I’m not directly saying it is a bad policy, but United’s new warning system to protect passengers against full flights will lead to unreasonable expectations.
United Airlines Will Warn You If Your Flight Is Full
It all started with this tweet on Saturday:
I guess @united is relaxing their social distancing policy these days? Every seat full on this 737 pic.twitter.com/rqWeoIUPqL
— Ethan Weiss (@ethanjweiss) May 9, 2020
The picture of a packed flight from Newark to San Francisco went viral, with many “condemning” United for operating full flights during COVID-19.
Rather than defend its right to survive and note that no is forcing passengers to fly, United has responded with an acknowledgment that some flights are filling up again…and a new policy.
“Because our schedule is so reduced, there are a small number of flights where our customers are finding planes fuller than they expect.”
More than 85% of flights remain less than half full, so this still represents a small proportion of total flights.
But for those flights that are projected to be at least 70% full, United will notify passengers a day before, allowing them to rebook on another flight or receive future travel credit if they are uncomfortable with the full loads.
Notices will go out via email 24 hours before the flight starting next week. Passengers will also have the choice to rebook at the gate if the flight fills up more than expected.
This Fuels An Unrealistic Expectation
I’m not going to attack United for this move, even though I don’t think it is a wise policy. Certainly, it is a way to shut down critics on a short-term basis. But this capitulation to “Nervous Nellie” flyers is dangerous in that it lays the groundwork for a sense of entitlement over extra spacing onboard airplanes.
I’ve already examined why social distancing on an airplane is nothing more than oxymoron. That remains the case: extra spacing is nothing more than a psychological crutch.
> Read More: Want More Space On An Airplane? Fly Private Or Stay Home…
The problem for United is passengers will come to expect this, which is simply incompatible with United’s long-term rebound strategy to begin filling up planes to the brim again once the economy re-opens. And this is hardly a concern unique to United; airlines around the world must grapple with the reality that high loads are necessary for profit. The idea that planes should not be more than 70% full is dangerous to the future of commercial aviation.
CONCLUSION
On the one hand, this is a far better move than tricking passengers into thinking middle seats will remain open. On the other hand, this may create unreasonable expectations in the future. For now, though, expect a warning if your United flight is looking full and flexility to get off it, if you so desire.
image: @ethanjweiss / Twitter
People flying complaining about…other people flying. Egads. Because everyone is entitled to four rows to themselves? Even blocking middle seats is health porn, Being 18 inches away instead of 2 or 3 inches away will certainly keep everyone safe???
If someone is afraid to fly, then don’t effing fly. These airlines are not charities. They are in survival mode. Period.
Here I thought TSA/security porn was over-the-top.
Testify – with everyone covering their face there’s no point to the extra spacing demands
As long this stupidity of flying domestically right now, is only within the US, I do not care less! These pax should know better that airlines will lie! Giving them more space better than First or Business is simply speaking one of the best lies they h¥ave thought to lured the mass to fly again! If you are stupid enough to believe it and risk your life for it because you cannot handle the preassure to wait until the virus is contained, well you deserve your fate!
Most people book a flight because that time works for them. I imagine that most, if faced with the decision of a full flight versus changing flights would still rather go as scheduled with a face mask.
This then gives UA the buffer to avoid criticism until at least all flights reach 70% full.
I don’t fly United, so I don’t know: do they have flight seating charts on their website? Yeah? Oh. The emails are sorta redundant, eh?
While flight seating is generally a good indicator, sometimes people book flights and do not pick seat nor does the system auto-assign them. A better way to see loads is to check fare buckets, which you can also by enabling the expert mode on united.com.
“extra spacing”……seriously?….. if a person sitting in an aisle seat does not even have to fully extend their arm/hand to touch the person at the window or across the aisle from them, one can hardly call it extra spacing or social distancing. Might was well have people right there in the middle seats.
So what now, arguments and debates (eventual lawsuits ?) at the gates while you watch the flight you booked pull away ? All United ever does is dig deeper and deeper holes that they can never get out of. Just book your flights to 50%, shout this information from the rooftops in advance and take the continuing monetary loss. Stop trying to please everyone at the same time.
“Nervous Nellies”?
Condescending much? Your posts are usually better than that, Matthew – when I saw the title, I assumed it was one of Kyle’s.
There’s a pandemic out there. It’s bad in ways that researchers are still discovering. Yes, airlines need to make money to survive, but it’s not paranoia when other air carriers and even United itself made a big deal about keeping seats open next to passengers only to have UA change that policy.
Add me to the list of persons that agree entirely with Greg’s post.
like most travel bloggers, they’ve demonstrated little to zero empathy for the global pandemic because their way of life has been uprooted. i remember in the early days of Covid he was still steadfast on carrying things as normal. The condescending title is a new low point for this blog and i’m honestly quite tired of this from both authors. People are literally dying (more people have died in a few months than in the 10+ years of the vietnam war) but sure lets shame people for being “nervous.”
I agree nervous nellie probably isn’t the right word. It implies that they are being unreasonably fearful, hen in fact, such fear is likely justified. I’d be inclined to call them fools. This guy is a doctor and he thinks the plane will magically be empty? Give me a break.
This guy is a doctor and was being exposed to 20 covid patients a day and has an extraordinarily high chance of being a carrier. I am glad u are volunteering to sit next to him.
I don’t see what the solution here is. Six feet would mean three empty rows in between each occupied row. How realistic is that?
Now, is the risk any greater than using the subway, going to the pharmacy, going to a doctors office? Hard to say, in my mind.
But his expectations seem off.
Risk is greater than pharmacy. Risk is greater than doctors’ office. Mass transit, hard to tell. Depends on crowding, incidence rate and duration of trip. Subway in NYC probably high risk. Since I have a doctors’ office and am an infectious disease MD and see 10+ COVID patients a day, I’d probably not take my advice with a grain of salt.
Thanks for the non answer.
BTW FWTW, I run a couple of clinics and a Covid testing site.
Yeah, I also thought “Nervous Nellies” was something Kyle would use, not Matthew. A bit disappointing.
@Tony
Lucky from OMAAT tends to be bit more sympathetic overall with what is going on these days.
He is more polite, but is his conclusion any different than mine? The expectation is simply ridiculous for social distancing onboard an airplane. As airlines struggle to survive, I’m tired of the hysteria, especially from a doctor who was exposed to patients all week. It just makes me roll my eyes.
Well, you’re use of “Nervous Nellies” made quite a few of us roll our eyes, so I guess that is something we have in common?
Arriving at the same conclusion while being more polite isn’t a bad thing, mind you.
Greg, but why play into people’s unscientific mental crutch? One foot? Three feet? It doesn’t matter. What matters is washing your hands, not touching your face, and perhaps wearing certain masks.
No. Washing your hands while always important, is likely far less protective than avoiding prolonged exposure to potentially infected people who are breathing. Please read the science before making these comments.
Perhaps people should call those who don’t understand or don’t care “Arrogant Arthurs” or the like.
You made a point that could have been argued cogently without the denigration that perhaps betrays a deeper sentiment. I disagree, but have no problem with it – just please don’t mislead on the science.
You’re talking about two different things! Of course “avoiding prolonged exposure to potentially infected people who are breathing” is the best defense. That means don’t fly. You think 17 inches (45cm) makes a difference? You think a 3-ply mask makes a difference?
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342
As always, I am open to learning. Can you provide me reports that show me the that a few extra inches is what will protect people from COVID-19?
My pursuit is common sense and a thoughtful compromise valuing life but balancing risk avoidance with unintended economic consequences.
And while I don’t have an “agenda” I do believe that if anyone is so afraid of a seatmate on an airplane, they are better off not flying until testing protocols are improved or a vaccine (unlikely) is developed.
Every inch makes *a* difference – that’s just physics and biology – however I completely agree that 17 inches in a recirculating environment (HEPA filters notwithstanding) isn’t going to make a material difference to anyone. It’s psychology that makes a difference though – you have to take that into account.
My reaction was more to the implicit “distance doesn’t matter as much as washing hands” contention. May not have been your intent but that’s how it read.
That, and the “nervous nellie” comment of course – which starts to pivot the discussion from “i have an opinion, let’s debate rationally” to “i know the facts and those who disagree are fake news or nasty”
I have to admit that I’m with @Greg about the condescension. It’s unbecoming and frankly beneath you.
As to the policy itself, it’s quite clever. People can either fly in fairly full planes or abrogate their right to complain if they choose not to fly on an empty red eye. The policy is impractical long term but if it gets people flying for now, why not?
How do you think people will react when United says, okay, we can no longer offer this option? Will there not be widespread outrage?
The problem is, it’s only going to get worse – schedules have been decimated through June (down 90%) but you are quickly going to have 25-50% pax increases weekly (off of a small base)
Precisely. And this is why I question the idea of allowing this and creating an entitlement that people should never have reasonably expected in the first place.
Follow me here. I used to LOVE leaving work on a Friday before a three-day weekend at 5pm. Way back in the day, this was the worst time to leave so everyone adjusted their time over the years away from a 5pm departure (leaving either earlier or later) so the new 5pm time was great.
Now, I am flying, say United tomorrow on a ‘full’ flight. United sends a message to me but also to everyone else saying the plane is full. Guess what, many passengers with this new information will bail on that flight making it nearly empty. My 2c prediction….
I For one applaud the term “Nervous Nellies”.
They believe that everything that is opening is…”too soon”.
If I need to fly..I will fly.
If I was that scared..I would not..whether there was an open middle seat or 50 feet of room.
I would drive or not go.
It was a “Nervous Nellie” that caused the silly practice of requiring face masks..that do nothing.
There are 2 sides to this…the overly cautious and the ones that want to get back to normal.
Not the “new normal” but normal.
These 2 sides are heavily divided by political affiliation.
Or we could say
There are 2 sides to this… the “Arrogant Arthurs” who are self-absorbed and the ones who actually care about humanity and other people.
Pretty easy to try and dress up a personal bias as “there are 2 sides” while clearly disclosing where you actually stand.
I’m not speaking for Debra, only myself. But I care deeply about humanity and other people, which is why I have been quarantined for two months now and will continue to abide by government orders. Yet more and more I am exploring the idea that the unintended consequences to human life, which touches not just on economic health, but physical and mental health, have not been properly quantified…
I was going to say the same thing, that masks are most likely (adding that just in case they actually do help) nothing more than a psychological crutch too.
You make the common mistake of thinking masks don’t work – they do, just not in the manner you expect. If I wear a cloth mask it doesn’t protect me from you…it protects you from me.
Not understanding that is what makes some people so infuriating. If you refuse to wear a mask, it tells me with certainty that you don’t care about infecting the people around you, and likely are not one who diligently observes social distancing…making you exactly the person I don’t want to see without a mask.
Countries where masks are routine – China, Japan, South Korea – have a lot lower rate of Covid-19 infection than we do. Masks work – don’t be scared to wear one.
Customer relations start with setting the customer’s expectation. That’s on the business. United used unfortunate language which led many customers to the mistaken belief that the middle seat would be hard “blocked”. United’s policy goes above & beyond, and coming off of that policy as this pandemic eventually wanes will be problematic. Seat inventory is a funny thing. Once an airline flies an empty seat, that’s a revenue source that’s gone and is irretrievable. If passengers insist on a policy that substantially reduced an airline’s seat inventory, then those same passengers should be will to absorb the cost of that lost inventory in the form of higher fares.
There should be ZERO flights more than ~1/3 full. Anything more is a flying petri dish and something that should NOT be operating under current conditions. Why do airlines get a free pass on social distancing, and what sort of unpatriotic idiots are cramming themselves into virus-tubes for hours on end? I got COVID-19 on a United Flight 2 months ago and nearly died. At that time, there was no evidence of “community transmission,” and I thought I’d be safe on a domestic flight. I wasn’t. The air-travel industry should be forced either to behave responsibly or SHUT DOWN.
Matthew,
I’m asking this in all sincerity, because this post seems uncharacteristic from you (angry, slightly condescending, lecturing) – what are your thoughts on Covid19? I’m likely jumping to conclusions here but you seem to think the pandemic and the measures implemented are overblown?
I have to fly frequently for my job (only 2-4 times a month; so not a road warrior) and will have to make the decision to fly soon. I haven’t seen it as a matter of the airline’s doing much. Airlines are in business for a profit and they will do what they have to do. Planes are flying germ magnets anyway I don’t think any amount of social distancing will do much. I think the question now though is with restrictions in place, and with the airlines making pompous statements about what they’re doing, it’s generated expectations on the part of the flying public. And when they don’t do what they said they’re going to do it creates controversy and disappointment.
Again, I’m sincere here and not trying to be controversial or political…
I’m working on a post to address this in a thoughtful way.
Those who do not like the words nervous nellies, what would you prefer? Pussy, cry baby, nut case? If you don’t wanna fly then stay home. Don’t jump on someone for pointing out that you are all of the above. This is an already overly sensitive PC correct nation now you’re just making it worse. Do us all a favor and stay home.
“what would you prefer?”
Rational, sane, caring about others? As opposed to people like you, arrogant, selfish, and ignorant?