5 ms·

The only thing better than business-class upgrades on your work-related travel is not having work-related travel.

jmspring 11y ago
I don't mind a bit of work travel, but I am also picky about the routes I take. Anything in Europe, it is SFO to "somewhere in Europe, not Heathrow" and then from there. I've usually had status (Gold) but my wife and I also travel enough privately where taking advantage of a travel credit card that gives you status (and extra miles blahblah) helps. I've not done a milage run, nor will I do multiple hops just to get a few hundred (or a thousand) extra miles. The only exception to that is if the alliance I prefer (Star Alliance) doesn't have as direct as say One World, I'll still take the Star Alliance route for the miles. About the only airline I travel with more than UA/other star alliance partners is Alaska because I head up to the Pacific Northwest frequently.
- steffan 11y ago
  Why not Heathrow? I just flew there last month and it didn't seem particularly bad. Was I lucky?
  - jonathanpoulter 11y ago
    I'm in Heathrow now, I can confirm... it's fine.
    - mollmerx 11y ago
      Your experience will depend very much on which Terminal you're at (there is a big difference in age and layouts of individual terminals) and, in particular, whether you're forced to switch terminals when transiting. A good airport for transiting into Europe, and in my view usually more pleasant than London, Frankfurt or Paris, is Amsterdam Schiphol.
      - sokoloff 11y ago
        Agree on AMS. The construction there has been going on for a couple of years and it'll be nicer once that's done, but even with that, it's my preferred airport to connect in EU.
  - klipt 11y ago
    Not sure about GP but I avoid Heathrow because the UK requires me to have a transit visa just to fly through. Most other EU countries don't.
  - jmspring 11y ago
    It's a large airport and when transiting to other parts of Europe, I've found it more painful than smaller airports. When I've had to go through customs there (US national) the lines have been incredibly slow and tedious. In terms of time/distance, some hops at Frankfurt are just as bad or worse than Heathrow (US -> FRA -> Tel Aviv being a really really nice not walk). Given a choice, I prefer Zurich or Munich first, Frankfurt second, and surprisingly my experience with CDG hasn't been bad compared to horror stories I have heard.
    - Gibbon1 11y ago
      My ex and I went to Britain 20 years ago (honeymoon trip) Beforehand everyone warned us how bad going though customs was going to be. But we for some deranged reason flew into Glasgow. Got off the flight, walked down to the customs counter (singular) and the agent looked at our passports, smiled, stamped them and that was that. Reminded me of flying into John Wayne International before they wrecked it. The difference in cognitive load between John Wayne and LAX was night and day.
      - jmspring 11y ago
        My last trip to London, single person at customs, about 40 people in line ahead of me, took almost an hour to get through. I've always found MUC/FRA/ZRH to be way more efficient. Upcoming trip to Dublin, I opted for going via Frankfurt instead of Heathrow. Silly, yes, but experiences and preferences play into planning.
        crdb 11y ago
        My wife is Australian, and when we arrived in London from Sydney, I'd pop through the e-gates with my biometric Shenghen passport, and then settle down in the cafe opposite arrivals, and took my time reading the paper and enjoying a (not so) fine English breakfast. Usually had time for a third of a book as well. Then she'd finally get out. I never understood why LHR had to have such long immigration queues. The solution is pretty simple: add more officers. Those booths were never fully staffed. I suspect some kind of labour dispute is involved.
umanwizard 11y ago
I couldn't disagree more. Work-related travel means seeing the world on someone else's dime, and getting paid to do it.
- Havoc 11y ago
  >Work-related travel means seeing the world on someone else's dime, and getting paid to do it. Thats the problem. You don't "get to see the world" in most cases. You're shuttled back & forth between some hotel and some office block. e.g. I was in Paris the other day & the only sightseeing I got to do is seeing the (far away) tip of the Eiffel tower from a fkin boardroom window. That kind of "seeing the world" gets old fast.
  - late2part 11y ago
    You were onsite at Franklin? http://finance.yahoo.com/q;_ylt=AgayMFIiQNK9WHKis3CYC9LxVax_;_ylu=X3oDMTFiOTdhZTM5BHBvcwMxMgRzZWMDeWZpU3ltYm9sTG9va3VwUmVzdWx0cwRzbGsDZmtpbng-?s=FKINX http://finance.yahoo.com/q;_ylt=AgayMFIiQNK9WHKis3CYC9LxVax_...
  - ghaff 11y ago
    In my experience, it's somewhere in-between. Yes, for the consultant, spending their weeks in $BORINGCITY (I'll avoid insulting anyone's hometown), it's pretty awful. And travel can be tough wherever you're going when there are snowstorms and other travel problems. But I usually also get time to experience places that I visit to at least some degree. YMMV of course, but I can't complain too much.
  - ajdlinux 11y ago
    Benefits of being in a job with only moderate travel requirements - you have enough time left over that you can usually extend your stay over at least a weekend and have a bit of time for sightseeing while still benefiting from company-paid flights. (Also helps that I'm not in a relationship - business travel is way harder on those with spouses or partners.)
  - umanwizard 11y ago
    I went to London for work. I got to walk around an unfamiliar big city, go drinking in traditional English pubs, meet people from around the world, etc. My evenings were free, just like they are at my local office. Unless you are working 24 hours a day, traveling to exotic places for business can be great.

I don't mind a bit of work travel, but I am also picky about the routes I take. Anything in Europe, it is SFO to "somewhere in Europe, not Heathrow" and then from there. I've usually had status (Gold) but my wife and I also travel enough privately where taking advantage of a travel credit card that gives you status (and extra miles blahblah) helps. I've not done a milage run, nor will I do multiple hops just to get a few hundred (or a thousand) extra miles. The only exception to that is if the alliance I prefer (Star Alliance) doesn't have as direct as say One World, I'll still take the Star Alliance route for the miles. About the only airline I travel with more than UA/other star alliance partners is Alaska because I head up to the Pacific Northwest frequently.

steffan 11y ago
Why not Heathrow? I just flew there last month and it didn't seem particularly bad. Was I lucky?
- jonathanpoulter 11y ago
  I'm in Heathrow now, I can confirm... it's fine.
  - mollmerx 11y ago
    Your experience will depend very much on which Terminal you're at (there is a big difference in age and layouts of individual terminals) and, in particular, whether you're forced to switch terminals when transiting. A good airport for transiting into Europe, and in my view usually more pleasant than London, Frankfurt or Paris, is Amsterdam Schiphol.
    - sokoloff 11y ago
      Agree on AMS. The construction there has been going on for a couple of years and it'll be nicer once that's done, but even with that, it's my preferred airport to connect in EU.
- klipt 11y ago
  Not sure about GP but I avoid Heathrow because the UK requires me to have a transit visa just to fly through. Most other EU countries don't.
- jmspring 11y ago
  It's a large airport and when transiting to other parts of Europe, I've found it more painful than smaller airports. When I've had to go through customs there (US national) the lines have been incredibly slow and tedious. In terms of time/distance, some hops at Frankfurt are just as bad or worse than Heathrow (US -> FRA -> Tel Aviv being a really really nice not walk). Given a choice, I prefer Zurich or Munich first, Frankfurt second, and surprisingly my experience with CDG hasn't been bad compared to horror stories I have heard.
  - Gibbon1 11y ago
    My ex and I went to Britain 20 years ago (honeymoon trip) Beforehand everyone warned us how bad going though customs was going to be. But we for some deranged reason flew into Glasgow. Got off the flight, walked down to the customs counter (singular) and the agent looked at our passports, smiled, stamped them and that was that. Reminded me of flying into John Wayne International before they wrecked it. The difference in cognitive load between John Wayne and LAX was night and day.
    - jmspring 11y ago
      My last trip to London, single person at customs, about 40 people in line ahead of me, took almost an hour to get through. I've always found MUC/FRA/ZRH to be way more efficient. Upcoming trip to Dublin, I opted for going via Frankfurt instead of Heathrow. Silly, yes, but experiences and preferences play into planning.
      - crdb 11y ago
        My wife is Australian, and when we arrived in London from Sydney, I'd pop through the e-gates with my biometric Shenghen passport, and then settle down in the cafe opposite arrivals, and took my time reading the paper and enjoying a (not so) fine English breakfast. Usually had time for a third of a book as well. Then she'd finally get out. I never understood why LHR had to have such long immigration queues. The solution is pretty simple: add more officers. Those booths were never fully staffed. I suspect some kind of labour dispute is involved.

umanwizard 11y ago

I couldn't disagree more. Work-related travel means seeing the world on someone else's dime, and getting paid to do it.

Havoc 11y ago
>Work-related travel means seeing the world on someone else's dime, and getting paid to do it. Thats the problem. You don't "get to see the world" in most cases. You're shuttled back & forth between some hotel and some office block. e.g. I was in Paris the other day & the only sightseeing I got to do is seeing the (far away) tip of the Eiffel tower from a fkin boardroom window. That kind of "seeing the world" gets old fast.
- late2part 11y ago
  You were onsite at Franklin? http://finance.yahoo.com/q;_ylt=AgayMFIiQNK9WHKis3CYC9LxVax_;_ylu=X3oDMTFiOTdhZTM5BHBvcwMxMgRzZWMDeWZpU3ltYm9sTG9va3VwUmVzdWx0cwRzbGsDZmtpbng-?s=FKINX http://finance.yahoo.com/q;_ylt=AgayMFIiQNK9WHKis3CYC9LxVax_...
- ghaff 11y ago
  In my experience, it's somewhere in-between. Yes, for the consultant, spending their weeks in $BORINGCITY (I'll avoid insulting anyone's hometown), it's pretty awful. And travel can be tough wherever you're going when there are snowstorms and other travel problems. But I usually also get time to experience places that I visit to at least some degree. YMMV of course, but I can't complain too much.
- ajdlinux 11y ago
  Benefits of being in a job with only moderate travel requirements - you have enough time left over that you can usually extend your stay over at least a weekend and have a bit of time for sightseeing while still benefiting from company-paid flights. (Also helps that I'm not in a relationship - business travel is way harder on those with spouses or partners.)
- umanwizard 11y ago
  I went to London for work. I got to walk around an unfamiliar big city, go drinking in traditional English pubs, meet people from around the world, etc. My evenings were free, just like they are at my local office. Unless you are working 24 hours a day, traveling to exotic places for business can be great.