Follow this authorMegan McArdle's opinions
Follow
Parents understandably think that airlines promising to “try their best” isn’t good enough; they want a guarantee that their kids can sit with them. Unfortunately, the only way to offer such a guarantee would be to toss people without children out of seats they chose in advance, perhaps even paid for, to sit by an aisle or a window or near (or far from) the restroom.
Some might say this is the problem; passengers shouldn’t have to pay to choose their seats. Fair enough — as long as you understand that the people who pay more for specific seats subsidize the folks who don’t. Stop the practice and the cost of the cheapest tickets will rise.
Advertisement
This is because of the peculiar economics of running an airline. Buying planes and maintaining them is fantastically expensive. The industry is heading into its 110th year of not earning back its capital costs. Even profitable airlines tend to careen between single-digit profit margins and periods of epic economic disaster. Moreover, there are only three ways to make their investments more profitable: fly each plane more often, put more people in each plane or increase what you charge passengers per flight.
The first is hard to do, though airlines constantly look for ways to reduce turnaround time. The second is the reason they pack us in like sardines. And the third is the reason they let us buy our way out of sardine class: They get more money from the same number of passengers.
This offends folks who instinctively feel that the ability to choose your seat or check a bag ought to be included with the price. But if airlines bundled all those things into one standard fare, that fare would be considerably higher than the budget fares the complainers are currently buying.
Advertisement
This might make parents better off, if the increase in fare is less than the value they place on being able to always sit with their children. But look at who is worse off: other budget travelers who have no kids and value a “families always sit together” policy at $0. Generally, this is true of every complaint about airline policy.
Hate bag-check fees? You would prefer that people who don’t check bags pay more so you can pay less.
Mad that airlines charge more for short trips and last-minute bookings? This is how they soak business travelers, which subsidizes vacationers who plan ahead.
Think the government ought to mandate more legroom and wider seats? You want shorter people to subsidize the tall, and thinner people to subsidize the heavy. (As a 6-foot-2 woman of a certain age, I sympathize.)
Advertisement
In fairness, airlines are not exactly transparent about what they’re doing — because people don’t like price discrimination. This is why it’s politically fertile territory for a president locked in a tough reelection battle. But it’s also why he probably won’t do all that much about the fees: There is no way to make everyone, or even most people, better off. There is only the Hobbesian scramble for the inherently scarce resources that can be crammed into an aluminum tube flying 35,000 feet above the ground.
Share Comments
Popular opinions articles
HAND CURATED
- Opinion|The antislavery giant at the center of the Trump disqualification caseFebruary 5, 2024Opinion|The antislavery giant at the center of the Trump disqualification caseFebruary 5, 2024
- Opinion|Nextdoor has gotten way out of handFebruary 5, 2024Opinion|Nextdoor has gotten way out of handFebruary 5, 2024
- Opinion|Why I changed my mind and think Trump should be thrown off the ballotFebruary 4, 2024Opinion|Why I changed my mind and think Trump should be thrown off the ballotFebruary 4, 2024
View 3 more stories Sign up
Every argument about airline customer policy is essentially the same one: “I should be entitled to cheaper and more pleasant flights, and airlines should charge someone else more or make their flight less pleasant to give me what I deserve.” To be clear, people don’t always realize this is the argument they’re making — but it is, just the same, whether they’re arguing about the ethics of reclining, or demanding that airlines provide, for free, some amenity they currently charge for.
Politicians are an exception, however. When they weigh in, the argument they’re making is “vote for me.” Which is what President Biden was saying when he started Monday morning by tweeting: “You ought to be able to fly with your child — and sit next to them — without paying an additional fee. It’s time all airlines offered fee-free family seating.”
His administration has been banging this drum for a couple of years, as part of its much-hyped war on “junk fees.” But it hasn’t done much about it, for the same reason its war on junk fees has been mostly hype: Junk fees are more complicated than they sound when one is complaining about them with friends.
On the face of it, of course, “airlines should seat families together” seems like a reasonable proposition. Indeed, it is eminently reasonable — so much so that, as air-travel expert Gary Leff pointed out, “Airlines generally seat you with your kids for free if you ask them to.” No one else wants to take care of your children, especially not a harried flight attendant. If you book a reasonable time ahead and ask the airline to seat your family together, it will try to accommodate you, though you might have to call to make your request.
Parents understandably think that airlines promising to “try their best” isn’t good enough; they want a guarantee that their kids can sit with them. Unfortunately, the only way to offer such a guarantee would be to toss people without children out of seats they chose in advance, perhaps even paid for, to sit by an aisle or a window or near (or far from) the restroom.
Some might say this is the problem; passengers shouldn’t have to pay to choose their seats. Fair enough — as long as you understand that the people who pay more for specific seats subsidize the folks who don’t. Stop the practice and the cost of the cheapest tickets will rise.
This is because of the peculiar economics of running an airline. Buying planes and maintaining them is fantastically expensive. The industry is heading into its 110th year of not earning back its capital costs. Even profitable airlines tend to careen between single-digit profit margins and periods of epic economic disaster. Moreover, there are only three ways to make their investments more profitable: fly each plane more often, put more people in each plane or increase what you charge passengers per flight.
The first is hard to do, though airlines constantly look for ways to reduce turnaround time. The second is the reason they pack us in like sardines. And the third is the reason they let us buy our way out of sardine class: They get more money from the same number of passengers.
This offends folks who instinctively feel that the ability to choose your seat or check a bag ought to be included with the price. But if airlines bundled all those things into one standard fare, that fare would be considerably higher than the budget fares the complainers are currently buying.
This might make parents better off, if the increase in fare is less than the value they place on being able to always sit with their children. But look at who is worse off: other budget travelers who have no kids and value a “families always sit together” policy at $0. Generally, this is true of every complaint about airline policy.
Hate bag-check fees? You would prefer that people who don’t check bags pay more so you can pay less.
Mad that airlines charge more for short trips and last-minute bookings? This is how they soak business travelers, which subsidizes vacationers who plan ahead.
Think the government ought to mandate more legroom and wider seats? You want shorter people to subsidize the tall, and thinner people to subsidize the heavy. (As a 6-foot-2 woman of a certain age, I sympathize.)
In fairness, airlines are not exactly transparent about what they’re doing — because people don’t like price discrimination. This is why it’s politically fertile territory for a president locked in a tough reelection battle. But it’s also why he probably won’t do all that much about the fees: There is no way to make everyone, or even most people, better off. There is only the Hobbesian scramble for the inherently scarce resources that can be crammed into an aluminum tube flying 35,000 feet above the ground.
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Nikkei Editorial
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
visit website
