4 ms·

That competition comes at a cost - usually on the backs of the lower level employees, such as the crew. Do you want the labor conditions in the article to be co

That competition comes at a cost - usually on the backs of the lower level employees, such as the crew. Do you want the labor conditions in the article to be common in the US? I get it, flying is awful. But it's a cutthroat industry. When everyone picks their flight sorting by price, you end up with what we have today.

vinay427 10y ago
I disagree that the competition always comes at a cost. Many European airlines tend to have a better reputation in the flying community than the major American carriers, and I have no doubt they provide more worker's rights than are the norm in the US. The same can be said for the top-notch Asian carriers, which to be fair also tend to have a lower cost of living and likely pay as a result.
- robk 10y ago
  That's nonsense. The European carriers are awful and have terrible reputations lately. Have you flown domestic on a European carrier? I'd rather fly any US legacy carrier domestic than the Euro carriers.
gumby 10y ago
> That competition comes at a cost - usually on the backs of the lower level employees This is true of all competition. But the fact is (as described in the article): the US carriers barely compete. Yes the ME3 have a few flights also served by US carriers, but the US ignores most of the interesting places (humiliating decent from the days when Pan Am girdled the globe). The fact is the US carriers aren't competitive. I only fly them when I have no choice (e.g. internal US flights). Their "strength" is in protected markets (domestic flights) where they have duopolies or monopolies, just like the telecoms carriers. American (4 million miles) UA (1 million miles) want to force me to buy from them rather than try to woo me. It's no coincidence that the US carriers I prefer to fly (Virgin/Alaska and Jet Blue) are the ones not joining this action.

vinay427 10y ago

I disagree that the competition always comes at a cost. Many European airlines tend to have a better reputation in the flying community than the major American carriers, and I have no doubt they provide more worker's rights than are the norm in the US. The same can be said for the top-notch Asian carriers, which to be fair also tend to have a lower cost of living and likely pay as a result.

robk 10y ago
That's nonsense. The European carriers are awful and have terrible reputations lately. Have you flown domestic on a European carrier? I'd rather fly any US legacy carrier domestic than the Euro carriers.

gumby 10y ago

> That competition comes at a cost - usually on the backs of the lower level employees This is true of all competition. But the fact is (as described in the article): the US carriers barely compete. Yes the ME3 have a few flights also served by US carriers, but the US ignores most of the interesting places (humiliating decent from the days when Pan Am girdled the globe). The fact is the US carriers aren't competitive. I only fly them when I have no choice (e.g. internal US flights). Their "strength" is in protected markets (domestic flights) where they have duopolies or monopolies, just like the telecoms carriers. American (4 million miles) UA (1 million miles) want to force me to buy from them rather than try to woo me. It's no coincidence that the US carriers I prefer to fly (Virgin/Alaska and Jet Blue) are the ones not joining this action.