America’s airlines are introducing a class below economy
economist.com
economist.com
I feel the same way about people who complain about crappy airlines as I do about people who complain about crappy video games. If you don't want to be treated like cattle don't buy the cheapest ticket you can find on Hotwire (and stop buying from EA). It's not like there aren't dozens of other options to choose from.
If they don't agree and the issue is big enough for me, I'll find a new job.
(a) being crammed in a space uncomfortable for anybody over 5'2" or 120 lbs between two chatty salesmen mutually disapproving those who think the world is ca. 600,000 times older than they think it is, or
(b) being shot with a tranquilizer dart and shipped in a dog crate.
I mean, I'd seriously consider (b) before sighing and going for (a) + alcohol.
So if the cheapest ticket is X dollars and the ticket you buy is Y. The employer will reimburse you for X and you pay the Y-X yourself.
Nothing illegal about that, it's the same as if a company says they will reimburse you for half your gym membership. You pay half the company pays half.
They can't expense a random "market price" but an actual ticket, if you then upgrade it it's fine, if you just say airline a had it for 200 and airline b had it for 300 and you can't expense the cheaper one.
However, if your company has strict policies about receipts and expense amounts you can always do the slightly shady "book two, cancel one" move - book one seat at the cheapest rate and another that's actually comfortable, print the receipt for the cheaper one, then cancel it within 24 hours to get a refund. I don't recommend this of course, but it is a way to get around excessive red tape.
Edit: I think there's also a lot of inefficiency. So often I see a huge line, half the equipment sitting idle, and half the TSA agents standing around talking to each other. I don't remember that sort of thing in the before times. Maybe because the security people were employed by private companies motivated to get their money's worth.
There is also no guarantee that the precheck line will be open at the airport for the time you visit.
I think people confuse airport congestion with security holdups. Carry-on x-rays have been mandated for a very long time (long before 9/11). And people always had to walk one-at-a-time through the metal detectors. What's happened over the last 25 years or so is a massive increase in air travel in the U.S., without a corresponding increase in airport capacity.
> Carry-on x-rays have been mandated for a very long time
You didn't have to wait so much. You didn't have to go barefoot. You didn't have to go through the "get naked" machine.
For a 23h trip, I'll definitely get the better option I can reasonably afford.
Sure you want to pay for a confortable flight that will not make you feel totally exhausted or in bad shape once you land. Would you travel from US to UK while standing up because it would be 50% cheaper? with no toilets ? and a 100% fee for luggage ? because after all, you "only buy it for the privilege of being flown from one area of the country to the other".
I remember a time when consumers believed their interest was the best possible value for their money. Now we have a generation who justifies the worse business practices "because corporations must maximise profit for their shareholders" ? How is it in the interest of the consumer ?
I don't know what field you work in, but give that this is HN I assume you're a developer, if so you'll probably not see a better job market, don't put up with shit.
But there are better solutions than that, anyway. Corporate travel policies might only reimburse the cheapest fair, but you can often book a better fair and reimburse the cheapest rate while paying the discrepancy yourself if you wish (which is how you might fly first class).
If you're concerned over uncomfortable travel 'once every year or few years' then you have better things to be worried about. I can't imagine a better example of a 'first world problem'.
Almost all of my travel in grad school was funded through taxpayer money. You ever fly to Okinawa in economy? It's not fun.
Now I don't discuss previous salaries, as I'm sure that has torpedoed several offers. That just leads down a road that is an inverse of the Impostor Syndrome, where they think you're overqualified for the position, and you can tell from the responses and further question. I am seriously wondering about the culture of the game, that it can be so seriously lacking of it's shining feature: distributed collaborative work.
I've gone so far as to offer to commute from central MD to northern VA a couple times a week - no dice. Gotta be onsite every day in their open-office floor plan where 90% of the workday is spent with noise-canceling headphones on and almost all communication is through Slack.
It's maddening how the pendulum keeps swinging away from remote work in this area.
I've literally dropped a quarter of my previous salary during negotiations, well aware of CoL differences, and had them come back at one-third to one-half as what they were thinking. But it's definitely hard to find any places that would offer remote, or even telecommutd options at a reaonable salary.
You poor thing!
At any rate, many corporate travel policies also allow business class on flights over N hours.
> You poor thing!
I seriously agree with him though. I never book first class, was upgraded once for free, but man I wish I could be business/first class all the time. They just shove us elbow to elbow and you can't even lie down. For 13+ hours flights it's a nightmare. Back problems for weeks after.
$548 is 7x $69!! That's a HUGE difference.
Anyway, I ended up taking Singapore Air because it flew at a time that fit my schedule. On the flight I had an issue with the entertainment system. It was resolved but had it not been resolved I'd have been extremely angry because I knew I'd paid some portion of $469 for entertainment.
I don't know how and if that will ever play out or if there will be any real repercussions but just knowing I paid 7x more means I expect extreme perfection, something I would not have expected if the price difference was only ~5% or something.
Last time I flew the reclining feature in person's seat in front of me was broken and it was 5 - 7 inches in front of my face for the duration of the flight. I couldn't even read my book. I got a free soda for my trouble.
In my view flying has become something exclusively for the wealthy who can afford the half-way decent seats made for real humans who have dignity.
For me, flying is now only something I do where the importance of my presence supersedes the cost of a decent seat. Otherwise, a video call will do.
Everyone bitches. No one pays more for more service.
But, hey that's pretty much the entire world outside of computing. Did you know that a modern coal plant is only about twice as efficient as one from a century ago? Same thing will happen in computing too, soon enough: http://imgur.com/NFysh.
[1]: http://ark.intel.com/products/81061/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-...
Besides that there is nothing wrong with aspiring for better travel. Why accept that we have to be crammed onto airplanes, busses, and trains. We should be looking for ways to improve quality of life for everyone.
Air-travel was essentially once reserved for the wealthy, and mostly white travelers but as more people moved up into the middle class there was increased demand for air-travel which drove competition to accommodate them. When southwest was born it completely changed the game and the race to the bottom started.
On one hand this has been great, as it has enabled everyone in the US to be able to fly and increased safety significantly. On the other hand, the "elegance" of air travel, which I think most people still desire, is basically gone in the US.
Asian carriers such as Emirates, Singapore etc... all maintain the elegant aspect, but at significantly higher costs because they are servicing the higher end still. You'll notice that they have no US domestic equivalent.
Expect that eventually there will be no pretense of elegance and it will look exactly like ground transportation.
Interestingly enough, Amtrak has taken advantage of this and on the east coast at least is largely considered a better experience between the DC <> Boston corridor.
[1] http://www.fastcodesign.com/3022215/terminal-velocity/what-i...
Bottom line: As flying increased in frequency, injuries went up linearly and people freaked out. The demands for better design, efficiency and well, safety, drove the industry to adopt standards very quickly which led to better records. There are some graphs out there that show it well [1].
Regional airlines, which carry half of pax, have been "last class" for decades, but they're about to disappear.
The new pilot training rules requiring 1500 hours of experience have destroyed their ability to operate. The first to declare bankruptcy is Republic, but the rest will soon join it.
The majors have used the regionals for union-busting purposes, but those days are over.
I remember being trapped next to a loud woman on one flight where she proceeded to complain about every minor insult (slow drink service, so so food, etc). When we got to the Sierra Nevada, I pointed out the Donner Pass to her, and suggested she look it up. "It'll give you some perspective on your trip".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/New-call-for-standing...
I am definitely willing to experience more discomfort in exchange for a lower fare, and from other comments, so are many others here.
Sleeping pods make much more sense - you are safe in case of sudden breaking and somewhat comfortable. The fairest way would be introducing progressive seat sizes and charge accordingly. Small people pay less for seats that are actually more comfortable (more fitting their height) and tall people have option not injuring themselves without paying 3x more.