Note: This is a reprint of an article originally published in 2010.

For quite a few years now, the beleaguered airlines have been slowly implementing ways to increase their revenues as they try to stem their losses. Quietly, airlines have been adding fees for food, checked luggage, pillows and blankets and now Spirit Airlines proposes to charge for carry-ons. In fact, the bold European airline Ryanair, has asked Boeing to design an aircraft with more seats and fewer bathrooms. They have publicly stated a plan to charge to use the bathroom.

Except for this last proposal, let me cover each of these one by one:

• Food service – for the most part, I am not sad that airlines eliminated food service on most domestic flights. In flight food is not a forte of the airlines as most of us can testify. United Airlines boxed food now ranks consistently adequate in my book. While these are not hot meals, they are passable.
• Checked luggage – as a frequent air traveler I very rarely check my luggage. It’s not that I fear from the lost luggage problem, nor the additional charge (United charges $25 per piece), but I can avoid the 15 or more minutes waiting around the carousel. However, I can see that an airline can save significantly if its planes fly lighter and its employees handle fewer pieces of luggage. While I may not like the additional fee for checked luggage, I feel it is a fair way for airlines to add revenue.
• Pillows and blankets – most often I find the cabin to be too hot, so I don’t have any problem doing without a blanket. My sweater or light jacket can take the place of a blanket. Pillows are useful on longer flights but a few dollars will buy a blow-up pillow from an airport vendor for about the same price as JetBlue charges ($7) to use them on board.
• Carry-ons – as checked luggage fees are now the rule, passengers have sought to avoid the fees by taking more and heavier carry-ons. Spirit Airlines justifies the carry-on fee as a way to streamline the boarding process. With fewer carry-ons, passengers can be seated more quickly with fewer delays. Similarly, with fewer carry-ons passengers can disembark faster. While I may inconvenienced about a fee for carry-ons, I see it as a fair way to charge a passenger for the service that he/she uses.

This last item – Spirit Airline plan to charge for carry-ons is now in the news. New York Senator Charles Schumer is outraged at Spirit’s plan. “ Airline passengers have always had the right to bring a carry-on bag without having to worry about getting nickeled and dimed by an airline company,” Schumer told the AP. “This latest fee is a slap in the face to travelers.” Apparently, other senators are also upset. Yesterday, Democratic Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland and Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana introduced such a bill, called “Free of Fees for Carry-On Act.”

What’s wrong with this picture?

I’m outraged at the senators’ proposal. I’m still under the impression that the general flying public is fully capable of making rational decisions. Low-cost, discount airlines such as Spirit have served the flying public by keeping fares low. These discounters have introduced competitive pricing that have benefited millions of passengers. Even with this proposed carry-on fee, Spirit’s total charges are often less than other airlines for the same route. If a passenger is upset at paying a fee for a carry-on, that passenger is free to choose another airline that may not.

As a whole, the nine largest US airlines last year posted losses of $3.4 billion. This comes back to back of losses totaling nearly $20 billion that they racked up in 2008. It’s incredulous to me that some members of Congress want to penalize companies for trying to find creative ways to deal with a lagging revenue problem. The lawmakers must feel that a tax on these so called ill-gotten revenues will “teach the airlines a lesson.”

Let’s recall that there have been more than a few airline bankruptcies in recent years: United in 2002, US Airways in 2004, Northwest and Delta in 2005, and Frontier in 2008. Do we want a repeat of this where airlines will be asking to be bailed out at public expense?

I don’t want Congress running interference against the airlines for me. I contend that myself and millions of other flying passengers are fully capable of deciding if Spirit’s proposed carry-on fee is acceptable by voting with our dollars. I’m not a fan of a government trying to micro-manage the airline industry. Please! Do we need senators deciding that a $7 fee to use a pillow for a few hours is unfair? I think this is a case where Congress should keep their noses out of the airline business when it comes to pricing. Our government should stay focused on safety issues, not pricing issues.

 

 

Written by: Arnie Lee