“One-person-one-fare”

Oh Canada!  A Canadian tribunal in early 2008 ruled that Canadian airlines could not discriminate against the obese by charging them for more than one seat if they spilled over into the accompanying seat.  The tribunal said that obesity is equivalent to having a disability.  I am a strong believer in individual rights and protections against discrimination, but I recently was traveling within the US and was seated next to an oversized person … luckily for both of us, I am not a big person.  This lady took at least a quarter of my seat.  What about my right to a whole seat?  Maybe I should have asked for a quarter percent refund, since I paid for a full seat and expected to get one.  In fact, the passenger could not even lower the arm rest.  I am not trying to attack obese people, but if you are have a waist size greater than 50 inches, why shouldn’t you have to buy two tickets.  I don’t think this is a bias; you are paying for what you get.  On one of my recent flights I did not get what I paid for.  What about one-person-one-fare-one-seat?

Passengers Bill of Rights … update

I am a free market person, but only when the free market works.  In my opinion, I do not think that the free market is working when it comes to passengers and airlines.  I am also a skeptical of government intervention, because the situation typically does not improve … that’s as positive as I can be.

The airline industry is making it difficult for me to be a free market person.  What would be ideal would be for the airlines to propose a “Passenger Bill of Rights.”  This “Bill of Rights” could even be different from one airline to another.  I think that we consumers are smart enough to decide if the “Rights” are important enough for us to decide to fly or not to fly with a particular carrier.  But the airlines have not do this, so who is left to give us a “Passenger Bill of Right?”  Congress of course.  If I were an airline excutive, I would be feverishly developing a “Bill of Rights.”  Of course, Congress can not produce one and the courts have ruled early in 2008 that individual states cannot write a “Bill of Right” … this may be a blessing in discuise, but I would like some protections or rights as a passenger that extends beyond what the airlines offer now.

The Senate proposed a bill that would guarantee that passengers have clean water, food, bathrooms, and the ability to get off a plane that is delayed by 3 hours.  The House bill proposed that airlines have procedures for addressing passenger complaint, provide information to passengers about delays, publish frequently delayed flight information, publish lowest fares and schedule information, make reasonable efforts to find and return baggages within 24 hrs, and all the Senate rights.

I don’t have a problem with any of the Senate’s or House’s requirements, but don’t the airlines try to do this anyway?  I fly often enough to get delayed quite frequently, and I am certain that the airlines and their employees would prefer not to deal with irrate passengers, which I am not one.  The airlines could do a much better job of updating passengers about delays, but often the poor gate agent doesn’t know why a flight is delayed.  I would like the airlines to have to honor what they promise.  For example, what does it mean to be a frequent flyer who has earned elite status, because they are a loyal flyer?  What does it mean or is worth to accumulate all of these miles? 

Sometimes, the airlines and airport do not honor what I consider to be a contract like elite passengers are supposed to have perks because they have demonstrated loyalty.  I can count the airlines and airports that actually provide a reason for being an elite passenger.  The airlines can also at any time change the rules for airline miles.  Why not lock the airlines into the initial contract that entered.  Airline miles are not like credit cards where you are asking for something like credit.  Airline miles are something that you have earned.  I want “rights” for the things the airlines explictly promise us.

Flying with those annoying mobile phone users!

One of my travel rants is mobile phone users who refuse to turn off their phones when the flight attendant says so.  To be honest, I am not sure that it even matters.  Supposedly, mobile phones and electronics interfere with navigation.  I have have read that the airlines and telecommunication companies propagate this lie about mobile phones interfering with navigation, because telecommunication companies cannot track minutes 30,000 ft/9200m in the air.  I occasionally believe in conspiracies, but not sure about this one. 

 What’s funny but very annoying is that all passengers know, of course, that they should turn off their phones once the flight attendant closes the cabin door.  There does not seem to be any particular group that is more of an offender than another.  I was on a flight not long ago where a young attractive woman was having a dispute about nothing with a “boyfriend.”  Knowing that she should not be talking on the phone, the young woman slumped over and stopped talking when the flight attendant walked by her row.  By the way, the flight attendant was absolutely worthless.   So, I thought, surely, she will stop talking before take-off … I was wrong!  I eventually turned around and sternly told her that she should turn off her phone … to my surprise she did.

That case was blatant.  Usually, mobile users are checking those critical emails.  On two separate flights that I will call a man, a woman, and two Blackberries a man and woman in business attire could not turn off their phones for a 30 minute flight.  Each time the flight attendant walked by they would cover their phones like primary school children passing notes in class.

On another flight … literally a school boy was compelled to keep texting someone about a school project, I am sure.  Each time I guess his phone vibrated, he would “sneak” the phone out of his pocket and check his messages.  Other times he kept his phone clasped in his hand.

I have learned that even if you do not say anything, If you stare long and hard, most people will discontinue their inappropriate mobile phone use.

So, why can’t we really use mobile phone?  Maybe because of mobile phone obsession … there would be a capacity load of obnoxious passengers all talking and checking their email.  How did we ever survive without mobile phones.  I am sure that every conversation would be absolutely necessary and every email would be life saving!  Lets continue the ban on mobile phones.

Galapagos Explorer II … now that’s one fine ship

I have to admit that I was a little skeptical about exploring the Galapagos Islands on the Explorer II.  The ship is owned and operated by Canodros who markets themselves as ecotourism providers.  There were a couple of things that I was concerned about like how comfortable would the ship be, would we get motion sickness, what would the food be like, what about the facilities [the toilets], how would we get to the islands.  Translation I was mostly concerned about comfort.

First, our arrival at Baltra and navigating the arrival process was absolutely confusing notwithstanding the language barrier.  My Spanish is minimal at best and almost totally unidirectional.  I can communicate somewhat in Spanish, but do not expect me to understand much of what you say … if you speak in Spanish.

When you land in the Galapagos, you have to declare [on a form] that you are have nothing that might impact the ecology of the Islands, but that’s a blog for another day.

Once we finally arrive on the ship we are greeted by the crew and a very persistent ship photographer, Fernando.  So far so good … the crew very carefully made sure that we safely got from the dingy to the ship.  A crewman carried our carry-on bag and took us to our room … a Deluxe suite … and showed us the room. 

The room was very nice … similar to a hotel room in terms of accommodations and size.  We had a nice bed, two chairs, a sofa, and cocktail table, as well as a minibar.  We had a lockable drawer and plenty of space to store our clothes.  Given that we were on a 100 passenger ship, the largest that the national park service allows now, the bathroom was okay … the shower and sink were fine. 

The toilet was our least favorite, it was filled with water, but the flush was a vacuum flush like what you find on airplanes.  Additionally, you were supposed to dispose of your toilet tissue in a waste basket … at least it was sealed.  I kept saying to myself that this is good for the ecology of the Islands.

Overall, this is one fine ship … the accommodations, the service, and the experience.  If you are going to the Galapagos, consider the Explorer II.

Barefoot in an airline restroom …

I am a little hypersensitive to germs, but this absolutely made me sick.  I saw a young attractive woman go to the restroom on an air plane barefoot, no it was not Britney Spears either.

Occasionally, at the start of a flight, the restrooms are clean, more or less, but this doesn’t last long.  Now, even if you are not neurotic about germs, going to a public restroom barefoot is just nasty.  We have about 50 people sharing a restroom and you know that no everyone hits the target every time.  Some people miss the toilet and hit the floor and if you are barefoot you have just stepped in it.

It just takes a little moisture and you’ve picked up a germ.  Okay, admittedly, your body may fight off any germ you pick up, but the yuck factor of stepping in something in a public restroom is enough to keep me from going barefoot.

My public service announcement … Please wear shoes.

Excuse me, please stop talking to me

Please stop talking to me, I am pretending that I am reading and I am traveling with someone else who I am also pretending that I am talking to, but you keep talking to me.  Don’t you realize that I am trying to be aloof and dismissal and that I am condescendingly pretending to be interested in what you have to say …

What caused that rant from an otherwise calm placid person?  Well, I should start from the beginning.  Okay, we were traveling home from Zurich and we effortless made it through security.  Now, the story begins.  We found a nice quiet spot near our gate and occasionally talked to each other.  Then what seemed like a million middle aged and retirees seemed to surround us where we hear all about their travel experiences.  That was just merely mildly annoying.

Here’s the disturbing part of the trip.  We board the plane without incident and take our seats in a two seat row.  Then a very talkative lady takes her seat in the next row to us.  I made the mistake of smiling back at her … and then the talking began. 

She is a traditional healer from the United States who has lived years in Europe most recently Switzerland.  I think that she told me how long she has lived there and how many countries she has visited … no exaggeration.  She is also fluent in several languages including German.  So, I say “how interesting.”  This was a mistake too.

But, I pick up my magazine and pretent to read … this did not deter her.  Then I learned how many clinics she has integrated her healer practices.  Mistake number two, I mentioned that I work at a university medical center.  Then I learned the full extent of healing skill.

Then I get a gift, she starts nodding.  I think, good, I’m free, free at last.  False alarm, she wakes up and starts talking again.  She is traveling to the west coast, i.e., California to “interview” a potential client to see if she will work for the clinic.

I swear that she must have talked for half the flight.  I have never been so happy to land at Dulles as this time.

Some people just can’t take a hint … next time I may say, “Excuse me, please stop talking to me.”

Airport security … doesn’t inspire confidence

I don’t know about you, but airport security does not really make me feel secure.  I am not hypersensitive about security, and think that some of our responses to September 11 was reasonable, while many were not.

Every time that I fly and see security make people throw away half empty 4oz tubes of toothpaste and 5oz bottles of antibacterial hand wash, I think what training and background do these people have in chemistry and explosive.  Could not a group of “co-conspirators” take the “legally” allowed limit of liquids aboard for some nefarious purpose?  Firearms and other weapons, okay.

My other issue with security is with “profiling” passengers and looking for strange behavior.  Okay, some behavior is easily identifiable as strange or suspicious, such as talking to an imginary person while boxing air.  What is security’s psychological and cultural training to identify the strange.  My normal may be strange and suspicious to you and your strange and suspicious may seem normal to me.

This is also not a U.S. issue either.  Security, here at home, as well as abroad, is woefully inconsistent on top of questionably competent security personnel.  On serveral international trips, I accidentally put my over 3oz bottle of contact solution in our carry-on bag.  Security in Europe and Africa missed the contact solution, but made us throw away a 6oz bottle of skin care lotion.  [Very irritating as well as expensive.  As an aside, one reason people don't like to check bags is because the airlines are always misplacing or losing them.  Post for another day.]

I also have accidentally forgot to remove a small pocket knife.  Believe me this knife could never be used as a weapon.  It’s a small filmsy knife that I picked up at a trade show.  Again, an example of the lack of throughness and inconsistency of airport security.

My largest issue is philosophical.  In our hypersensitive mood over security, I am critical of both political parties over the way that they have addressed this issue.  The Democrats, who first proposed the Department of Homeland Security — how easily we forget, want to protect and unionize airport employees.  I have no problem paying people better wages, because the more you pay people the more you can demand and expect.  You pay people poorly and you are almost assured to get poor quality work.  You pay people well and you may get high quality work.  My problem with the Democrats approach is that you end up with employees who are virtually tenured and difficult to fire.  It’s bad for academia and elsewhere.

The Republican approach is just as bad.  They are borderline paranoid about terrorism and see it everywhere.  Much of this push is piece of mind.  The focus on security measures, profiling, and risk levels does not make me feel particularly safer.  Where is the training of secuity personnel and investment in equipment?  What other measures should we be thinking about in terms of potential future attacks?  Should a parallel focus be softer targets?  Note, I said parallel, referring to maintain the focus on airline security.

I think that security is a real issue.  I don’t feel all that secure given our current efforts, which I think is often guided by politics.