Boston to London

“Abigail Adams was terrified of the sea.” That information comes from the beginning of Chapter Six of John Adams by David McCullough. He goes on to describe her trip to Europe in 1784 to join her husband John, who had been negotiating support from France, peace with England and financial help from The Netherlands.

Having been separated from him for four and a half years, she gathered her courage to join him in Europe. Prior to that she had never been away from her home in Massachusetts or the home of a close relative for more than a night or two.

It says of the passengers, no sooner was the ship out of port “than they were all horribly seasick.” In her words, the passengers “crawled upon [the] deck whenever we were able, but it was so cold and damp that we could not remain long.” 

“The ship was filthy and carrying a cargo of whale oil and potash.” The rolling of the ship caused leaks in the cargo containers resulting in a very unpleasant odor from below. The only way to get air into their cabins was to leave the doors to the main cabin, where the men slept, partially open, with only curtains to afford the women a small sense of privacy.

When they dropped anchor in the English Channel, after 30 days at sea, the only way to get ashore was in an open pilot boat exposed to “squally rain and the roar of the heaving waves, with everyone soaked to the skin.”  She had to be supported by some of the crewmen to avoid being swept overboard.

The next day they traveled seventy-two miles to London in one day, twice what was at that time considered a hard day’s journey, exposed to robbers and highwaymen along the way, dangers that were in those days a rarity along roads in the United States.

Her return trip was described later in the book as a 58-day “rough crossing.”

Consider that today it takes six and a half hours to travel from Boston to London. When they arrive passengers will complain about long security lines at the airport, the size of the seats, the food service and a fear of flying that can only be conquered with the help of a comfort animal. Perspective anyone?

Economic Connections

Last time I checked into a hotel or motel, it was quite simple. I parked temporarily in front, walked in and told the desk clerk my name and handed over my credit card. In short order I got my credit card back along with my room key and was politely given directions to the room along with other information, such as breakfast or pool hours. I parked my car or drove it to the most convenient doorway. It was easy and pleasant.

The last time I boarded an airplane was a different story. If someone dropped me off, parking was limited and patrolled – and don’t leave the car unattended. I had to show an ID to get my boarding pass and check luggage, which was presumably inspected after the airline took control. I then took my carry-on bag to the security area where everyone lined up, showed an ID again, showed a boarding pass, took off shoes, emptied pockets, separated electronic devices, walked through a scanner, and sometimes had to be rescanned or even searched. I then picked up my belongings, refilled my pockets, put on my belt and shoes and walked to the gate.

It used to be much simpler. Relatives could even meet you at the gate when you arrived, but not any more. Now there is security everywhere, and for good reason. We don’t want terrorists or crazy people to be able to use the airports or airplanes for murder.

This came to mind when I read about  MGM "suing" the victims and survivors of the shooting massacre in Las Vegas where a lone gunman used the MGM-owned Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino as his base of operations to slaughter 58 concertgoers and wound many others. 

Suing these innocent people sounds heartless, but the word is not being used in the familiar sense. There will be no trial, no testimony, no demand for payment. MGM filed for a declaratory judgment, where a judge decides whether they can be held liable for damages. “Here, MGM is asking a federal court to pre-emptively determine whether a particular federal law prohibits a lawsuit by the victims against MGM, instead forcing them to sue only the vendor that provided security.” As people line up to sue someone, MGM wants a judge to move them out of the line of fire.

Of course there are lawyers already jumping into the fray looking for victims to represent and for deep pockets to exploit. In addition, because people either don’t understand the intent of the lawsuit and jump to the conclusion of heartless behavior or believe that the victims deserve as much compensation as possible regardless of real fault, boycotts are being encouraged.

Now I have no interest at all in MGM, but I can predict the ramifications of such a battle. Lawyers will argue that the hotel, and by extension MGM, did not do everything possible to avoid the situation – that’s the usual argument, “everything possible.” Everyone else in the hospitality industry will be put on notice. Their insurance will increase, and they will begin to take steps to do everything possible – which, by the way, is impossible when you can’t predict what threat(s) to anticipate.

As a result, all travelers will be affected in at least a couple of ways. First, things will cost more. Economic understanding tells us that when costs like insurance and precautions go up across an entire industry, there is no competitive incentive to absorb the costs. They are easily passed on to all customers.

Second, could checking into a motel become more like taking the plane, with some combination of heavily monitored parking, baggage inspections, metal detectors, photo IDs, take off your shoes and empty your pockets – with the same for all visitors and meeting attendees? 

The second outcome is not guaranteed, but it is possible. This lawsuit by the owner of a Vegas hotel may seem unfair and distant, but our world is connected in many unexpected ways.

Air Rage

A few weeks ago I commented on the doctor being dragged from an overbooked United Airlines flight.  Since then there have been incidents of a mother hit by a stroller while boarding an American Airlines plane, followed by a heated confrontation between a flight attendant and passenger on the same flight, a brawl between customers and police over Spirit flight delays in Ft. Lauderdale and a full fist fight between two passengers on a Southwest flight as they deplaned in Los Angeles.  Is this a new, widespread phenomenon or just another case of the “summer of the shark attack”?

Despite Time Magazine labeling the summer of 2001 as the Summer of the Shark Attack, with other media outlets picking up the theme, it turned out to be just another case of hype from the news.  A University of Florida investigation yielded a different story.  “The annual total of 76 unprovoked attacks worldwide [in 2001] was less than the 85 recorded in 2000, and fatalities declined from 12 to five in the same period.”  This is typical of what happens when the news uncovers a supposed trend with scary consequences.  Now we have this barrage of stories about how badly the airlines treat customers, and Congress gets to show off by calling in the CEOs to grill them about policies and practices.

Perhaps this has something to do with expectations.  When commercial airlines first began service, air travel was a luxury, limited to those who could afford the high ticket prices, executives and movie stars.  People dressed up for the experience.  The common folks who had to travel long distances drove their own cars or took the bus, Greyhound or Trailways, which was relatively inexpensive and not very luxurious.

Now the buses have added more amenities: more comfortable seats with extra legroom, free Wi-Fi, no safety restrictions on phone use and individual power outlets.  Meanwhile, airlines have turned into fast versions of the older busses, where everyone is squeezed on and service is limited.  The whole experience has changed.

Compare this to “road rage,” a term created in the 1980s to describe aggressive or irate driving.  Media stories of road rage have increased from 4,000 per year in the late 1990s to over 13,000 by 2012.  It is often blamed on a combination of more vehicles on the road and an “atmosphere in this country [that] has people more stressed,” an atmosphere of stress that has been amplified over the past two years.  Yet when is the last time we heard of an incident of road rage highlighted and played over and over on the news?  By now it’s old news.  But when the current state of hyper-stress in society is manifest on an airplane instead of behind the wheel and captured with a viral smartphone video, it becomes a headline.  When it happens two or three times (out of 2.5 million domestic airline passengers per day), it takes on the appearance of a serious pattern, like the summer-of-the-shark-attack.

We must always be aware that the news media is in the business of selling news.  The best news will engage us through fear, disgust, curiosity or excitement.  Good pictures and exaggeration add to the sale.  If necessary they will make it up, for example by conducting a poll and then report the results of the poll as a surprising revelation.  They follow important trends, like the murder of black citizens by police last summer, or trivial trends, like these incidents of air rage; then drop them and move on when interest wanes or another, more enticing crisis crowds them out.  It’s up to us to think critically and distinguish between the two.

Critical Thinking About the United Airlines Fiasco

By now everyone has heard the news and seen pictures of the doctor being dragged from the United Airlines flight from Chicago to Louisville.  The Internet and network news went crazy with cell-phone videos of the incident.  The company stock is dropping based partially on talk of a boycott in protest.  The CEO apologized, but it’s too late; the damage is done.  Now Americans are pouring out prayers and sympathy for the doctor, but is this really justified?  

It is clear that the company screwed up to such an extent that they deserve the public relations disaster they are experiencing.  There were clearly other solutions.  Four seats were needed on the plane for crewmembers who had to be in Louisville (and rested) in the morning for uninterrupted service the next day.  Since there were no more flights available that night, the company could have used the thousands of dollars offered in vouchers to pay for ground transportation for the five-hour drive either for the bumped passengers or the crew.  Otherwise, they could have announced that the plane was not moving until that passenger got off and let peer pressure take over.  Instead they called in the airport security goons.

But something is missing.  According to earlier stories, the airline offered vouchers and motel to volunteers but got none.  Then they resorted to a random drawing to choose passengers to give up their seats.  What of the other three passengers?  They were not dragged from the plane, only the doctor.  How was he treated before being forcibly removed and how did he react?  The airline characterized him as "disruptive and belligerent.”  That is an opinion, but in the videos he certainly didn’t appear to be cooperative.

The big question in the midst of this outpouring of sympathy and prayers is, what was the underlying message?  It was there.  If people were alert and thinking instead of emotionally reacting to only the video, they could see it very clearly.  The underlying message from the doctor, and he might as well have stood up and shouted it at the rest of the passengers, was “I am more important than you!”

That’s right.  Three other passengers, who are receiving no media attention, cooperated with the airline in the legal exercise of their authority based on the agreement on every ticket.  “Federal rules dictate a carrier must first check whether anyone is willing to voluntarily give up their seat before then bumping flyers involuntarily if nobody comes forward.”  It’s the law.

So did the doctor react as the others did?  If someone else had been chosen, he would have sat back and enjoyed the flight with the message unspoken.  But when he was chosen, he reacted like a two-year-old who didn’t get his way.  He went limp, forcing security agents to drag him off.  He looked like a protester being removed from a picket line.  But remember what he was protesting – he was protesting his right, his firm belief, that he was better than everyone else on that flight.  If you had been on the flight, the implicit message figuratively being shouted in your face as he was dragged from the plane would have been, “I am more important than you, too!”

With that in mind, give him as much sympathy as you think he deserves, but don’t forget the message.  Also note that one interviewed passenger mentioned that she and her son “were sitting in the row directly behind…the doctor and his wife.”  Wait, yet another solution, if he had patients so desperately in need of attention the following morning, couldn’t he have turned to his wife and said, “Excuse me for imposing, Dear, but you know the situation.  Would you be so kind, and I promise to make it up to you.”  Given that information perhaps the patients were not the issue but merely a pretext for the real message, “I am more important than you.”

Predictable But Still Unexpected

In February 2013 when I wrote, “Will airlines charge based on the total weight of the luggage and the passenger?” some people thought I must have been joking.  Here is a reliable news source reporting another step in that direction.  “Two American Samoan businessmen have filed complaints with the U.S. Department of Transportation alledging [sic] they may have been the target of discrimination after being weighed while boarding a recent flight from Honolulu.

“In the complaints, the men also say they were assigned new seats on the aircraft that they did not originally select, to ensure that the weight on the flight was evenly distributed.”

I don’t claim any supernatural powers.  In most cases, any semblance of clairvoyance is merely a matter of looking at behavior and predicting the logical consequences.  Airlines already weigh baggage.  They also must estimate the weight of passengers to calculate the amount of fuel needed to safely make the flight.  In this case, after finding that the fuel burn on certain flights was consistently higher than expected, they ran a survey to find how far off their estimates had been and to make the appropriate adjustments.

The businessmen were not barred from the flight or apparently inconvenienced in any way except to be assigned new seats to better balance the plane.  It seems reasonable that passengers, even though they were customers of the airline, would be interested in cooperating to make sure the airplane they were riding in for many hours over open water was properly balanced and had enough fuel.  But as I noted last week, some people are so spoiled that they look for ways to be offended.

This was just a weight distribution issue, but the trend continues.  “In 2013, Samoa Air became the world's first airline to charge passengers according to size.”  Ticket prices are based on combined weight of passenger and baggage.  With an adult obesity rate estimated around 95 percent, it’s not surprising that American Samoans became the first to face this new fare scheme.  But as the issues of fuel and balance are real for every airline, will they be the last?   In what other unexpected areas will the consequences of our problems with discipline affect our lives and wallets?

I'm Not Joking

No, I wasn’t joking back in February 2013 when I wrote, “Will airlines charge based on the total weight of the luggage and passenger?

The subject was whether or not overweight people will begin to feel the same kind of pressure from government and businesses as smokers now do.  Secondhand smoke has been declared a danger, especially to children and otherwise can be very irritating to nonsmokers.  Smoking also adds to medical costs, so it is considered in the public interest that the act of smoking be both isolated and discouraged by restrictions and higher prices.  But obesity has social costs of its own.

Have you ever seen or heard a heath publication or advice to prevent or cure a disease that did not include eating less and exercising more or maintaining a healthy weight?  Not taking care of these basics leads to many diseases and increased healthcare costs.  With economic understanding it is easy to establish that healthcare costs accumulated by one segment of society affect the costs of everyone as the total cost is spread over the entire population to make healthcare affordable to all.

So just yesterday on CBS This Morning this news came:  “Airplane maker Airbus has filed a patent for a new kind of adjustable seat that could…change the seating to make room for larger passengers.”  This would most likely come with a fee, and as they say later in the story, “could usher in a day when the airlines could truly price by your size.”

So there it is, three years after the initial warning here.  Along those lines, the general warning remains the same:  when we don’t improve our behavior, economic and governmental forces tend to take over the job for us through penalties, restrictions and by other methods.  Behavior does have consequences.

Please Pass the Turkey?

About ten years ago was the first time that I saw something on the Internet where I couldn’t figure out whether or not it was a legitimate news story or a creative work of fiction.  This type of puzzle has become more and more common since then.

The latest comes from Fox News, and I had to read the entire article to make sure it wasn’t from the Onion or another satirical site.  It involved a turkey allowed to board a Delta flight as a support or comfort animal.  “The passenger provided proper documentation proving the fowl was indeed their emotional support animal, so Delta let the bird on board, and even gave it its own seat.”  No information was available to determine if the passenger was pulling someone’s leg, trying to win a bet, or putting one over on the airline; but according to Federal law, airlines are required to accommodate support animals or face fines up to $150,000 for refusing legitimate requests.  The article points out that airlines have little recourse since “as those requests increase, so does the threat of a lawsuit.”

Increasingly and regardless of the paperwork, there is some question about the legitimacy of these claims as it is very easy to get a therapist to write a note, which is all it takes.  In addition websites are available where, for a fee of between $60 and $200, people can order emotional support vests and necessary letters allowing them to fly with their pets for free at any time while possibly faking the disability.

A few questions come to mind.  Aren’t airlines crowded enough with the smaller seats, less legroom and the mad dash for overhead bin space to avoid baggage fees without having to share the row with someone’s “support” critter?  After the turkey precedent to what ridiculous lengths will some people be willing to take this privilege to overcome their fear of flying?  Will you be sitting next to a parakeet cage or a goat on your next flight?

The most important question is whether America, with all our compassion, is turning into a “victimocracy,” a form of government, or at least a form of commerce where the vote of one victim outweighs the votes of dozens or even hundreds of other people just trying to live routine lives?  Will the claim of having a disease, a phobia, or some minor disability override the rights of the majority in more and more situations.  Notice that these people are never asked to compromise.  They insist on their full rights (sometimes threatening to sue if they don't get them).  As I have pointed out before, every right granted to one introduces an obligation to everyone else to respect that right, regardless of cost or inconvenience.