Travel issues on the bailout bill in Congress

We need airlines to screen obviously ill passengers at the boarding gate

How exactly would you propose they accomplish that?

How about a future min seat size? I would rather have that than no fees. Of course, isn't this a little corporate socialism.?

No this isn't corporate socialism. It's getting something for government support. They want money, we want no fees, and I agree about the seat size.

As to the screening for illness, begin with temperature checking, and also look for coughing and sneezing. If someone is ill, they generally look it.

And I’ll bet my life savings that free domestic beverage service is gone once things return to normal. Once they’ve taken it away, they won’t bring it back for free.

No beverage? Are you kidding me?

Right now, or before COVID, the airlines profited an average of $10 a passenger. That's outrageous?

Without change fees, and because planes -as the OP wrote - are full, the result would be passengers booking a lot of 'just in case' flights, then changing them close to the date of travel. If airlines are also not allowed to return to their bad routine-overbooking days of the early 1990s (when even no-show passengers mostly retained their tickets intact minus a small fee), this means some serious problem with demand-management. A possible outcome would be wild price and availability movements within days (not weeks/months) before each flight.

I've read somewhere other consumer advocates asking for a limit on changing fees. And one, specifically, entertaining the idea of also going back to the bad old days of government-controlled maximum airfares and schedules.

For many years either my wife and I, or both, came down with terrible colds after flying to Europe and our trips suffered. We started using those wipes upon boarding, wiping down the seat belt and buckle, tray table, arm rest, and were careful not to touch the magazines. It made a world of difference once we became semi-obsessive about wiping things down, including the handle of the overhead bin. When we had to touch anything not wiped down, we wiped our hands down. We're seniors so have been semi-obsessive about using wipes or washing our hands every year everywhere out in public when cold and flu seasons start. So far, so good. I know we can't prevent anyone sneezing or coughing on planes without covering their mouths, but it seems to have had a positive effect.

Good practice and we all should follow your example.

I like some of what you propose, especially the screening.

As for eliminating change fees, why legislate this, since it appears that all the airlines are doing this for flights through 30 April and will likely expend this when more cancellations are necessary.

Delta has already issued policies for International flights through May31.

The reason that the airlines deserve government help is that Government has issued the travel restrictions, also, the airlines are necessary for travel. Bankrupting the airlines is not the answer. Neither is unnecessary legislation.

George, thanks for sharing. I know in theory wiping things down works, but never have done it myself. I find it helpful to know from someone that has suffered in the past, that doing this actually stopped it from your trips! From now on, I’m taking wipes with me on the plane.

Some reactions to comments:

On health screening at the boarding gate: There are several approaches. First, a temperature check can be made. Second, we can build in an expectation that illness should be a bar to travel. Fines can be built in. No method is 100% certain, but stopping those who are coughing uncontrollably or sneezing incessantly is a good first step. Those are the persons who are actively spreading whatever disease they have.

On barring the "make frequent reservations and cancel all but one" situation: This is not difficult. Simply retain the money for future travel. You don't get a refund, you simply leave the money with the airline. This is the Southwest model. You pay for the flight. If you cancel, they retain the money and you can use it in the future, and there is no change fee. If you make 12 reservations and cancel 11, you are still out 11 flight costs, which is likely to be a substantial fee. If you try this little stunt, you will only do it once, because parking $3000-$6000 with the different airlines for future travel will stop such dumb moves in the future.

On taking responsibility by wiping and washing: Very good tips on how to do the best job. I have terrible habits about touching my eyes and nose. I am working very hard to resist the habit. Wiping stuff down can enhance the airline attempts to clean. Thanks for the suggestion.

This article from the NYT on 3/16 speaks to the AIRLINE bailout with some ideas for the constraints that could be included, like addressing change fees:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/16/opinion/airlines-bailout.html

.....No method is 100% certain, but stopping those who are coughing uncontrollably or sneezing incessantly is a good first step. Those are the persons who are actively spreading whatever disease they have. ...... But they might not have a disease either. So you have non-medical personal making decisions about who travels and who doesn't based on someone thinking they might be sick. Maybe just issue everyone high grade masks and gloves. I am plagued with a dry cough that is related to a problem with acid reflex. It is unpredictable and somethings can look pretty bad with a lot of hacking. Often times people have coughs that are related to allergies and drainage. They could be sneezing, watery or red eyes but nothing related to a disease. So how do you tell the difference between a bad head cold or bad allergies? So do we have to start carrying documentation that our cough/sneezing is not related to any disease. This gets a little silly. And I am sure the liability associated with the screen is well beyond an airline's interest.

As for numbers ---- Without a reference I will take it as your opinion. Have no idea if 5% is average or if $10/passenger is accurate. Anyone can throw out a number. I would trust the numbers in the NYT piece a bit more but you still do not know what is included or excluded from the numbers.

@Frank: Yes, people have chronic conditions. I have a post-nasal drip. I blow my nose a lot. You have a chronic cough. Solution: Physicians to provide a note attesting to these conditions.

@Jessica: Thanks. I had not read that NYT piece. It speaks to the comments I have made, that the airlines use these fees as profit centers, and that they do not offset costs. While reasonable limits need to remain, the airlines have gone overboard in monetizing necessary parts of the flying experience, to the point of charging for carry-on baggage. They need restrictions in their behavior. We allow them to get bigger and bigger. We need to put in restrictions.

As for numbers ---- Without a reference I will take it as your
opinion. Have no idea if 5% is average or if $10/passenger is
accurate. Anyone can throw out a number. I would trust the numbers in
the NYT piece a bit more but you still do not know what is included or
excluded from the numbers.

I cant read the NYT article. But most of what gets thrown around is the total cash. And yea, its a huge number. But the industry is huge, so those huge numbers only represent a 5% net profit (9% a few years back but its been on a slide). Even huge numbers mean very little when a slight shift can cost you your entire 5% or more in profits. But all that aside, unlike health care, and housing and day care and minimum wage and guaranteed middle class retirement; an airline ticket isn't a human right, its just a lowly business. There are boats and buses and trains to choose from.

Paul, airlines cannot control or enforce their own rules on carry on luggage and your expect them to enforce a medical screening. And how do you check the authenticity of a physician's certificate? Cannot control "comfort animals." It is a can of worms that the airlines will never tolerate. It is an ideas that sounds good on the surface but dies with the details.

Physicians to provide a note attesting to these conditions.

As a physician, I would like to veto this. I already have enough people trying to get me to write shady notes. I don't want to create a new genre of notes.

In China during 2009 flu outbreak, the airport had temperature scanners that you had to walk through/under -- any fever meant you got pulled aside for interview and possible isolation/quarantine.
Decision was not left to individual airline gate attendants.

You folks realize Covid-19 and other viruses can be asymptomatic for days? Good luck screening for that.

What if someone has a common cold and a slight fever? Are we going to deny travel for them? If so, shut down everything from November through April.

@bigmike: Do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Screening cannot eliminate all ill people. Those who are ill could take pills to conceal symptoms. Nonetheless, establishing a national policy of "do not travel while ill" and screening for obviously very ill persons is still reasonable. If you are coughing uncontrollably (every minute or so), you should not be on a plane. And those with bad colds should also be screened and stopped from flying.

James - if you care, the NYT article is written by Tim Wu and subject is airline bailout

George, relevant to another thread about how we will change the way we travel, I'm going to start wiping down everything too.
And I too am currently coughing because of draining that irritates my throat. (Of course, it gets better with cough drops) It happens all the time, and barring fever or feeling bad, I don't consider it a reason to self-isolate.

This is a reminder that we allow politics ONLY as it relates directly to travel. Keep your opinions about the president or other politics-only opinions off our forum.

We're temporarily having a lighter hand re politics as the global situation is difficult and we're trying to be mindful of this as everyone tries to navigate this novel landscape, but know that those who routinely bring it back to politics will not remain a part of our forum. Our #1 guideline is to stay on topic. That means travel. Thanks, everyone!

Webmaster, I hope this is okay. It's only meant to be a discussion of business in general. No politics.

Well jennifer I found something attributed to him on another site... I dont pay for NYT access.

US airlines haven’t saved for a rainy day, and that’s on them

I agree, business are responsible to run themselves. Not my business.

Wu argues that airlines have spent the past several years making
billions of dollars through a series of mergers and customer
unfriendly policies. He uses American Airlines as an example:

In 2015 the company reported $7.6 billion in profits, and it has
earned billions per year in profits ever since American CEO Doug
Parker even bragged in 2017 about how he didn’t think the company was
ever going to lose money again Between 2014 and 2020, American
Airlines has blown through most cash reserves through stock buybacks,
which have amounted to more than $15 billion

When we want to promote an ideology we speak in Dollars. When we want to examine a situation we talk in Net Profit as a percent of the total. Its 5%. Meaning it doesn't take much for that $7.6 billion profit to become a $7.6 billion loss. But when we talk in billions of dollars everyone gets excited and that's what the author is going for. Go back to the first statement, saying that airlines should be saving for a rainy day.

The company has heavily financed new planes, meaning American has more
than $30 billion in debt, which is more than five times the company’s
current market value

If a butcher wants to stay in business he needs meat. If an airline wants to stay in business they need planes. I would imagine a lot of it has to do with older stock and newer more cost effective (lower fuel costs, lower maintenance) planes. Hey, they are switching to planes with lower carbon footprints. Isn't that what we want them to do? Money has to come from somewhere and millions of retired Americans are hoping that the Airlines and all of the US giant corporations are managing their companies to be as profitable in the long run as possible. Assuming that the top people aren't intentionally trying to put themselves out of business, I would suspect they made educated judgments that might have worked had it not been for this flu popping up in China. Was your company ready for this? All those who work for a company that was ready for this, stand up.

They’ve done that in lieu of building up cash reserves, in lieu of
settling labor disputes with employees, and in lieu of investing in a
better product

No new plans, but a better product? I happen to think they provide an excellent product for the price. Best in history if you look at the cost of travel 10, 20, 40 years ago. More flights to more places, and the safest in the history of flight. Absolutely nothing to complain about.

Bail them out? I am not a big bail out fan. But at least I will put sensationalized agenda driven opinion to the side and try and find the facts.

Unless you are willing the nationalize the airlines, you aren't going to get something for nothing. They will go out of business if they cant make a profit. You will have few choices and it will cost you a lot more to fly.

Remember when trashing "Big Business", its nothing but a bunch of our friends, neighbors, associates all working to make a living. I dont know any evil people, so I suspect there are few in Big Business.

Great idea. Have Congress get hung up in the minutia of legislating seat pitch, baggage fees and refund fees, plus tackle funding TSA to make every screener at least an EMT level of medical knowledge to screen for 'sick' passengers.

In the meantime there is no funding for the emergency supplies hospitals need and those without jobs and small businesses just get financially killed

If having airlines around so we can travel once the virus is dealt with, now is the time to act and leave to another time the task of fixing the other 'problems'

Amen ............................