Non Rev policies after merger?

[jimntx]

That doesn't sound very fair, especially with the no out/back policy if you're willing to do that from a hub to get on a flight. What if there are more nonrevs listed each day than seats open and you're the only one local. You could spend days not getting on just by shear number of connections even if you are more senior or willing to check in 24 hours ahead of flight time that might put you above some of the connecting customers. I don't work in a hub, but I can't imagine someone trying to get to Europe or South America where there could be lots of connections and you're stuck unless you go through another hub if possible to make a connection. That just seems weird.

So, you think that since you don't work in a major hub, it would be fair for hub employees to always get on flights and you have to spend additional travel funds to pay for over night stays at the hub in the hope of getting on the next day or the day after that? Ok. However, I would bet that other non-hub employees might disagree with you.

(Besides, it's a moot point. There are almost NEVER any non-rev seats to any Hawaii destination--especially out of DFW or ORD. Those pesky revenue passengers, don't you know. ) And, that's no joke. I have a new-hire classmate friend who commuted from HNL to STL for 6 months after we were recalled in 2004. She rode the jumpseat in both directions something like 99% of the time no matter whether she was commuting through ORD or DFW. For destinations like HNL, OGG, etc., most AA employees just go ahead and buy a ticket, it's the only way to be sure that your vacation is actually spent in Hawaii.

 

[chellow]

I noticed in my company email, that their is already a new Interim Reciprocal nonrev travel agreement between USAir and AA starting March 1.

 

[Non Rev]

I noticed in my company email, that their is already a new Interim Reciprocal nonrev travel agreement between USAir and AA starting March 1.

Details?!?

 

[chellow]

Remove

 

[1AA]

Details?!?

. AA employees go behind usair but before zed. Usair employees go behind AA employees but before zed. Now you wonder if its fcfs or doh. Good question.

 

[tadjr]

So, you think that since you don't work in a major hub, it would be fair for hub employees to always get on flights and you have to spend additional travel funds to pay for over night stays at the hub in the hope of getting on the next day or the day after that? Ok. However, I would bet that other non-hub employees might disagree with you.

I thought FCFS was supposed to level the playing field? If the HUB people don't have a shot with a lot of connecting non revs and not being able to have the same 24 hour check in requirement, how is that level? Also, when I'm traveling I check the flights all the way to try to have a shot. If one hub connection looks better than the other, I make my choice on which way I think I can get all the way. This wouldn't just affect a HUB employee either. What if people are flying from a hub connecting in a spoke to get to another hub? ORD-TUL-DFW. The people based in the connecting spoke (TUL) are going to get screwed as well with this policy aren't they? If I'm willing to make an effort to check in 24 hours ahead of time to get on a flight, why should I be penalized because of where I'm based? FCFS should be an equalizer right?

 

[tadjr]

. AA employees go behind usair but before zed. Usair employees go behind AA employees but before zed. Now you wonder if its fcfs or doh. Good question.

It depends on what category they are as to whether its time of check in or seniority. Our employee (S3), retirees and family members of employees traveling without the employee (S4), Non owned Express employees and retirees family members traveling without the retiree (S5) and non owned Express family members traveling without the employee (S6) all are seniority based.
Buddy passes (S7), Star Alliance employees (S8) and other airline (S9) are all time of check in.
Does it say what category they will be listed as?

 

[jimntx]

I thought FCFS was supposed to level the playing field? If the HUB people don't have a shot with a lot of connecting non revs and not being able to have the same 24 hour check in requirement, how is that level? Also, when I'm traveling I check the flights all the way to try to have a shot. If one hub connection looks better than the other, I make my choice on which way I think I can get all the way. This wouldn't just affect a HUB employee either. What if people are flying from a hub connecting in a spoke to get to another hub? ORD-TUL-DFW. The people based in the connecting spoke (TUL) are going to get screwed as well with this policy aren't they? If I'm willing to make an effort to check in 24 hours ahead of time to get on a flight, why should I be penalized because of where I'm based? FCFS should be an equalizer right?

First off, I don't think it is permitted to game the system by going out, then coming back through your base just to qualify as a through passenger. Since I am based at DFW, I believe it is a violation of the travel policy for me to list something like DFW-TUL-DFW-HNL just so I can be shown as a through passenger on the HNL leg. Gaming the system is not admired or looked kindly upon.

Furthermore, you are coming up with scenarios that just don't happen. I've never heard one single person at DFW say they didn't get to their travel destination because of all the through passengers. As I said earlier (this thread or another), for super popular destinations, like Hawaii, most AA employees going there on vacation just buy a ticket rather than risk spending their vacation at home. No one in their right mind non-revs to Hawaii, unless they have the leeway to allow up to 3 days of travel going and 3 days coming back.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Non-rev flying is a perk that emerged in the heyday of regulated airline flying. Every airline was "guaranteed" a margin of profit by the CAB's protecting routes for particular airlines. The fares were set based on the typical load factors and this resulted in empty seats on almost every flight. Employees could non-rev easily in that environment.

Unfortunately, airline employees live in the past with this "perk." It doesn't really exist in any reliable way anymore, but here we are arguing over a perk which, at least for places that one actually cares to travel, does not exist.

Anyone who plans a vacation based on non-reving is slightly bent, IMHO. For vacations, buy a ticket on a cheap, convenient flight (there are so many) and be done with the non-rev-non-sense.

 

[snapthis]

Non-rev flying is a perk that emerged in the heyday of regulated airline flying. Every airline was "guaranteed" a margin of profit by the CAB's protecting routes for particular airlines. The fares were set based on the typical load factors and this resulted in empty seats on almost every flight. Employees could non-rev easily in that environment.

Unfortunately, airline employees live in the past with this "perk." It doesn't really exist in any reliable way anymore, but here we are arguing over a perk which, at least for places that one actually cares to travel, does not exist.

Anyone who plans a vacation based on non-reving is slightly bent, IMHO. For vacations, buy a ticket on a cheap, convenient flight (there are so many) and be done with the non-rev-non-sense.

I discourage use of pass travel because of the high loads. I agree, spend a few more dollars and get on the flight.

 

[Kellerguy]

Question on DOH for retirees. Is DOH adjusted in any way for how long an employee worked or is is straight DOH? For example, would a 15 year employee (begins at age 40 and retired at 55 in 2002) come before a 25 year employee who began a day later and retired in 2012? Just wondering if length of service plays into anything in those cases.

 

[Seatacus]

Question on DOH for retirees. Is DOH adjusted in any way for how long an employee worked or is is straight DOH? For example, would a 15 year employee (begins at age 40 and retired at 55 in 2002) come before a 25 year employee who began a day later and retired in 2012? Just wondering if length of service plays into anything in those cases.

when going by DOH seniority should not be considered.

 

[USnonrev16]

. AA employees go behind usair but before zed. Usair employees go behind AA employees but before zed. Now you wonder if its fcfs or doh. Good question.

Hmmm. US Air doesn't have anything on their website yet. I guess they're slow posting it.

 

[ContUNITEus]

Non-rev flying is a perk that emerged in the heyday of regulated airline flying. Every airline was "guaranteed" a margin of profit by the CAB's protecting routes for particular airlines. The fares were set based on the typical load factors and this resulted in empty seats on almost every flight. Employees could non-rev easily in that environment.

Unfortunately, airline employees live in the past with this "perk." It doesn't really exist in any reliable way anymore, but here we are arguing over a perk which, at least for places that one actually cares to travel, does not exist.

Anyone who plans a vacation based on non-reving is slightly bent, IMHO. For vacations, buy a ticket on a cheap, convenient flight (there are so many) and be done with the non-rev-non-sense.

I know that this sounds like it is from out of this planet, but did you all know that there are airlines out there that offer the employee and a companion, one positive space ticket per year to like a long range destination? Some do that and others give employees sort-of-like a bank of money, that they can use to book positive space travel with it. It's like a free thing you get as part of your benefits... you can use it or not but almost everyone I know, that has such a benefit, they book a confirmed ticket (or two) a year to fly anywhere they want to (as long as the airline flies there) for their long vacation.

Now that's what I call a benefit... I gave up on non-reving long time ago... unless it involved jump-seating as an alternative....

 

[jimntx]

Yes, but a lot of those airlines giving away seats to employees are government-owned and/or subsidized. Making a profit is not an absolute requirement for them. As was already pointed out, non-rev travel was granted as a perk to employees during the days of government-controlled air fares. Airlines didn't have to worry about losing money because competition on a given route to most cities in the U.S. was limited to 2 or 3 airlines at most. Also, the CAB (Civil Aeronautics Board) set air fares. 30 years ago the average roundtrip air fare in the U.S. was about $550 in real dollars. Today it is about $350 in real dollars. That does not take into account the inflation over for the past 30 years. The public today thinks they are owed cheap airfares.

Then once they get onboard they complain about the lack of amenities--blankets, meals, space.