LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksSo lets say i have a ZL on DL from NRT-SEA. I could use This same ticket on UA NRT-SEA Because our agreements with them are also ZL?
So lets say i have a ZL on DL from NRT-SEA. I could use This same ticket on UA NRT-SEA Because our agreements with them are also ZL?
That's an easy one: since both accept ZL, and the route is the same, that's a definite YES.Originally Posted by qxramper
Even if the route would not be exactly the same, but within the same milage zone, the answer should be YES.
My question is what UA would do if they'd only have a ZM agreement in place with your airline, whereas DL has the ZL and you try to board the UA plane with your ZL ticket, originally intended for use on DL. I've heart from people that they got on the plane of a ZM carrier with a ZL ticket without problems, but then others have told me this is not possible, so I'd like to know what are the rules on this, and how 'flexible' they are in real world...
Last edited by flyer146; 09-Mar-2010 at 02:28 AM.
BUT...what about when a ZED ticket you are wanting to use is still in the same mileage zone, but now instead of flying from FRA-JFK, you had to fly MXP-JFK because FRA was full? I think that is the question being asked re: TAXES on a pass?
That is why it's not zone to zone--the taxes change--maybe ZRH and MXP are close in a zone but the taxes are different
I'm still lost...well, kinda...so I am assuming that when travelling to Europe - where taxes vary GREATLY - I should not assume that while I might be meeting both the ZONE & FARE LEVEL (ZL/ZM/ZH), I now may have a problem because of the taxes paid on a pass, thus denying me boarding because of it? Just clarifying! Thanks for all the great info!
I'm not sure I follow you. DL collects the airport fees/taxes after you travel, so it wouldn't matter where you wanted to go, only where you went.
As I read DL's ZED agreement as long as you stay in a zone the price is the same. The only thing that would change it is if one were travel through a connecting city that moved the mileage into the next zone. (Disclosure- I've only used a ZED ticket once CDG-MUC, so maybe I'm missing something)
"I'm not sure I follow you. DL collects the airport fees/taxes after you travel, so it wouldn't matter where you wanted to go, only where you went."
no no--DL only collects on THEIR nonrev flights after the fact and deducts from payroll.
You have to "buy" a zed ticket point to point and you PAY UP FRONT at tkt desk--we're talking about buying a zed for another airline.Those tickets are paid on a credit card or cash and are refundable within 90 days [typically] if unused in part.
Similar to ID90somethings but those are airline specific and God help you if you can't find a DL employee who knows how to do them anymore!!
Ah, I see. I hope someone writes that ZED article that was suggested.
Seems to be a deep discussion.
Appears NW, or DL as it now? has a strict policy.
A ZED fare, like an ID90 has monetary value. If you approach another carrier with a ZED L, where your agreement is ZED M - should the other carrier accept the ticket, so be it.
They cannot bill the issuing carrier for a higher value than paid ( Contrary to what AAZED wrote ), likewise with an ID90 or ID75. Without getting into the nitty gritty of interline billing with sample vs non sample, a request for a higher value can be declined by the issuing carrier since the accepting carrier did not obtain an endorsement from the issuing carrer as a blank endorsement, or as we would often use in the ' old days ' endorsed at face value only to BA or YY if it's going to be any IATA carrier ... it is highly unlikely an ID percentage will be declined by the issuing carrier for payment due to lack of endorsement, unless the billing is for a higher value, but since Interline billing is boring and not what people on this forum are generally interested in, the mechanics of it aside ........
Since these tickets are subject to load, an employee will be boarded if there is an empty seat. Better to receive some revenue than let the seat go empty. Where a carrier provides meals - ordinarily the meal you will be given would otherwise have been wasted, or as many gate staff advise, there may not be enough meals.
I fail to see how an employee could potentially be placing their job at risk under the umbrella of abusing their benefits if another airline voluntarily accepts the coupon - regardless of the agreement. One could ask the question, with say, 100 IATA carriers that a carrier could possibly have an agreement with, are they expected to know the agreement for each carrier in advance of approaching the other airline?
The only time I was declined occured while returning from a short New Year trip to VIE by BA. My ZED with OS was a ZED L and upon checking, declined to accept the ticket since our agreement is a ZED M.
However, they did inform me that they were soliciting for denied boardings, had the DB situation not arisen, the Duty Manager may have permitted me to use the OS ticket.
I must admit, it's the first time another carrier has not accepted a ZED for a parallel routing, so begs the question on whether the DB situation had not arisen, would the DM have accepted me with the knowledge I was in possession of a slightly lower fare ....
By the same token, I could have been in possession of a ZED M issued to BA and travelled on OS where we have a ZED L. I would not have been entitled to a refund for the fare difference since that is our company's policy, OS would have received a higher value than our agreement.
I will certainly accept that taxes are an issue. The fare goes to the airline, taxes are paid to a local government or airport authority. If the taxes paid on your ticket do not equate to the leg you are flying on, said carrier is potentially out of pocket since they may be required to remit a higher tax than you were originally ticketed for.
However, that comes back to my initial point - The carrier has voluntarily accepted your ticket, it's their call for a potential loss of revenue.
I would advise if anyone feels they could potentially be placing their travel benefits at risk in such a scenario, contact your Interline/Staff Travel Dept and ask them for clarification. The other alternative is to simply arm yourself with backups & plan for the ever increasing eventualities that are part of travelling sub load .... Good Luck !
Last edited by italgreco; 25-Mar-2010 at 09:00 PM.
Seems to be a deep discussion.
Appears NW, or DL as it now? has a strict policy.
A ZED fare, like an ID90 has monetary value. If you approach another carrier with a ZED L, where your agreement is ZED M - should the other carrier accepts the ticket, so be it.
They cannot bill the issuing carrier for a higher value than paid, likewise with an ID90 or ID75. Without getting into the nitty gritty of interline billing with sample vs non sample it is highly unlikely an ID percentage will be declined by the issuing carrier for payment due to lack of endorsement.
Since these fares are all subject to load, an employee will be boarded if there is an empty seat. Better to receive some revenue than none, and where a carrier provides meals - ordinarily the meal you will be given would otherwise have been wasted, or as many gate staff advise, there may not be enough meals.
I fail to see how an employee could potentially be placing their job at risk if another airline voluntarily accepts the coupon - regardless of the agreement. One could ask the question, with say, 100 IATA carriers that a carrier could possibly have an agreement with, are they expected to know the agreement for each carrier in advance of approaching the other airline?
I was recently declined by BA at VIE returning from a New Year long weekend. My ZED with OS was a ZED L and upon checking, declined to accept the ticket since our agreement is a ZED M.
However, they did inform me that they were looking for denied boardings, had that situation not arisen, the Duty Manager may have permitted me to use the OS ticket.
I must admit, it's the first time another carrier has not accepted a ZED for a parallel routing, so begs the question on whether the DB situation had not arisen, would the DM have accepted me with the knowledge
I was in possession of a slightly lower fare ....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks