I'd be curious to see how the all-in price of airline tickets has evolved in recent decades. It feels like it's now commonplace to have hundreds of dollars in additional fees for things like legroom. That means a cheap ticket is a midrange ticket and a midrange ticket can end up being quite expensive unless you fall for the "we get to strap you behind the bathroom with only the clothes on your back" Saver ticket. It…
US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees
41–50 of 678 posts
Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees
#42> 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…
yeah, now imagine when its even worse
Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
> [Elimination of] Automatic Refunds for Cancellations Airline cancellations. Seeing as they're talking about making a change, I assume it's airline cancellations, since no airline will currently refund you for a passenger cancellation.
Some will, you just have to pay an extra fee when you buy the ticket. It is ridiculous.
Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees
#44Get 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…
Capitalist money-making idea: guarantee young children are seated as far away as possible from their parents if the fee is not paid, then offer to collect the fee from other passengers seated next to the child. Double the cost if it's a baby.
Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees
#45> [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…
Many airlines have punitive seating algorithms (looking at you, Alaska), or pull crap like moving your seats around and separating you after you select them unless you have status (United used to, at least, since they had a practice of selling non-existing flights, then bin packing planes the day before) so without this you can end up having a breast feeding infant sitting across the plane from its family.
In essentially all cases, the kid can be put next to the parent without splitting up another parrty.
Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees
#46> [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…
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 you are more likely to buy an upgrade is evil.
I understand paying for checked luggage because luggage handling costs money. But purposely making the experience worse just so you can charge money for upgrades is evil.
Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
> [Elimination of] Automatic Refunds for Cancellations Airline cancellations. Seeing as they're talking about making a change, I assume it's airline cancellations, since no airline will currently refund you for a passenger cancellation.
Some will, you just have to pay an extra fee when you buy the ticket. It is ridiculous.
Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees
#48Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees
#49Re: US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees
#50I'd be curious to see how the all-in price of airline tickets has evolved in recent decades. It feels like it's now commonplace to have hundreds of dollars in additional fees for things like legroom. That means a cheap ticket is a midrange ticket and a midrange ticket can end up being quite expensive unless you fall for the "we get to strap you behind the bathroom with only the clothes on your back" Saver ticket. It…
Hundreds of dollars for legroom? Are you... sure? For what kind of flights?