside of the 20min window b/c the flight was oversold, whereas another agent was.

And to be clear, that other agent confirmed them when they didn't have the inventory. They only had 3 seats available when she confirmed all 4, and ended up waiting for a no-show to get the 4th on.
Please advise me how you want UA to confirm you out of the 20 min window with no seats. Do you want to sit in the lav?

Also, I don't understand your way of thinking. 4 people going to SYD (you call them vacationers) are going to miss their connection in SFO, so UA is proactive and books them thru LAX to make their flight. You come along after, and request the SEA-LAX flight as well, but there are not any seats now. Did you expect UA to take 1 of the 4 people going to SYD off the plane for you? No. That is whole game of STANDBY.
UAX_Brasilia is offline  
Old May 5, 2009 | 11:06 pm
  #120  
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
Programs: UA, AA, WN; HH, MR, IHG
Posts: 7,055
Originally Posted by iluv2fly
Stuff happens.
Such an easy philosophy... And yet, somehow, some people think that "stuff" should never happen, or should always be reimbursed with compensation (or retribution, should compensation not occur). Thankfully, they seem to be a small few...

Originally Posted by iluv2fly
1.5) Compensation? I hope not. I really hope not.
Unfortunately, while you may have missed it, the OP reported getting compensation from the 1K line earlier in the thread. It's IMHO a sad state of affairs when companies (or individuals) are willing to shell out compensation to silence even the most unreasonable complaints because it's faster/easier/cheaper than standing their ground...

Originally Posted by fastair
everyone seems to KNOW the correct course of action.
I don't claim to know the correct (vis--vis official policy) course of action... but I do know what I think is the right course of action and what I would have done in the GA's place - which, incidentally, is what happened.

Originally Posted by nyctravis
I don't believe the OP is being completely forthright.
I don't think that really matters; even if the OP made the story as favorable to himself/herself as possible, most people still disagree with the OP's premise and recognize that what did happen is what "should" have happened (however you define "should"). That, at least, makes me not lose all faith in humanity...
cepheid is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.