Should frequent flyer schemes still exist when the climate is in crisis?

Back when they started, frequent flyer schemes were simple affairs. The premise, first introduced in 1979 by Texas International Airlines, was straightforward: customers who chose to fly with a specific airline would be “rewarded” for their loyalty. Early rewards might come in the form of perks or special fares for frequent customers, but this quickly evolved into air miles, which could go towards the cost of future flights once enough of them had been accrued. The idea was taken up by airlines around the world, in the hopes that offering an incentive would encourage passengers to pick them over a competitor.

Skip forward to 2023 and these programmes have morphed into something much more complicated. Air miles have been replaced by points, with different names, values, methods of collection and stipulations around how you can spend them depending on the carrier or group of airlines (British Airways recently made waves by changing the way Avios (its name for points) are earned from per mile flown to per pound spent). These days, you don’t just earn – or have to redeem – points from or on flights; stay in the right hotel chain, rent a car from the right company and pay with the right credit card, and points can be garnered and used on partner airlines, or indeed spent on a whole host of other travel experiences.

With ever-more complex rules, travellers have to be increasingly savvy in order to make collecting points worthwhile. Entire online communities and websites have sprung up to cater to this new breed of loyalty scheme “gameification”, such as The Points Guy, Head for Points, One Mile at a Time, View From the Wing and Inside Flyer. Website thepointsguy.com, for instance, is packed with articles advising travellers on how to get more points for their buck, from “How to maximize your rewards earning with the Ink Business Preferred” to “Amex Platinum vs. Delta Reserve: Which card is best for Delta loyalists?”.

Amid this mind-bending world of virtual currency, airlines have introduced tier points – separate from reward points – to denote just how special a customer is. The more you fly – but, more importantly, the more money you spend – the more tier points you receive, and the higher status you’re given. Different tiers, for example Bronze, Silver and Gold, come with varying levels of benefits. These could include access to exclusive lounges, priority boarding, and more reward points awarded per flight.

But rather than simply encouraging customer loyalty, these days Frequent Flyer Programmes (FFP) incentivise travellers to spend more, take unnecessary flights, and plump for the most expensive class of airline seat (with the biggest carbon footprint) to keep their elite status, according to new research from climate charity Possible.

Its latest report, entitled “Pointless: The Climate Impact of Frequent Flyer Status”, assessed British Airways and Virgin Atlantic’s FFPs, and the carbon footprints needed for an individual to attain tier status. The results are sobering. Flying enough to qualify for any kind of FFP membership requires emissions between seven and 112 times higher than the average UK air travel footprint, Possible claims (although British Airways asserts that this is incorrect, arguing that anybody can sign up to the British Airways Executive Club for free without the need to take a flight).

Achieving “Gold Status” with either British carrier means taking flights that emit an average of 27 tonnes of CO2e (carbon dioxide equivalent) every year, over 33 times higher than the average UK air travel footprint. Gaining or keeping elite-tier status requires an exceptionally large air travel carbon footprint, up to more than 90 tonnes CO2e each year for higher levels. And lifetime membership status can require a carbon footprint of more than 1,800 tonnes of CO2e per person for the highest FFP status level – 34 times the lifetime per person share of the remaining carbon budget for a 50 per cent chance of limiting global warming to 1.5C.

open image in gallery

“We need urgent action to protect the climate, but frequent flyer reward programmes are sending emissions soaring in the wrong direction,” says Alethea Warrington, senior campaigner at Possible. “Airlines are incentivising a small group of incredibly frequent flyers to take flights they don’t even want, just to get points – while people around the world pay the real price as they face dangerous heat waves and out of control wildfires. Airlines need to end this irresponsible behaviour, and stop awarding points for pollution.”

This summer, we’ve already seen scorching heatwaves affect the realm of travel. Countries across southern Europe issued weather warnings ahead of 40C+ temperatures; holidaymakers had to be evacuated in their thousands as wildfires swept across Greek and Hawaiian islands. It followed a warm winter blighted by a dearth of snow across the continent’s ski resorts. Tourist destinations are having to adapt, while travel experts predict a move from holidays in the Mediterranean to northern Europe, and that peak holiday season will switch from summer to autumn and spring in years to come. Climate change isn’t some far-off future event to be worried about later. It is already here, impacting the way we live. And, somewhat ironically, every flight we take to go on holiday contributes to the climate change-related issues we encounter once we’re there.

Under such circumstance, perhaps one of the most abhorrent trends that has sprung forth as a result of FFPs is the “tier point run”. This is a term used in FFP member circles to describe a journey taken for the sake of collecting tier points, rather than because the passenger really needs to take the flight. These are often long and convoluted routes, since indirect flights can be cheaper, and splitting a journey into multiple legs can result in more points. One tier point run recommended on frequent flyer forums is Malaga-Helsinki-London-New York-Los Angeles-San Francisco, resulting in 1,080 British Airways points (Avios) for a return flight – and a carbon footprint of 14.2 tonnes of CO2e (13kg CO2e per tier point).

Another British Airways tier point run involves flying from Budapest to Honolulu via London, Helsinki, New York and Los Angeles to collect 1,080 points, with emissions of 15 tonnes of CO2e (13.9kg CO2e per tier point). One frequent flyer described flying to Hawaii for just 90 minutes in order to accrue tier points: “Seven of the other people in the front cabin were all doing the same thing as me – flying just to get their status… it’s not a sensible thing to have to do from a personal health perspective, it’s certainly not green,” they told BBC Sounds on its Inside the World of the Frequent Flyer podcast.

In this context, FFPs don’t just seem frivolous – they are unethical, argues Possible. The charity is calling for the immediate scrapping of FFPs by airlines operating in the UK, and in fact suggests that those who fly most be penalised rather than rewarded, with the proposed introduction of a frequent flyer levy, as well as a kerosene tax. According to Possible, “This would help to reduce excessive, wasteful consumption of high-carbon travel by a small group of people, and more accurately reflect the real cost of flying for our climate.”

A Virgin Atlantic spokesperson told The Independent: “Long haul connectivity brings huge societal and economic benefits, and we believe that aviation can innovate forward to reduce the carbon impact of flying whilst continuing to connect families, businesses and communities around the world. 

“Flying Club is our loyalty programme designed to reward those who choose Virgin Atlantic when they travel, rather than based on their flying frequency. Our customers can earn Virgin Points through a variety of purchases, from everyday items to higher value experiences, with the majority of points earned on the ground through our credit cards. When customers do choose to use their points to fly with us, they are doing so on one of the most fuel-efficient fleets across the Atlantic.”

Meanwhile, British Airways said in response to the research: “Like many other airlines and brands globally, we recognise our customers’ loyalty by offering tangible benefits as part of our Executive Club programme. We acknowledge the need to balance this with our environmental commitments. As part of our BA Better World programme and commitment to net zero emissions by 2050, we have a clear roadmap and have introduced a range of measures, including investing in the development of sustainable aviation fuels, flying more fuel-efficient aircraft and investing in the growth of zero emissions hydrogen-powered aircraft. In addition, our CO2llaborate platform gives customers the option to calculate and address their emissions before, during or after their flight.”

Previous research from Possible found that just 15 per cent of Brits were responsible for taking 70 per cent of all flights; around half the population don’t set foot on a plane each year. Though we might not think of it as such, aviation is already an elite activity – and flying enough to qualify for top tier FFP status is elite as it gets. Isn’t it time the biggest emitters paid the price rather than getting a pat on the back?