As you are probably aware, recently, Spirit Airlines started charging a $45 fee for carry-on luggage. Well, judging by the reaction of the congress, you would have thought Al Qaeda had taken ownership of a U.S. airline. Aren’t there a lot of other problems in this country that need tending … high unemployment, etc.? The fee in question pertains only to luggage that goes in the overhead bins. According to the airline’s management, the public’s reaction to the new charge has been positive. That may be true or not. Regardless, the purpose of this blog is to briefly consider the government’s response to this action and how it may relate to other sectors of our business.
Up front, I will admit, by and large, my attitude in regards to government regulation is essentially laissez faire, a doctrine that opposes governmental interference in economic affairs beyond which is necessary for the maintenance of peace, property rights, and the safety of its citizens. I hold government’s role should be focused on the welfare of its individual citizens, rather than centering on national power and prestige. There are many that differ.
How does this relate to the Spirit thing and maintenance of aircraft? Easy. I contend we are advancing to a point where we will be regulated in such a way that efficiency and innovation will be affected negatively.
Take Spirit Airlines. Immediately, upon the announcement of the new charge, all sorts of fire came down from the D.C. legislators. I ask: Do they really understand airlines and the product that is sold? I don’t think so. For airlines today, price is the product and from what I understand Spirit is profitable. So why is congress interfering? The cynic in me says votes and photo ops. It can’t be safety. We all travel the airlines. How many of you have seen carry-ons ranging from boxes filled with all sorts of household items to even things like bar bells, all the while these passengers are attempting to fit their suitcases under their seats. That’s why it takes so long to board and exit the plane. What is more important is, in these scenarios, there are greater chances for passenger injuries by mishandled bags and, you can bet if there were an emergency, evacuation will be more difficult. Carry-on luggage has gotten way out of control. Something needs to be done and I applaud Spirit for its originality.
The other thing is that you always have the option to book with another airline or another mode of travel. Air travel is not a God given right; it’s a product. So why are our legislators getting involved in “free enterprise�
Our federal government is not a model of efficiency and innovation and have they forgotten that decades past airline travel was “deregulated.â€
Yes, I agree there are some things airlines have wrought upon themselves. For instance, keeping passengers on the tarmac for excessive hours while awaiting clearance or a gate. Well the change to three hours (I think more than two is excessive) is a step in the right direction.
Going forward with this, I question why we are seeing some of the proposed regulations that are on the docket. Do we really need a regulated safety management system? While it’s a good idea, I think aviation does well without big brother looking over its shoulder constantly. I truly believe that, with few exceptions, all of us involved with the aviation product take the responsibility for safety seriously.
Do we really need a security program for business aviation and FBOs? Such legislation will add to cost, drive some from business, and have nary an effect as business aviation is already well secured.
Do we really need new legislation, such as that meandering about Europe in the form of cap and trade rules for environmental reasons? While well intentioned, it’s hardly the time to add such significant costs to an already teetering economy.
I think you get the idea. Let’s watch where these new regs are taking us.
Finally, one last plug … regulation without representation is not what we want.