Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Beware Lufthansa's *A Deception

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Beware Lufthansa's *A Deception

    LH was already on bad terms with me after a terrible long-haul experience with them 2.5 years back followed by trying to argue last year I couldn't access their lounge at MUC before boarding SQ327 as a KF Gold unless I could get SQ staff to phone them and confirm the "KFEG" printed on my boarding pass wasn't fake/an error/[insert bizarre nonsense here].

    Now I've really had enough of them!!!

    I issue the following warning to all Star Alliance travellers:

    I went to the LH website and booked and paid for a flight. It said "operated by Germanwings" but since I am being ticketed by LH, and Germanwings is wholly owned and controlled by them, I think that's okay. It tells me how many miles I can earn and I paid Lufthansa and received a Lufthansa E-ticket with no logo other than Lufthansa on it, including an LH logo printed next to each flight number. (This flight incidentally was DUS-BIO, which was in fact an LH flight less than a year ago until LH 'rebranded' it along with virtually all other flights out of DUS.)

    I arrive at the airport with my LH E-ticket and Star Alliance Gold card. "Germanwings isn't a member of Star Alliance," I am told. "OK, but I am flying on a Lufthansa ticket." The reply: "Yes, we are in cooperation with Lufthansa but not a member of Star Alliance." This exchange went nowhere so I moved to the LH business check-in.

    "No, you can't earn any miles off this flight unless you are a member of Miles and More". So no miles then. "Yes, you can use the lounge, however."

    At the lounge: "No, this is a Germanwings boarding pass." (This of course ignores the gigantic LH logo on the boarding pass.) "But I booked and paid through Lufthansa because you are Star Alliance." I also explained the check-in said lounge access is possible. "No, we are the lounge, and we say it is not." This was followed by some discussion among colleagues right in front of me who all made the assumption I couldn't speak any German. Aside from being rude to the customer, it was a bad assumption. No lounge access or any apology ensued and arguing with Germans who are behind a desk is a frivolous exercise so I ended it quickly. Interestingly, this desk was adorned with a gigantic Germanwings logo.

    So as tips:
    *Don't ever trust LH to offer you any Star Alliance benefits (the long haul flight I once took came with an assurance the miles would be credited to my KF account- still waiting for that... )
    *LH will sell you flights on planes they own and operate but insist they are not *A and simply cooperating with themselves.
    *LH will happily take your money with the *A logo proudly displayed and also indicate LH levels of service and booking classes and then issue you with an e-ticket where each flight has an LH logo displayed next to it, as well as a gigantic LH logo on the top and a *A logo on the letterhead but then suddenly insist things are otherwise when you ask for the *A loyalty to be returned in kind.

    Rant over. But hopefully I can save at least one other person on the forum for being deceived by this rubbish.

  • #2
    Originally posted by SQ228 View Post
    ....I went to the LH website and booked and paid for a flight. It said "operated by Germanwings" but since I am being ticketed by LH, and Germanwings is wholly owned and controlled by them, I think that's okay......
    The relationship between LH and 4U is just like SQ and MI. Perhaps you didn't realize it cause you are a SQKF member. Just ask any non-SQKF member flying MI and you will know what I mean.

    There are many more examples: AF/KL and HV (transavia), QF and JQ (Jetstar), CI and AE (Mandarin), LH/TK and XQ (Sunexpress), to name a few.
    Last edited by TerryK; 20 January 2015, 02:43 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      This rant is pretty bizarre but amusing to read. I guess that MI gives indeed similar headaches to non-KF pax flying SQ.

      Comment


      • #4
        Rather an odd post. Maybe jet lag was kicking in, but I thought it would have been pretty obvious as soon as the words "operated by Germanwings" appeared. Can't blame Lufthansa for one's own misunderstanding.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Wan1dap View Post
          Rather an odd post. Maybe jet lag was kicking in, but I thought it would have been pretty obvious as soon as the words "operated by Germanwings" appeared. Can't blame Lufthansa for one's own misunderstanding.
          QF operate a subsidiary company called Jetconnect for trans-Tasman flights, but they are still QF flights from a passenger point-of-view, it's just an operational matter. When booking they appear as "operated by Jetconnect on behalf on Qantas". All benefits, mileage accrual and One-World membership still applies.

          VA have an alliance with SQ, but VA Gold members also have status recognised by MI.

          If you book Australia to Germany on LH, the flight to SIN is marked as operated by Singapore Airlines and you still receive benefits.

          These are three examples that constitute my knowledge of inter-airline operations as to why the words "operated by Germanwings" would therefore not make it appear obvious to me.

          When various staff members at different desks representing both the parent and the subsidiary issue conflicting information, then that also doesn't help make matters appear obvious.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by SQ228 View Post
            QF operate a subsidiary company called Jetconnect for trans-Tasman flights, but they are still QF flights from a passenger point-of-view, it's just an operational matter. When booking they appear as "operated by Jetconnect on behalf on Qantas". All benefits, mileage accrual and One-World membership still applies.
            Jetconnect IS a oneworld affiliate. QF made it so and the only reason they exist as such is because they're NZ based.

            In any case, the example you provide just goes to illustrate that some companies DO include their subsidiares as members of the larger alliance, and some DON'T.

            I'm sure there are arguments on both sides as to whether the onus lies with us to check or the airline to make more clear. For me - the jury is out on that one as I tend not to fly these subsidiaries anyway.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by SQ228 View Post
              .....If you book Australia to Germany on LH, the flight to SIN is marked as operated by Singapore Airlines and you still receive benefits....
              Of course. SQ is a member of Star Alliance. Benefit is based on operating airlines. There is no reason why you will not receive *A benefit on SQ operated flights no matter how you book your ticket. The issue here is that 4U is not a member of *A; just like MI is not a member of *A.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TerryK View Post
                ...just like MI is not a member of *A.
                I still can't understand what SQ's rationale behind this is. It's utterly annoying.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by SQ228 View Post
                  QF operate a subsidiary company called Jetconnect for trans-Tasman flights, but they are still QF flights from a passenger point-of-view, it's just an operational matter. When booking they appear as "operated by Jetconnect on behalf on Qantas". All benefits, mileage accrual and One-World membership still applies.

                  VA have an alliance with SQ, but VA Gold members also have status recognised by MI.

                  If you book Australia to Germany on LH, the flight to SIN is marked as operated by Singapore Airlines and you still receive benefits.

                  These are three examples that constitute my knowledge of inter-airline operations as to why the words "operated by Germanwings" would therefore not make it appear obvious to me.

                  When various staff members at different desks representing both the parent and the subsidiary issue conflicting information, then that also doesn't help make matters appear obvious.
                  Simple matter of referring to alliance membership lists. I don't see what's so confusing. The LH/SQ Australia to Germany example is not relevant here.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by SQGamespeed View Post
                    I still can't understand what SQ's rationale behind this is. It's utterly annoying.
                    No need to understand, it is just a business decision.

                    SQ, LH, TK, AF, KL, QF, and many others, made a business decision not to include their subsidiaries in alliance to avoid paying for alliance benefits. KA was not in OweWorld for awhile before CX brought it in.

                    The rules are simple. Benefit is based on operating airlines. You receive alliance benefit if operating airlines is a member of alliance. For example: you will receive *A benefits if you book DPS-SIN under GA code but operated by SQ even though GA is not in *A. Perhaps I should start a new thread: Beware, you will receive *A benefit even though you didn't book with *A and your ticket doesn't show *A airlines.

                    BTW, I think codeshares are the source of all evil and should be outlawed.
                    Last edited by TerryK; 20 January 2015, 08:08 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by SQGamespeed View Post
                      I still can't understand what SQ's rationale behind this is. It's utterly annoying.
                      I read that having MI out of Star Alliance is a deliberate strategy to ensure that passengers connecting to/from MI fly SQ since MI flights carry SQ's code. So for example, someone from Germany wanting to fly to a MI destination will be able to book it on SQ but not on LH. Something like that, correct me if I'm mistaken.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by TerryK View Post
                        No need to understand, it is just a business decision.

                        SQ, LH, TK, AF, KL, QF, and many others, made a business decision not to include their subsidiaries in alliance to avoid paying for alliance benefits. KA was not in OweWorld for awhile before CX brought it in.

                        The rules are simple. Benefit is based on operating airlines. You receive alliance benefit if operating airlines is a member of alliance. For example: you will receive *A benefits if you book DPS-SIN under GA code but operated by SQ even though GA is not in *A. Perhaps I should start a new thread: Beware, you will receive *A benefit even though you didn't book with *A and your ticket doesn't show *A airlines.

                        BTW, I think codeshares are the source of all evil and should be outlawed.
                        Thank you, it's much clearer now it has been explained in a friendly manner. Most of us come here to learn how it all works and when someone goes to this trouble it helps us understand!

                        I guess what angers me more than anything else is LH's decision to convert all destinations other than ex-FRA and ex-MUC over to "Germanwings" which is a cynical exercise designed to strip customers of benefits and strip employees of their industrial rights, which at the same time, makes everyone living in Germany but not based near those two hubs a bit of a second class citizen. At the same time, they want to splash the LH logo around as a marketing tool so that we still "feel" it's Lufthansa. It certainly fooled me, and that's why I feel deceived.

                        IF SQ has been converting routes to MI and excluding them from *A as well, then they deserve the same criticism. The new 5th daily to DPS comes to mind.

                        And you are right- codeshares just leave customers wondering what they will get and which baggage rules will apply etc. which are frequently unable to be found anywhere obvious on their website.

                        You are also right about getting surprise benefits. I flew an SK flight as an FI codeshare and was welcomed warmly by SK as a *A member. It just seems illogical given that in most commercial sales situations, benefits are assigned to the customer by the company you have paid for the service as part of your purchase offer, not the service provider, hence I expected it to be the opposite and was well prepared to sit out my wait for the SK flight in the gate lounge.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Whilst customers should take the time to familiarise themselves with the T&Cs (and operating carrier disclosures are there for a reason), which they often do not - the airline can T&C till it's blue in the face and people will just assume, I tend to sympathise with the view that airlines could do a better job of identifying the various benefits or exclusions you get from airline partners as it's not often quite as clear cut.

                          In the OP's case it sounds like staff were also confused re the lounge access.

                          Jetconnect for Qantas isn't a good example as it's a wet lease rather than a traditional codeshare. Similar to VANZ operating for Virgin Australia or Aer Lingus operating Little Red flights on behalf of Virgin Atlantic.

                          MI recognises VA for loyalty benefits as the partnership between VA and the SIA group includes MI, whereas MI isn't a member of Star. VA also codeshares on MI.

                          It's a lot more straightforward in a multilateral alliance like Star or oneworld where you can safely assume that you'll get your benefits on any member of the alliance and selected affiliates. But it's not as straightforward for customers in a bilateral alliance arrangement like QF/EK or VA/EY, as you'll only get your benefits on flights marketed and operated by either partner but not if you book a codeshare flight that may be marketed by the partner airline but is actually operated by a carrier outside of that relationship as you won't be recognised by the partner's partner which isn't in partnership with your airline program. Cue the complaints when an EK Skywards member doesn't earn on a QF codeshare service operated by MU, or when a Velocity member does not get status benefits on an EY flight operated by AZ. This is perhaps similar to the frustrations experienced by FFP members of alliance partners when airlines have subsidiaries that aren't part of the main alliance that the parent airline is a member of.

                          With the increased trend towards bilateral joint ventures, hopefully a combination of greater transparency from the airlines through more experience administering these partnerships and increased consumer education should lead to better informed customers.
                          Last edited by KeithMEL; 21 January 2015, 09:24 AM.
                          All opinions shared are my own, and are not necessarily those of my employer or any other organisation of which I'm affiliated to.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The *A operating carrier rule is pretty simple, but other alliances and programs can handle this differently. Do not assume that the *A or similar rules apply outside of *A.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              It probably wouldn't kill LH (or SQ in the MI case for that matter) to indicate during booking process that no Star Alliance benefits will apply. For LH this applies to all the 4U flights unless you are a M&M member, but then that would be work right?

                              The SQ / MI situation is just better known to many *A travelers as the situation has persisted for many, many years already. Oh well, YMMV.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X