←back to thread

663 points duxup | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.64s | source
Show context
eadmund ◴[] No.45359858[source]
> [Elimination of] Automatic Refunds for Cancellations

Does this mean when the passenger cancels or when the airline cancels? If it’s when the passenger chooses to cancel, this seems fine and fair: he paid for a flight; he chose not to take it. If it’s the latter, then it seems very unfair.

> Transparency of Fees

This seems patently unfair. Folks should know what they’re going to be paying ahead of time.

> Family Seating Guarantees

On the one hand, this seems fair. If you want to sit together, pay for that privilege. It doesn’t make sense to tax every other passenger for it. OTOH, families are a net benefit to society, so maybe it’s right for everyone else to pitch in a bit. Also, nothing is worse than the folks who didn’t pay up ahead of time who bug one, ‘may we switch seats so we can sit together?’ So perhaps free family seating makes life easier for everyone.

> [Elimination of] Accessibility Protections for Disabled Passengers

I wonder what that actually means. It could be fair (for example, folks too large for one seat purchasing two) or unfair.

replies(18): >>45359959 #>>45359963 #>>45359981 #>>45359994 #>>45360024 #>>45360055 #>>45360094 #>>45360106 #>>45360155 #>>45360160 #>>45360223 #>>45360555 #>>45360614 #>>45360663 #>>45360939 #>>45360970 #>>45360997 #>>45361708 #
cls59 ◴[] No.45359994[source]
> It doesn’t make sense to tax every other passenger for it.

I'd rather pay a monetary tax on my ticket to keep families organized together instead of the discomfort tax of sharing a row with parent+child that has been unexpectedly split up from their partner and is now trying to manage the child's behavior for the duration of the flight without the benefit of teamwork.

replies(2): >>45360144 #>>45360631 #
hedora ◴[] No.45360144[source]
They don’t guarantee both parents are with the kid. They only guarantee that at least one parent is next to each (very young) child.

This presumably would mean you’d be feeding a random kid a bottle on long flights. God knows how they’d accommodate breastfeeding.

replies(1): >>45360238 #
the_sleaze_ ◴[] No.45360238[source]
You are suddenly shaken awake from your restless, fractured sleep. A woman with a look of bright concern implores "Sir your son is watching porn!" "Huh?" She gestures to your right towards the 11 year old boy seated there. "That's not my son"
replies(1): >>45360858 #
1. 8organicbits ◴[] No.45360858[source]
Remember, children as young as five can fly with out a parent/guardian (in the US, per AA website). So that could happen without change to regulations.
replies(2): >>45361233 #>>45373291 #
2. HWR_14 ◴[] No.45361233[source]
The crew is aware of all the unaccompanied minors on a flight.
replies(1): >>45364893 #
3. 8organicbits ◴[] No.45364893[source]
Is that a meaningful distinction, though? "Aware of" != "Actively supervising". I guess it's easier to page a flight attendant than find a parent seated elsewhere, but neither can provide active supervision.
4. hedora ◴[] No.45373291[source]
The protection they’re stripping is for younger kids than that.