Bribes and re-regulation
…at least they have arguments, as opposed to the airlines, who don't seem to have any response to the complaints against them.
“We don’t need no steenking arguments. We’ve got a checkbook.” That should be the answer, from US-based airlines, to the comment above. In other words when you can pay-off a member of Congress, through a 5-figure campaign contribution, your arguments don’t even have to make sense—assuming you decide to raise any arguments at all!
The irony is that when deregulation of airlines was implemented under Reagan, the idea was that it was supposed to fuel competition and give better service to passengers at a more competitive price. That's the whole idea behind competition and free enterprise, and yet, it's had just the opposite effect.
To this end the DOT should institute limited re-regulation.
The number of airports where take-offs and landings are “slot” restricted should be increased. Atlanta, for example, should have such restrictions. Slot restrictions should also consider historical weather patterns, such as summer thunderstorms.
The DOT should document all requests for police assistance which are initiated by flight attendants or gate agents. Employees who rack-up an unusual number of police calls over a given period of time should be banned from employment in the industry.
The government, not the airlines, should start policing carry-on baggage. This should eliminate major inconsistencies found in the status quo of carry-on enforcement by the airlines. One or more TSA staff should be stationed at a gate to monitor what people are trying to carry-on.
|