Air Travel

Question:

> greetings, > can someone explain to me what a back to back ticket is? > thanks, > bob

Simple – Lets say you want to go from A to B and back to A.  Most fare rules require that "Saturday night stay" thing. Aha – but you want to go Monday and back Thursday.  Bad news – high price.  So you buy "Out Monday and back ’some day later’" but for sure Saturday is included. Then you buy B to A out Thursday and back some other day, but again Saturday is included.  Lo and behold, the cost of TWO tix is usually less than the "high priced" one.  Now, of course, you could alway go back and forth again (particularly if you are good with the ticketing or have another reason to return to "B"), otherwise, you pitch the 2 unused halves and save the difference.  The airlines THINK you are doing something wrong (at least if you get "caught", but particularly if you change airlines on the second tick, there is little to NOTHING they can do).  (I fly all the segments anyway – I guess I just love to fly)

Response:

greetings, can someone explain to me what a back to back ticket is? thanks, bob

Response:

> I know the airlines say that BTB ticketing violates existing fare rules, > but it doesn’t.  The rule you quote would apply if you were buying > two round trip tickets and throwing away the return flight.  BTB > ticketing doesn’t do that.

That was my thought. I thought that BTB ticketing meant you were throwing away the return. Using all the segments of two tickets couldn’t violate any rules because it is not the airlines’ concern what travels a passenger may take between using the outbound and inbound tickets of a round-trip, i.e.. Airline: ‘Hey, you flew to SFO to JFK on June 1 and were supposed to return on June 20. But we have evidence that you actually flew from JFK to SFO in between those dates and we don’t allow that.’ This is ludicrous. They have no way of knowing what travels you take in between, and by what means of transport. So I guess you violate the rules only if you use only the outbound halfs of two seperate tickets and never use the inbound half. I can see how this would be easy to track in their computers. Of course there is no law that you have to use the return half of any ticket. I’d love to see someone take them to court over this, alas I have never heard or read of any instance where the airline enforced their BTB rules, so I think this is all much ado about nothing. They use threats to ensure that travel agents don’t do BTB, but thats all they do. Steve

Response:

Actually, the airlines say you are violating the fare rules even if you don’t throw away the return flight.  Using the tickets out of order is also a violation of Back to back.  They consider doing anything to circumvent the minimum purchase and stay requirements as a violation of their rules for Back to Back ticketing, weather you use the second half of the tickets or not.  Of course, enforcing it is a different matter. If you do the trips on different airlines I don’t see how you would ever be caught though. There are many instances of travel agents who have received debit memos for booking back to back tickets, hidden city tickets, etc.  Do a search on back to back and you will find them, here are a couple of stories with examples: http://cnnfn.com/fntraveler/9807/30/biztravel/ http://www.sltrib.com/97/sep/091497/business/3959.htm – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I know the airlines say that BTB ticketing violates existing fare rules, > but it doesn’t.  The rule you quote would apply if you were buying > two round trip tickets and throwing away the return flight.  BTB > ticketing doesn’t do that. > That was my thought. I thought that BTB ticketing meant you were > throwing away the return. Using all the segments of two tickets > couldn’t violate any rules because it is not the airlines’ concern > what travels a passenger may take between using the outbound > and inbound tickets of a round-trip, i.e.. > Airline: ‘Hey, you flew to SFO to JFK on June 1 and were supposed > to return on June 20. But we have evidence that you actually flew from > JFK to SFO in between those dates and we don’t allow that.’ > This is ludicrous. They have no way of knowing what travels you > take in between, and by what means of transport. > So I guess you violate the rules only if you use only the outbound halfs > of two seperate tickets and never use the inbound half. I can see how > this would be easy to track in their computers. Of course there is no law > that you have to use the return half of any ticket. I’d love to see someone > take them to court over this, alas I have never heard or read of any > instance where the airline enforced their BTB rules, so I think this > is all much ado about nothing. They use threats to ensure that travel > agents don’t do BTB, but thats all they do. > Steve

Response:

>>Is there a rule that you must use the return of one >ticket before the outbound of another? >That is precisely the context of the airline’s rules concerning >BTB tickets.  Those rules typically say something like, "you >can’t combine two round trip excursion tickets so as to get >around the fare rules imposed on those tickets.  That is why >combining two one-ways with a round trip ticket isn’t against the >rules.

I know the airlines say that BTB ticketing violates existing fare rules, but it doesn’t.  The rule you quote would apply if you were buying two round trip tickets and throwing away the return flight.  BTB ticketing doesn’t do that.   Here’s an example that might clarify things:  Let’s say I’m in New York and I need to be in San Francisco on June 15 and June 25 for meetings with clients.  I also need to be in Newark from June 17 to June 23 for a sales conference.  So I can either fly JFK-SFO-JFK JFK-EWR-JFK JFK-SFO-JFK or JFK-SFO SFO-EWR-SFO SFO-JFK (with the JFK-SFO and SFO-JFK being a roundtrip ticket). Would the second set of tickets violate the rules?  If so, substitute Dallas for Newark, is that a violation?  How about if I drive home from Newark to Manhattan everynight, does that make a difference?  If none of these are violations what happens if the SFO-EWR-SFO flight is sold out and I decide to fly to JFK instead? marcos — Not ready reading .signature                          |    Marcos H. Woehrmann

Response:

>Threats to back bill the TAs that ticket in violation of the >tariff rules is also administratively possible to implement given the way >these transactions are handled.

I always thought this was a weak threat. First, anyone willing to use a "BTB" would have no problem booking the flights through two agents, or even two online reservation systems. Second, using separate airlines, if possible, makes the challenge of the airline to detect this practice pretty difficult. I say screw the airlines. Hell, it’s definitely their "motto" in dealing with their best customers, the business traveler …" We, the airlines, feel it is highly unethical for you to taken actions to  avoid being screwed by us." You’ve gotta love that logic. Tom:   I don’t accept e-mail, so please respond to group.

Response:

>Is there a rule that you must use the return of one >ticket before the outbound of another?

That is precisely the context of the airline’s rules concerning BTB tickets.  Those rules typically say something like, "you can’t combine two round trip excursion tickets so as to get around the fare rules imposed on those tickets.  That is why combining two one-ways with a round trip ticket isn’t against the rules. Brian Charles Kohn "Hope, not fear, is the best advocate of action."

Response:

> My company has a policy against violating the fare rules.  The simple reason > is that it is inconsistent with our corporate mind set to act in a manner we > consider to be unethical.  We also have exclusive provider agreements that > allow substantial discounts on airfare which would certainly be jeopardized > if we were to disregard the rules.

The latter reason certainly makes sense, but I’ve not seen any explanation of what makes BTB ticketing unethical. BTB ticketing is working within the system the airlines set up. If BTB tickets are on two different airlines then you’re not even violating any rules. The reason the airlines make noise about BTB, but ignore it, is that they know that if they tried to enforce it that they’d do nothing except lose one of the tickets to a competitor and accomplish nothing. I have done BTB ticketing where I used ALL the segments because I took two trips to the same destination–I just didn’t use the inbound of the first itinerary until after the outbound of the second itinerary, i.e. Trip 1 ABC-XYZ  June 1 XYC-ABC June 30 Trip 2 XYZ-ABC June 4 ABC-XYZ June 27 Is there a rule that you must use the return of one ticket before the outbound of another? This all is so silly. The airlines need to fix their fare structure instead of making unenforceable rules before Southwest drives them out of business. > Two of the the expressed  penalties of the airlines for rule violations > include forfeiture of frequent flyer miles and refusal to honor an onward or > return ticket. Therefor, it would seem that the passenger, not the airline, > would need to sue to recover damages placing the burden of proof on the > plaintiff.  Threats to back bill the TAs that ticket in violation of the > tariff rules is also administratively possible to implement given the way > these transactions are handled.

Use two different TAs buying tickets on two different airlines then. Now the ethics question is solved. > In the case of b to b – I think the airlines have the upper hand.  It doesn’t > make it any more palatable or defensible, but it does make it more > profitable.

For corporate travel they certainly do have the upper hand because no corporation would risk their discounts to do it, at least not with both tickets on the same airline. For personal travel most people can do advance purchase and don’t need to resort to it. It’s probably pretty low on the airline’s priority list of ways to make more money. Steve "All truth passes through three stages.  First it is ridiculed,  second it is violently opposed,  third, it is accepted as being self-evident."                               Schopehnauer

Response:

As to Boeing not permitting the use of BTBs and throwaways on company business, well, I would be quite shocked if that *wasn’t* the case, since the airlines, after all, are Boeing’s customers. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Yes, and _I_ posted one of them.   Intentional B2B merely to gather > miles on HP.  LAX-LAS-PHX-TUS-PHX-LAS-LAX (return outbound SAME DAY from > TUS – after arrival, of course) with _THE SAME AGENT_ at the same time, > 2 bookings and I, of course, took all the flights.  Agent didn’t care. > Neitherapparently did HP.  (Back in the "good old days" of 750 min miles > per – 4500 per RT.  That was why I got Platinum this year)  BTW – Boeing > "ethics" say that we cannot do B2B on COMPANY business or "toss" back > 1/2 of RT’s, or any of the things that _I_ >  personally_ do.  The difference is that it’s MY money I’m spending and > I don’t get the discounts that the company does.  For some reason, they > (our internal travel company) even seems AMAZED that I _CARE_ how much > it costs for company travel.!!  (Lower costs mean lower budget impact > and possibility of more unscheduled trip additions if we stay under > budget) > SNIP > > Two of the the expressed  penalties of the airlines for rule violations > > include forfeiture of frequent flyer miles and refusal to honor an onward > or > > return ticket.        Therefor, it would seem that the passenger, not the > airline, > > would need to sue to recover damages placing the burden of proof on the > > plaintiff.  Threats to back bill the TAs that ticket in violation of the > > tariff rules is also administratively possible to implement given the way > > these transactions are handled. > My thought about this is that I while there are reports of travel agents > getting debit memos for booking some back to back tickets, I’ve NEVER > heard of an airline sending a memo to their own reservation agents.  In > fact there have been posts where the airline res agent cared less about > booking a BTB fare…. > Rich

Response:

Yes, and _I_ posted one of them.   Intentional B2B merely to gather miles on HP.  LAX-LAS-PHX-TUS-PHX-LAS-LAX (return outbound SAME DAY from TUS – after arrival, of course) with _THE SAME AGENT_ at the same time, 2 bookings and I, of course, took all the flights.  Agent didn’t care. Neitherapparently did HP.  (Back in the "good old days" of 750 min miles per – 4500 per RT.  That was why I got Platinum this year)  BTW – Boeing "ethics" say that we cannot do B2B on COMPANY business or "toss" back 1/2 of RT’s, or any of the things that _I_    personally_ do.  The difference is that it’s MY money I’m spending and I don’t get the discounts that the company does.  For some reason, they (our internal travel company) even seems AMAZED that I _CARE_ how much it costs for company travel.!!  (Lower costs mean lower budget impact and possibility of more unscheduled trip additions if we stay under budget) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > SNIP > Two of the the expressed  penalties of the airlines for rule violations > include forfeiture of frequent flyer miles and refusal to honor an onward > or > return ticket.        Therefor, it would seem that the passenger, not the > airline, > would need to sue to recover damages placing the burden of proof on the > plaintiff.  Threats to back bill the TAs that ticket in violation of the > tariff rules is also administratively possible to implement given the way > these transactions are handled. > My thought about this is that I while there are reports of travel agents > getting debit memos for booking some back to back tickets, I’ve NEVER > heard of an airline sending a memo to their own reservation agents.  In > fact there have been posts where the airline res agent cared less about > booking a BTB fare…. > Rich

Response:

The upper hand no.  I’ve done back to back with the same airline and they didn’t bother to notice.  If you want to make it unchallengable then spend a little extra time at the intermediate city.  If you don’t take the next flight out and want a stopover the airlines require that you book it as two separate trips.  If you really don’t want to be noticed then use different airlines.   As for the ethics, I don’t consider violating someone else’s ideas of what my actions should be as unethical.  I’m the only judge of what my actions should be. Frank Matthews – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >>X-No-Archive: Yes > >>>If you strictly look at it on an individual ticket basis, and don’t > >>consider if > >>>there is any ethics involved… > >>Well, if we want to talk about the ethics of the situation, is it morally > >>right for airlines to ban the practice in the first place? > >Bravo, Chris!!! How refreshing! Of course, you realize that ethics > >in some circles (like rta) = ‘what is in the interest of the companies > >in which I have stock’… > >Actually, I really don’t believe the airline rules could hold up > >in court since they can’t actually define what it is we cannot do > >without resorting to some mystical notion of intent. > I believe the issue of intent doesn’t enter into it.  The airlines > feel that back-to-back ticketing is a violation of the fare rules.  But > the rules don’t state that you will actually spend Saturday night in > the city to which you are travelling, only that you can’t use the > return ticket before Sunday 12:01am, which you are not doing (you are > leaving and returning before using the return ticket, but that’s not > forbidden). > marcos > My company has a policy against violating the fare rules.  The simple reason > is that it is inconsistent with our corporate mind set to act in a manner we > consider to be unethical.  We also have exclusive provider agreements that > allow substantial discounts on airfare which would certainly be jeopardized > if we were to disregard the rules. > Two of the the expressed  penalties of the airlines for rule violations > include forfeiture of frequent flyer miles and refusal to honor an onward or > return ticket.  Therefor, it would seem that the passenger, not the airline, > would need to sue to recover damages placing the burden of proof on the > plaintiff.  Threats to back bill the TAs that ticket in violation of the > tariff rules is also administratively possible to implement given the way > these transactions are handled. > In the case of b to b – I think the airlines have the upper hand.  It doesn’t > make it any more palatable or defensible, but it does make it more > profitable. > amp > —Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.—

Response:

The impracticality of two airlines will occur only when a carrier has a monopoly on both segments.  Minneapolis, where Northwest has a near monopoly, is a problem only if NW controls either the intermediate stop or the destination also. Frank Matthews – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > The obvious solution is to buy the two roundtrip tickets > on different airlines. > In my experience, the airlines will make noise about > back to back ticketing, but they know if they enforce > their rule (and it’s just an airline rule, there is > nothing illegal or unethical about this practice), > passengers will simply book the second ticket on a > different airline. There are a few destinations, > where using different airlines won’t work, i.e. > Minneapolis, where Northwest has a near monopoly, > but for most routes it isn’t a problem. > I’ve also run into problems with corporate travel > agencies. Saving money is not there forte, even > ignoring back to back tickets, which I understand > why they don’t do. > The firm that I am employed by just recently issued a memorandum stating > there > policy about issuing back to back tickets, through our corporate travel. > While they state they will not knowingly issue such tickets, they concede > that > it can happen (we have a very large organization) and in some instances > tickets > can be issued to an employee outside of the travel agency via other > sources. > those ticketrs are usually out on the individuals expense account and > charged > to a particular job or overhead. > The policy states that the majoir airlines have stepped up there > activities on > "back to back" ticketing and some of those instances has been brough to > the > attention of our firm.  The policy goes on to state that any penalities > arising > from the back to back ticketing will be charged directly to that > individual’s > depatment and disciplinary action such as dismissal may occur. > I believe my firm is trying to protect our generous discounts we get from > some > of the majors. > I was surprised to hear that the majors have "stepped up efforts" in this > arena, and obviously passengers are getting caught and this could reflect > poorly on the employer. > Any other employers have this policy?  What say ye…Sheryl?

Response:

The obvious solution is to buy the two roundtrip tickets on different airlines. In my experience, the airlines will make noise about back to back ticketing, but they know if they enforce their rule (and it’s just an airline rule, there is nothing illegal or unethical about this practice), passengers will simply book the second ticket on a different airline. There are a few destinations, where using different airlines won’t work, i.e. Minneapolis, where Northwest has a near monopoly, but for most routes it isn’t a problem. I’ve also run into problems with corporate travel agencies. Saving money is not there forte, even ignoring back to back tickets, which I understand why they don’t do.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> The firm that I am employed by just recently issued a memorandum stating there > policy about issuing back to back tickets, through our corporate travel. > While they state they will not knowingly issue such tickets, they concede that > it can happen (we have a very large organization) and in some instances tickets > can be issued to an employee outside of the travel agency via other sources. > those ticketrs are usually out on the individuals expense account and charged > to a particular job or overhead. > The policy states that the majoir airlines have stepped up there activities on > "back to back" ticketing and some of those instances has been brough to the > attention of our firm.  The policy goes on to state that any penalities arising > from the back to back ticketing will be charged directly to that individual’s > depatment and disciplinary action such as dismissal may occur. > I believe my firm is trying to protect our generous discounts we get from some > of the majors. > I was surprised to hear that the majors have "stepped up efforts" in this > arena, and obviously passengers are getting caught and this could reflect > poorly on the employer. > Any other employers have this policy?  What say ye…Sheryl?

Response:

SNIP > Two of the the expressed  penalties of the airlines for rule violations > include forfeiture of frequent flyer miles and refusal to honor an onward or > return ticket.     Therefor, it would seem that the passenger, not the airline, > would need to sue to recover damages placing the burden of proof on the > plaintiff.  Threats to back bill the TAs that ticket in violation of the > tariff rules is also administratively possible to implement given the way > these transactions are handled.

My thought about this is that I while there are reports of travel agents getting debit memos for booking some back to back tickets, I’ve NEVER heard of an airline sending a memo to their own reservation agents.  In fact there have been posts where the airline res agent cared less about booking a BTB fare…. Rich

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>X-No-Archive: Yes >>>If you strictly look at it on an individual ticket basis, and don’t >>consider if >>>there is any ethics involved… >>Well, if we want to talk about the ethics of the situation, is it morally >>right for airlines to ban the practice in the first place? >Bravo, Chris!!! How refreshing! Of course, you realize that ethics >in some circles (like rta) = ‘what is in the interest of the companies >in which I have stock’… >Actually, I really don’t believe the airline rules could hold up >in court since they can’t actually define what it is we cannot do >without resorting to some mystical notion of intent. > I believe the issue of intent doesn’t enter into it.  The airlines > feel that back-to-back ticketing is a violation of the fare rules.  But > the rules don’t state that you will actually spend Saturday night in > the city to which you are travelling, only that you can’t use the > return ticket before Sunday 12:01am, which you are not doing (you are > leaving and returning before using the return ticket, but that’s not > forbidden). > marcos

My company has a policy against violating the fare rules.  The simple reason is that it is inconsistent with our corporate mind set to act in a manner we consider to be unethical.  We also have exclusive provider agreements that allow substantial discounts on airfare which would certainly be jeopardized if we were to disregard the rules. Two of the the expressed  penalties of the airlines for rule violations include forfeiture of frequent flyer miles and refusal to honor an onward or return ticket.  Therefor, it would seem that the passenger, not the airline, would need to sue to recover damages placing the burden of proof on the plaintiff.  Threats to back bill the TAs that ticket in violation of the tariff rules is also administratively possible to implement given the way these transactions are handled. In the case of b to b – I think the airlines have the upper hand.  It doesn’t make it any more palatable or defensible, but it does make it more profitable. amp —Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.—

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Oh, and then their’s the 4th camp. The > ones who come to Sheryl and say, help > me get this fare down cause I just > CAN’T change planes at DFW anymore > (I actually had someone come to me > saying this). I really admire this group, > as they DO have the company’s best > interests in mind, but there’s just so > much they are willing to sacrifice via > increased travel time. And that’s when I > pull out my little tricks. Just this week, I > saved our company $1700 when one > traveler knew she’d have a hard time > substantiating a $1137 and a $1600+ > ticket on the same expense report. And > yep, all the flights I booked were on CO > with fully legal routing. > Oh, and I just bet they admire _you_…. > gm

As a matter of fact they do.  Care to say something about air travel? What a pitiful excuse you are they you take such enjoyment in ridiculing me.  Great character trait, TV boy.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->X-No-Archive: Yes >>If you strictly look at it on an individual ticket basis, and don’t >consider if >>there is any ethics involved… >Well, if we want to talk about the ethics of the situation, is it morally >right for airlines to ban the practice in the first place? >Bravo, Chris!!! How refreshing! Of course, you realize that ethics >in some circles (like rta) = ‘what is in the interest of the companies >in which I have stock’… >Actually, I really don’t believe the airline rules could hold up >in court since they can’t actually define what it is we cannot do >without resorting to some mystical notion of intent.

I believe the issue of intent doesn’t enter into it.  The airlines feel that back-to-back ticketing is a violation of the fare rules.  But the rules don’t state that you will actually spend Saturday night in the city to which you are travelling, only that you can’t use the return ticket before Sunday 12:01am, which you are not doing (you are leaving and returning before using the return ticket, but that’s not forbidden). marcos — Not ready reading .signature                          |    Marcos H. Woehrmann

Response:

Ever hear of a killfile???? In fact you’ve mentioned this in your voluminous posts, voluminous numbers of times. =T. (sitting back watching this unfold) "Go ahead… send me flaming email… I’ll just post it here for EVERYONE to enjoy."

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >Oh, and then their’s the 4th camp. The > ones who come to Sheryl and say, help > me get this fare down cause I just > CAN’T change planes at DFW anymore > (I actually had someone come to me > saying this). I really admire this group, > as they DO have the company’s best > interests in mind, but there’s just so > much they are willing to sacrifice via > increased travel time. And that’s when I > pull out my little tricks. Just this week, I > saved our company $1700 when one > traveler knew she’d have a hard time > substantiating a $1137 and a $1600+ > ticket on the same expense report. And > yep, all the flights I booked were on CO > with fully legal routing.

Oh, and I just bet they admire _you_…. gm

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > The firm that I am employed by just recently issued a memorandum stating there > policy about issuing back to back tickets, through our corporate travel. > While they state they will not knowingly issue such tickets, they concede that > it can happen (we have a very large organization) and in some instances tickets > can be issued to an employee outside of the travel agency via other sources. > those ticketrs are usually out on the individuals expense account and charged > to a particular job or overhead. > The policy states that the majoir airlines have stepped up there activities on > "back to back" ticketing and some of those instances has been brough to the > attention of our firm.  The policy goes on to state that any penalities arising > from the back to back ticketing will be charged directly to that individual’s > depatment and disciplinary action such as dismissal may occur. > I believe my firm is trying to protect our generous discounts we get from some > of the majors. > I was surprised to hear that the majors have "stepped up efforts" in this > arena, and obviously passengers are getting caught and this could reflect > poorly on the employer. > Any other employers have this policy?  What say ye…Sheryl?

Lots of companies have that policy, but not mine.  Absent any written corporate travel policy (they keep saying they’re working on it), there are basically three camps of business travelers at my company: 1.  Just get me there the quickest way.  I don’t care how much it costs.  In most cases, that means CO for our travelers.  These are the greedy ones, IMO, as they only have themselves in mind, and not the company.  Basically, it’s a few in senior mgmt. 2.  Those who’ll book BTB, but not on CO, cause they don’t want to jeopardize their FF status and account, not because they consider it an ethical issue. 3.  Those who book BTB, even on CO, cause they want all CO miles, but basically, "we ain’t payin $1200 to go to Denver."  DEN is a very common destination for many of our employees, but not the travelers who I handle.  They just don’t think they’ll get caught.  Me, well I think some of them WILL eventually get caught.  IMO, if they’re going to do BTB IAH-DEN, they should be buying one ticket on CO and one on UA. Oh, and then their’s the 4th camp.  The ones who come to Sheryl and say, help me get this fare down cause I just CAN’T change planes at DFW anymore (I actually had someone come to me saying this).  I really admire this group, as they DO have the company’s best interests in mind, but there’s just so much they are willing to sacrifice via increased travel time.  And that’s when I pull out my little tricks.  Just this week, I saved our company $1700 when one traveler knew she’d have a hard time substantiating a $1137 and a $1600+ ticket on the same expense report.  And yep, all the flights I booked were on CO with fully legal routing. So anyway, my company doesn’t have a problem with BTBs.  In fact, someone with the title of Sr. V.P. actually sent out an e-mail to all employees about 6 months ago, suggesting BTBs and even explaining what a BTB is.  Very poor judgment, IMO, as anything put in writing to all employees can "surface" at very inopportune times.

Response:

>ubject: Re: Back to Back Ticketing  ..Policy >Well, if we want to talk about the ethics of the situation, is it morally >right for airlines to ban the practice in the first place?

Can we equate ethics with legality?  Are you saying that back to back ticketing is unethical or the practice by the airlines banning it? I wonder if the practice of banning it by the airlines has been challenged in a court of law?  Would seem to me that if an individual could prove that he or she copuld find themnselves very rich.   Why wouldn’t a large corporation challenge it, especially one that couls say much money if they employed the back to back practice.  It would be quite a windfall. If passengers think the airlines are wrong about banning this practice, then they should purchase back to back ticket and announce to the airline that they are doing such a practice and get it into a court of law. I believe our ethics are somewhat defined by our legal system, parially, the other portion is what society believes. Where is the DOJ when we need them on this issue.

Response:

>X-No-Archive: Yes >If you strictly look at it on an individual ticket basis, and don’t >consider if >there is any ethics involved… >Well, if we want to talk about the ethics of the situation, is it morally >right for airlines to ban the practice in the first place?

Bravo, Chris!!! How refreshing! Of course, you realize that ethics in some circles (like rta) = ‘what is in the interest of the companies in which I have stock’… Actually, I really don’t believe the airline rules could hold up in court since they can’t actually define what it is we cannot do without resorting to some mystical notion of intent.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->ubject: Re: Back to Back Ticketing  ..Policy >Not my firm.  They will use any fare method available to get the fare >down.  Recently, somebody had to get to MEM to go to the lovely >little town of Blytheville.  The fare r/t was about $1100.  The attorney >didn’t think twice about suggesting a BTB fare for the route to reduce >the costs a couple hundred dollars. >Considering, in the long run, you win 9 out of 10 times, what is really >to stop you from doing it (or even 10 out of 10 as the airlines are hard >pressed to enforce it on those who fly them 2 or 3 times a year). >Rich

Rich: If you strictly look at it on an individual ticket basis, and don’t consider if there is any ethics involved …oh sorry you did say it was an attorney who suggested it , there is not much to argue with, by playiong the odds. Unfortunately soem large firms would have allot to lose, such as the one I am employed by, which get substantial discounts +20% and other perks from some of the majors. Wayne

Response:

> The firm that I am employed by just recently issued a memorandum stating

there SNIP > I was surprised to hear that the majors have "stepped up efforts" in this > arena, and obviously passengers are getting caught and this could reflect > poorly on the employer. > Any other employers have this policy?  What say ye…Sheryl?

Not my firm.  They will use any fare method available to get the fare down.  Recently, somebody had to get to MEM to go to the lovely little town of Blytheville.  The fare r/t was about $1100.  The attorney didn’t think twice about suggesting a BTB fare for the route to reduce the costs a couple hundred dollars. Considering, in the long run, you win 9 out of 10 times, what is really to stop you from doing it (or even 10 out of 10 as the airlines are hard pressed to enforce it on those who fly them 2 or 3 times a year). Rich

Response:

The firm that I am employed by just recently issued a memorandum stating there policy about issuing back to back tickets, through our corporate travel. While they state they will not knowingly issue such tickets, they concede that it can happen (we have a very large organization) and in some instances tickets can be issued to an employee outside of the travel agency via other sources. those ticketrs are usually out on the individuals expense account and charged to a particular job or overhead. The policy states that the majoir airlines have stepped up there activities on "back to back" ticketing and some of those instances has been brough to the attention of our firm.  The policy goes on to state that any penalities arising from the back to back ticketing will be charged directly to that individual’s depatment and disciplinary action such as dismissal may occur. I believe my firm is trying to protect our generous discounts we get from some of the majors. I was surprised to hear that the majors have "stepped up efforts" in this arena, and obviously passengers are getting caught and this could reflect poorly on the employer. Any other employers have this policy?  What say ye…Sheryl?

Response: