Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees

travelandtourworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 678 posts

Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees

#251

Post by ASinclair »

tveyben wrote: post #239
rimunroe wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flying with babies (and other young children) presents challenges which "everyone else" doesn't have to deal with. Babies and children need much more attention. Babies are much more likely to throw tantrums, to feel pain from pressure changes, to be sick, etc. They often need a LOT of soothing. Many also need to be breast fed (some babies don't take bottles), which depending on the baby's length and the side they're…

Do kids have to fly…???

Do adults have to fly? Certainly they could walk or swim to their destination.

Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees

#252

Post by scruple »

floatrock wrote: post #224
AtlanticThird wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's what anyone wants. I think they just want families with young children to pay to sit together, like everyone else has to

What the airlines want is to have people pay more to sit together. What they're gonna get is same thing that happened when luggage fees became standard: enshittification because people find ways to pay less. In the case of luggage fees, suddenly everyone's like "yeah, okay, I guess I can fit things into a carry on" and turns out there's not enough overhead space for the entire plane so the plebs in Group 4+ have mand…

> What the airlines want is to have people pay more to sit together.

And charging parents paying extra so families can sit together is just an easy target.

Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees

#253

Post by bilekas »

lxgr wrote: post #223
bilekas wrote: post #188

These two in particular : > Automatic Refunds for Cancellations > Transparency of Fees How does a lawmaker justify this being in the publics interest ? I'm not even joking, I know "well lobbyist going to lobby", but this is a legitimate question. How does a regulatory body say "Yup, that's okay with us to remove" ?

Playing devil's advocate for a moment: I could imagine airlines wanting to not allow for a full refund if passengers can be booked on a "reasonably similar" connection. (I've done this myself in the past, as far as I remember; changes of a few minutes in either direction often make an entire booking refundable.) The problem here of course would be the definition of "reasonably similar". Arriving a few hours later can…

Okay, I can see some benefits to the airline that are not too egregious for point 1, maybe automatic can be updated to manual intervention. Not the worst.

But price transparency ?

> A4A opposes the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (DOT) rules requiring airlines to disclose ancillary fees upfront, arguing that these rules exceed the DOT’s authority and don’t provide any clear benefits to consumers.

> don’t provide any clear benefits to consumers

As a customer I like to know where my money is going and how much.

Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees

#254

Post by HWR_14 »

AtlanticThird wrote: post #153
jjcob wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you want to sit together, pay for that privilege This is evil. There is no cost to the airline to put people who booked together next to another. It's seems like Mafia-tactic to seat people apart from another unless they pony up another $500 in upgrades. I refuse to fly with United. I understand that there may not be 10 adjacent seats when flying with a big group, but spreading out a family on purpose just so yo…

What do you mean there is no cost? Aisle and window seats are more valuable and can be sold for more, and this would force airlines to sell them to families without any up charge they would've received from other customers

An aside or window seat next to an unaccompanied toddler is worth considerably less.

Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees

#255

Post by afavour »

AtlanticThird wrote: post #145
egonschiele wrote: post #130

> Family Seating Guarantees: Under current regulations, airlines must ensure that families with young children are seated together without additional charges. This would no longer be guaranteed under the new proposal, meaning families could face extra costs just to sit next to one another. This one is wild. You want to sit next to somebody's crying 2 year old? Go nuts. Change their diaper while you're at it.

I don't think that's what anyone wants. I think they just want families with young children to pay to sit together, like everyone else has to

They are meaningfully different scenarios, though.

If you and your partner board the plane, sit separately, and one of you sits next to me that's not a negative for me. You'll sit, you'll watch a movie, read a book, whatever. You're self-contained.

If you and your five year old child board the plane, sit separately, and your child sits next to me that's a clear negative for me. Your child needs attention and assistance. It's bad for you, it's bad for the child, it's bad for me. Probably also bad for whoever sits next to the parent because they’ll be standing up and sitting down constantly to go and attend to their child.

I get that it isn't "fair" in a very straightforward examination of the scenario but take a step back and it's just making every passenger's experience more miserable in an attempt to gain more airline profits. If it happens just watch, the airlines will introduce a "guarantee not sat next to a solo child" add-on fee for you to pay.

Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees

#256

Post by hiroantag »

tveyben wrote: post #239
rimunroe wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flying with babies (and other young children) presents challenges which "everyone else" doesn't have to deal with. Babies and children need much more attention. Babies are much more likely to throw tantrums, to feel pain from pressure changes, to be sick, etc. They often need a LOT of soothing. Many also need to be breast fed (some babies don't take bottles), which depending on the baby's length and the side they're…

Do kids have to fly…???

What an odd question...families travel all the time for vacations or to see grandma and grandpa for thanksgiving. You can't leave a kid at home.

Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees

#257

Post by scrps »

Mistletoe wrote: post #42
code_for_monkey wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah, now imagine when its even worse

I’ve seen the movie Brazil and I wish more people had so they would have voted better.

Don't forget the inverse can happen, like when tech-bros read sci-fi and end up thinking Bad Thing is a good idea... :|

Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees

#259

Post by HWR_14 »

8organicbits wrote: post #191
the_sleaze_ wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are suddenly shaken awake from your restless, fractured sleep. A woman with a look of bright concern implores "Sir your son is watching porn!" "Huh?" She gestures to your right towards the 11 year old boy seated there. "That's not my son"

Remember, children as young as five can fly with out a parent/guardian (in the US, per AA website). So that could happen without change to regulations.

The crew is aware of all the unaccompanied minors on a flight.

Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees

#260

Post by SoftTalker »

grafmax wrote: post #11
duxup wrote: post #2

Original title did not fit on HN so I had to edit it, origional: >American Joins Delta, Southwest, United and Other US Airlines Push to Strip Away Travelers’ Rights and Add More Fees by Rolling Back Key Protections in New Deregulation Move

Deregulation once again helping business at the expense of consumers.

Look at what flying cost before deregulation and then decide if you want to go back.
Post reply on HN