Live data from Hacker News

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

travelandtourworld.com

371–380 of 678 posts

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

#371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If each flight leg is a different price, how can the website show you the total until you select both (or all) legs?

That doesn't mean it's not opaque and complicated.

"We can't tell you the exact price because you haven't told us what you want to buy yet" isn't opaque or complicated.

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

#372

> Instead of the clear, itemized pricing system that passengers currently rely on, airlines could hide fees until later in the booking process… They call what we have now “clear”? Where when looking at a page of flights I don’t know how much the multitude of economy/economy+/economy++/premium economy/business/business++ seats will cost until I click on each flight? Where every carrier offers slightly different variat…

What airlines are you searching on?

Whenever I search (admittedly mostly on Southwest), I get everything up front.

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

#373
post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EP is just economy with slightly more leg room. PE is closer to business than EP. The food is upgraded along with the service. The seats are more recliner like and you generally have more room. Additionally, the PE seats are often the quickest to deplane if that's important. I can also work in PE seat, whereas EP not so much. The problem with PE is that it's often not that great of a deal. Unless it's a super busy ro…

I agree with all that. The food still isn't great. And the seat still isn't great for a red-eye relative to business. I wouldn't generally work on a plane anyway. I've been in PE--don't remember the circumstances--but as I recall didn't think it was anything special for the cost.

Your final point is exactly it. PE is better, but the cost difference is generally too high above EP. At that point I tend to just go BC.

To your other points, at the end of the day, it's an airplane. And since I'm usually flying US airlines, even business class isn't that special outside of laying flat. I do fly back and forth to the EU enough though, that being able to work for 4ish hours is pretty useful.

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

#374
post #90
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US flights (99% of what I have experienced) definitely can get into three figures for anything other than "middle seat, way back". They know there's at least a built-in audience of taller people who will spring for legroom on any flight over an hour. And now that I am old and tall, an aisle seat and legroom are incredibly valuable to me (don't tell 'em, ok?).

Oddly there is no such premium for wide people. I understand (somewhat) price discriminating based on the quantity of space required by the passenger (for comfort or from physical necessity), but then why does this apply to one dimension and not the other. I'm not even talking about pay-by-weight as was famously tried between pacific islands. Nobody wants to have someone spilling over the armrest into their seat, and…

There's rules for passengers and airlines... but enforcement is limited, because who wants to slow down boarding by checking.

And compliance is hard for passengers, because you have to call in to book the special case, and who wants to call in?

But theoretically, a passenger that will encroach on an adjacent seat can pay for the extra seat (I don't know if they need to also pay for seat assignment to get two seats next to each other), and then if the flight doesn't actually sell out, the extra seat fee is refundable. But when you actually board, people will see the 'empty' seat and try to sit in it, even though you paid for it. Etc.

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

#375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you drove your car across 17 countries in Europe would you expect to pay the same at every station you come across? I don't think what you're saying is even the norm within European countries, is it?

I suspect it’s something about how often in the US, taxes are added to the displayed price at the cash register. That’s not true in Europe, and is jarring when visiting or moving here. However, this doesn’t apply to gas stations in the US. The displayed price is always inclusive of all taxes and fees. I don’t think there are any states in the US where that isn’t true.

Which is strange because gas stations are a very notable exception to this rule and the tax is all included in the posted price.

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

#376
post #295

I was hoping that the pendulum would swing the other way with the scandal over too many passengers bringing out their bags on a recent AA evacuation caused by a burning tire. The push to eliminate checked bags has created a chaotic cabin environment that probably exacerbated the situation. There's no sign of it getting better either. The overcrowding of overhead bins creates a prisoners dilemma where flight attendant…

As someone who has traveled for a long time, I find two things to be true: 1. People like business travelers or those with even minimal levels of status/benefits (who don't pay for checked luggage) don't usually preferentially check bags because luggage gets delayed, it's harder to switch flights when there's a weather etc. problem, and they have to wait at the luggage carousel. 2. Hard and hard-ish roll-aboards are…

My wife and I are both Delta Platinum and it’s half and half. Since we always get upgraded to C+ with dedicated overhead and we board early, for non stop flights, we won’t check our bags for short getaways.

We hate lugging luggage around the airport for layovers and now that we don’t live in ATL any more, we almost always have layovers.

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

#377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, why even bother to run flights at all in this scenario? They could cancel 80% of flights and keep the rest to pretend they are still an airline. Cancelations would be more profitable than the flights themselves.

I imagine the class action lawsuits at that point would bankrupt them

Class actions lawsuits only work if the courts and legislators have an interest in consumer protection.

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

#378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, why even bother to run flights at all in this scenario? They could cancel 80% of flights and keep the rest to pretend they are still an airline. Cancelations would be more profitable than the flights themselves.

I imagine the class action lawsuits at that point would bankrupt them

Presumably pre-emptively nullified by that arbitration agreement when you accepted the T&C to purchase the ticket.

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

#379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not entirely true with the cheapest = first. I've been using a reputed and magnanimous airline for years and it doesn't matter what the other low-blow contenders are offering. As long as it's in my anticipated budget, I want comfort, consistency, and courage. These undercutters have me scared they shaved off a wing to save on price. @#$% them. I fly with my airline, and these jerkoffs who want to bend over for fascis…

Out of interest, which airline? I've never found a particularly good one in the us.

I absolutely love Delta. I’ll fly other airlines domestically occasionally. But I have found their customer service to be top notch and they have the best web interface/app.

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

#380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Asking families if their teenager could be seated separately is one thing, but knowing the airlines, they might as well start seating the toddlers in the overhead luggage compartments.

That was an option in the 1950s for infants. They attached a little cot to the overhead — sort of like the changing shelf on a pack and play!

Isn't this basically just putting the kid in a tumble drier whenever you hit turbulence? Did they pad the roof and door as well?
Post reply on HN