Southwest booted me off my flight!

[Greysword]

My point is WN could have made the change in a way that allowed it to make the change without owing the customer any compensation, other then allowing a cash refund. We don't know if WN took care of the fine print. The general rule is an airline can move you, in advance, from one flight to another flight for a variety of legitimate reasons without owing you any compensation.

Yes, and you are correct. I think we've kind of used this thread as an example to highlight the FAA rules on what the airline is liable for regarding denial of boarding, so the discussion has broadened beyond the scope of this one example.

If WN did change aircraft, move the flight times, or cancel the flight outright (for any reason), then this would not be a case of involuntary denial of boarding. However, most airlines simply make the change, not call, and sometimes send an email to the fact.

However if the WN did not make a schedule change, aircraft swap, or cancel the flight; rather, simply bump the OP, then it would seem the provisions would fall under the involuntary denial of boarding provisions (despite Katiee's objection to timing ). To that end, the appropriate steps would be to file a complaint with the airline (as the OP did), then file a complaint with the FAA and let them decide if it was or wasn't IDB.

In addition, WN has been fined for these shenanigans in the recent past, so I would not put it past them to simply continue the practice if it suits their business needs, especially since the bulk of WN fliers are not as experienced with the culture and rules of flying.

I bet if the OP told the agent on the phone that the Flyer Bill of Rights (or straight up say 14 CFR 250) would qualify this as IDB, thus cash compensation is required, the phone rep would have backed down quick and likely went onto another passenger (or at least called a supervisor). This is why I wanted our community to know and have the rules, just in case. They are not long, and a quick skim before traveling at least puts the thought in our heads. Having them on a tablet (iPad, Kindle, Nook, etc) takes hardly any space and makes it even better should the need arise to produce the info.

 

[Lewisc]

Yes, and you are correct. I think we've kind of used this thread as an example to highlight the FAA rules on what the airline is liable for regarding denial of boarding, so the discussion has broadened beyond the scope of this one example.

If WN did change aircraft, move the flight times, or cancel the flight outright (for any reason), then this would not be a case of involuntary denial of boarding. However, most airlines simply make the change, not call, and sometimes send an email to the fact.
.......
In addition, WN has been fined for these shenanigans in the recent past, so I would not put it past them to simply continue the practice if it suits their business needs, especially since the bulk of WN fliers are not as experienced with the culture and rules of flying.

I bet if the OP told the agent on the phone that the Flyer Bill of Rights (or straight up say 14 CFR 250) would qualify this as IDB, thus cash compensation is required, the phone rep would have backed down quick and likely went onto another passenger (or at least called a supervisor). This is why I wanted our community to know and have the rules, just in case. They are not long, and a quick skim before traveling at least puts the thought in our heads. Having them on a tablet (iPad, Kindle, Nook, etc) takes hardly any space and makes it even better should the need arise to produce the info.

IDB occurs when a passenger with a confirmed reservation shows up at the gate at the appropriate time and is denied boarding due to overbooking.

The OP is having their reservation changed months in advance. That can be done for a variety of reasons. The airline can manufacture a reason, just change the flight number. Changing the reservation at random isn't permitted. It has nothing to do with bumping.

I agree with you, to a point. I think a passenger can politely say no, I'm happy with my flight, I'll be at the gate and expect to take the flight I booked. You can mention flyer bill of rights and suggest they contact another passenger. My guess is the CSR will back down. However the airline doesn't have to do much to force you to accept the change (or a refund) with no compensation.

Southwest rarely makes schedule changes. A reason why the CSR called instead of sending an email reflects how rare this kind of situation is with Southwest.

Posters who equate this with bumping are giving people bad advice. Southwest might not have dotted the "I"s and crossed the "T"s but if they did the passenger wouldn't even been entitled to the $200 voucher they received.

 

[Greysword]

IDB occurs when a passenger with a confirmed reservation shows up at the gate at the appropriate time and is denied boarding due to overbooking.

The OP is having their reservation changed months in advance. That can be done for a variety of reasons. The airline can manufacture a reason, just change the flight number. Changing the reservation at random isn't permitted. It has nothing to do with bumping.

I agree with you, to a point. I think a passenger can politely say no, I'm happy with my flight, I'll be at the gate and expect to take the flight I booked. You can mention flyer bill of rights and suggest they contact another passenger. My guess is the CSR will back down. However the airline doesn't have to do much to force you to accept the change (or a refund) with no compensation.

Southwest rarely makes schedule changes. A reason why the CSR called instead of sending an email reflects how rare this kind of situation is with Southwest.

Posters who equate this with bumping are giving people bad advice. Southwest might not have dotted the "I"s and crossed the "T"s but if they did the passenger wouldn't even been entitled to the $200 voucher they received.

I apologize for the delay in responding.

I agree with you on all points, yet I think the impetus of the conversation needs to be taken into account.

The OP said the airline called and wanted her to change with no indication of an aircraft swap, flight time change, flight number change or anything that qualifies. Instead, they just called and wanted to OP to take another flight due to being overbooked on her ticketed reservation. Under these circumstances, it qualifies as "bumping", whether it is at the gate or months before. The result is not taking the planned flight, and even though the advanced warning gives the OP an opportunity to change her plans, it is still inconvenient and makes more work for them, especially if the plans are unalterable.

Also, the OP stated to the agent on the phone that she did not want to accept the flight change, and the response was a big "tough". This then falls into the realm of involuntary denial of boarding the flight for which she has a ticket. Am I wrong on this specific point? If so, why?

If, as indicated, WN never changed the flight in any way (aircraft swap, flight time, flight number, etc) and forced the OP to switch to another flight, despite her protesting the change, how does this not qualify as an Involuntary Denied Boarding situation? I premise that the only outlier is the time frame (in advance versus day of travel), which is not specified as a factor for consideration in the FAA pronouncement (14 CFR 250). To that end, anyone in this same situation (as outlined in the first sentence of this paragraph) is due cash compensation under the IDB rules, and a $200 voucher is insufficient compensation under these conditions.

That is my concern and argument.

If you have the time Lewis, please expand on why you feel IDB is only applicable at the gate, versus in advance. Also, why do you think "the airline doesn't have to do much to force you to accept the change (or a refund) with no compensation", unless the argument is based on what you stated previously (flight number change, time change, aircraft swap, etc). In the case of none of these things occurring, would this still be IDB?

I just want to flesh out the rules.

 

[Greysword]

The OP is having their reservation changed months in advance. That can be done for a variety of reasons. The airline can manufacture a reason, just change the flight number.

Southwest rarely makes schedule changes. A reason why the CSR called instead of sending an email reflects how rare this kind of situation is with Southwest.

As a follow-up and for clarification, while WN could change the flight or aircraft slightly to avoid the IDB rules, it isn't guaranteed they would do this. I think this is specifically due to their primary clientele being less than frequent flyers and WN counting on the passenger not fully understanding the implication of the action. Most people would just accept the "no" and change their reservations.

 

[Greysword]

This is a great discussion, and I'm very curous about the tiem requirement. As such, I sent the following question to the FAA (copied exactly):

The involuntary denial of boarding pronouncement 14CFR250 does not list a time requirement, in which the infraction must occur. Is a denial of boarding applicable only while at the gate, the day of travel, or at anytime between ticket purchase and aircraft liftoff? Is an airline responsible for providing cash compensation when forcing a passenger to change their flight days, weeks, or months before the day of travel, given no flight number, time or aircraft was altered and the passenger declined a voluntary flight change?

Hopefully, we'll get an answer

 

[seashoreCM]

We will need a trip report from someone else who declined the proposed flight change of the airline and showed up for his originally booked flight.

 

[kaytieeldr]

The original poster would have to recall additional details of her first conversation, but this section of 14 CFR 250 might cover the lack of monetary compensation:

(c) Carriers may offer free or reduced rate air transportation in lieu of the cash or check due under paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, if—

(1) The value of the transportation benefit offered, excluding any fees or other mandatory charges applicable for using the free or reduced rate air transportation, is equal to or greater than the cash/check payment otherwise required;

(2) The carrier fully informs the passenger of the amount of cash/check compensation that would otherwise be due and that the passenger may decline the transportation benefit and receive the cash/check payment; and

(3) The carrier fully discloses all material restrictions, including but not limited to, administrative fees, advance purchase or capacity restrictions, and blackout dates applicable to the offer, on the use of such free or reduced rate transportation before the passenger decides to give up the cash/check payment in exchange for such transportation.

(d) The requirements of this section apply to passengers with “zero fare tickets.” The fare paid by these passengers for purposes of calculating denied boarding compensation shall be the lowest cash, check, or credit card payment charged for a ticket in the same class of service on that flight.

 

[Greysword]

I wanted to share the answer I just received from my asking the DOT about this. Below is the full answer, but bottom line up front, the OP was due cash compensation if the flight was not changed in any way (that is they just bumped her to another flight).

Cheers.

Dear Mr. Chris:

Sometimes a flight gets to be more overbooked than the carrier had intended for it to be, i.e. somehow the number of reservations that the airline has accepted exceeds the "overgauge" that the carrier had set for that flight. Consequently, the number of overbooked passengers is no longer likely to be offset by the number of projected no-shows, thus making an oversale situation at the airport likely. (Nearly all flights are overbooked, but because of no-shows and the scientific overgauge calculation, comparatively few flights end up being "oversold" at the airport.) When a carrier discovers a flight’s bookings exceed the overgauge for that flight, or when something changes that makes the basis of the overgauge calculation no longer valid, carriers sometimes call passengers before the flight date to ask if they would be willing to move to another flight. They do this in order to minimize disruption at the airport and reroute passengers in a more orderly manner. The airlines call this process “advance reprotection.”


Advance reprotection is not specifically addressed in DOT's oversale rule. However, we have told carriers that we expect this process to be handled consistent with the procedures in that rule for voluntary and involuntary denied boardings, including compensation. As required in that rule, airlines are expected to solicit volunteers willing to give up their seat for compensation before they bump anyone involuntarily. If they use the advance reprotection process to involuntarily shift someone to another flight, that person has been denied boarding involuntarily and should receive Denied Boarding Compensation.


The difference between compensation for voluntary and involuntary denied boardings (both in an advance reprotection environment and at the airport) is that the amount of involuntary Denied Boarding Compensation is set by the DOT rule, and the carrier must offer it in the form of a check (although airlines are free to offer such passengers the option of a larger amount in the form of a travel voucher, which most carriers do). Compensation for volunteers, on the other hand, is not regulated, because prospective volunteers are free to decline to volunteer if they don't like the offer. Carriers usually offer a fairly good deal when soliciting volunteers, however, because they prefer to bump passengers voluntarily rather than involuntarily. Involuntary denied boardings usually result in higher compensation, count against the carrier's published denied-boarding rate, and generate passenger ill will.


All of this assumes that the flight itself ends up operating. No compensation is required when a flight is canceled. We have no similar compensation requirements for passengers affected by delayed and canceled flights because such a mandate could adversely affect safety, by providing carriers an incentive to operate a flight in marginal weather or mechanical conditions in order to avoid the cost of the compensation. (In the case of an oversale there are no mechanical or weather considerations and the flight is going to operate regardless of who gets bumped.)


We hope you find this information helpful.

Jessica
US Department of Transportation
Transportation Industry Analyst

bolding is mine

 

[robinb]

Thanks Chris! So the OP *was*, for all intents and purposes, involuntarily bumped via "advanced reprotection". My guess is that Southwest probably crossed their "t"'s and dotted their "i"'s to spin it to actually be a voluntary bump. The OP didn't know that she didn't have to say "yes" to the new flight.

 

[Lewisc]

Not to nitpick but the reply said:
Advance reprotection is not specifically addressed in DOT's oversale rule The reply is filled with language like we expect and should I don't see language like the airline is required to.

You got one response. I'm not sure if the response would have been different if an inquiry came from an airline's attorney.

Legacy airlines know how to work the system. If necessary the flight won't be running. A different flight number, possibly even at the exact same time, will be added to the schedule. Some passengers might be accommodated on that new flight, others on a different flight.

Southwest rarely has schedule changes. This process is new to Southwest. I'll agree with you to a point. I'll share your "skepticism" regarding Southwest crossing the "t"s. My guess is the OP might have won if they said no thank you. Southwest might have moved on to another passenger. Southwest might have sent an email with the change. At that point the OP could have considered complaining to the DOT.

I suspect the OP is being listed as a passenger who accepted the offer voluntarily move to another flight. Sounds like a no-thank you, I'm happy with my reservation and I'll be at the gate waiting to board my flight followed by the passenger disconnecting the call might have lead to different results.

 

[Greysword]

I agree with you on all point, Lewis.

I caught that opening sentence, as well. It does seem the analyst follows this up with an explanation that the airline is supposed to follow the rules, even if time isn't specifically stated (in this version).

I also agree that airlines do make slight changes to schedule, aircraft, etc to avoid liability, but WN rarely makes changes. This just means understand which airline we are dealing with. Delta(DL) makes changes all the time, maybe to avoid certain fees, but JetBlue (B6) and Southwest (WN) rarely do. Who knows about Spririt?

I also agree that WN has a case that the OP agreed to be bumped by taking the voucher, regardless of whether she thought she had no choice. As such, she likely would not be able to go back later and ask for more.

I do like the statement that

although airlines are free to offer such passengers the option of a larger amount in the form of a travel voucher, which most carriers do

since it means the voucher should exceed the cash equivalent, which is generally twice the amount of the leg(s) being denied.



I guess the reason I wanted to pursue this by asking the FAA was to give the DIS community ammunition if they are contacted by an airline for advanced bumping. Hopefully, the readers of this thread will be more aware and prepared to challenge the customer service agent that calls, if they do not want to change their flight.

Now we know...

To our fellow DISers, if you are called (or even at the gate) and do not want to be bumped, just tell them in specific terms that you refuse the voluntary denial of boarding and to find someone else. If they say you have no choice, tell them this will then be considered an involuntary denial of boarding and you expect both cash compensation and a written confirmation in accordance with FAA rules (14CFR250 if you want to be specific). If they deny your request and offer a voucher as the only payment, then tell them you refuse and will be contacting the FAA (the form on their webpage is easy to use).

 

[TLSnell1981]

Did anyone think, the airline is just being considerate when they " ask for volunteers"?

 

[seashoreCM]

Did anyone think, the airlines is just being considerate when they " ask for volunteers"?

With s small number of exceptions, airlines are required to ask for volunteers at boarding time before bumping anyone involuntarily.

 

[robinb]

Did anyone think, the airlines is just being considerate when they " ask for volunteers"?

Meh. They don't do it out of the kindness of their heart, but I think it works pretty well. It is, for the most part, it's a win-win situation. It's easier for the airlines to have a list of volunteers to reschedule rather than force unhappy passengers off the plane. Plus, a lot of people LIVE for "the bump". We have volunteered and been bumped more than once and my DH used a bump voucher to visit his parents just two weeks ago.

 

[keishashadow]

Meh. They don't do it out of the kindness of their heart, but I think it works pretty well. It is, for the most part, it's a win-win situation. It's easier for the airlines to have a list of volunteers to reschedule rather than force unhappy passengers off the plane. Plus, a lot of people LIVE for "the bump". We have volunteered and been bumped more than once and my DH used a bump voucher to visit his parents just two weeks ago.

problem with so many more people seemingly being interested in 'the bump' is I haven't seen the 'let's make a deal' spin in years...wherein the gate attendants sweeten the original offer. Somebody always seems to takes the 1st deal on the table.

Vering OT here, sorry, but hoping somebody can educate me

we have limited NS offerings out of PIT and time is increasing between connecting flights so we've passed. I'm concerned about our luggage's security on the carousel before it's yanked for storage at our arrival. I've never gotten a straight answer 'how soon' somebody will be dispatched to collect it, makes me nervous.Anybody know the standard operating procedure?

 

[robinb]

Vering OT here, sorry, but hoping somebody can educate me

we have limited NS offerings out of PIT and time is increasing between connecting flights so we've passed. I'm concerned about our luggage's security on the carousel before it's yanked for storage at our arrival. I've never gotten a straight answer 'how soon' somebody will be dispatched to collect it, makes me nervous.Anybody know the standard operating procedure?

Why would your luggage get to MCO before you? I thought that when they bumped you usually they take your luggage off too.

 

[keishashadow]

Why would your luggage get to MCO before you? I thought that when they bumped you usually they take your luggage off too.

nope, not in my experience YMMV.

Each time i inquired was told bags would be retrieved and waiting for us upon arrival. It's been a year or so, but we've always had to find the airlines luggage office at destination airports (MCO, MIA, LAS) and sign for our bags. Note that we only fly AT & SWA when possible & have no idea how other carriers handle this situation. Also, we don't participate in the ME luggage program but I assume things would go off without a hitch in that event since they deliver the bags directly to whatever disney hotel if elected.

 

[goofy4tink]

Why would your luggage get to MCO before you? I thought that when they bumped you usually they take your luggage off too.

Not always. My luggage has made it to the airport before me on numerous occasions.

 

[Greysword]

Did anyone think, the airlines is just being considerate when they " ask for volunteers"?

If they were actually trying to be "nice", they would not have told the OP to pack sand when she said she did not want the bump.

This is a strategy to attempt to not have any involuntary denied boardings, as it counts against them both in money and time. Instead by calling early, people think the airline is being nice and passengers also accept whatever voucher WN (Southwest) wants to provide, instead of the cash from being IDB.

As such, I don't think WN had the OP's best interests at heart.

we have limited NS offerings out of PIT and time is increasing between connecting flights so we've passed. I'm concerned about our luggage's security on the carousel before it's yanked for storage at our arrival. I've never gotten a straight answer 'how soon' somebody will be dispatched to collect it, makes me nervous.Anybody know the standard operating procedure?

I do not think there is anyone actually checking to match claim tags to bags at the carousel, so just about anyone could walk up and take a bag. However once all the passengers leave, an airline rep comes along to take control of the bags.

As for how soon this happens, it likely depends on when the baggage claims agent is available, based on customers at their desk, number of flights, other problems, etc. You likely won't get a hard answer, but they may have a range. You'd need to check the baggage claim rules on their website, if they exist.

This is just my analysis from experience, as I do not work (or know anyone that works) for an airline.

 

[jsilvers]

If you have the time Lewis, please expand on why you feel IDB is only applicable at the gate, versus in advance.

I don't want to put words in someone else's mouth, but the answer seems to be: Because an administrative judge specifically has looked at the issue and concluded that denied boarding compensation is only available if the denial occurs at the airport, not in advance.

The DOT (not FAA) is today responsible for the enforcement of the denied boarding compensation rule, but in the "old days" it was the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB). In a 1984 enforcement case (which unfortunately doesn't appear to be freely available online), a long-forgotten airline called South Pacific Island Airways had informed passengers in advance of a flight that they no longer had confirmed seats and were being placed on standby. The CAB filed a complaint against the carrier, but an administrative judge held that SPIA had not violated the Part 250 rules:

The complaint clearly states that SPIA prior to the date of the flight, cancelled the reservations of the passengers named. It also alleges that these potential passengers were therefore placed in a standby status and were so notified. Faced with these alleged facts when the twelve passengers named in the complaint arrived at the airport on March 9, 1983, they were not holding "confirmed reserved space" and were not eligible for any compensation​

There have been various changes to the rules since 1984, but nothing that would appear to affect the language that was at issue in the SPIA case. I'm therefore intrigued that the position asserted by the DOT analyst is inconsistent with the above ruling - quite possibly, it's older than her and she isn't even aware of it.