[HN Gopher] U.S. fines airlines more than $7M for not providing ...
___________________________________________________________________
U.S. fines airlines more than $7M for not providing refunds
Author : lxm
Score : 256 points
Date : 2022-11-15 02:18 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nytimes.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nytimes.com)
| the_only_law wrote:
| You know, my return flight from the holidays last year was
| suddenly canceled the day I was supposed to fly back (ofc they
| didn't announce it till much later)
|
| I ended up having to purchase a new last minute flight from
| another airline. I was supposed to get a refund for the cancelled
| flight, but I'm not sure I ever did.
| mtalantikite wrote:
| I have a voucher from a cancelled flight on JetBlue stuck in the
| abyss of their computer systems. In order to use it I've been
| told I have to call, but the wait times are hours long. I can use
| their text message interface on iOS to get someone to call me
| back instead of waiting on hold (which is nice), but the couple
| times I've tried there's been some ridiculous problem with
| actually using the voucher: They can't find it. Or I need some
| confirmation number that is different from the one they gave me
| that I swear doesn't exist. Or they can't transfer the credit
| into my actual account so I can book a flight on my own.
|
| It expires in a couple weeks from today and I just assume I'm
| never going to use it. I'm also always going to avoid JetBlue in
| the future. They don't even advertise prices that include _carry
| on bags_ anymore, you have to pay extra to bring a change of
| clothes with you.
| kylehotchkiss wrote:
| also if you book JetBlue and the flight changes at all (your
| change or theirs), you can never look at your reservation
| online again, the website and app break. Problem has existed
| for years, nobody wants to fix it -\\_(tsu)_/-
| himinlomax wrote:
| What about sending a physical certified letter?
| aleyva wrote:
| About time
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Should be more like $7B if they want this punishment to sting
| enough to make a difference in behavior.
| mkl95 wrote:
| $7m sounds like... pocket change? Am I missing something here?
| ranUltra wrote:
| Another case where EU has this settled. If an airline cancels a
| flight, they are obligated to refund the money in the same
| payment method, or book another flight, depending what the
| passenger chooses. They have to provide accommodation in a hotel
| if needed & you can request compensation up to 600 euros if the
| cancellation/delay was done in short notice.
| idlehand wrote:
| The EU isn't quite there yet, see the issues with refund
| processing times during covid for an example. I heard some
| official talking about how airlines shouldn't be allowed to
| charge you until you step on the plane, which sounds like a
| brilliant solution to me.
|
| Don't have to fight the airline for compensation for a flight
| that was cancelled if the airline doesn't have your money yet.
| [deleted]
| banannaise wrote:
| > I heard some official talking about how airlines shouldn't
| be allowed to charge you until you step on the plane, which
| sounds like a brilliant solution to me.
|
| This sounds insane until you realize that this is essentially
| how hotels work. You pay a deposit, and the rest isn't owed
| until you are physically in the hotel.
| stavros wrote:
| > This sounds insane until you realize that this is
| essentially how hotels work.
|
| Or _everything else_. Trains, taxis, restaurants,
| everything.
|
| How many institutions do you know where you _can 't_ buy a
| ticket at the door, and instead have to prepay?
| ghaff wrote:
| Hotels do tend to have a cancelation policy though (which
| is increasingly a day or two in advance rather than 6pm
| day of even for for not-charged-in-advance flexible
| reservations). You pay in advance for tons of other
| services (concerts, plays, etc.) and they're often non-
| refundable. Trains and transit also pay in advance in my
| experience. The main difference with planes is that,
| while you can pay for a ticket at the airport, it will be
| expensive, there's a decent chance they won't have a
| seat, and you'll get the worst seat choice.
|
| Yes, there are a few services you post-pay like
| restaurants and taxis but you probably don't want to make
| a practice of running out on your bill.
|
| Rental cars are something of an outlier in that, in the
| US, you can mostly book with major brands and just not
| show up with no penalty.
| stavros wrote:
| It's not about prepay VS postpay, though. It's about
| whether you HAVE to prebuy or whether you can pay at the
| door. Planes don't have the option to just show up and
| buy a ticket.
| ghaff wrote:
| >Planes don't have the option to just show up and buy a
| ticket.
|
| Sure they do. Maybe not _literally_ at the door because
| you have to go through security first. But they 'll sell
| you one at the ticket counter if there are seats
| available.
| stavros wrote:
| Will they really? As far as I know, they stopped doing
| that years ago, but I might be wrong.
| throwaway290 wrote:
| I've seen people buy tickets at the airport with cash
| before same day flight this year. I came to the airport
| and changed my ticket to depart on that day once.
| rtkwe wrote:
| They'll still do it but most planes are oversold already
| to increase utilization, some of the airline's high
| rewards levels allow you to force your way onto planes
| too.
| xeromal wrote:
| The US has solid flyer protections. The fact this article is
| about airlines being fined for ignoring the law shows that
| they're doing their job.
| sccxy wrote:
| It only works in theory and with good airlines.
|
| 4 months and still waiting for my Lufthansa refund (4000 eur)
| and no sign of compensation...
|
| They ignore till you take it to the court.
| user3939382 wrote:
| If I may comment on the abstract issue here... the experience of
| flying (US domestic) is a boiling frog situation. Flying used to
| be fun. 9-11 greatly accelerated the problems, but it had already
| been getting worse for decades as its popularity grew. Especially
| because I have long intervals when I don't fly, I absolutely
| dread the answer to my question, "What new, horrible treatment /
| experience / standards / fees / abuse will I be learning about
| this time?" Between the security, checking in, leg room, just
| everything. The airline's behavior from the post is just an
| example.
| brewdad wrote:
| One advantage of being only 5'7" and my wife 5'2" is that by
| the time the shrinking legroom issues really become a problem
| for us, the plane will be mostly empty because normal sized
| people won't fit. There aren't many advantages to being at the
| left end of the bell curve but this is one I'll gladly take.
| [deleted]
| annoyingnoob wrote:
| In my experience, you can get the attention of an airline by
| complaining about them to the DOT (in the US).
|
| I had an airline change my ticket from refundable/changeable to
| non-refundable/non-changeable. The airline refused to acknowledge
| our original contract. A complaint to the DOT got their attention
| quickly and I was refunded quickly.
|
| https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/complaint-process
| andrewmunsell wrote:
| Same experience for me. I had tickets booked under Aeromexico
| and cancelled them (they had a waiver that provided a cash
| refund in 12 months after the request, yes that's already
| ridiculous). I had an email confirmation they would refund the
| tickets.
|
| After the 12 month period, I spent 2 months calling, email-
| escalating, and eventually filing a DOT complaint. Aeromexico
| responded within 2 days of the DOT complaint being received and
| theoretically is in the process of _actually_ refunding me this
| time (knock on wood).
|
| $7m is nothing for them. The fines need to be bigger, quicker,
| and more aggressive to stop this behavior. They are screwing
| customers because they can get away with it. EU regulations
| around customer refunds are significantly better than in the
| US, and we should be heading in that direction to hold these
| companies accountable.
|
| Side note: my sister actually had tickets on the same route but
| for an itinerary the week before me and got the refund with no
| issues, so I have no clue why I had to do the DOT song and
| dance.
| JusticeJuice wrote:
| I spent $600 on a flight from London, to San Diego. There's a
| stopover in New York - but the connecting flight is delayed for
| six hours. At this point it's 10pm, but they get a plane, we
| board, we're actually taxing to the runway... and then the flight
| is canceled. Turns out it would arrive too late in San Diego for
| noise regulation. We all get off, I get another flight with a
| different company next thing in the morning.
|
| Few days later I hit them up for a refund on the canceled flight.
| They're happy to refund the NY to SD leg... to a tune of $24.
| Turns out their internal valuation of a $600 flight is $576 for
| the first 8h, then $24 for the last 6h. Lol. JetBlue man.
| darksaints wrote:
| "My internal valuation for the London to NY leg is $0.01, and
| NY to San Diego is $9999.99, which coincidentally is the
| damages limit for small claims court. Now let's be reasonable
| and work this out without a judge".
| nielsbot wrote:
| Wonder if you could add the last 9 mill: $9999.999
| [deleted]
| vinay427 wrote:
| Did they not offer to rebook you? I've never had an airline not
| offer to rebook someone at the airline's expense for an
| airline-canceled flight, whether in the US or Europe.
|
| As an aside, originally written as a response to a now-deleted
| comment about noise regulations that shouldn't excuse your
| compensation situation at all:
|
| > The airport in San Diego is abnormally close to the downtown
| area more than virtually any other major airport in the US or
| Europe, barring dedicated urban airports like London City. To
| paint a picture, while landing there it feels like you're
| flying between skyscrapers, and that's probably actually the
| case. If there's any commercial airport that should have
| noise/time regulations, SAN is probably up there on the list.
| JusticeJuice wrote:
| They were happy to rebook me on a flight from NY to SD, but I
| had a speaking event to get to, and they had no free seats
| available to get me there in time - so rebooking wasn't very
| helpful. So I coughed up for a Delta flight early next
| morning.
|
| And nah, the noise regulation was never suggested to be a
| reason for bad compensation. As a foreigner I've never seen
| people flip their shit so much in public - like the plane
| staff (attendants, pilot etc) clearly had no part in the
| flight getting canceled, and were so apologetic - but people
| were yelling, swearing at them, it was pure fucking anarchy.
|
| At that point I had been up 27h, I just walked away, bought
| my morning flight. Found a hotel that was open (it was past
| midnight), took a cooked 2h subway ride into NY, slept for
| 4h, took 2h subway back, got my flight, presented. Honestly
| my biggest regret in the whole experience was just not
| choosing to sleep at the airport on the ground. Lol.
| wheels wrote:
| > _I 've never had an airline not offer to rebook someone at
| the airline's expense for an airline-canceled flight_
|
| I have. Even after 3 hours on the phone. For a flight booked
| months in advance, and canceled 20 hours before departing.
| They kept finding flights, and then saying they needed to get
| them approved by their supervisor, which was rejected 3
| times. I assume they decided that the lost tickets would be
| too expensive and would rather just screw me.
|
| I had to file a chargeback with my credit card to even get a
| refund (after 2 months), and I'm currently using a legal
| service which is in the process of suing American Airlines to
| get the statutory standard compensation for canceled flights
| in the EU. They simply ignored my (and the legal service's)
| requests for such.
| pricechild wrote:
| If you're "departing from an airport in the UK on any airline"
| then I'm pretty sure the legal minimum compensation is more
| than that:
|
| * https://www.caa.co.uk/passengers/resolving-travel-
| problems/d...
|
| * https://www.caa.co.uk/passengers/resolving-travel-
| problems/d...
|
| It sounds a bit confusing as to whether you were cancelled or
| delayed, or accepted an offer etc. but I wouldn't accept $24...
| JusticeJuice wrote:
| I was just so over it, I took the $24 and treated it as a
| lesson. I talked to a manager, but I couldn't be fucked doing
| more than that - I wasn't strapped for cash. If I was in my
| home turf, with a legal system I knew maybe I'd fight it
| more, but I was a tourist.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _with a legal system I knew maybe I 'd fight it more_
|
| For future reference, Airhelp will fight it for you [1].
|
| [1] https://www.airhelp.com/en/
| JusticeJuice wrote:
| A private company startup to protect consumer rights from
| other private companies? Easily most American thing I've
| seen this week.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _most American thing I 've seen_
|
| I'll let their Berlin-based team know :).
| [deleted]
| insane_dreamer wrote:
| That's unsurprising. It's likely the ticket from London - NY
| was $576 (often domestic legs are added on nearly for free, and
| on occasion even cheaper than without for reasons that I don't
| understand).
| m-ee wrote:
| Flew BCN to SFO with a stopover in Philly. Short ~10 min delay
| on the tarmac rerouting around a storm in the midwest. Flight
| is abruptly cancelled, the combination of the delay and the
| very slightly longer route caused the pilots to time out. AA
| refused a refund because they classified it as weather and they
| have no responsibility for the fact that their pilots had 20
| minutes of buffer in how long they were allowed to fly, and no
| other pilots were available.
|
| My credit card comes with insurance for this, but I've been
| going back and forth with Visa's process for this since July
| and still haven't gotten reimbursed.
| Symbiote wrote:
| File a complaint under the European rules. It should be much
| easier.
|
| https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-
| right...
| [deleted]
| chairmanwow1 wrote:
| This thread is making my blood boil. I'm going to go outside and
| try not to get frustrated at things that didn't even happen to
| me.
| wnolens wrote:
| I've abandoned probably a thousand dollars in airfare in my life.
| Just don't have the energy nor do I think it's possible to get it
| back.
|
| I once cancelled a flight on United, but the $400 "credit" I had
| (1y expiry) with them had some special "booking code" attached to
| it (not informed of this on purchase, bought regularly through
| their website) so the only tickets I was allowed to use the
| credit on cost > $1000 (regular economy class..) due to this
| booking code and had to be searched through a special portal..
| what the hell? I could use the regular front page flight search
| and buy same seat on same flight for less than the difference
| using my credit..
|
| Does anyone have a positive experience with an airline? They're
| all such trash.
|
| My only one is with Porter airlines, flying out of Toronto. It's
| often delayed but they're incredibly kind and sometimes give me a
| $15 voucher to the bar! Also a free alcoholic drink on board.
| JusticeJuice wrote:
| So I've been working remote and traveling for the last year,
| visited 28 countries so far so taken a lot of flights - and in
| my personal, anecdotal, probably biased experience - North
| American airlines and airports are particularly bad. Many
| positive experiences everywhere else.
| partdavid wrote:
| Sometimes I feel like I live in bizarro world, because air
| travel upsets so many people, and they find it so unpleasant,
| and I love it. I've had mostly positive experiences. That
| doesn't mean that nothing has ever gone wrong, but I don't
| really have an _airline_ horror story (Expedia, on the other
| hand...)
|
| United took care of everything I wanted through many
| disruptions, delays and cancellations; I got more than value
| back. Their agent worked through a complicated ticket reuse
| scenario with setting up a different number of travelers on a
| different itinerary, I was thrilled with that experience.
| Alaska gave me free Premium Economy so that I'd have a better
| chance to make a connecting flight after a delay, and their
| agents worked really hard to rebook me for a long international
| itinerary (including on non-partner airlines) to try to make up
| my time after another delay (and I didn't need one but they
| also made sure everyone got hotel vouchers and handheld people
| through using it for accommodations for those who needed it).
| Both standout positive experiences. I'm continually impressed
| by flight attendants as a class, and I've never seen one lose
| their cool even with bizarre, ignorant, or frustrating
| passengers. Onboard device stuff works pretty well these days,
| free messaging and streaming a bunch of media from the onboard
| server for free is nice! Wi-fi is pretty cheap (half of what
| hotels which charge for Wi-fi cost).
|
| Flying now is cheaper and more accessible than ever. If you're
| nostalgic about the golden days of aviation you can still get
| white-glove service, free cocktails and real silverware if you
| pay those golden-era prices. If you want to save as much money
| as possible, you can sit a middle seat without baggage and fly
| across Europe for $35. I will say that once upon a time you
| could find "dream fares" on unsold inventory, and those kind of
| rare deep discounts don't seem to exist, I assume because there
| are better pricing algorithms for filling flights.
|
| Some of it's knowledge and expectations: I've learned more over
| the years about things like fare classes. There _is_ a
| cancellation policy and you agree to it when you buy your fare.
| It 's not like it's a secret. These days you'll almost always
| see that there's a flexible fare class which gives you more
| options for cancellation; and some, where you can save money
| with a nonrefundable fare. I have learned more about the ins
| and outs are here, over time, so I can certainly understand
| that if you didn't know these things in advance you'll feel
| shafted. I've never _felt_ that way but I certainly get it. I
| guess I just see it more as something to learn rather than
| something bad someone did to me. I know more about how to spend
| money on the things I care about and save money on the things I
| don 't.
| rhacker wrote:
| Perhaps a better system: US set up a website to enter your
| cancelled flight/missed flight because of security and the
| amount, airline, proof of ticket, etc...
|
| Airline has 36 hours to process a refund or direct payment or US
| fines the airline $7M each DAY there is at least 1 customer that
| has not received a refund.
| balderdash wrote:
| These fines are far too small to drive the correct behaviors.
| kqvamxurcagg wrote:
| What a bargain for the airlines. A 1% penalty and they probably
| saved at least 5% in financing costs.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| No, it was an inconvenience. They actually had to take off the
| cushion from the couch in the CEO's office, to get that money.
| Hellion wrote:
| When people see small fines like this, they assume it's a slap
| on the wrist.
|
| And it is. Because the message is loud and clear: don't make us
| pay attention to you and fix your shit.
| solardev wrote:
| I think the message is more like "eh, we're on your side, but
| once in a while we gotta pretend to do something... just play
| along and wink, will ya?"
| Loughla wrote:
| Counting to three only works if you're willing and able to do
| whatever the thing is you said you would do to the child when
| they are misbehaving.
|
| I think it's less that people see a slap on the wrist, and
| more that people see the systemic, wholesale capture and
| gutting of regulatory bodies and are not surprised that
| nothing substantive happens in this kind of case.
| redanddead wrote:
| And why are they not paying attention 99% of the other time?
| When people lose faith in institutions it's not because
| they're dumb. They understand things.
|
| And then to be gaslit into thinking "don't trust your eyes",
| you can see why some people are pretty angry nowadays.
| nfriedly wrote:
| To be fair, it does say that the penalties will ratchet up if
| the airlines don't correct their behavior.
| triceratops wrote:
| Why not bring the hammer down so they won't do it again for
| at least 30 years? No need to spend time and regulatory
| attention on them, that way.
| ticviking wrote:
| Seems to me like the airline might fight that harder.
|
| I don't know what the reality is, but I can imagine a
| justification that looks something like, "We do this slap
| on the wrist. You fix this or next time we have a paper
| trail showing you know this is illegal conduct"
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| I'll believe it when I see it. Threatening to take a kid's
| toy away when they know you won't cause you never do doesn't
| teach a good lesson.
| Thorrez wrote:
| Has the US threatened to ratchet up fines in the past and
| not done so?
| Frost1x wrote:
| Spam callers come to mind. Some of it may be due to some
| technical nature that made it difficult/impossible to
| enforce but we've had donotcall.gov and all sorts of
| legislation for fines and penalitoes and I still get
| slews of spam solicitations to this day.
|
| I think the general consensus for your average citizen
| and consumer these days is that they are voiceless and
| powerless in most these situations while lots of
| posturing and theatrics go on between government and
| businesses, all while fleecing your average citizen and
| consumer.
|
| Most see a lot more erosion than we see realized
| improvements in daily life from rights, regulatory
| action, or market trends/shifts.
| TuringNYC wrote:
| Similar experience, I had a Frontier plan land in a different
| airpot 80 miles away. They said to just take an Uber to the
| original destination, and submit the Uber receipt. The ride was
| almost $200 since the entire planeful of folks were doing the
| same (I imagine it went into surge pricing.)
|
| How does one actually enforce their verbal promise of
| reimbursement. Is there a government agency where people file
| their complaints?
| jaywalk wrote:
| https://airconsumer.dot.gov/escomplaint/ConsumerForm.cfm
| ezfe wrote:
| When COVID caused a trip I had planned to be cancelled, I had
| flights with Iceland Air, TAP Air, Easyjet, and Brussels
| Airlines...
|
| - Iceland Air and Easyjet issued refunds quickly
|
| - Brussels took a few months, but communicated proactively that
| they were working on it and provided updates without me reaching
| out
|
| - TAP never picked up the phone and I ended up having to force a
| charge after every other airline had come through with a
| refund...
|
| Not surprised, lol
| personlurking wrote:
| > TAP never picked up the phone and I ended up having to force
| a charge after every other airline had come through with a
| refund...
|
| Same happened to me. And I even called an additional time and
| only dealt with them in Portuguese hoping I might get somewhere
| with that tactic. Nope. Called, emailed, tweeted, you name it.
| No luck.
|
| Ryanair was pretty bad too. I spent a few weeks trying to book
| a short, direct flight between major cities and they kept
| cancelling the flights (3-4 in a row) and trying to give me
| credit. Their webchat helpline was quite poor, too.
| fy20 wrote:
| I had a few flights cancelled with Ryanair too. Of course
| they make it hard to get a refund and suggest you take credit
| instead (which if it was valid for a long period I would
| have, but it expired after 1 year), however eventually they
| did give me a full refund.
| piskerpan wrote:
| Loved EasyJet for that.
|
| I also had a buttload of flights planned for March/April 2020
| and EasyJet was by far the easiest. I got a Trenitalia refund
| probably 18 months later and I had to PayPal-chargeback some
| OTA which eventually emailed me asking to reverse the
| chargeback. Sure. The OTA capitulated soon after.
| thepasswordis wrote:
| I can't read this paywalled NyTimes article. Where does this $7M
| fine go?
|
| I propose the following: when fines like this are levied against
| an airline, the airline has to pay out the full $7M figure to one
| individual who was wronged, and that person is chosen via
| lottery.
| qikInNdOutReply wrote:
| if Earnings - Fine > 0: print("Cost of buisness is " + Fine) end
| nfriedly wrote:
| In this case, it sounds like the airlines are paying the fine
| AND the refunds.
|
| > _The department's intervention contributed to the airlines'
| issuing more than $600 million in refunds, it said._
|
| > _..._
|
| > _[United States Secretary of Transportation] Mr. Buttigieg
| said that, while the department was more focused on ensuring
| that refunds were paid than on collecting fines, he had
| nonetheless asked staff to look into whether the penalties were
| sufficient to prevent such behavior in the future._
|
| > _"This really shouldn't be happening in the first place," he
| said. "And we'll continue ratcheting up the penalty side until
| we're seeing less of this kind of behavior to begin with."_
| vxNsr wrote:
| If you look more closely that's not the case. If they pay the
| refunds, they get to subtract a portion of that from the
| fine.
|
| Dan has more detail and isn't paywalled:
| https://www.dansdeals.com/more/news/airline-news/dot-
| issues-...
| invisible wrote:
| Weird -- why not make the fine $604 million (or whatever
| they truly should owe in refunds) and allow all but, say, 4
| million to be reduced?
| 988747 wrote:
| That would create a weird dynamic: is it more beneficial
| to the airline to issue refunds to passengers, or is it
| better to give money directly to the DOT, which, as most
| government institutions, is probably underfunded and will
| appreciate the "donation"? Cost for the airline is the
| same if both cases, but indirectly funding DOT might win
| you some friends there :)
| nfriedly wrote:
| It sounds like that's only the case for "good-will refunds"
| where the airline wasn't otherwise obligated to pay the
| refund.
|
| > _Frontier said it had issued about $100 million in what
| it described as "good-will refunds" that were not legally
| required. The airline will pay only $1 million of the $2.2
| million fine because the Transportation Department credited
| it for providing refunds to passengers who canceled
| nonrefundable tickets early in the pandemic._
|
| But, either way, the DOT's main focus is on getting people
| the refunds. I added a bit more context to my first message
| to clarify that, but also the fact that the fine is ~1% of
| the owed refunds makes it fairly clear IMO.
| sidewndr46 wrote:
| Businesses never admit that they are legally required to
| pay a refund. It would constitute a public material
| statement and open the flood gates to more refunds. For a
| publicly traded company this would probably actually be
| some sort of SEC violation as well.
|
| I can't tell you the number of times I've gotten a "one
| time refund" from the same companies over and over. From
| the perspective of a business any refund issued is done
| in good will. Otherwise it isn't a refund.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| Called _counting beans_.
| donbronson wrote:
| $7M seems small. I assume the airlines make more money by not
| providing refunds and will continue to do so at the expense of
| small fines.
| kaycebasques wrote:
| I am relieved to see that regulators appear aware of the game
| that Frontier seems to be playing. I flew to Denver recently and
| didn't need to travel heavy so I went with their cheap fare. The
| flight from SFO was fine. The flight from DEN to SFO was
| extremely frustrating. We arrived at DEN early because we got a
| text message warning us about major TSA delays. Literally the
| moment we were about to board Frontier changed the flight status
| to canceled. The plane was there, we saw it arrive and I didn't
| get the impression there was mechanical issues. It was one of
| those situations where I intuited that it was useless to try to
| get my money back and I should just vow to never fly with them
| again and give everyone a heads up not to use them (like I am
| doing here).
| mattwad wrote:
| They are the scum of the universe. If you don't pay for your
| seats, they will separate you and your party even if there are
| available seats together, because they know you'll shell out
| cash to fix it. (I think American does this now too, and
| possibly others but I haven't confirmed they also do it when
| there's available seats).
| pxx wrote:
| I'm actually fairly upset when airlines _don't_ do this.
| They're just leaving money on the table.
|
| If you want to pick your seat, pay for it.
| spoils19 wrote:
| 100% agreed. On my last flight where a family sat together
| without paying, I was literally crying and shaking. 'This
| isn't how capitalism works!' I cried out, but the flight
| attendant wouldn't have any of it.
|
| I don't know how you managed, but on my next flight with
| families who dodge valid charges, I will raise my plastic
| cup to you good sir.
| elmomle wrote:
| So you only get to sit with your loved ones if you have
| enough money? That's not a world I want to have any part
| in.
| pxx wrote:
| You only get to fly to see your loved ones if you have
| enough money too.
|
| Ancillary revenue like seat assignment fees makes it so
| that more people can afford to see their loved ones.
| yamtaddle wrote:
| This is only true if those seat assignment charges
| actually result in significantly lower ticket prices for
| everyone else, which is far from guaranteed.
| pxx wrote:
| It's not _guaranteed_ , but competition solves this
| problem, and competition has empirically been
| particularly effective in the airline industry.
|
| There is a very good reason people fly
| Spirit/Frontier/Allegiant/Sun Country.
| cool_dude85 wrote:
| No, you see, if they don't lower costs to the point of
| making no profit, then they will go out of business.
| Thats called competition and it's why no companies are
| able to buy shares back or pay dividends.
| ghaff wrote:
| I'm not a fan of a lot of the fees that airlines impose--
| but then I also don't fly budget airlines or buy the
| cheapest tickets. Personally I'd probably be happier with
| a more premium flying experience and somewhat higher
| ticket prices--though not enough to routinely upgrade to
| business class. And I'm sure there are many people for
| whom air travel over Christmas to visit family is
| something of a luxury appreciate being able to spend less
| money.
| [deleted]
| thereisnospork wrote:
| >If you want to pick your seat, pay for it.
|
| Ya its called a ticket, which are typically received in
| exchange for money. Should airlines also charge a
| disembarking fee? pay up or don't get off the plane? Seems
| like that's more money left on the table, captive audience
| and all.
| pxx wrote:
| You're still going to get to where you want to go and
| you'll still get a seat. That's the service you're paying
| for.
|
| Disregarding the kidnapping part of your straw man: we
| also do already charge for priority disembark. This is
| why premium seating is typically near the boarding door.
| thereisnospork wrote:
| > You're still going to get to where you want to go and
| you'll still get a seat. That's the service you're paying
| for.
|
| The service I'm paying for includes an assigned seat,
| just like my ticket to the movies does. Its not
| justifiable for an airline - A federally regulated
| industry, not some mom and pop local business - to
| intentionally degrade the quality of their product to
| nickle and dime their customers.
|
| Lets expand your premise a little: Should toll roads
| charge families extra tolls if they are in the same car
| together? There's revenue there - a family is certainly
| getting more use out of the "privledge" of traveling
| together than two strangers, or one person. Should NFL
| stadiums, movie theaters, concerts charge extra for
| booking seats that are adjacent? Revenue and 'Value'
| there as well. How about hotels? Trying to book 3 rooms
| for a company-conference visit, it'll be $100 for the
| first room, $250 for the second, and $500 for the 3rd.
| pxx wrote:
| > federally regulated industry
|
| Regulations are primarily there for safety concerns, not
| you complaining about what is honestly a non-issue. If
| you don't want to pay for premium seats just don't pay
| for them??
|
| But on that note, airline deregulation in the US has been
| the best thing that has ever happened to air travel. It
| is now far, far more accessible to travel by air. The
| revealed customer preference is that very few, if any,
| people want to go back to being forced to pay the old
| fares, even if the seats were bigger and the service was
| better.
|
| > The service I'm paying for includes an assigned seat,
| just like my ticket to the movies does
|
| Frontier is pretty upfront about this. You certainly have
| absolutely no guarantee of sitting next to somebody
| without paying for it one way or another. You get a seat.
| You don't get to choose your seat. Some theatres also do
| charge extra for choosing seats, and the ones that don't
| market themselves as premium theatres.
|
| > some varying strawmen
|
| I certainly don't think any of these techniques should be
| regulated. I can certainly see a surcharge if you require
| adjoining rooms in a hotel.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| The ticket in this case is for a flight, not a particular
| seat on that flight.
|
| Think of it like buying lawn seating at a concert. Best
| spot is taken? Tough luck.
| mindslight wrote:
| With a general admission concert ticket, your grouping
| still remains intact. I haven't flown in a while
| (thankfully), but the original comment makes it sound
| like they sell you an unassigned seat ticket, but then
| assign you a specific sometime down the road, perhaps
| maliciously.
| partdavid wrote:
| No, it doesn't, it's still a matter of luck. When you get
| to a general admission event, you might find that there's
| a seat in the middle two rows up, two seats together and
| then another seat three rows away. I've certainly
| experienced this; and I've experienced cases where I'm
| lucky and we can sit together. But it's very typical for
| parties to leave single seats between and for you to be
| stuck with scattered single seats.
| mindslight wrote:
| General admission is usually either standing room or lawn
| seats. I can't think of a show I've been to that had GA
| tickets and capacity defined by the number of hard seats,
| for exactly that reason. I'd believe it could happen,
| just not commonly.
|
| There are many reasons you might want to split up your
| group at a GA event, like say some people wanting to push
| up to the front. Or in your seat example, if your group
| values being closer rather than being together in further
| back seats. But that's your own choice and not a result
| of the venue forcing you.
| pxx wrote:
| The concert analogy is close but not perfect because the
| problem is that grouping necessarily puts you into
| premium seats.
|
| If they can sell aisle and window seats at a premium, you
| can't allow people to group for free without putting
| people in relatively more premium seats for free.
|
| The scale of airline seats (on a single flight) and
| concert tickets is incredibly different anyway, and
| different forms of price discrimination are required.
| mindslight wrote:
| Southwest is an example of general admission applied to
| airline seating.
|
| By the time you're calling non-middle seats "premium",
| we've already lost. We should aim to have markets that
| provide abundance rather than focusing on extraction
| through things like price discrimination.
|
| It's indefensible that they sell seats which then aren't
| actually big enough to fit a person, whether it be their
| legs or their arms - this is essentially the entire setup
| of "middle seats".
|
| If they wanted to charge _linearly_ based on dimensions,
| I 'd understand that. But the general pattern with price
| discrimination is that they charge outsized amounts for
| slightly more use, because they know they have you over a
| barrel. See also: dinosaur ISP data caps.
| partdavid wrote:
| There's no airline seat that can't "fit a person", that's
| hyperbole. Fit _any_ person, maybe. Fit without touching
| the person next to you, maybe. Fit without negotiating
| who uses the armrest or shared spaces with a stranger,
| maybe. I fly frequently, I 'm 6'2", I'm obese. I fit into
| a middle seat. Don't love it, it's not the nicest, but
| it's less cramped than any public transit seat and most
| theater seats.
| mindslight wrote:
| By your definition, it would be fine for them to sell the
| seat that was your lap to someone else, since your body
| still has enough volume to exist.
|
| I've often flown in seats where I had to spread my legs
| (eg into the aisle) so my knees were not pressed up
| against the seat in front of me. And on most flights, my
| shoulders are over the armrests. Talking about "the"
| armrest nicely demonstrates how much we've been saturated
| by their nonsense.
|
| As I said, I'd have no problem if airlines charged as a
| linear combination of your weight and the dimensions of
| your seat. But rather the setup is to gouge an outsized
| price for a comparatively small amount of additional
| room, because they'll catch people at the margins over a
| barrel.
| rtkwe wrote:
| The idea that everything that can be differentially
| priced should is really annoying and leads to BS like
| this where everyone's life is worse to marginally
| increase profits.
| banannaise wrote:
| "We will actively make your life worse unless you pay us a
| premium in exchange for not doing that" is a terrible way
| to run any part of a society. If that's just how businesses
| are expected to behave, then we need to find ways to change
| that as a society.
| ghaff wrote:
| There are classes of service and product just about
| everywhere.
|
| Basically everyone flying coach on a commercial aircraft
| has a deliberately worse experience than if they paid for
| business class. The alternative is to have a single level
| of coach service only (which is fairly common on regional
| jets) or a single level of business class only service
| (which is rare--BA LCY to JFK as far as I know although
| I'm not sure that even exists any longer).
| joking wrote:
| I can get that first rows of the plane or places with extra
| leg space could be charged, but charge for selecting the
| last row of the plane? thats just greediness
| fossuser wrote:
| Isn't that their whole game? If you're going to fly them you
| should know it.
|
| They have the cheapest fares, but they do that by upselling
| everything and any mistake will be expensive. If that's worth
| it to you (and sometimes the cost difference is big enough
| for it to be worth it imo) then it can be a reasonable
| tradeoff.
|
| Flying an extreme lost cost airline that's entire existence
| is predicated on this model and expecting them to act
| contrary to that is confusing to me.
| Benjammer wrote:
| A large chunk of people think that every product should be
| certified as 100% effective and that just being able to
| read two numbers and see which one is the smaller number is
| the absolute maximum amount of work that should be required
| to be an informed customer of any product on the planet.
| Any defect in the product is "a scam," yet, anyone who pays
| anything more than the absolute minimum viable option is a
| total sucker. It's honestly a very strange way to view the
| world that I don't really understand. My source is that my
| mother is an ardent member of this group of peole. I find
| that it mostly just leads to the opportunity to complain
| about everything and build up a complex around you being
| "slighted" by the universe all the time.
| everforward wrote:
| I don't think it should (or can) be that simple, but I
| also think some of these airlines intentionally hide that
| "standard" services aren't included, and sometimes even
| the pricing.
|
| E.g. [1]. I had no idea the pricing of carry-ons for
| Frontier changed depending on when/where you add it. It
| also makes it hard to compare prices across airlines,
| because I have to remember which charge for luggage and
| how much, so I can add it to the cost when I use flight
| finders.
|
| Sometimes the changes are also something I wouldn't think
| about. E.g. I flew Southwest recently and had no idea
| that "open seating" was even a thing to check for.
|
| I can see how people who don't fly regularly get
| confused. I fly a couple times a year and get surprised,
| I can't imagine the bewilderment of someone who flies
| once every 5 or 10 years.
| jimbokun wrote:
| I see your point, but also believe markets of all kinds
| function better where there is price transparency and
| it's easy to see what you get for what you're paying, as
| early in the process as possible.
|
| Makes for a more efficient economy that benefits
| everyone, even the producers in the long run.
| qazxcvbnmlp wrote:
| Right now American seats basic economy in the middle seats
| and main in isle or windows. The system will try and seat
| family's together if they are on the same reservation and the
| kids are under 15.
|
| So you're best to pay for seats if you want to be together.
| However, if you pay for seats and they change your flight on
| you, those seats are 'lost and you need to call for a refund.
| fknorangesite wrote:
| > they will separate you and your party even if there are
| available seats together
|
| Airline seats are also assigned based on weight distribution.
| It's not just malice and greed.
| infotogivenm wrote:
| Personally I've always seen them allow you to get up and
| relocate as soon as cabin doors closes. But yea, you didn't
| pay for a seat assignment so you might get stuck where-ever.
| They're pretty clear about this...
|
| Flown Frontier many dozens of times, since I usually travel
| alone with just a backpack. It's probably saved me $5-10k in
| my adult life. Very often it will be $150+ less than the next
| cheapest option.
| jghn wrote:
| Speaking of relocating, I don't love having to pay to pick
| one's seat, but IMO the larger problem are the customers
| who choose to don't pay and assume they can bully other
| passengers into moving. Yeah it sucks you have to pay for
| the privilege, but it's not the other passenger's
| responsibility to handle it for you.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Why would you not get your money back from an airline-initiated
| cancellation? I get giving up on delay compensation - I'm
| currently fighting travel insurance on an 18 hour delay that
| incured a hotel stay - but "we canceled your flight, but we're
| keeping your money" seems like a scenario where the airline
| clearly has no leg to stand on.
|
| Hell, do a credit card chargeback.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| We had flights cancelled -- they gave us a "voucher", not our
| money back.
|
| The voucher apparently expires so we had to use it or lose
| it.
|
| Also, the voucher was only good for the ticketed passengers
| it affected, so we could not use it for one of our daughters,
| for example.
|
| Also, when we did try to use it we were told it was not valid
| for many of the seats/tickets we were trying to book. Where
| it was valid: upgraded (business class or first class)
| flights, flights with several layovers....
|
| Such bullshit.
| jrockway wrote:
| I think you just play the call to complain game there. They
| have to give you like for like; if you bought the flight
| with a voucher that expires, sure, refund it with a voucher
| that expires. But if you bought with cash, they should give
| you cash back.
|
| In my experience (at 800k lifetime miles at this point),
| the squeaky wheel gets the grease. If you're not happy with
| something, call to complain.
| brewdad wrote:
| This. The voucher is always their first offer and they
| will claim it is all they can do. Keep pushing and they
| will refund your money in the same form of payment you
| used but they don't want you to know you have that right.
| TedKroft wrote:
| Yea but you have to commit to spending hours on hold with
| the expectation that they might not cave. I've gone back
| in forth with airlines before only to get nothing, it's
| not worth the time often. There should be some law that
| refunds (and many other business operations) should be
| automatic and can't be gatekept with several layers of
| phone systems, lies about only giving you a restricted
| voucher, and holds of more than X minutes.
| idontpost wrote:
| Zircom wrote:
| I'd imagine this practice of only refunding people that
| spend hours and hours complaining to customer service is
| part of what they're getting fine for in the first place.
| If they're legally obligated to refund you, you shouldn't
| be getting the runaround like that just to get what is
| owed to you.
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| Frontier can be really cheap, I've gotten trips from New
| York to Miami for $39. It's just not worth 4 hours on the
| phone for a $39 refund.
| robohoe wrote:
| Yep. American gave me a voucher that only I could use
| within 12 months.
| Taylor_OD wrote:
| If it was the cheap fare, likely around ~$100 for Spirit,
| then for a lot of folks it might not be worth fighting with
| customer service for the money.
| TuringNYC wrote:
| Depends on how much you make. $100 in college would have
| put me into the red for a month.
| kaycebasques wrote:
| My time, energy, and inner peace is more valuable than the
| loss I've incurred ($300) and the mental anguish of waiting
| for hours to get a customer support person to issue me a
| refund (someone who has probably been instructed to resist
| giving me back my money)
|
| Vowing to never use their business again (so my loss is
| limited to a one-time event) and recommending everyone to do
| the same has worked out pretty well for me --- I can make
| peace with the experience and we slowly weed out these bad
| apples from the world
| bornfreddy wrote:
| Chargeback works wonders.
|
| They have already determined that they don't care if you
| fly with them or not, so why not make sure they don't get
| paid for experience? It is only fair.
| dundercoder wrote:
| This works surprisingly well. At least for Visa. I just
| initiate the chargeback and they sick their dogs on the
| vendor.
| TuringNYC wrote:
| Wouldnt you get banned from the airline in the future?
| jobs_throwaway wrote:
| wouldn't that not matter if you vow to never fly with
| them again?
| jffry wrote:
| Seems like that would have no impact since they've
| already vowed to never fly with that airline again
| anyways
| ticviking wrote:
| If I have already decided I will never fly with them
| again it isn't a big deal.
| brewdad wrote:
| Also, there are potentially plenty of costs that can't be
| recouped when a flight gets canceled. I have an 8 day
| vacation coming up with my lodging and rental car prepaid
| and non-refundable at this point. Delta has already changed
| my flight once in a way that would have cost me two days at
| my destination. I was able to reroute and actually ended up
| with a better schedule than my original flight but if they
| cancel or change it again, I might get my $800 back for the
| plane tickets but could lose thousands on everything else.
| ghaff wrote:
| Large non-cancelable expenses are probably one area where
| travel insurance can make sense. When you can mostly
| unwind things in light of travel disruptions, illness,
| etc. mostly not. (Or, when you can, maybe make refundable
| reservations even if there's something of a premium.)
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Travel insurance can be bizarrely difficult, though. My
| travel delay coverage covers "mechanical" issues but not
| "operational" ones. Plane broke? Covered (if you can get
| the airline to admit it). Pilot couldn't be found? Not
| covered. Why the difference? No one knows!
| partdavid wrote:
| It would be nice to have more consumer advocacy and
| information in this area. I have had two travel insurance
| claims and they were both like butter, I easily recovered
| my extra costs. I stuck with that company, but now their
| COVID rider doesn't seem very good, so I went with
| another for an upcoming strip. Some offer "for any
| reason" upgrades... yeah, it's complicated and not a very
| friendly place to buy products or understand what they
| cover.
| ghaff wrote:
| I rarely buy travel insurance but, last time I did, I
| bought from American Express which seemed more reputable
| than some of the ones that came up in search results.
| germandiago wrote:
| I would be happier if they gave back that money to customers
| directly. If the airlines do not do it, let the govt. do it
| after they pay the fine.
|
| However, what happens is that they put a fine and later they
| spend the money however they decide. It is funny. :)
| MichaelCollins wrote:
| > _major TSA delays._
|
| This infuriates me. Last week I was stuck in line for TSA for
| an hour and a half at Sea-Tac. The TSA clowns had one guy
| looking at the X-rays of luggage at the speed of molasses. Am I
| to believe that the TSA, FAA and airlines can't coordinate to
| determine when gluts of incoming passengers are expected?
| Bullshit. Why didn't they have more TSA workers on shift?
| Because they don't give a shit, nothing in the structure of the
| system gives the TSA an incentive to give a shit and do their
| job well. What do they care if people miss their flights? They
| don't, those smug pieces of shit don't care at all.
|
| They even have signs plastered all over their checkpoint
| threatening you with federal charges and huge fines if you
| "verbally abuse" the TSA workers. In this country it is legal
| for me to call a traffic cop a fascist pig, but I can't say the
| same to a TSA agent? I hate them so much.
| the_only_law wrote:
| Last year I made the mistake of flying up to visit family on
| Christmas Eve. The TSA line wrapped around the entire
| airport. Luckily I made it just barely in time. I was already
| delayed when a nasty accident shit down the interstate and
| added an extra hour to my airport trip.
| TecoAndJix wrote:
| That's what you get for not arriving at the airport six
| hours before your flight /s
| ThunderSizzle wrote:
| Sad thing is that the system constantly says that
| unsarcastically.
|
| Airlines, TSA, and airport messaging constantly remind me
| to be hours early and to anticipate long security lines.
| throwaway2037 wrote:
| Real question / Zero trolling: For your travel situaton,
| is it possible to not fly?
| bluGill wrote:
| I can drive, spending 20 hours on the road, and 2 nights
| in a hotel - each way. Hard to say if that is better or
| worse than flying. The above trip is taken with my family
| so flying is more expensive than gas+hotels. However last
| time I took the trip we missed our connection (weather)
| had to take grey hound there as they couldn't get
| everyone there. Driving is not fun, but at least we can
| be sure to arrive on time.
| ThunderSizzle wrote:
| edit: misread your question
|
| I will go out of my way to not fly, since I've found
| flying (more specifically, the logistics _around_ flying)
| to be a displeasurable experience, and driving is much
| easier and affordable.
| jtsiskin wrote:
| Airports also have an incentive to keep the TSA lines as
| variable as possible.
|
| If the line can sometimes take 5 minutes and sometimes take 2
| hours, you need to arrive 2 hours early. And then if it
| actually takes just 5 minutes - that's 1:55 left for buying
| food and shopping.
| crooked-v wrote:
| It's not TSA, but I was particularly dumbfounded at
| Heathrow Airport when security exited straight into an
| extended shopping corridor of champagne, jewelry, and
| caviar.
| devilbunny wrote:
| It's not quite the same situation as it used to be, but
| this stuff used to be ideally suited to the dual purpose
| of buying gifts to take home and burning all your
| remaining foreign currency.
| pjc50 wrote:
| It strikes me as remarkable that, in a pandemic which killed
| several hundred airliners worth of Americans, a lot of fuss
| was made about mask-related impositions, while TSA-related
| impositions that save a number of lives that's close to zero
| have become entirely normal. All War On Terror and no War On
| Viruses.
| beebmam wrote:
| The problem fundamentally with the mask debate is that
| surgical masks barely make a difference in transmission. If
| we were serious about mask wearing to prevent respiratory
| viral transmission, we would be wearing well-fit N95s like
| 3M Auras, which are virtually impossible to fit improperly
| and are way more comfortable than surgical masks. They are
| also far more effective at preventing airborne/droplet
| viral transmission. This, in my opinion, is one of the
| biggest mistakes the CDC (and other institutions) made, and
| it had dire consequences: millions of people died and a
| majority of Americans lost trust in this institution for
| its poor recommendations.
| throwaway2037 wrote:
| Are you suggesting that _less than_ N95 masks do not
| reduce COVID-19 transmission?
| monksy wrote:
| Yes. Surgicals are not meant for protection against
| airborne contaminants.
| bluGill wrote:
| While that is true, surgicals do provide some protection.
| They cut your risk down significantly when worn
| correctly, though proper N95 (and other similar standards
| meant for airborne contaminants) will reduce risk a lot
| more.
| wjmao88 wrote:
| In the beginning everyone thought COVID is only droplet
| transmission and in that case regular masks work really
| well because it prevents someone carrying the virus from
| spreading dropdlets. It doesn't even have to be very
| tightly fitting because droplets will get attached to the
| fabric. Later there were some evidence that it can become
| aeresol in some high concentration situations like
| hospitals, but for all practical purposes in everyday
| life its droplet.
|
| The problem is not that they are ineffective but that
| people followed them poorly. I've seen countless people
| wearing them super ineffectively like leaving their nose
| completely out, and many people when they wear surgical
| masks they don't bend the metal bar to fit to their nose
| and instead basically have like a canopy instead of a
| mask which of course doesn't do much.
| monksy wrote:
| > Later there were some evidence that it can become
| aeresol in some high concentration situations like
| hospitals, but for all practical purposes in everyday
| life its droplet.
|
| That's not true. There are good studies, followed up with
| full contact tracing in the environment it happened in,
| that show aerosol transmission in everyday situations
| (such as planes and restaurants)
|
| Additionally on the poor fitting masks, triple layer
| surgicals are more effective (not effective enough) when
| double masking (which that situation is surgical first,
| cloth second.. this is the same as using a mask brace to
| ensure a tight fit)
|
| However, the findings from Aaron Collins found that yes,
| they are better with a mask fitter.. but they still fail
| to qualify at the same level as an N95, KN95, or KF94
| level of protection. (Those are the levels of protection
| you require when dealing with airborne based
| contaminants) On top of that it made it more difficult to
| wear.
| bluGill wrote:
| That was later yet. At least in the public mind - some
| leaders who should know better were saying things that
| they should have known were false.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _while TSA-related impositions that save a number of
| lives that 's close to zero_
|
| Are there any good estimates of the total economic costs of
| this security theatre?
| bluGill wrote:
| You can make one yourself: How many hijackings of US
| airlines where there in the 20 years before, and after.
| The number was higher before, but it was very small.
|
| Locking the airplane cockpit door, along with awareness
| that hijackers will kill you (as opposed to fly you to a
| different country and you are free in a couple days if
| you stay quiet) are also factors. I don't know how to
| separate them from anything the TSA does, but I have to
| believe those are both more important.
| pooper wrote:
| I don't know about the cost but the benefit is close to
| zero, if not zero. I am positive that the net benefit
| (because cost is surely positive) is negative accounting
| even for the number of jobs it creates.
|
| > The source did not give an exact number, but said the
| failure rate was close to 80 percent. Members of Congress
| called the results "disturbing" in a public hearing
| following a private, classified briefing to the House
| Committee on Homeland Security.
|
| https://www.usnews.com/news/national-
| news/articles/2017-11-0...
|
| archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20221116171835/ht
| tps://www.usnew... https://archive.ph/hzA1y
| Sylamore wrote:
| I long ago concluded that TSA is mostly a jobs program, not
| a security program.
| newbYhrly wrote:
| I'm not against government jobs programs. Just wish it
| was something useful day to day, like healthcare, versus
| security theater.
| mcronce wrote:
| I'd rather just provide UBI. Pay them to do nothing
| instead of paying them to make everybody else's lives
| worse.
| newbYhrly wrote:
| Who is them?
|
| A UBI is going to normalize condition and make "them" see
| there's even more to participate in.
|
| Sounds like you still prefer maintenance of a steerage
| class, assuming you'll be a bit higher on the totem pole.
| But I mean, real talk is you're still just one of
| billions. How you feel the world as-is is a meaningless
| measure for how you would fit into a UBI world. And I
| have no particular obligation to your sensibilities.
| _shrug emoji_ You're a "them" to me is not an
| unreasonable statement.
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| I think you're overthinking it and "them" here is the TSA
| employees. UBI by definition means everyone.
|
| Also I have no idea what "normalize condition" means?
| newbYhrly wrote:
| Oh I meant something like equality of condition.
| 8note wrote:
| This is payment and structured days, which ensures that
| people have a good reference for applying to other jobs.
|
| It's somewhat better than a UBI
| mcronce wrote:
| It'd be better than UBI _if they weren 't making
| everybody's lives worse in the process_.
| MichaelCollins wrote:
| Or at least something useless but harmless, like smashing
| rocks into gravel with hammers. That would be much better
| than harassing and hassling everybody trying to go on a
| vacation.
| cnelsenmilt wrote:
| People objected to the TSA, but the political climate in
| 2002 was too much in favor of it.
| mullen wrote:
| Everyone is against government security until a bunch of
| guys fly airplanes into buildings.
| pjc50 wrote:
| Sure, but that was then and this is now. I guess it's
| simply not possible to get it back into the "discourse"
| as a thing that should be changed.
| whatwherewhy wrote:
| It's a worldwide thing. EU airport security is even
| stricter and they're not going to let go now.
| martopix wrote:
| The few times I was in the US I definitely did not have
| the feeling that EU is more strict.
| [deleted]
| ghaff wrote:
| Aside from the shoes and scanner thing (absent TSA-Pre)
| in the US, as someone who has traveled a lot in both
| Europe and the US, is seems pretty much a wash. I've had
| silly things like a bladeless corkscrew confiscated in
| Spain but I seem to have the same generally low rate of
| hand inspections etc. (usually related to having a bunch
| of cables/electronics jammed together in a bag) in both
| areas.
| blkhawk wrote:
| Yes so strict that we don't even do the shoe thing or the
| crotch grab thing here.
| stavros wrote:
| While I agree that the US is stricter, the EU has gotten
| strict as well. There are millimeter-wave scanners in
| many airports (usually mandatory with an opt-out pat-
| down, but in some airports you have a chance to just go
| through the metal detectors), sometimes they make you
| take your shoes off, X-raying takes ages. The US is
| stricter only in the sense that the TSA is everywhere all
| the time, whereas in Europe it's only some places some of
| the time. At least in Europe you don't have some
| highschool dropout rifle through your luggage and leave
| your suitcase open, though (that's happened to me in the
| US).
|
| It used to be that you'd go through a metal detector and
| be done with it, and that's still the way it is in, for
| example, Greece. My local airport (second largest in the
| country, but still no SFO) gets you from the entrance to
| the gate in less than ten minutes.
|
| I don't know why we've accepted this bullshit. It's not
| as if some malicious actor couldn't just hit a train or
| bus instead and kill just as many people, yet we accept
| all this hassle and invasion of privacy for exactly zero
| benefit.
| whatwherewhy wrote:
| > At least in Europe you don't have some highschool
| dropout rifle through your luggage and leave your
| suitcase open, though (that's happened to me in the US).
|
| No but the people putting the suitcase - that you had to
| take apart yourself - through the scanner will steal
| things from you - my credit card and powerbank went
| missing during the process this summer.
| stavros wrote:
| What do you mean take apart? When taking your laptop out?
| I just close it again, that limits opportunistic theft by
| a lot (though you're the first person I hear having stuff
| stolen from).
| whatwherewhy wrote:
| Yeah, I took it out, closed the suitcase and send the
| boxes on their way. Then they forced me to open it up
| again and take out my camera, chargers and some cables
| etc too, I guess they took it during this.
| whatwherewhy wrote:
| We don't? So the officers groped me just for fun this
| summer? And my GF's bra had to be undone just for fun
| too?
| MichaelCollins wrote:
| > _So the officers groped me just for fun this summer?
| And my GF 's bra had to be undone just for fun too?_
|
| Probably yes. But for their fun, not yours.
| whatwherewhy wrote:
| They didn't look like they were having fun, tbh. If I had
| to grope 300+ people, some of them really not appealing,
| I wouldn't have fun too.
| Max-q wrote:
| In most European countries this is done by private
| companies and they are really efficient. Rarely waiting
| time is more than 5-10 minutes in.
| felipelemos wrote:
| The airport security in Europe and South America is not
| even close to how it is in USA.
| mcronce wrote:
| My sample size is two - one departing flight each from
| LHR and DUB - but they were _way_ less painful
| experiences than any airport I 've flown out of in the
| US.
| bagels wrote:
| Even if it was in the discourse, nobody wants to be
| blamed as the person who got rid of the TSA when the next
| shoe bomber or whatever pops up.
| jtbayly wrote:
| We must _do_ something!
|
| This is something, I will do it!
|
| Fill in useless mask mandates or shoe removal as you see
| fit.
| Frost1x wrote:
| The problem is we have a culture that often overly
| accepts protectionist and defensive systems and is highly
| averse to any risk what-so-ever. When these sorts of
| systems are put in place, they become far more difficult
| to remove than erect, even if they're shown to be
| ineffective, wasteful, or actually _add_ to risk.
|
| You're not going to see many politicians vote against
| such systems because the second some incident occurs,
| their stance against protectionism will be crucified by
| opponents and gobbled up by the general public. This is
| one reason why the US defense budget continues to
| balloon. Anyone who pushes to reduce spending can easily
| be painted to the masses as someone who doesn't care
| about or want to secure your safety. This dynamic also
| plays into use of fear for power, so those in power drum
| up fears and explode risk in their own interest.
| jtbayly wrote:
| > protectionist and defensive systems and is highly
| averse to any risk what-so-ever
|
| ... like masks.
|
| But seriously, a lot of the same people that objected to
| the TSA madness also objected to the mask mandates.
| bluGill wrote:
| > But seriously, a lot of the same people that objected
| to the TSA madness also objected to the mask mandates.
|
| But this time a lot of people who didn't object to the
| TSA objected to masks.
| insane_dreamer wrote:
| That's the danger with putting measures like this in
| place as a reaction to a shocking event. Once done it's
| nearly impossible to undo (Patriot Act, NSA Surveillance
| Act, etc., are more good examples).
|
| It reminds me of Norway's response to the Utoya massacre.
| IIRC in a speech at the time the gov said they weren't
| going to change their system because of one terrorist. (I
| might be remembering wrong but that's what stuck with
| me.) The US on the other hand took the opportunity to ram
| through as many "security" provisions through as possible
| which are with us to this day and can no longer be
| questioned as to whether they are indeed necessary or
| helpful.
| dfxm12 wrote:
| Someone decided to make masks a partisan issue. TSA enjoys
| pretty much bi-partisan support from politicians.
| tastyfreeze wrote:
| Airport security was much better when it was private security
| not government security. At least privately security had
| alignment with airport customer service. Airports just have
| to deal with TSA BS now.
|
| I like to remind people, especially kids that don't know
| different, that the TSA was imposed on us and air travel used
| to be so much better.
| ThunderSizzle wrote:
| It's actually one of the reasons I'm hesitant at being pro-
| public transit.
|
| Last thing I need is a TSA equivalent pat down for entering
| a bus or metro because the government decided it wants to.
| throwaway2037 wrote:
| Have you ever travelled to and taken mass transit in
| Israel? This is common.
| ThunderSizzle wrote:
| No, I don't live in or have visited Israel, but it's
| obvious why Israel would have such precautions compared
| to many other parts of the world.
| bagels wrote:
| Better in that it was more effective?
| tastyfreeze wrote:
| More cost effective and answered to the business serving
| travelers. TSA answers to nobody and customer service is
| not even a priority. Private security that harassed,
| berated, and abused patrons would not be working private
| security for very long.
|
| You will have to define effective to tell if TSA or
| private security is better. TSA is an effective
| hinderance on travel, jobs program, and public money
| funnel for scanner companies. Private security was more
| effective at scaling security for the risk and trying to
| be a minimal hinderance to travelers.
| [deleted]
| gnarbarian wrote:
| There is little to no incentive for the TSA or FAA to provide
| better service to the public. you can't exactly go with a
| competitor, The best you can do is file a complaint or email
| your congressman. (source 15 years of federal work experience
| for multiple agencies)
| FigurativeVoid wrote:
| I used to work in the same building as the TSA. They were
| some of the rudest people I have ever been around. They would
| smoke in the stairwells and literally anywhere other than the
| smoking areas.
|
| They have the same problem as BMVs, they have literally no
| incentive to improve. There is no competition.
| mcculley wrote:
| And now they are like other bad organizations (e.g., police
| departments that have a history of shooting unarmed people)
| in the respect that nobody wants to be associated with
| them, so they can only recruit from the bottom.
| FigurativeVoid wrote:
| They also don't get paid when we have budget legislation.
| Who would want to work in a place like that?
| banannaise wrote:
| Paying more for a job already designed to attract
| terrible people will still attract the same terrible
| people, it will just make them richer. Again, see police
| departments.
|
| You can see a different sort of example in teaching:
| teachers put up with terrible pay for a long time, but
| now they're quitting in droves because of terrible work
| conditions and lack of emotional fulfillment.
|
| You have to change the nature of the job from something
| designed around theater and blustering to something
| actually useful. The pay is never the problem, it's that
| the jobs are bullshit. Although once the jobs are no
| longer bullshit, we should probably pay them better.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| > threatening you with federal charges and huge fines if you
| "verbally abuse" the TSA workers
|
| It's probably unconstitutional, but no one has tested it in
| court yet as far as I'm aware.
| phone8675309 wrote:
| I don't think anyone wants to be detained by the TSA and
| put on the no-fly list to call a TSA agent a fascist
| MichaelCollins wrote:
| I expect they would detain you, force you to miss your
| flight, but not actually fine you. Without actually
| charging you with anything despite the threats, they
| avoid having their bullshit rule challenged in court.
| Karunamon wrote:
| If I ever come into possession of fuck you money, I
| intend to set up an organization whose mission is to buy
| cheap plane tickets that people are not intended to fly
| on, and then pay and instruct people on how to screw with
| the TSA completely legally.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| It would probably be more effective to fund a few
| senators and congress people on the condition that they
| amend the The Aviation and Transportation Security Act.
| 1024core wrote:
| > Am I to believe that the TSA, FAA and airlines can't
| coordinate to determine when gluts of incoming passengers are
| expected?
|
| Same with the Customs and Immigration Services (the passport
| checkers) at SFO. I have seen lines going out to the walkway
| (leading into the big room). I can't even imagine traveling
| with a couple of little children; there's no restroom in that
| big hall.
|
| By law, these people get full passenger manifests, arrival
| times, etc. before the flight even lands. They know, down to
| the passenger, everyone's status, nationality, etc.
|
| AND STILL THEY ARE OFTEN SHORTHANDED!
|
| This is the reception we give to visitors to the country.
| SMH...
| ISL wrote:
| Perhaps they're trying to hire, but either the labor market
| is tight or they're not able to offer enough to get people
| to take the job.
|
| GP's desire to berate TSA agents, for example, suggests
| that job-satisfaction might not be real high.
| tastyfreeze wrote:
| My friend that worked TSA for a few years said it was the
| worst job he has ever had.
| nradov wrote:
| It's tough to live near SFO on a Customs and Border
| Protection salary. I'm not surprised they have trouble with
| staffing.
| sagarm wrote:
| SFO's airport security is actually run by a private firm:
|
| https://www.flysfo.com/about/airport-operations/safety-
| secur...
| nradov wrote:
| The parent comment by @1024core was about passport
| control, not security screening. All passport checks at
| SFO are performed by government employees.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Outside the USA, especially at smaller airports, xraying all
| the bags is something thats only done to meet the rules. The
| staff don't care what you have in your bag - if security has
| a queue, they'll just pick 100 random people and tell them to
| skip security and go straight through to departures.
|
| Likewise, if there is only 2 people on duty to search bags
| identified that need searching, and they're busy, then any
| liquids etc. in other bags will be 'not noticed' so as to not
| overload the people searching bags and cause queues.
|
| Such things make me always deliberately choose small airports
| - they're just so efficient compared to airports where
| security theater is done 'properly'.
| dfxm12 wrote:
| _xraying all the bags is something thats only done to meet
| the rules. The staff don 't care what you have in your bag_
|
| I wish this was true.
|
| In Spain recently something in my bag tripped the Xray
| alarm. I had to unpack my bag and take "something metal"
| out for inspection. It turned out it was an empty food
| packaging with a shiny foil bit on the side. Over all, it's
| not so big a deal, but they certainly cared about it.
| bluGill wrote:
| Spain has had an actual terrorism problem in recent
| years, so they are likely to have better standards. Other
| EU countries don't really have that problem and so will
| have less strict standards. there are different standards
| for flying into Spain than other countries (or at least
| there were last time I flew to Spain, but that has been a
| long time)
| throwaway290 wrote:
| Never seen anything like it anywhere. This might be a
| European thing?
| bagels wrote:
| Domestic flights in New Zealand are incredible. Single
| X-Ray machine, toss your bag on the conveyor, and it goes
| through just as fast as you can walk to the other side. No
| body scanners, no metal detectors.
| spoils19 wrote:
| The security 'theater' is what we pay for a high level of
| freedom in the US, especially in conservative states. You
| may reach the end of the queue faster, but what if
| there's a bad guy with a gun there? Where will the good
| guys be?
| techdmn wrote:
| Presumably standing around outside, waiting for the SWAT
| team, and not letting anyone else enter the building. How
| the Uvalde PD didn't all get charged with aiding and
| abetting is beyond me.
| wellareyousure wrote:
| Southwest also advertises many more flights than it plans to
| actually fly. Like if there's no penalty for a less than 2 hour
| adjustment, why not advertise flights every hour, and then
| regroup people day of? Or send them to Oakland instead of San
| Francisco, day of?
| infotogivenm wrote:
| Probably flight crew resourcing issues. Incredibly common on
| all airlines lately unfortunately, this year I've had it happen
| on American (twice!) and United, but surprisingly not Frontier
| yet. United at least let me know _before_ I went to the
| airport.
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-11-16 23:02 UTC)