Every recent flight delay I've experienced was due to mechanical issues or flight crew availability (scheduled crew was delayed on another flight, available crews had or would exceed mandatory hours limit, etc). As frustrating as these are, I'm not sure I want the decision-makers thinking "Gee, this delay will cost us thousands of dollars. Fuck it, send the flight!". These mechanical checks and crew hour limits are there for a reason. And let's be honest, regulations are only as good as the enforcement. This may not necessarily be a good change for consumers.
this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2024
304 points (99.7% liked)
News
23259 readers
3404 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
If they could get away with bypassing those inspections or regulations, they already would.
I want the decision makers thinking "Gee, this pattern of delays will cost us more than if we hired more workers"
Yea, you're probably right. I guess I was overestimating the Risk-Reward calculation they go through. Like, if it doesn't cost much to be compliant (schedule already accounts for inspections, crews are already on salary) then they would be less willing to risk regulatory consequences. But as soon as it starts to cost them more to do so, compliance becomes "nice to have" and not a standard. Recent incidents suggest they have already been skipping steps, so I concede.
yes. maintaining or tightening safety standards and their associated penalties in conjunction with penalizing delays is probably the best way to do this.
as a non-expert, i am hoping that the investigations into recent safety failures go somewhere positive so that the fears this comment section are bringing up are assuaged. cuz we shouldn’t as citizens be forced to choose between basic consumer rights and safety.
In the USA* (in civil countries it has been that way for decades)
Ah the backwater country
I was about to say
But don't worry, they are stil allowed to make your life and the life of coming generation more and more difficult #climatechange without having to do anything about it (except pretend r&d about "biofuels" and "electric planes" to look cool).
Edit: fixed typo and clarified
Thanks, President Biden!
It’s unlikely that this will set up perverse incentives to sacrifice safety for the bottom line, right?
They already do that... so nothing is lost
You mean like Boeing has been doing for the past 20 years?
“Airlines should compete with one another to secure passengers’ business—not to see who can charge the most in surprise fees,” US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said in a statement.
That makes sense, until you see airlines pulling out huge profits then using our subsidies to operate while whining air travel is not a good business
Which airline is making huge profit? I can’t find even one that isn’t breaking even +- 1 or 2 percent.
AA is the biggest, but makes no profit. Delta makes a small profit compared to their revenue.
either clever misinformation or really bad misunderstanding here. “profit compared to revenue” is not a useful metric of profitability and is quite misleading.
the costs associated with running an airline are incredibly high, mostly because of jet fuel. so of course, airlines are going to be the industry with some of the smallest profit margins.
and airlines are currently in a recovery period from covid, so their profits are lower than pre-pandemic numbers.
none of this excuses the cost cutting, stock buybacks, and other exploitative behaviors of airlines. 1-2% of billions of dollars is still a fuck ton of money.
I'm sure they'll take this lying down.
Then compensate for that when it happens instead of vigorously defending the status quo :)