Does United’s new “LaneBuster” idea have a ghost of a chance?

With all the customer service “enhancements” the airlines like to trot out, one would think more customers would enjoy the travel experience.

Unfortunately, it feels like many enhancements are either revenue enhancements — like fees — or simply ways to get travelers to deal with machines instead of humans.

And United’s new “LaneBuster,” while it has some interesting potentials, looks like more of the latter.

“LaneBuster” is being tested at Chicago O’Hare this Thanksgiving weekend. The idea is relatively simple. United’s reservation computer already has the ability to automatically rebook passengers on later flights if they miss a connection or their original flight is canceled.

So the airline will give handheld touch-screen device to employees, and have them approach people waiting in the customer service line. A line that often seems like it reaches halfway to downtown Chicago. By entering the passenger’s name and original flight number, the device will tell the agent if the customer has already been automatically rebooked.

At that point, the agent can direct the passenger out of line to an automatic kiosk, where they can print a new boarding pass. United claims that most passengers are already automatically rebooked, but that few of them use the kiosks. In theory, this should free up the customer service agents for the tougher challenges.

In theory.

In practice, here are just a few issues that come to mind.

First, the automatic rebooking problem doesn’t generally look at other carriers. So, if for example, a passenger is booked with a connection Chicago to Cincinnati, and there is no United flight for five hours, the computer will cheerfully book that five hour connection. Only by talking to a human is a passenger likely to get a seat on an possibly open Delta or American flight.

Second, automatic booking programs aren’t very creative. They often have problems with cities that have more than one airport, like New York or Washington. Which means that if you are booked on a nonstop from say, Los Angeles to JFK, the system may not find a decent option from Los Angeles via Denver to La Guardia.

And with a nearby but different city entirely, you are really out of luck. If you are stuck on the way to San Jose, the program doesn’t consider San Francisco, 30 miles away, as a option. Let alone such drivable options as Chicago-Madison, or Boston-Providence. So again, a automatically rebooked flight might be hours, or even a day later, when a workable alternative might have been available.

So a passenger approached by a “LaneBuster” agent might have an potentially tough decision. United says the agents will be able to answer “simple questions,” but they will not have powers to rebook alternatives. So if you are in line with 100 people in front of you, and a “LaneBuster” tells you the computer has an alternative, but it’s not a great one, what do you do?

Take the less than perfect option, or hold out in line for the possibility of something better? If taking the automatic alternative gets you out of wasting an hour in line, then maybe it might be a better option than an earlier flight where you waste not only time in line, but time arguing with a reservations agent.

On the other hand, if you accept the computer option, you could potentially be missing out on some seriously potential better options. (This is another of many situations, where, if you have a travel agent and a cell phone, it’s a good idea to call them.)

But if you ask the United Airlines employee, whose job performance will depends on getting you out of line and to a kiosk, what they would recommend, accept the choice or wait for a human? Well, at least, that employee’s decision will be relatively simple.

(Photo by
Jon Wiley/Creative Commons/flickr.com)