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

191–200 of 678 posts

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

#191

Post by 8organicbits »

the_sleaze_ wrote: post #69
hedora wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don’t guarantee both parents are with the kid. They only guarantee that at least one parent is next to each (very young) child. This presumably would mean you’d be feeding a random kid a bottle on long flights. God knows how they’d accommodate breastfeeding.

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.

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

#192

Post by dboreham »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #98
hedora wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve definitely selected adjacent seats in the past, then ended up separated the day of the flight. Even if it’s a couple, it’s probably the airline’s fault. I solved the problem by preferring southwest, but their new CEO is an a*hole, and instead of raising ticket prices $50 a seat is adding assigned seating, removing legroom, charging for bags, adding ticket change fees, etc, etc.

I avoid southwest because they don’t have assigned seating.

Post time traveled from when they didn't. But now they do.

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

#193

Post by pfdietz »

hedora wrote: post #114
panick21_ wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about overall, deregulation of routes has not been bad for consumers. The opposite actually.

It’s been a disaster. There are fewer routes, and flying is miserable, and getting worse every year. Crashes are way up this year. Airlines profits are basically zero per ticket. Adding $10 per trip would be some sort of fantasy land windfall for the shareholders. Deregulation badly broke this industry.

Safety is massively improved since the days of regulation. Fares are way down in real terms. Flying might be miserable, but that's because people realize they'd rather pay less than pay more for luxuries they don't actually value very much.

Your comments remind me of the arguments Ma Bell gave to justify their monopoly. Oh noez, quality will suffer if there's telecom competition. Well, people ended up being willing to make the tradeoff.

You did score a hit with airline profits being low. The whole purpose of regulation was to artificially inflate prices to ensure profits for airlines.

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

#194

Post by mkipper »

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

I don’t have any data to back this up, but I think window and aisle seats being more valuable doesn’t necessarily mean they can be sold for more.

I am very tall and I always pay for a seat with extra legroom in economy. Whenever I’m picking my seat early, almost every seat in economy is available. People could pay to reserve a window or aisle seat, but anecdotally it seems like almost no one does this. Everyone I know just tries to check in as early as possible so they can grab a good seat before they’re all taken.

I don’t think airlines are actually losing any money by seating families together. It’s not like all those window and aisle seats would have been paid for otherwise.

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

#195

Post by granitepail »

DangitBobby wrote: post #27
eadmund wrote: post #17

> [Elimination of] Automatic Refunds for Cancellations Does this mean when the passenger cancels or when the airline cancels? If it’s when the passenger chooses to cancel, this seems fine and fair: he paid for a flight; he chose not to take it. If it’s the latter, then it seems very unfair. > Transparency of Fees This seems patently unfair. Folks should know what they’re going to be paying ahead of time. > Family Sea…

> If you want to sit together, pay for that privilege. Agreed. I think they leave too much money on the table. Use of window shades and lavatories could be behind a subscription service as well, with Sky Comfort+ affording you the privilege of multiple lavatory visits for those who have chosen the luxury IBS lifestyle. I'll let you know if I think of anything else those pesky airline passengers take for granted.

If ya made it through all three of the sentences they wrote, you'd see the comment you replied to came around to it being reasonable to give families a break on group seating.

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

#196

Post by JackFr »

jjcob wrote: post #46
eadmund wrote: post #17

> [Elimination of] Automatic Refunds for Cancellations Does this mean when the passenger cancels or when the airline cancels? If it’s when the passenger chooses to cancel, this seems fine and fair: he paid for a flight; he chose not to take it. If it’s the latter, then it seems very unfair. > Transparency of Fees This seems patently unfair. Folks should know what they’re going to be paying ahead of time. > Family Sea…

> 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…

As a parent who once flew with a baby with an ear infection, I'll admit there were times I desperately wanted to be seated apart from her.

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

#197

Post by rimunroe »

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

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 nursing on may involve their legs sticking into the aisle or their neighbor's space. They also like to fling solid foods, spit up or vomit with no warning, and are generally fantastic at making messes.

My spouse and I just finished our first two flights with our 11 month old this weekend which were about 3.5 and 4 hours apiece. Even with an extra seat reserved for them and an overall extremely well tempered baby, I cannot imagine how much harder the flight would have been if the gate agent hadn't been able to rearrange our seats so all three of us were sitting together. If that hadn't been guaranteed, we would have had to ask one of the neighbors to swap seats with us. They'd have been highly motivated to do so, but it wouldn't have been a sure thing. They may have their own needs. Impromptu swaps during boarding seems not great for making the process go smoothly.

Having to get an extra seat to fit a car seat for an infant isn't required, but flying with the infant in a car seat is strongly recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics. Having somewhere to put the baby or their various toys/bottles temporarily helps a whole lot over a four hour flight. This already added $500 onto the price of our trip.

The cost of raising children is already very high in the US, so it will really suck if flying becomes yet more expensive and stressful. In my opinion, this (and many others) are a cost which we should spread out if we actually want people to have kids.

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

#198

Post by lxgr »

willvarfar wrote: post #5
bunnyfoofoo wrote: post #3

Get a 403 from EU. Is there a better source?

These are the main points listed in the article: * Automatic Refunds for Cancellations: Airlines want to remove the requirement to provide automatic refunds when flights are cancelled or significantly altered. Passengers may instead receive only vouchers or no compensation at all, leaving them without recourse in the event of a major flight disruption. * Transparency of Fees: The airlines also aim to strip away rules…

> no compensation at all, leaving them without recourse in the event of a major flight disruption

Would airlines even get away with that, given that card payments for non-provided services can usually be trivially charged back?

Presumably business travelers would not always care enough, but their company's expense management department certainly would.

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

#199

Post by mcaravey »

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

I think that part of the problem is a want versus a need. I don't particularly care if me and my wife don't sit together. We see each other all the time. But I don't want to have my four-year-old sitting in between two strangers, six rows in front of me where I can't see him. That's not fair to the two strangers, but also I don't trust strangers.

I get the idea of paying for the privilege, but at the same time, it's not like they roll out the red carpet for someone who flies with their kids. Pretty much every time that I can remember them ever rearranging seats to get us together, we always wind up sitting in the rows at the very back of the plane close to the bathroom, which is fine with me. If I wanted red carpet treatment, I'd pay for first class for everyone. But I'm not about to do that.

All I do know is that if they were to stop rearranging seats, it would make the frequency of our flying go down quite a bit. At a minimum, if they went that route, I would want there to be a guaranteed payment to be able to get everyone to sit together. That way I can at least plan for the extra cost. Knowing airlines they would probably use a sliding scale based on age or something.

Post reply on HN