Loyalty and airlines - are we expecting ridiculous things??

Status
Not open for further replies.

juddles

Suspended
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Posts
5,283
Qantas
Platinum 1
Hi there all, just pondering.

It is an extremely common occurrence in this forum that customers get very upset when their "loyalty" is not respected the way they want. It seems to me that most of these gripes involve circumstances that the pax interpretation of "loyalty" is th expectation that the airline breaks the rules for them in whatever circumstance.

We have all read the threads: "I have been a loyal member of Qantas for 20 years and they wouldn't even do xx_X" - of course xx_X being something that is above the conditions of the airline / ticket / whatever.

IMHO airlines specify quite explicitly what "loyalty" brings you, in the form of status. Having status does in fact give you good advantages, whether it be greater points earn, seat selection, etc. This is, IMHO, what the airlines are openly and honestly offering. They even give clear and concise requirements to fulfill. Anything above that is wishful thinking, which unfortunately gets cloudy when on some occasions staff do give you something above and beyond what they promise. Then suddenly everyone expects same.

I also get the feeling that many people have far greater expectations of an airline (due to this loyalty concept) than they would ask for of any other company.

This forum is peppered by people in unfortunate circumstances expecting great things. Do people also ask this from every other service provider in their lives? I have NEVER asked Woolworths to do me a favour, to drop a price for me, or expect something I haven't paid for. I have bought items from Woolies for many decades, but does that give me the expectation they will do me "favours"? No.

Why is it that we expect differently from airlines? Where has an airline ever said that if you prefer them they will give you anything above what is in their terms and conditions?

Please understand that this is about loyalty, not "customer service" - that is a separate thing.
 
I think that's a pretty fair assessment - iff [sic] - you apply the logic, reasoning and data points which we gain from being members of a site like AFF.

For an ordinary passenger who might have been flying QF year in and year out. Paying higher fares. Taking any delays, cancellations, downgrades, or seat shifts in their stride (bearing in mind we have little or no consumer protection for those in Australia), paying for seating, having their points devalued by simpler and fairer, waiting for two+ hours to get through to a call centre agent, dealing with limited or no premium award space (unless you know how to work the system to find it). And then one day you're late for a flight yourself but the airline comes crashing down on you like a ton of bricks with little or no compassion... yeah - I think they may have had some expectation the airline would look after them.

Do other service providers grant favours? Generally if you have the same sort of 'loyalty' or established relationship they might. Ever forgotten your wallet at the coffee shop in the morning? 'No worries, pay us next time'. Forgotten to pay the credit card by the due date and accrued interest? 'As a one off we'll reverse that for you'. Parked in a no parking zone due to street cleaning in your own street? 'We'll waive it this time'.

None of those examples of flexibility require a shiny card. The council or bank may take a quick look through your files though. But do airlines 'look through your file' or just go by the shiny card?

Airline terms and conditions (in the context of people wanting leniency) are not 'law'. They are there to suit the airline. Any of them can be waived if the airline wants. And I think in some cases people might think that 20+ years of 'loyalty' might be rewarded.

The mistake is that airlines just don't record that low-level loyalty because they're chasing the top $$ shiny card holders.
 
Have wondered the same thing... IMO the answer why is "human nature"... It won't ever change....

Many of those comments "ive been loyal for 20 years" seem to come from folks who have never travelled enough to gain ANY status...but seem to feel that buying their 1 or 2 flights a year from the same airline makes them "loyal".... In one sense they are right...... but its not the same way the airlines view it... and both parties sort of have a point. The airline however gets to set the "meaning" of loyalty!
 
It’s definitely not just airlines.

All the hand-wringing about Holden’s disloyalty in abandoning design & manufacturing here was & is a bit surprising, given that it’s just GM & GM has the reputation of being one of the most Big America (and least “good corporate citizen’) companies around. “We bought their sub-par product for years, and they still left us” ... !
 
I must admit, when I read a complaint that starts with "I've been a Platinum member for X years" I just skip past the preamble and try to determine what the actual complaint is about. Being a Platinum member or not doesn't make any difference IMHO, unless the complaint is about not receiving a published Platinum status benefit.
 
I must admit, when I read a complaint that starts with "I've been a Platinum member for X years" I just skip past the preamble and try to determine what the actual complaint is about. Being a Platinum member or not doesn't make any difference IMHO, unless the complaint is about not receiving a published Platinum status benefit.

And my point is that I don't recall ever such a complaint where the actual problem was the Platinum member being denied a published benefit.
 
Most loyal pax do get benefits that often we just dont know are happening.
A good lesson this trip.Paid AA airfare.Normally I travel with my AA number in and really do get good service as an LTP.But on this trip had my BA number in-orders taken last in the J cabin,really no contact with FA as in a little chat,bags off long after the rest of J pax.So I now have been reminded what loyalty does for you.
AA did track more than the dollars you spent.I always gave feedback if good service and that quite obviously got me better service than the ones who complained every time-told as much by 2 AA staffers.They had a rating of pax-by eagles where 5 eagles was the highest ranking pax.Although not EXP with AA I was told I was a 4 eagle pax.Hence as a mere plat getting upgrades before a lesser eagled EXP.

But on Juddles points-yes people really want special treatment from the airline but dont want to reciprocate most of the time.
 
But on Juddles points-yes people really want special treatment from the airline but dont want to reciprocate most of the time.

Special treatment, or just some understanding and appreciation for 'loyalty' when things go wrong?

There is nothing, other than commercial reasons, why an airline is bound by its end of the contract. If it wants to waive a fee it can. If it wants to put you you on another carrier in the event of a delay, it can. If it wants to pay fair and resonable compensation for a downgrade (rather than the walk up fare), it can.

Many folk don't complain when things 'go wrong'. They buy the line that 'late inbound aircraft' is reason enough for a delay. Often they don't question other delays, thinking it must be safety related. EU261 has righted much of that for folk in the EU. But not here in Australia.

So when passengers have a special circumstance, is it unreasonable they might think it's a two-way street? Obviously their expectations are unreasonable, from an airline perspective. But passengers don't find out until it's too late.
 
Please understand that this is about loyalty, not "customer service" - that is a separate thing.

Although I agree with the majority of your statement, I would say that most believe 'loyalty' and 'customer service' are intertwined and cannot be separated in this discussion.

Consumer airline contracts are extremely one sided, written by the airlines to suit the airlines (like most consumer contracts). As there is effectively no competition in the Australian airline marketplace, consumers are 'forced' to accept terms and conditions which they would not if they were able to change them (assuming that not flying at all is not an option).

Therefore, consumers (and the Government) rely on the airlines (and other near monopolies) to be a little 'flexible' when enforcing some of their more questionable terms and conditions. As the amount of 'flexibility' is left solely up to the airline (or other business), some would argue that your 'loyalty' to the airline (or other business) should be taken into account. If the original contract terms and conditions were more balanced in the first instance, this level of 'flexibility' would not be required (or expected).

Using your example of Woolworths, the 'contract' between WW and the consumer is far more balanced and therefore your 'loyalty' and the required 'flexibility' in the terms and conditions is less of an issue. If you do not like their price, service, products etc you can generally walk out and go elsewhere with little cost and/or inconvenience. When was the last time you walked into WW and paid full price for a product and then they delivered something far inferior but refused to refund the actual difference in cost (not some made up amount)?

If you are at an airport and need to get home and your flight is delayed, airline downgrades you and/or does not provide any of the services you have paid in full for etc there is effectively nothing you can do, you are forced to be 'flexible' and you just have to accept it or 'hope' that the airline 'does the right thing' by you. Going elsewhere could be at very large cost and/or inconvenience and therefore may not be a feasible option.
 
I personally think there are a number of people on this site as well as others who may not really understand loyalty programs. With airlines they are all much the same and these days I would only complain if my published benefits are not honoured. Over the years I have had the odd complimentary downgrades, been delay, bad customer service but these things just happen, it is the nature of flying. I also have received what could be considered "special perks/ treatment", when this has happened I now choose not to post the details as others read this and start complaining (human nature) then before you know it - no more "special perks/ treatment".

I also think that social media has a lot to do with expectation management, the site is used to littered with comments from P1s and the inconsistent benefits they receive. Then there are complaints from the WP that QF will not hand out J rewards seats when requested, this is not a published benefits (as far as I am aware). When you read through some of these posts I often wonder what did you expect, when requesting seats for routes like AU to the UK, EU, US, JP etc at the start and end of school holidays or other peak travel periods. Then there are the SG complaints, I will not even go there, I will be back there one day.

I am under no illusions that airlines have any loyalty to me and my loyalty to them is only out of self interest and how I can use the system to benefit SHMBO and MissM.

@juddles I think your comments are spot on and personally think there seems to be a somewhat higher sense of entitlement when it comes to air travel. Don't get me wrong I like to travel in as much comfort as possible and in my books a second rate J seat or experience still beats a first rate Y experience.
 
Last edited:
Spot on, basso.

However, the way its sold to us is that "If you fly more with us, we'll give you certain benefits and the more you fly with us, the greater the benefits will be, and here's a list of the benefits ...". Right?

I think juddles' point was that he thought it unreasonable for people to expect benefits beyond those 'published'. But many of the complaints here are about 'published' benefits not being given - such as priority baggage and priority boarding. Ah, yes, those :oops:. Oh, and being able to select priority seating (the getting bumped by higher status pax, or a family isn't 'published' though). Oh, yes, that too. :oops:

So if the airlines can withhold benefits - consistently, deliberately (in that the issues are known but not resolved over a long time) and over a long period, where does that leave the relationship of 'you fly more with us and we'll give you these benefits'? Obviously its imperfect and 'flexible' as far as the airline is concerned, so why can't the pax also take it that the 'benefits' are flexible? If I've been Plat if 12+ years, then if Qantas can deny me 'published' benefits year in, year out, even deny me lounge access on occasion when it suits or when they haven't trained their staff properly, why shouldn't I ask for some flexibility too, juddles?

What about the hidden benefits for the airline? For Qantas, the pax side of the equation is of much lesser importance than having the members on a detailed database which they make available to third parties in exchange for commercial sale of points to those third parties. Commercially, this is hugely valuable to the airline. That's a 'hidden benefit' for the airline. Where are my 'hidden benefits'? I would think that they should be some flexibility on the part of the airline to consider granting me things beyond the 'published benefits'. What do you reckon, juddles?

Loyalty should be a two way street. It definitely isn't as far as Qantas is concerned, and I understand that. So I have flown much less with them over the past few years. I'm sure they haven't missed me and couldn't care less, as they still have me on their database, and still market me to third parties for $$$ which is more valuable to the commercially than my flying.
 
.......What about the hidden benefits for the airline? For Qantas, the pax side of the equation is of much lesser importance than having the members on a detailed database which they make available to third parties in exchange for commercial sale of points to those third parties. Commercially, this is hugely valuable to the airline. That's a 'hidden benefit' for the airline. Where are my 'hidden benefits'? I would think that they should be some flexibility on the part of the airline to consider granting me things beyond the 'published benefits'. What do you reckon, juddles? Loyalty should be a two way street. It definitely isn't as far as Qantas is concerned, and I understand that. So I have flown much less with them over the past few years. I'm sure they haven't missed me and couldn't care less, as they still have me on their database, and still market me to third parties for $$$ which is more valuable to the commercially than my flying.

...I am under no illusions that airlines have any loyalty to me and my loyalty to them is only out of self interest and how I can use the system to benefit SHMBO and MissM.......

I think it is the term 'loyalty program' that is the problem. It is really just a marketing program.

I agree with basso that the reality is it is a marketing program. And with Rooflyer that the airline gets a lot out of the whole thing.

As someone said to me recently (about "free" things like facebook, etc) "When a product is free, it is YOU who is actually the product" - this refers to the value extracted by such things as mailing lists and consumer behaviour data, etc.

At the end of the day, I am similar to Matt_01, in that my "loyalty" to Qantas is often broken by me when I get a better deal elsewhere. I could claim huge loyalty to Qantas, given the money I have spent on them and the masses of SC I have gained over time. (and the often nice comments I make about them). But my spending decisions are based on the total package on offer, of which the most important thing is normally price. So I have also been so very very "disloyal" over the years :)
 
I think it is the term 'loyalty program' that is the problem. It is really just a marketing program.
It's our expectation of the term that's a problem. Loyalty programs are setup by businesses as a way to get you to be loyal to them. Some seem to think they are setup to provide loyalty to the customer and want to keep believing this even in the face of persistent evidence to the contrary.

I can't help being reminded of the definition of insanity frankly. We all know this is true, all the evidence points to it being true and yet people continue to complain about the airlines behaving in a way that's always been clear.

Of course business are very aware that just by calling a program a loyalty program that a considerable number of people will rely on the emotional view of what they want this to mean despite all evidence to the opposite.
 
Last edited:
Most loyal pax do get benefits that often we just dont know are happening.
A good lesson this trip.Paid AA airfare.Normally I travel with my AA number in and really do get good service as an LTP.But on this trip had my BA number in-orders taken last in the J cabin,really no contact with FA as in a little chat,bags off long after the rest of J pax.So I now have been reminded what loyalty does for you.
AA did track more than the dollars you spent.I always gave feedback if good service and that quite obviously got me better service than the ones who complained every time-told as much by 2 AA staffers.They had a rating of pax-by eagles where 5 eagles was the highest ranking pax.Although not EXP with AA I was told I was a 4 eagle pax.Hence as a mere plat getting upgrades before a lesser eagled EXP.

But on Juddles points-yes people really want special treatment from the airline but dont want to reciprocate most of the time.

But isn’t that just your perception - that the service and the bags were because you did not have your AA number there. It’s feasible that even with the AA number there that the crew would have treated you the same because they were having a bad day or simply didn’t want to talk to you. Similarly, the bag delay could simply have been the handler not putting them in the right place.

I’ve had my platinum status in bookings and been treated wonderfully, and had it there and service was perfunctory.

When you’re dealing with service delivery - it is dependent on who you get, what else is going on in their work day and their level of interest in engaging with a person. All subjective!
 
I doubt it Milboo.That 1 flight wasn't the only instance I gave in that post and there was my whole history with AA to go on.
 
A phrase often used is that "loyalty is a two way street" - invariably being used in the sense that if customers show "loyalty", so must the airlines. But it begs the question, what is "loyalty" from the customer side? (as against the angst against the airlines)

A truly "loyal" customer would always buy a Qantas ticket where available. If Qantas didn't fly a route, but had a codeshare, the pax would buy the QF ticketed codeshare. Despite the price.

A person truly "loyal" to Qantas would never bag them.

Who can claim this?

Can you be "loyal" to two different airlines whose routes overlap? If you have ever bought a Virgin flight, can you still claim to be loyal to Qantas even if you are P1 with them? I think that many people only raise the loyalty concept when they need something. Which is truly not a loyal thing.

It is true that "loyalty" programs use this term at times, but at the end of the day, at least with Qantas, it is a FREQUENT FLYER program, and branded as such. There are loyalty bonuses and so forth, but can someone please show me where in the Qantas site they describe people as loyal and deserving better benefits if they do not actually meet the minimum frequency of flying as per their program??
 
The Frequent Flyer Concierge team takes the hard work out of finding reward seat availability. Using their expert knowledge and specialised tools, they'll help you book a great trip that maximises the value for your points.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

Status
Not open for further replies.

Enhance your AFF viewing experience!!

From just $6 we'll remove all advertisements so that you can enjoy a cleaner and uninterupted viewing experience.

And you'll be supporting us so that we can continue to provide this valuable resource :)


Sample AFF with no advertisements? More..
Back
Top