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

491–500 of 678 posts

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

#491

Post by rimunroe »

sokoloff wrote: post #483
rimunroe wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said elsewhere in the thread there are situations where it's not a luxury. A bigger point though is that it's an additional burden on parents for something childless people simply don't need to deal with. Childless people might want assigned seats, but they don't need to sit next to an infant. When a parent can't sit near their kid it negatively impacts everyone else on board the aircraft. It might result in the…

Then the airlines should offer those more flexible people the option to buy a cheaper ticket that doesn’t include seat assignment. Just brainstorming here, they might call those tickets “Basic” or something. Then, people with that flexibility could offer that flexibility to the airline in exchange for a cheaper ticket that meets their needs and people who don’t have the same level of flexibility could buy tickets tha…

I assume this is a somewhat flippant/sarcastic response, but it completely ignores the gist of the message (well, multiple messages) you're replying to.

> I say this as a parent who pays for assigned seats because we choose to buy tickets that reflect our actual level of flexibility.

For what it's worth, I'm saying all this as a parent who flies on airlines where assigned seats are the only option afaik

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

#492

Post by jacobgkau »

charcircuit wrote: post #404
Lio wrote: post #318

> Airlines want to remove the requirement to provide automatic refunds when flights are cancelled or significantly altered. This is wild. Are they really asking to be able to take money for a flight, then cacel it and keep the money? That's crazy.

>This is wild. Keep in mind this rule has only been in affect for a little over a year. Airlines weren't being "wild" last year before the change.

They were being pretty annoying, which is why the regulation went into place. The "wildness" is that they're openly trying to make it annoying again.

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

#494

Post by jermaustin1 »

OhMeadhbh wrote: post #458
jermaustin1 wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I flew a LOT pre-covid, and still more than average post-covid (2-4 times a year), and primarily via United (thanks to racked-up miles from the Continental days) out of Houston/NYC/London, and I have never had any issues with delays or cancellations - In 2009, a Continental flight did have me circling IAH for 2 hours while they troubleshot a landing gear malfunction before landing again and switching planes, though,…

I'm flying out of the west and have to go through SLC or DEN when flying United. It's ALWAYS a PITA. Now that I think about it... I had a segment a couple years ago on United from JAX to ORD that was delayed only 5 minutes and wound up arriving 5 minutes early, so maybe east of the Rockies things are better. And my brother tells me international flights on Untied through SFO to Asia are generally pretty stable. I bet…

Now that you are saying that, I wonder if HOU to LAX or LAS is better served because it stays south of the Rockies. And since I've almost always been based out of Houston, or when I lived in NYC, flying home to HOU or vacationing in DEN, those flights never had to cross the Rockies.

I bet you are on to something.

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

#495

Post by abawany »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #440
runako wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a search just now, Delta Main r/t from ATL-LAX is $337. Delta Comfort on the same flight is $727. (Yes, it's more than 2x the price.) Obviously Comfort boards earlier, but it's not unreasonable to attribute most of the fare differential to the legroom. Checked bags are also extra for either seat.

I've never understood why boarding early is considered a premium worth paying for (for normal flights with assigned seating). Planes are never as comfortable as whatever I have access to in the airport, whether that's hanging out in the lounge or sipping a drink at a restaurant, or just stretching my legs walking around the airport.

When I used to have carry-ons, boarding early ensured that I got room in the overhead bins to place the bag. I now use under-seater bags only and pack light so I no longer care when I get to my seat.

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

#496

Post by perfectstorm »

kumarsw wrote: post #276

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…

i wonder if they could create a central locking mechanism where if a plane makes an emergency landing, it automatically locks all the overhead bins so passengers don't waste time trying to pick their baggage out. the only remaining thing would be smaller bags underneath the seats which i don't tihnk would delay anyone or at least not significantly as the overhead bins.

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

#497

Post by sokoloff »

rimunroe wrote: post #491
sokoloff wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the airlines should offer those more flexible people the option to buy a cheaper ticket that doesn’t include seat assignment. Just brainstorming here, they might call those tickets “Basic” or something. Then, people with that flexibility could offer that flexibility to the airline in exchange for a cheaper ticket that meets their needs and people who don’t have the same level of flexibility could buy tickets tha…

I assume this is a somewhat flippant/sarcastic response, but it completely ignores the gist of the message (well, multiple messages) you're replying to. > I say this as a parent who pays for assigned seats because we choose to buy tickets that reflect our actual level of flexibility. For what it's worth, I'm saying all this as a parent who flies on airlines where assigned seats are the only option afaik

I don’t think it does. People with flexibility to be assigned to sit next to whomever and willingness to sit in middle seats ought to be able to pay less in exchange for providing that flexibility.

Their flexibility is lubricating the entire system and making it work better. Why should we charge them the same amount as people who aren’t as flexible?

What I see is people who aren’t offering that flexibility arguing that they should still get the price as if they were willing to provide it, when they are consuming rather than providing it.

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

#498

Post by topkai22 »

Spooky23 wrote: post #307
itopaloglu83 wrote: post #155

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!

You can still do this for infants on some long haul flights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8fphE1v66M&msockid=42557114...

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

#499

Post by duxup »

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.

It drives me crazy that airlines are allowed to book tickets for families who have to sit together ... but then they have to sort it out at the gate.

It's just a big pain for everyone.

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

#500

Post by tehjoker »

philjackson wrote: post #48

Trump really has enabled grifting en mass. Any semblance of corporate responsibility out of the window.

Don't forget that it was Delta airlines that lobbied the Biden administration that got CDC to reduce isolation duration. Both administrations are deadly liars. When it comes to the airlines, the last administration's deregulation killed people, a lot of them. Not that if Trump was in power he would have done anything different.
Post reply on HN