Airlines: Take the poor off the plane

by Tom Johansmeyer on

My recent post on passenger rudeness and airline employee customer service generated a considerable amount of discussion. What really struck me was the number of readers who cited the overlapping factors of deregulation, lower fares and increasingly crowded flights. Basically, because flights are cheaper, more people can afford them, and service levels can’t be sustained in light of both increased passenger traffic and ostensibly lower revenue per available seat mile.

So, it seems to me the solution to fear and loathing in the skies is to boot the poor – to make air travel unaffordable. In doing so, you reclaim the regulated-industry experience that everyone seemed to enjoy, whether or not regulation itself is actually necessary.

What I’ve learned from many readers – and airline industry employees – is that we need to return to the days of getting dressed up to fly, dignified behavior and a higher cost for better service. Translation: we need the “right” people in seats … even in coach. And that means setting up financial barriers to entry. If we restrict travel to the elite, the experience, I seem to be hearing, would be far better.Make no mistake about it: every complaint about the impact of low fares on the industry, especially when compared to the days of airline regulation, is a tacit admission that a specific group of people should be excluded from air travel based on disposable income. Of course, any price does this, as you need to have the funds available to purchase an item that’s for sale, but the notion that air travel is too cheap implies that, like an upscale restaurant, it should be inherently exclusive.

With higher fares, limiting air travel only to those who could afford it, fewer people would experience different parts of the country or the world. Some currently flying would have to turn to cars or buses instead. It’s easy to see how these travel experiences, without access to flights, could turn ugly quickly. The flights themselves, however, would be far better, comprised only of passengers with the means to purchase higher-priced tickets.

I, frankly, have no stance on whether air travel should exclude large portions of the proletariat. Rather, I support pricing that is driven by an efficient market (which also means that I’m not a fan of regulation). Yet, I do see the implications of what some would consider to be “appropriate” fares – rather than the cheap stuff we encounter out in the market now – as turning the airlines into a transportation equivalent to a private club.

Is this what people intend through their lamentations about flight pricing?

So, we can solve the customer service problem, it seems, by taking the poor – and perhaps the lower middle class – out of the equation. Those left will have to pay a bit more, but at least they’ll be surrounded by “desirable” travelers. The rest of us? Well, we’ll have plenty of leg room at home, I suspect.

[photo by stevendepolo via Flickr]

Hidden airline fees under attack, industry pushing back

by Tom Johansmeyer on

It isn’t so much the airline fees that are being targeted these days: it’s the extent to which they are hidden. Three advocacy groups are pushing for airlines to do a better job of disclosing how they’ll nail passengers for extra cash. So, a battle of paper is emerging. On one side, advocates are pushing a petition to get airlines to open the kimono a bit more. And on the other, airlines are looking to protect the paper they’re stacking from ancillary fees.

The stakes are high: last year, the airline industry pulled in a whopping $8 billion for extra charges. They stand to do even more this year, thanks to a recovering travel market.

The American Society of Travel Agents, Business Travel Coalition and Consumer Travel Alliance are getting together to push for fee transparency and to “allow travel booking companies access to fee schedules, making comparisons easier among airlines by third parties.”
According to the Dallas Morning News:

Travelers “are tired of arriving at the airport and finding huge unexpected costs for travel services they thought were part of the ticket price,” said Kevin Mitchell of the Business Travel Coalition, which lobbies for corporate travelers. “It’s time for consumers, corporate travel managers and travel agents to stand up and say, ‘We’re not going to take it anymore!’ “

Meanwhile, the airline industry is marking its territory:

“We remain confident that the level of transparency that some opine doesn’t exist, in fact, does exist,” said Air Transport Association spokesman David Castelveter, who points out that coverage of airline fees has become ubiquitous and that even casual travelers are likely aware of fees. “I went to the websites of all our members, and there isn’t one of our carriers that didn’t have bag fees prominently displayed when you book.”

The goal is to drop the petitions to the Department of Transportation on September 23, 2010.

[photo by williamcho via Flickr]

Five business travel factors for Obama and the midterm elections

by Tom Johansmeyer on

Leisure travel is irrelevant during the election season, but the woes of business travelers seem to resonate. With the midterm contests two months away, all eyes are on the White House … and President Obama‘s success rate with road, rail and runway repair.

This is the one time business travelers make the presidential agenda, according to Portfolio.com: “Presidents (or people campaigning for any office) only talk about business-travel infrastructure during election season. Our issues almost never seem to rate presidential attention at any other time in the cycle.”

Well, let’s take a look at what Obama’s done for the white collar travel crowd. Here are five business traveler issues that could attract some attention in November:1. Secretary of Transportation appointed: With passengers’ rights considered and a solution implemented (and one that seems to be working), Ray LaHood seems to have been a savvy secretary. And, airlines have been slapped with some hefty fines, proving that they need to take responsibility for their actions.

2. Not so much at the TSA, though: While Portfolio.com gives Obama high marks on behalf of business travelers for LaHood, it’s a little tougher on his choice for top dog of the TSA. The president waited a year to tap someone for the job, suffered through Senate procedural tricks and eventually had to go with his third nominee.

3. Security is solid: The system is relatively safe, Portfolio.com opines, but expect some rancor over the body scans that are set to be implemented, as “the TSA is about to ratchet up the security kabuki at airport checkpoints.”

4. Travel consumer rights on the rise: It took 47 passengers getting stuck overnight on a Minnesota runway, but passengers finally got some rights. The airline industry warned of (self-servingly) of unintended consequences … which have yet to materialize. The Obama administration has airline fee structures on the agenda now.

5. Merger-mania managed: Despite the fact that the “balancing act is tricky,” the administration has done a decent job of facilitating healthy competition without impeding too much of the urge to merge.

[photo by jurvetson via Flickr]

Five reasons flight attendants should become Wal-Mart greeters

by Tom Johansmeyer on

Flight attendant complaints about compensation are not unusual, but they’ve certainly gained momentum with the recent admission of food stamp use by one. Sure, it’s a low-paying gig – the average income of $35,000 isn’t what newbies to the friendly skies are pulling down. Some make less than $20,000 a year, which is tough in just about any part of the country. The work isn’t easy, especially for the thin comp. So, it does make me wonder why more haven’t quit and picked up easier jobs for the same pay.

Maybe it makes more sense to become a greeter at Wal-Mart? If the pay is comparable and the life isn’t as hard, why not?

Based on federal minimum wage of $7.25 and the 70-hour work week I’ve heard flight attendants claim, that comes to $507.50 a week and $25,375 a year. This assumes two weeks off unpaid (for mental health) and no overtime, since the work may have to be split across two Wal-Mart locations, because of shift availability.

How do the two gigs stack up? Well, becoming a greeter might just be the perfect alternative to pushing the beverage cart.1. The financials
While a 70-hour work week at Wal-Mart, at $25,375 (with no overtime pay), does fall short of the $35,000 or so average flight attendant compensation, it does stack up against starting pay at some carriers reasonably well. And let’s face it: you can’t expect to start at the top, right? Now if you build in some time-and-a-half, you’re looking at $39,875 in greeter pay at minimum wage. My advice: flight attendants choosing this route should opt for a Wal-Mart location that is short-staffed.

2. No prolonged customer exposure
While a flight attendant can be trapped working on a plane for hours with the same loathsome people, the greeter only deals with customers on the way in and may notice them on the way out. The interaction is fleeting, making it difficult to become annoyed by the personality types that can stand out in the cabin three hours into a trans-Atlantic flight.

3. Still responsible for safety
As any soldier will tell you, it’s tough to move from a job where people’s lives are on the line to one in which what is considered a high priority doesn’t involve the risk of fatality. I’m sure this is an issue for flight attendants, as well. The good news is that Wal-Mart greeters can see their share of life-or-death action, especially when there’s a big sale. Think back to the 2008 Black Friday death at the Wal-Mart in Queens if you need proof. Also, there’s always a chance one of the “people of Wal-Mart” will have a heart attack before making it through the door. Time to spring into action!

4. No union nightmares
Flight attendants who lament insufficient union protection won’t have to worry about that at Wal-Mart, which isn’t exactly friendly to organized labor. If you think something of value is lost in this arrangement, look back to point #1 above. Flight attendants looking to trade one polyester uniform for another will get by just fine with federal minimum wage protection.

5. Nobody’s griping for an upgrade
Why not? Well, I have no idea how you could possibly be upgraded in any Wal-Mart transaction. So, you can be sure the usual collection of white-collar business travelers won’t be bothering you at the door for priority of entry or a better shopping cart.

What can flight attendants in Manhattan do? Wal-Mart is conspicuously absent from this borough, making it one of the few places in the country that isn’t home to one of this American institution’s stores. Well, there are countless Starbucks locations, and they’ll even teach you how to make a latte!

[photo by FaceMePLS via Flickr]

Some flight attendants worse than drunk passengers says survey

by Tom Johansmeyer on

“Surly demeanor” is what bugs passengers most about flight attendants, confirming any suspicion anyone’s ever had about customer service in the airline industry. More than 5,100 readers weighed in on a USA Today survey, with 38 percent saying that attitude was the worst part of dealing with flight attendants.

What else can’t we stand about flight attendants? According to USA Today, 21 percent of respondents can’t stand flight attendants “gabbing together in the back”, with 20 percent irritated when they won’t deal with “unruly passengers.” Twelve percent of passengers are annoyed by the “schoolmarm attitude” and 9 percent by drink and food service that isn’t fast enough. I suspect the 9 percent result would have been higher if so many amenities hadn’t been cut during the recession … which has effectively eased the workload.

The results were surprising, according to the article, which thought passengers would be irked by flight attendants who won’t deal with problematic passengers, but it seems we don’t like flight attendants more than we don’t like our fellow fliers:

I thought refusing to deal with bothersome passengers would come out higher; that’s what irks me most. I rarely have seen an FA challenge an obnoxious drunk, the person who hogs more than his or her share of space or the loud talker who clearly is making the flight miserable for anyone within earshot.

[photo by alexindigo via Flickr]