←back to thread

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

(www.travelandtourworld.com)
663 points duxup | 3 comments | 24 Sep 25 12:30 UTC | HN request time: 0.023s | source
Show context
Zak ◴[24 Sep 25 14:54 UTC] No.45361273[source]▶
I've had four overnight delays on three transatlantic trips this year. Fortunately, EU passenger compensation rules applied to three of them; the airline must pay each delayed passenger 600€ or convince them to take a more compelling non-cash offer.

I'm not for heavily regulating non-safety details of how most industries do business, but I do think it's fair to demand the true price up front and compensation when the airline doesn't provide the service it sold for reasons within its control.

replies(5): >>45365125 #>>45365176 #>>45365287 #>>45368649 #>>45369271 #
1. Braxton1980 ◴[25 Sep 25 04:27 UTC] No.45369271[source]▶
>I'm not for heavily regulating non-safety details of how most industries do business, but I do think it's fair to demand the true price up front and compensation when the airline doesn't provide the service it sold for reasons within its control.

Why the exception for this then? There are many situations where regulations could protect consumers and I don't understand why you have the general view against non-safety regulations.

replies(1): >>45378322 #
2. Zak ◴[25 Sep 25 20:11 UTC] No.45378322[source]▶
There are several factors that make this situation especially suitable for regulation.

The most important is that airlines have the ability and motivation to force passengers to accept unfavorable terms, and passengers have no ability to negotiate more favorable terms. Many routes are only served by one airline, so there isn't even competitive pressure in those cases. There's also a financial incentive for airlines to mistreat customers, e.g. by overbooking flights, canceling underbooked flights, and delaying non-mandatory maintenance until the cheapest or most convenient time.

replies(1): >>45380306 #
3. Braxton1980 ◴[25 Sep 25 22:52 UTC] No.45380306[source]▶
The limited availability of choice makes sense for regulation but I will say most of the other reasons exist with most other companies.

I believe in regulation for the market to protect consumers for all products and services.