United Airlines even uses a "class system" for customer service counter

Yeah judit, I don't think it's unique to United, but found myself dealing with them in particular yesterday.

Face, all the folks in the "economy maze" are welcome to purchase these upgraded services. Why does it upset you that some choose to take advantage of these opportunities?<<<<

While I'm not a fan, I understand the situation of upselling legroom, boarding priority, or any other actual real time amenity.

What I don't understand is how a company is able to upsell access to the rectify a problem caused by the airlines' own doing?  How does this not suggest the airlines are minimizing the problems of those who've elected not to pay the extra "loyalty dough"?

Which problems are caused by the airlines own doing?<<<

Mechanical issue caused an aircraft to be sidelined & the delay caused me to miss my connection.

VIP lane access to customer service was it's own issue; however, another thing I learned is how unwilling United was to be an advocate for getting me to my destination in terms of providing straight up information in real time about compensation for ground transportation.   Every person I spoke to at the counter or on the phone kept referring me to a website contact form to submit questions for final answers.   In light of the bigger picture, it was adversarial IMO.

Are you suggesting that mechanical issues are totally beyond the control of the airlines akin to weather?

^I'm saying that machines will breakdown from time to time<<<

Does that entail having some customers to absorb significant loss of time without compensation?

There are many possibilities as to why mechanical issues arise, but they all stem back to the airline as being the source of all functionality - or lack thereof.  All I was saying previously is that it's within their "realm of control" vs. the weather, acts of terrorism, etc.

Does it piss you off that some people have better seats than you at concerts because they PAID MORE?<<<<

No, that doesn't piss me off; although on a related note, I might roll my eyes at the whole VIP scene in general and try to imagine a "concert world" without said fences that divide us.

Orange's example about doctor's office is far more on point.

It's not that your example of the doctor's office necessarily refutes my objections, but it does flush out some of the important differences: 

In the case of a doctor's office, individualized treatment might differ significantly from patient to patient in terms of time consumption; however, being a passenger on an airline puts 95% of people within very broad boundaries that are sufficiently dealt with wide brushstrokes in an efficient manner (even if disturbing for other reasons).

Likewise, maintenance of equipment is very straightforward & airlines will typically try to make things as easy as possible for themselves by limiting the various types of different aircraft within their fleet; some will even limit to a single type. 

Are you really OK with "punishing" some customers for being at the wrong place and the wrong time as it relates to a company's ability to contend with circumstances that are clearly known to be inevitable? 

Not sure about feeling entitled and victimization in light of how the airlines, as for-profit entities, establish onerous contractual terms - stacked to their own benefit - placing it's customer base at a severe disadvantage to attain what was originally due?  Or, are you saying we should all simply relent to the notion of the "big print giveth, while the small print taketh"?

I think there's info missing from this story. From what I can deduce, you were bumped off of a flight, or severely delayed, due to a technical failure. The airline then, instead of processing everyone as quickly as possible, decided to keep open a premium and economy line, thus delaying you all even more. Is that correct? Or is this just general bitching about a premium line existing?<<<<

I was delayed enough to miss my connection to get to my final destination the same day (without having to fly elsewhere and / or arrange for ground transportation to cover significant distance).  Yes, the airline didn't process those of us seeking customer service to rectify our pressing issues as quickly as possible on an equal first-come-first-served basis; instead, they allowed those who were loyalty members at a certain "class level" to bypass the much longer line; causing those of us in said longer line to be delayed from having our issues resolved.   Lets put it this way, I didn't instigate this conversation in the line, but certainly stirred the pot after the issue was raised.

Personally, I would've been totally OK if they had sorted the customer line on a time sensitivity basis & pushed me back further ... it'd be kind of like letting the person who's barely able to make their flight budge through the security maze.  On the other hand, United que'ing the customer service line by loyalty status only served to rub salt into my existing wound; incurred as a result of the airline's operational procedures (or lack thereof), regardless of whether or not it was intentional.

I fly often, exclusively on American, and, as such, enjoy status.   The status includes upgrades, priority check-in, security and boarding, as well as other perks.  I have earned those perks because of my loyalty and the money I have spent.   Why shouldn't I?<<<

You shouldn't feel guilty.  The problem is with the airlines; in my case, United.

I see now. So, if they hadn't allowed those few people in the priority line to go first, would you have made your connecting flight? That is pretty weak. Normally they let people through who have some kind of time issue. Did you let anybody know what your situation was prior to getting in the maze?<<<

I'm not sure the added delay actually exacerbated my situation, but it easily could have & likely did affect others in the long line of "commoners".

It's a long story involving my uncertainty re: exacerbation, but United was anything but helpful.  In fact, they almost seemed adversarial in so far as not giving me a straight answer as to whether they'd cover the cost of a rental car ($54) to avoid being stranded in Denver overnight.   It was like pulling teeth at every step of the way; even the "happy ending" was a result of me overhearing an announcement at DIA that there was a flight to Montrose that was currently boarding.  I heard this announcement 10 minutes after I had left the customer service counter (not the original customer service counter line in Chicago the thread is referring to) and walked on independently as a standby passenger; only to see the aircraft (regional jet) was 80% empty! 

Perhaps ned is correct & the agent was looking at my "file" ... since I did submit a complaint to the DOT re: my last trip with United this summer where I had also missed a connection & they blatantly lied about weather being the reason.

It could've been far worse, I'm amazed it turned out as well as it did in the end.  I still try to maintain perspective, and always think of covered wagons taking months to cross the country.  Likewise, upon initially departing for my trip out of Montrose, there was a 10 minute delay for the crew to assist a person in a wheel chair up the metal ramp to the aircraft (this is outside).   So, ultimately, in the vernacular of "ned", I haven't been seriously oppressed.

Yeah, social media is a good place ... although all of this got me thinking about how great it would be to develop a product that would allow passengers to broadcast their displeasure with an airline in the midst of their travels; either on the plane or in their airports.

Broadcast to whom?<<<

Other travelers and personnel who work for the airlines.

There's plenty of ways to get the word out. Passive aggression isn't working for you?<<<

Oh, the irony

^ Trust me, this question went through my mind at many points along the way.

But it's a lot like some of the online privacy questions that we're being plagued with as a society; most of us just go ahead and click "agree" for FB, Google, etc., but does that make obtrusive use of personal data "right"?

Are you really going to defend how corps often leverage the practice of "big print giveth while the small print taketh" with an argument about individual responsibility being the bottom line?

You seem to take out your frustrations on individual employees when your problem is actually with the policies of the corporation at large<<<

Where did I mention that I took out my frustration on an individual?

Are you suggesting that it's "bad form" to voice one's complaints about a company's practices to the personnel who work for said company?

Thank you for helping me from getting "cold cocked" by an airline employee as a result of a non-existent hypothetical product!

 Any adult should not enter into a contract unless they know exactly what agreement they are entering into. I often have contracts presented to me that I walk from because I don't agree with the terms. At times that has cost me time and money but one has to be true to themselves. <<<

No, I definitely didn't read all of the terms; however, I did read over what I believed to be the items mostly relevant to my travel plans, such as:   whether or not the itinerary could be modified, refund eligibility, baggage limitations, and requirements pertaining to identification all immediately come to mind.

By the same token, at no point along the way have I ever believed that I wasn't essentially bound to said terms.  Likewise, I agree with you about one keeping true to themselves; however, we might part company with respect to the onerous nature of having to read every single minutia of fine print we might encounter in the course of living one's life in the "modern world".   You've raised a good general point that is ultimately true; however, in most instances not involving a contract for a big ticket purchase (i.e. car / home ) or for work, I'm willing to relinquish full knowledge of nuanced details as a trade-off for my time.  I prefer not to navigate the world as if I were a lawyer 24/7.

As it relates to my core observation about United's hamstringing economy customers' access to service by virtue of prioritizing "loyalty customers":  while it wasn't exactly surprising, it wasn't something I was expecting either.  I'd be awfully surprised if their lawyers didn't cover their asses on this issue, so I'm now even more curious how this sort of "line item" might have been built into the contract?