4 ms·
That would defeat the purpose. The point of the carveout is so that we don't accidentally incentivize the airlines to fly a flight that should be canceled for s
by josephcsible 4y ago
That would defeat the purpose. The point of the carveout is so that we don't accidentally incentivize the airlines to fly a flight that should be canceled for safety reasons, and this would do exactly that.
- ALittleLight 4y agoPerhaps they could require the people who make the go/no-go decision on flight safety to visit a prison every three months and receive a lecture on how this will be their new home if they knowingly approve a plane not safe to fly.
- WalterBright 4y agoThreatening people does not improve safety, as people will tend to hide the issues instead of exposing them so they're fixed.
- justsomehnguy 4y agoYou are forgetting what the decision to blanket everything as a safety issue came not from the people who make the go/no-go decision on flight safety. As a sibling comment says it would be just swept under the rug until planes start to fall.
- sokoloff 4y agoIndeed. I feel like so many of these arguments that “airlines are making up fake safety or weather cancellation reasons; when’s the last time an airline crashed from a safety or weather reason; they’re over-stating the risks just to get out of paying penalties!” seemingly without reflecting on why the second clause is the case.