Re:Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident
by mikeash on Thursday April 20, 2017 @10:35AM
(#14156974)
"A completely free market approach" would not allow airlines to involuntarily remove passengers who have already paid for and used a ticket. A free market approach would involve offering greater and greater compensation for voluntary removal until enough people took it.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident
by masondixon on Thursday April 20, 2017 @11:19AM
(#14157450)
Ok "completely free market approach" was a bad statement.
A "generous free market approach" maybe is better, as the penalty for bumping is steep.
Re:Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident
by TorKlingberg on Thursday April 20, 2017 @11:28AM
(#14157527)
No, it would involve whatever the contract between the passenger and the airline says. Which is very likely to favor the airline as they wrote it.
Re:Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident
by tarlinian on Thursday April 20, 2017 @12:50PM
(#14158371)
Exactly...I don't get the complaints about the existence of IDB legislation. If the airlines got to write the contracts themselves, they'd say you'd get no compensation at all outside of a refund of your ticket price if you can't be rebooked.
Re:Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident
by mikeash on Thursday April 20, 2017 @12:56PM
(#14158448)
I'm OK with its existence. I'm not really OK with its content. min(4 x fare, $1,350) is way too low. Make the minimum compensation for involuntary bumping $10,000 (cash, not stupid vouchers) or something, and then maybe we'd see some sense.
I'm sure there needs to be some way to remove people against their will if something really crazy happens. But it should be the absolute last resort if all else fails, not a way to cap losses to a low amount.