Usairways Vs. Southwest
- Thread starter usacrew3
- Start date
wnbubbleboy
Veteran
BoeingBoy said:
If you have a travel for free I am pretty sure the company can book you to DAL from any where. Using a Reward Pass is what I am thinking of. Of course I have been off the ramp for pretty long time. I have seen DAL tagged bags sent from BWI the belonged to Rewards Customers who used their free tickets to fly from BWI.
Here's the actual text of the Wright Amendment (well, the relevant part):
The Shelby Amendment merely added Kansas, Alabama, and Mississippi to the list and made the language regarding aircraft configured for 56 seats or fewer more specific (largely because of the way DOT was trying to enforce this restriction with respect to Legend).
The key here is that airlines serving Love Field may not offer for sale transportation to or from, and the flight or aircraft does not serve, any point which is outside any such State. What the passengers choose to do in terms of purchasing tickets is their own business, especially since Southwest has no restrictions on back-to-back, hidden-city, or throw-away ticketing. In fact, if you buy a round-trip ticket and choose not to fly the return leg(s), they will happily apply the unused portion of the itinerary to future travel with no service charges.
You can see in the wording of the Wright Amendment that non-revenue travel between DAL and points outside the Wright/Shelby states (such as Rapid Rewards award redemption) is permissible since such travel is not offered for sale. It's also clearly permissible under the law for individuals to travel on paid itineraries from outside the Wright/Shelby states as long as they are not offered through ticketing and flights. It's difficult to gauge Jim Wright's intent here, but it's also clear that there is nothing morally or ethically wrong with following the letter of the law. If Jim Wright had meant to proscribe travel to DAL from outside the permitted states, he should have put it in his little amendment. You can't blame people for taking advantage of his screw-up to save themselves a few hundred dollars.
Nor is it morally or ethically wrong for passengers to buy tickets at prices which an airline (through its revenue management department) offers them for sale. If US wants to sell you a PHL-LAX ticket for $150 round-trip, it's not wrong to accept their offer. Nor is it wrong to upgrade to First on these tickets if the airline's policy is to do so for its preferred members. It is a bit hypocritical to claim that one's concern is primarily for the airline's employees and financial health, though, when it is clear that self-interest is truly the main concern. I think it is also painfully obvious that the gravy train of free upgrades on loss-leader fares will eventally come to a grinding halt when the airline either closes its doors or revamps its upgrade policies or pricing.
The Shelby Amendment merely added Kansas, Alabama, and Mississippi to the list and made the language regarding aircraft configured for 56 seats or fewer more specific (largely because of the way DOT was trying to enforce this restriction with respect to Legend).
The key here is that airlines serving Love Field may not offer for sale transportation to or from, and the flight or aircraft does not serve, any point which is outside any such State. What the passengers choose to do in terms of purchasing tickets is their own business, especially since Southwest has no restrictions on back-to-back, hidden-city, or throw-away ticketing. In fact, if you buy a round-trip ticket and choose not to fly the return leg(s), they will happily apply the unused portion of the itinerary to future travel with no service charges.
You can see in the wording of the Wright Amendment that non-revenue travel between DAL and points outside the Wright/Shelby states (such as Rapid Rewards award redemption) is permissible since such travel is not offered for sale. It's also clearly permissible under the law for individuals to travel on paid itineraries from outside the Wright/Shelby states as long as they are not offered through ticketing and flights. It's difficult to gauge Jim Wright's intent here, but it's also clear that there is nothing morally or ethically wrong with following the letter of the law. If Jim Wright had meant to proscribe travel to DAL from outside the permitted states, he should have put it in his little amendment. You can't blame people for taking advantage of his screw-up to save themselves a few hundred dollars.
Nor is it morally or ethically wrong for passengers to buy tickets at prices which an airline (through its revenue management department) offers them for sale. If US wants to sell you a PHL-LAX ticket for $150 round-trip, it's not wrong to accept their offer. Nor is it wrong to upgrade to First on these tickets if the airline's policy is to do so for its preferred members. It is a bit hypocritical to claim that one's concern is primarily for the airline's employees and financial health, though, when it is clear that self-interest is truly the main concern. I think it is also painfully obvious that the gravy train of free upgrades on loss-leader fares will eventally come to a grinding halt when the airline either closes its doors or revamps its upgrade policies or pricing.
