3 ms·
If they suddenly have way more safety issues, the logical next step would be to prevent them from operating an airline, right? All this says to me is that the
by rendaw 4y ago
If they suddenly have way more safety issues, the logical next step would be to prevent them from operating an airline, right?
All this says to me is that the government does nothing to prevent hugely unsafe airlines from operating.
The cancellation loophole seems fine to me, it's the followthrough that's concerning. What am I missing here?
- concordDance 4y ago> If they suddenly have way more safety issues, the logical next step would be to prevent them from operating an airline, right? Thing is, you, as an external observer, can't tell. There are a zillion things that slightly increase risk. If a manager ignores a couple to avoid having a black mark due to costing the company money its very unlikely to bite him in any way that can be pinned on him. But the combination of a very large number of these little decisions will eventually result in a crash. And before you ask, no, saying "well you just tell everyone they must take no risks at all or its prison time" is not the answer as that will basically kill the airlines as a form of mass transit, leading to everyone taking the more dangerous car trips. There's always something more that can be done to reduce risk.
- makapuf 4y agoOr reduce passenger travelling, which in the current days of possible zoom meetings and climate disruption would be a net positive.