Government out of control

[layoutshooter]

It is now officially getting silly. This government is without a doubt now in the process of a total takeover of the economy. It started decades ago with socialist ideas like the minimum wage. The idea that government knows better as to what to charge for a product, what labor is worth on a particular job and what is "justified" profit.

Now this New York State Dumb-O-Crat is wanting to tell airlines what they can and cannot charge customers for. This is at a time that airlines are struggling to stay in business.

Don't be surprised to see a government takeover of the air travel industry in the near future. Then prices and fees will really go up and service will suffer. This may be the first shot in that war.

Let's see, they are ruling health care, the auto industry and the banks for the most part. Welcome to Soviet America!!



U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer to urge prohibition of airline fees on carry-on baggage

By The Associated Press

April 11, 2010, 9:20AM




ALBANY, N.Y. — U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer said today he's trying to get the federal government to prohibit airlines from charging a fee for carry-on baggage, calling it a "slap in the face to travelers."

The New York Democrat is making a personal plea to the Treasury Department to rule that carry-on bags are a necessity for travel, which would make them exempt from a separate fee outside the ticket price.


Previous coverage: • Spirit Airlines' $45 carry-on fee is latest move in airline surcharges
• Spirit Airlines to charge up to $45 for carry-on bags
• May 12, 2009: Airlines' baggage fees tripled to $499M in fourth quarter, report says
• Security screeners at Newark airport get advanced technology X-ray machines

"Airline passengers have always had the right to bring a carry-on bag without having to worry about getting nickeled and dimed by an airline company," Schumer said. "This latest fee is a slap in the face to travelers."

Schumer said carry-on bags often contain medications and other necessities, particularly for families. Carry-on fees artificially avoid higher ticket prices and the taxes applied to tickets, Schumer said.


The fee, however, is legal. The first airline to try it, Spirit Airlines, announced last week it would charge up to $45 for a carry-on, but that it was also reducing the cost of most tickets by $40.


Spirit CEO Ben Baldanza has said having fewer carry-on bags will help empty the plane faster, and the fee is intended to get customers to pay for individual things they want, while keeping the base fare low. Charging for checked bags but not carry-ons also means many passengers lug as much as they can onto planes.


There was no immediate comment Friday from the Treasury Department, which would handle the case because it's considered a tax issue.


Schumer wrote to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner seek to end what Schumer calls a loophole in law that allows the fees. Without action by Treasury, Schumer said he will introduce legislation.

 

[greg334]

Airlines are like trucking, federally regulated. They get their routes, their operating permission and licensed pilots from the federal government. The general aviation gets taxed because of the commercial aviation doesn't seem to want to pay for it.

To me this is alright because this is the business they choose to be in. I mean that the world doesn't stop if one airlines goes out of business or a few for that matter.

If it mattered, then let's get the feds out of the airline business and never ever again lend them money and make them pay for the improvements to the airports they service.

Then again many in our industry want to see the feds step in and stop brokering of freight, force rates to be stable and so on - you can't have it all.

 

[layoutshooter]

Yes, it is a regulated industry. I understand, sort of, the need for that. I do believe, however, that the kind of regulation being talked about here is beyond the scope of what should be regulated. This has nothing to do with safety. This is demanding what can and cannot be charged for. What in the name of Pete does the congress know about profit and loss and what it costs a business to run? Shoot, look at their books.

Regulate safety, maybe, not that they know anything about it. They do not apply the same safety rules or fines to their employees. So, either they don't care what happens to federal employees, or, the rules that they come up with are bogus. I believe that it is both.

It all goes back to the title I gave the thread, even if I am off a bit in this one example, we have a government out of control.

 

[greg334]

I understand what you are getting at but it is not out of control. We had a deregulation of this industry which has caused us some serious issues and need to step back to regulating it again.

Right now the feds can regulate the cost, and if they want to, then that's alright with me. But it seems that Shumer's response is not about the industry but the reaction to the crybabies in NY.

 

[LDB]

If the base price of a ticket is lower and a fee added per bag that would be a benefit for a few flyers who don't take anything with them when they are going just for the day. As long as the rule applies across the board I don't care either way. It has to be fully disclosed and uniform for all though, not haphazard.

 

[layoutshooter]

I am not opposed to "reasonable" safety regulations. First off, they must be equally applied to both private and public employment. The regulation must be based on sound science not based on providing an "edge" for one company or allowing for a government monopoly. Fines and enforcement have to be equal across the entire employment spectrum.

The way a government in control would do it, at least in my opinion, is as follows.

You determine, based on sound scientific non-biased studies, what is safe and unsafe for an industry. Say pilot training, duty hours, weather margins etc. Set the regulations, enforce those regulations equally and get out of everything else.

The government may have a role in the safety aspect but no role in pricing or determining how an individual company should run to make a profit.

Just as in our business. The HOS regulations are messed up. No provision for teams and how we can operate in a safer manner if not stuck with the 10 hour sleeper rule. The medical requirements being looked at under CSA 2010 are not based on any proven scientific studies. BMI, neck size etc have not been proven to be a solid indicator of sleep apnea. Just one example. Many of the new regulations being looked at are being put forth by people with vested interests, like companies that make sleep apnea products, or the ATA, to name a few. Many, if not all, of our congressmen and senators take contributions from those vested interests casting doubt on the validity of the regulations.

That is just one criteria that I use when determining if a government is out of control. This one is. In my opinion.

 

[Moot]

"Carry-on fees artificially avoid higher ticket prices and the taxes applied to tickets," Schumer said.

The airlines are offsetting higher operating costs by charging baggage fees rather than increasing fares. The Feds aren't reaping any more money because the federal excise tax (7.5%) is based on the ticket price.

 

[Turtle]

The airlines' "a la carte" pricing is truly getting out of control. Yes, you can rebel with your wallet, but for a lot of people airline travel is the only way to get where they need to go, and not all airlines fly to all destinations.

A la carte pricing is known as “unbundling,” and on the surface sounds good, where you have a base price, and then pay for only those services which you use. Phone and cable companies have been using this pricing approach for years to offer extras like premium channels and pay-per-view events. But rather than true a la carte pricing, airlines are going with the "unbundling" of services that used to be part of the overall price, and are charging for everything other than the flight itself. Airlines see unbundling as a way to boost revenue and defray the high prices for jet fuel. Recently airlines have added and enlarged charges for fuel, checked baggage, changing flights, upgrading from coach and other services.

But US airlines are getting out of control. They have grown more sophisticated at wringing every last dollar out of a flight, partly by lowering and raising fares based on supply and demand. Much of this crap, called “yield management,” is invisible to passengers, but it results in people in the same cabin paying wildly different amounts for the same flight. Recently a friend booked a round trip ticket from Cincinnati to Dallas for $325 (or thereabouts), and the person sitting next to her on the same flight paid more than $600 for the same round-trip ticket.

Air Canada, which revamped its fare structure and began unbundling five years ago after emerging from bankruptcy, look down their noses a bit at the actions of their U.S. counterparts, saying a la carte pricing should be about transparency and customer choice, not simply revenue. Air Canada offers right up front the ability to pick from four fare levels. The top tickets, called Latitude and Executive Class, are fully refundable and come with priority check-in, food and other goodies included.

The cheapest fare, called Tango, requires extra fees for upgrades such as a food voucher, advance seat selection, flight changes and airport lounge access. Tango passengers can save another $3 by declining frequent-flier miles or not checking a bag.

Air Canada is up front and out in the open with all services and charges, no surprises.

US carriers, on the other hand, have ridiculously low air fares, and then charge you for things like paying for the ticket with a credit card, with a credit card "convenience fee." They will also charge you a similar "convenience fee"for paying by check, and another "convenience fee" for paying by cash. Awesome.

They have figured out that computers, and the Web, now allow for attaching a price to just about everything. Seat location can be priced differently, where aisle seats command a premium, especially the ones at the emergency exit row which are more roomy, and middle seats will be offloaded to bargain hunters, and window seats will be priced somewhere in between. Want a pillow or a blanket? $7, you buy it. Fine, charging for something that actually costs the airlines money, like overweight bags (or people for that matter, but that's not gonna happen in a PC world) no problems, but it has to be a reasonable price, and not like the $3 for a 4 oz bag of trail mix, or $3 for a 12 oz can of Coke. Or charging someone $250 to change the destination of an international flight on a frequent-flier ticket that gets changed a week or more in advance. That's just to change the destination, and doesn't include any increase of decrease in the actual fare.

AirTran, Allegiant Air (based out of Vegas) and a few others are charging extra if you want to use the restroom. Many are charging for the use of the overhead bin if your carry-on doesn't fit under the seat. Some are charging for anything you put under the seat, or, in other words, for any and all carry-on items.

They do this in order to offer the silly $39 one-way destinations and stuff like that. Eventually, it'll be free to fly, but everything will cost extra. And it'll cost you more than a full-fare, all-inclusive ticket will. Want a seat belt? Extra. Want a pilot, pony up. Do you want that ticket in your hand to actually represent a confirmed seat on the plane? $15. In the event of a sudden loss of cabin pressure, strap the mask on your face and breathe normally while you please deposit $.25 for the next three minutes.

 

[layoutshooter]

Have to fly? In this country?

 

[Turtle]

Have to fly? In this country?

Yes, business and other travelers who need to get somewhere within a certain amount of time. Often, rail or driving won't get them there in time. The only option is to fly.

 

[layoutshooter]

Yes, business and other travelers who need to get somewhere within a certain amount of time. Often, rail or driving won't get them there in time. The only option is to fly.

So the Congress should get involved? Oh well, why not? They run almost everything else.

Don't you just get tired and fed up when we just look to Washington to handle everything? I do. They have proven themselves not capable for that job, why keep expecting them to fix everything? If they do fix it, it will cost more, do less and break more.