[URBANTH-L]more responses: tickets, legality

bvergara at sfsu.edu bvergara at sfsu.edu
Mon Oct 25 10:18:54 EDT 2004


Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 17:41:44 +0200
Subject: SF
From: Rik Pinxten <Hendrik.Pinxten at UGent.be>

I second mails you get from graduates , as a foreigner visiting the AAA, who
would be forced to pay more for a conefrence rescheduling which indeed
favors Hilton once more, and has us customers pay double.
AAA cannot get away with such a policy, i would hope. this is bitchy , to
say the least. 
prof. Rik pinxten 


Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 08:15:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kelly Neiman <kelly_neiman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [URBANTH-L]Student Issues in SUNTA and the AAA, Other Postings

I am also stuck with a non-refundable ticket to SF and will be out the complete
price if I cancel.  I am holding on to the ticket just in case there is a
counter-meeting in San Jose.  I am hearing that other AAA sections are
considering meeting in San Jose. . . It appears the AAA would have been better
off taking their chances with cancelling the contract.  I doubt very much that
they will even get half the attendance in Atlanta.


From: J. Shawn Landres <shawn at landres.com>
Subject: Is the Atlanta move even legal?
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:09:31 -0700

I am _very_ frustrated by the move to Atlanta -- as I'm sure many 
people are.  The callousness with which the AAA board acted, 
particularly with respect to low-income members & graduate students 
(especially those who are presenting and/or interviewing), leaves me 
with a bitter enough taste in my mouth to make me rethink my membership 
in the association all together.  Frankly, if the constituent societies 
of which I am a member offered a membership option other than through 
the AAA, I would leap at it.

It strikes me that the AAA now may be vulnerable to a lawsuit from its 
members, since it arbitrarily cancelled/moved the meeting and may be 
said to have acted against the fiduciary interests of its own 
membership.  At the very least it should offer to cover 
cancellation/change fees, perhaps by offering an equivalent credit of 
$100-150 on 2004 conference registration & 2005 membership.  The SAR 
Board might consider making such a proposal along with other society 
boards.  (Probably this would cost the AAA around $200,000-$250,000, 
which is a far cry from the $1.2 million it stood to lose.)

Has anyone considered asking a judge (in Virginia? in San Francisco?) 
for an injunction to prohibit this arbitrary move to Atlanta?  
Alternatively, has anyone considered some kind of class action against 
the AAA for damages related to non-refundable airfare & hotel 
commitments?  Surely it would be cheaper (and more ethical) for the AAA 
to do the right thing for its members than to pay to defend itself 
against claims like this.

As much as the AAA should attend to and defend the socioeconomic 
interests of hotel workers, it also should attend to and defend the 
socioeconomic interests of its own members.  The AAA board's actions 
suggest that it ultimately cares about neither.

Shawn Landres

J. Shawn Landres                        shawn at landres.com

More information about the URBANTH-L mailing list