Slashdot Mirror
Airlines Face Crack Down on Use of 'Exploitative' Algorithm That Splits Up Families on Flights (independent.co.uk)
Algorithms used by airlines to split up those travelling together unless they pay more to sit next to each other have been called "exploitative" by a government minister. From a report: Speaking to a parliamentary communications committee, Digital Minister Margot James described the software as "a very cynical, exploitative means... to hoodwink the general public." She added: "Some airlines have set an algorithm to identify passengers of the same surname travelling together. They've had the temerity to split the passengers up, and when the family want to travel together they are charged more." It's an issue that will be looked at by the Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation, launched by the government this week to identify and address areas where clearer guidelines and regulation are needed in how data is used. Passengers first started noticing they were being split up from their party if they didn't pay more for allocated seating in June 2017, with Ryanair most commonly associated with the practice.
Make airline boarding more like the old Southwest system or like a commuter train. Board handicapped people first. Other than that, those who show up earlier get to board first and pick seats first.
Seriously. This is just about the most abusive use of public information that I can imagine.
"Cracking Down" doesn't even approach what needs to be done - the airlines identified should be forced to list all family groups who have travelled together since, I dunno, 1947 and pay back (with interest) all the exploited families.
Anybody not complying should be subjected to something equal to or or worse than public hanging.
Identification of airlines and, perhaps, public shaming just isn't appropriate here.
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
Things have been changing over the last few years; in general, the trend has been to find ways to offer a lower level of service for less money than what we used to think of as the basic Economy Class fare. This manifests in what some airlines sometimes call "Basic Economy," which has more restrictions and limitations on it than what you think of as Economy. Typically, the two things you lose in Basic Economy are A) The ability to bring on a full-sized carry-on (so everything you bring onboard has to fit under the seat in front of you) and B) Assigned seating.
So what you are saying is that the airlines arent losing enough money? There will be plenty of posts ignoring the fact that airlines lose money.
Except airlines aren't losing money. See: Airlines had second-most profitable year ever in 2017
2017 Net Profit: 15.5 billion
IATA - Another Strong Year for Airline Profits in 2017
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Found the source of the stats (on page 20):
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/do...
Among the airlines in the survey, Ryanair is the worst offender by far, Emirates and Virgin Atlantic are also splitting up families more than average. The lowest were TUI and Flybe.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Of course this would be Ryanair, the subway of air travel. I can't wait until they actually book standing room only and have people pushing in backwards so the doors can close.
Fixing intentional family split-ups should be part of a bill that gets rid of a number of abusive airline policies that passengers can do nothing about:
1. Fees shall be for features of a flight that are optional, such as meals or a second checked bag, rather than for items that you need on every flight. There shall be no extortionate fees for fixing a name typo or making a schedule change months ahead of time.
2. There shall be a minimum seat width and pitch, as determined by flight safety professionals;
3. All tickets which are non-refundable shall be transferable, with the cost limited to the above non-extortionate name change fee. A seat sold is a seat for which revenue has already been collected. Airlines will discover that no longer having to deal with special exceptions and notes from doctors is well worth the lost revenue from selling the same seat twice.
4. The auction buyback system for oversells shall not be capped or limited in any way. If you really want a seat for that deadheading crew member at the last minute, you have to find a pax willing to give up his seat at the market price.
5. For any ejection or denied-boarding of a passenger not coming under the oversell rule, the carrier must file a report with the FAA detailing the situation and attaching signed statements by all crew and passengers involved. No more ejecting a passenger because "somebody felt uneasy about this person."
6. Passengers shall have unlimited right to film or record confrontations that occur during a flight, with the stipulation that a copy be submitted as evidence with any report the airline has to file in (5).
7. Carriers shall be required to use real math, rather than 'airline math' in calculating rebates for downgrades from higher classes of service that a passenger paid for but which cannot be provided at flight time.
The effect of such a set of minimum service standards will be to push revenue from extra fees, etc. into the base fare. Good, because this is the one number on which airlines compete. The reason for policies like charging people $5000 for fixing a name typo is to pull standard features of a flight out of the base fare, making it look artificially low. If a decently hu,mane level of service adds 20% or so to the base, then we will still be better off. Less air rage and fewer instances of "I'll never fly with you again!"
Corporations don't have to be moral. Too bad for everyone.
Corporations don't have to exist either. They are a legal fiction, not a guaranteed right.