Will Airlines ever say enough of this crap?

[Jaydee]

 

American Airlines sued by man 'cramped' by obese passengers

 

http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2017/05/05/american-airlines-sued-by-man-cramped-by-obese-passengers.html

[Kip Powick]

Wait until a couple of these get on WestJet ULCC

 

"......cramped' by obese passengers....."

[Seeker]

It's funny that you never hear people complaining about their meal from MacDonalds - lots of customers and the food meets the basic criteria to be called "food" but it's not high quality.  Airline passengers will spend hours searching various websites to find the lowest cost ticket they can find and then complain about the seat pitch, not having a meal, the guy beside me is too fat, the flight is too early in the morning, the flight is too late at night, I don't get a free bag, I didn't get to pick my seat, etc, etc.

[Wolfhunter]

19 minutes ago, seeker said:

It's funny that you never hear people complaining about their meal from MacDonalds ...

If MacDonalds only produced 14 Happy meals and 132 Big Macs every 4.5 hours and sold each of them to multiple customers (at a time) I think it might cause a stir.

[Seeker]

6 minutes ago, Wolfhunter said:

If MacDonalds only produced 14 Happy meals and 132 Big Macs every 4.5 hours and sold each of them to multiple customers (at a time) I think it might cause a stir.

You seem to have a real burr up your a55 with the whole overbooking issue.  This is like the 4th reference to it in the last 24 hours, or so it seems - seek counseling.

[Wolfhunter]

19 minutes ago, seeker said:

... seek counseling.

During my brief 5 year foray into the airline world I admit that I never gave the whole fare structure thing a lot of thought. Not sure, but I suspect that might be true of a lot of pilots (non MBA ones anyway). The more I think about it though, and, more to the point, the more I hear industry insiders try to defend it, with the same sarcastic self-righteous tone you captured above,  the more I tend to side with the pax. 

If someone prepays for a non refundable, non transferable seat, and paid a premium for the privilege of picking that very seat, is it unreasonable for them to assume it actually exists in the first place? Are you a vegetarian or does it bother you to know that Defcon is eating your steak?

[Seeker]

24 minutes ago, Wolfhunter said:

During my brief 5 year foray into the airline world I admit that I never gave the whole fare structure thing a lot of thought. Not sure, but I suspect that might be true of a lot of pilots (non MBA ones anyway). The more I think about it though, and, more to the point, the more I hear industry insiders try to defend it, with the same sarcastic self-righteous tone you captured above,  the more I tend to side with the pax. 

If someone prepays for a non refundable, non transferable seat, and paid a premium for the privilege of picking that very seat, is it unreasonable for them to assume it actually exists in the first place? Are you a vegetarian or does it bother you to know that Defcon is eating your steak?

#5 and #6.  There's a couple of problems with your rationale.  First of all the tickets often are refundable and transferable.  Now, the next thing you're going to say is that we should make all tickets nonrefundable and nontransferable - the passengers picks a flight and pays their money, be on the flight or lose your money!  Sure, sounds good on paper, how are you going to handle the flat tire on the way to the airport, the kid who gets sick and has to travel the next day, the university student who has their final exam delayed a day? 

The system has evolved in a certain way because it's actually the best system for the most people.  The people who set the parameters are extremely good at setting the numbers of seats that are overbooked.  Rarely does anyone get involuntarily denied.  Yeah, I know the media would have you believing it happens all day every day but actually it doesn't.  The ability to overbook has the net benefit of allowing more generous/lenient cancellation and rebooking policies for the passengers and lower fares.  So 1 out of 10,000 (I have no idea what the actual number is) gets involuntarily denied but the other 9999 get a lower fare.

[Wolfhunter]

According to numerology, #5 and #6 are not romantically compatible. My sister in law became a vegetarian and it made her cranky too. Apologies to Defcon, I though it was funny at the time. Back to hunting wolves.

[boestar]

Face the fact that roughly 10% of the passengers do not show up for their flight for one reason or another

 

[Guest]

13 hours ago, boestar said:

Face the fact that roughly 10% of the passengers do not show up for their flight for one reason or another

 

Then there should be a use it or lose it for noshows.  But of course that would never "fly". 

[Vsplat]

I think we will all be long retired, or worse, before this story line is.

Rant alert.

The trouble I see is that it is not one thing alone, it is a culture of so many interwoven factors that improvements are elusive.

For example.  Overbooking.  Why is this done?  Because margins are so thin that flying with empty seats often means losing money on the route.  Why not charge more so you can be sustainably profitable with 10% open seats?  We know why, because your passengers will simply abandon you for the competitor who charges 10% less - and overbooks.

How about charge the same money and adjust cost structures so you can fly with 10% open seats and be profitable?  The holy grail.  The problem is, see #1.  As soon as someone figures out how to do it cheaper, they don't fly with open seats, they just continue to overbook and bank the extra 10% proflt. Or worse, increase their cost structure, dividends, whatever so that they now consume the savings on the spot. 

As for obese passengers.  I've been in the middle row between two individual, both requiring seat extensions, both requesting that the armrests be raised for their comfort, then doing the typical leg splay such that their knees would have been touching in front of me if they were not crushing my legs between them.   Neither fellow seemed to care about body space, armrest or no, I was simply gonna get squished and pushed whenever either moved an arm or anything else. I had to move or deplane. it was a 6 hour flight ahead and there was no way,

No one wants to be disadvantaged, and it seems that more and more travellers identify themselves as part of a special interest group that they feel gives them preferential consideration over others.  This creates a new disadvantaged group, those that require no special accommodations, so get no accommodation at all.

I think it is long past time for frank discussions.  You don't like the seat pitch or width, then don't buy the fare.  You don't want to have the risk of gate seat assignment, ditto.  You want to pay 50% of the going rate by travelling in a high density cabin, then understand your 60 kg roll aboard is not rolling aboard with you. 

I fully get that some of the passengers that have been displaced lately did pay a full fare, we can assume for argument sake that they had all of the protections promised but denied.  Being punted off an airplane in those circumstances is wrong, unfair and should be illegal. I fully agree, airlines can and should be held accountable for denying the product they sold to their customers, but this is not a one way problem, and it sure as heck is not going to be a one way solution. And given that these policies are almost all driven by passenger expectations set by chasing a price point, the solution is going to wait until passengers learn that you can't fly for less than a bus ticket and expect something more.

Sorry for the rant....

Vs

[Guest]

Vsplat, your rant does not read like a rant, it reads like common sense......  Great post.

[Wolfhunter]

Agreed...

[Innuendo]

16 hours ago, boestar said:

Face the fact that roughly 10% of the passengers do not show up for their flight for one reason or another

Unless I am trying to travel that flight on a pass of course. 

(Sorry, a bit obvious but I couldn't pass it up.)

[av8tor]

5 hours ago, Vsplat said:

The trouble I see is that it is not one thing alone, it is a culture of so many interwoven factors that improvements are elusive.

I agree. But I believe a place to start is with the airlines taking responsibility and being more proactive when it comes to overbooking. They know how many seats are on an aircraft and they know when they have sold the "last" seat. Overbooking implies, and in reality is, selling a product that is sold out - for which an argument could be made that this constitutes a form of misrepresentation. Having said that, I understand "no shows", the myriad number of legitimate reasons for those no shows, and the airlines' necessity to mitigate the impact of those no-shows.

From the passenger's point of view, the issue is: who gets bumped in an oversell situation? As I wrote in a previous thread: "someone who books 24 hours before departure using one of those 'refundable fares' for which they have paid a 'hefty premium for that privilege' should not bump a passenger who made their plans and booked their flight possibly months previously."

It is the airline that oversells the flight, it is the airline that decides who gets bumped and thus it is the airlines' problem to solve. If they don't solve the problem of their own volition then I suspect that eventually, public complaint will force regulatory authorities to step in and solve the problem for them - a resolution that might not sit well in the boardroom. 

[Super 80]

36 minutes ago, av8tor said:

If they don't solve the problem of their own volition then I suspect that eventually, public complaint will force regulatory authorities to step in and solve the problem for them - a resolution that might not sit well in the boardroom.

You can only blame the market and the consumer so much when you're delivering an unacceptable level of service. A child wishing to subsist on a diet of pop tarts and corndogs doesn't remove the responsibilities of the parent.

As far as I am concerned the airline industry has spent the last decade lobbying for heavy-handed regulation of customer service and the passenger experience and when that day comes the CEOs will just have to ask themselves if it was worth it.

They are not just going to regulate IDB situations, they're going to establish a minimum standard of service that is probably not going to be set Rouge or Spirit as the baseline. And when that day comes, please remember to blame your own management first because they spent a solid decade poking the sleeping bear of regulation.

[Seeker]

Jeeeze, when did the AEF merge with the CBC?  I thought the people who visit and post 'round here had some ability to see nuance.  For those predicting/hoping for regulation I say be careful what you wish for because you might get it.  Take a look at the tarmac delay program in the USA; the slightest whiff of a storm and everything gets cancelled.  You can visit EWR on a standard winter's day with a bit a snow forecast and it looks like a ghost town.  In the old days airlines would keep trying and there'd be delays but maybe 30-50% of the passengers would get to destination the same day but now the threat of having to deal the new regulations it's best just to cancel the majority of flights.  Wanna legislate against overbooking - fine, but everyone will be worse off.  They won't know it but the loss of the ability to overbook would be a big loss for the consumer.

[Super 80]

I don't wish for it by any means, but I will happily point and laugh at the responsible decision makers who will have squandered the light-touch regulation environment thought their own arrogance and stupidity when the feds are showing up with tape measures.

The oil industry had to learn this the hard way, you can't operate in tone deaf indifference to the outside world for very long before the government will make your life miserable.

[Fido]

Bring back in big time regulation and airfares will rise.

Then fewer people will buy tickets.

Then there is not a need for so many flights.

Then the airlines need fewer pilots, flight attendants, service people and mechanics.

[Vsplat]

av8tor, you make an interesting point about the "last' seat. 

Maybe if this is truly an issue of managing expectations, airlines who overbook, and wish to continue to do so, say for routes with high no-show factors, should (and technically have the data already to) advise customers when the seat they are looking at is an oversell, along with some sort of indicator, based on historical experience or other measure (pick one) that gives some sense of the probability of getting bumped. 

Of course, such a stat would be a ready weapon in the hands of any regulator.  Once the probability of getting bumped passed some agreed on level, a regulator could simply say, 'stop overselling to that level'.

Just a Sunday musing as dinner cooks.  For those in the business lucky enough to be with family today and not some far flung hotel, Best wishes for the evening!

Vs

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Fido said:

Bring back in big time regulation and airfares will rise.

Then fewer people will buy tickets.

Then there is not a need for so many flights.

Then the airlines need fewer pilots, flight attendants, service people and mechanics.

Re fewer pilots, since there is talk about a pilot shortage, would that be all bad? (tongue firmly in cheek)

[Seeker]

Actually we all might be better off with less air travel.  Wasteful and harms the environment, causes too much stress on a personal level.  Given the option to go back to a more civilized state I might just take it depending on the day.  Where's Mitch when we need him? 

[better4me]

2 hours ago, seeker said:

.....For those predicting/hoping for regulation I say be careful what you wish for because you might get it.  Take a look at the tarmac delay program in the USA; the slightest whiff of a storm and everything gets cancelled.  You can visit EWR on a standard winter's day with a bit a snow forecast and it looks like a ghost town.  In the old days airlines would keep trying and there'd be delays but maybe 30-50% of the passengers would get to destination the same day but now the threat of having to deal the new regulations it's best just to cancel the majority of flights.  Wanna legislate against overbooking - fine, but everyone will be worse off.  They won't know it but the loss of the ability to overbook would be a big loss for the consumer.

One place where the regulation environment is well understood is the Canadian Transportation Agency. I had the opportunity to attend a luncheon with the CEO of the CTA as the speaker. I came away with a much deeper appreciation for the work done by the CTA and Transport Canada. 

Some things are completely off the table, Tarmac delay program and EU flight Compensation Regulation 261/2004 are two such regulations that cannot be implemented in Canada.

The CTA has seen what results when the Tarmac Delay program, the previously mentioned mass cancellation of flights. It was noted at the Luncheon the Tarmac Delay program was instituted in response to short term weather events (thunderstorms) that are moderately complex to recover from. The Tarmac Delay program also has an off ramp provision in that the FAA or NTSB does not have to impose a fine. So a thunderstorm will get a fine but an ice storm might not. 

With regard to EU 261/2004; the EU has a purpose built off ramp in the form of industrial action does not warrant compensation. The CTA postulated that weather issues are Canada's version of industrial action. Further, the air Industry in Europe can mitigate compensation losses by using the train system. A similar form of alternate transportation does not exist in Canada. Finally, Europe has much larger per capita number of hotel rooms that can be used to accommodate displaced passengers. 

What I have heard from the CTA, the incoming new regulations will enshrine the current tariff rules into a passengers bill of rights. So if current IDB compensation is a max $800 in both the WS and AC tariff, this will be the limit in the new Passengers Bill of Rights, alternately there might be a small bump in IDB compensation so that the Transport Minister can say the new regulations address current concerns.

I will speculate that the current furor over UA3411 and the recent DL OGG situation (plus the CBC constant stories about rough winter air travel) have hindered the current timeline for Passenger Bill of Rights legislation. Garneau will not want to introduce the Bill of rights with a $1000 IDB limit when the CEO of UA is offering a limit of $10,000. 

[Seeker]

better4me;  Good info, thanks for posting.

I didn't know much about the EU compensation until you posted the official number/name and I looked it up.  This explains something that happened to me a few weeks ago.

I was standing near a gate in YYZ, in uniform, waiting for the inbound flight.  As I am wont to do I was making idle chitchat with my pax.  The inbound was delayed (due to the runway work being done) and therefore the flight I was to do was also delayed by about 45 minutes.  Out of the corner of my eye I saw a squarish middle aged woman closing rapidly;

Her (stepping right into my space):  I want my compensation (pronounced German accent).

Me:  I'm sorry, what compensation?

Her: My compensation.  I'm entitled to compensation.  Or a refund.

Me:  Compensation for what?

Her: For the delay.

Me: It's less than an hour and it's due to an airport issue.

Her: In Europe we are entitled to compensation for any delay - it's the LAW!

Me:  Ahhh, well, I don't deal with compensation issues.  Perhaps you could speak with the agent (as I indicate the agent standing behind the counter) and make my getaway.

[better4me]

3 hours ago, av8tor said:

I agree. But I believe a place to start is with the airlines taking responsibility and being more proactive when it comes to overbooking. They know how many seats are on an aircraft and they know when they have sold the "last" seat. Overbooking implies, and in reality is, selling a product that is sold out - for which an argument could be made that this constitutes a form of misrepresentation. Having said that, I understand "no shows", the myriad number of legitimate reasons for those no shows, and the airlines' necessity to mitigate the impact of those no-shows.

From the passenger's point of view, the issue is: who gets bumped in an oversell situation? As I wrote in a previous thread: "someone who books 24 hours before departure using one of those 'refundable fares' for which they have paid a 'hefty premium for that privilege' should not bump a passenger who made their plans and booked their flight possibly months previously."

It is the airline that oversells the flight, it is the airline that decides who gets bumped and thus it is the airlines' problem to solve. If they don't solve the problem of their own volition then I suspect that eventually, public complaint will force regulatory authorities to step in and solve the problem for them - a resolution that might not sit well in the boardroom.

Regarding the issue of who gets bumped, the last person to purchase a ticket or the passenger who paid the least. Here is my story. 

Late September 2015 and I was working as the CFO of a medical software company. I was selling a division that made 250k revenue per year for 750k profit. We hit a snag in closing the deal. To resolve I had to go to NYC during the United Nations General Assembly for a 2 hour meeting and to negotiate an escrow agreement. I had four days to get to NYC. Flights were booked and hotels were impossible to find. 

For this trip the airfare was $2,500 (paid J) and the hotel was over $700.  Instead I worked out a deal to go YYC-IAH-RSW-EWR for $1,300 paid J. Overnight at the EWR Marriott for $300. The payback was I got to return EWR-IAH-DEN stop DEN-PDX-YYC and the President was okay with having his CFO on email (WIFI) for the three days. Truth is my budget was unlimited.

My point, the selection of airline was not based on price but based on the airline that could get me to NYC guaranteed. I didn't fly the local YYC airline because there was chance that a cancelled nonstop would kill the whole corporate negotiations. So I fly the local ORD airline on a route that offered numerous (there are about 500 daily flights to EWR) reaccomodation options. I don't know if another person got IDB because of my last seat. 

Another point, the traveler who purchases the last seat might be worth more to society (in terms of economic output) than the person who is currently getting IDB.