Why are flights being cancelled from Florida today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They move the planes and crew out of the storm's path. They don't want either in harms way. This always happens, and it shouldn't be a big surprise. They move planes out ahead of big snow storms too.

+1

Ok. But yesterday was still 3 days before any Irma wind would hit MIA. Next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS got out of Miami yesterday. On Monday, before anyone breathed a mention of "evacuate", he booked a flight out of MIA for Thursday, 3 days ahead of Irma's likely hit. Sounds reasonably prudent to me.

So American had 9 scheduled flights yesterday MIA to DCA.
First 2 flights: cancelled.
Next 2 flights on time.
Next flight cancelled.
Next 2 flights take of within 30 minutes of schedule (DS was on one of these).
Last two flights were at least 2-3 hours delayed -- I assume they took off eventually.

I cannot blame anyone for planning and having their flight cancelled (still 3 days ahead of Irma). If DSs flight did not take off, his plan B would have been to wait out the storm with a family of a friend of a friend who was offering shelter to people stranded.

The cancelled flights were for insufficient crew.

Half the flights cancelled 3 days before a hurricane? That's a lot of missing crew.
Oh and when I tried to change my flight from Thursday to Wednesday? American waived the change fee but the difference in ticket price was $2000 (for MIA to DCA one way). Thanks American.

This was the computer - it raised the prices when everyone started searching for flights. American has since capped the prices.

Blaming the computer? That didn't help anyone get out Wednesday. Or avert 50% cancellation on Thursday. The cap on fares came many hours and many many screaming complaints later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS got out of Miami yesterday. On Monday, before anyone breathed a mention of "evacuate", he booked a flight out of MIA for Thursday, 3 days ahead of Irma's likely hit. Sounds reasonably prudent to me.

So American had 9 scheduled flights yesterday MIA to DCA.
First 2 flights: cancelled.
Next 2 flights on time.
Next flight cancelled.
Next 2 flights take of within 30 minutes of schedule (DS was on one of these).
Last two flights were at least 2-3 hours delayed -- I assume they took off eventually.

I cannot blame anyone for planning and having their flight cancelled (still 3 days ahead of Irma). If DSs flight did not take off, his plan B would have been to wait out the storm with a family of a friend of a friend who was offering shelter to people stranded.

The cancelled flights were for insufficient crew.

Half the flights cancelled 3 days before a hurricane? That's a lot of missing crew.
Oh and when I tried to change my flight from Thursday to Wednesday? American waived the change fee but the difference in ticket price was $2000 (for MIA to DCA one way). Thanks American.

This was the computer - it raised the prices when everyone started searching for flights. American has since capped the prices.

Blaming the computer? That didn't help anyone get out Wednesday. Or avert 50% cancellation on Thursday. The cap on fares came many hours and many many screaming complaints later.

You can believe what you want, but I work in the industry. It gets exhausting trying to explain this to people who don't understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You'd think in an emergency situation they could fly the planes with less flight attendants. Just say they aren't offering snacks, drinks, etc. Sit down and don't ask for anything. I always think there are too many on flights, but I realize it's a union thing.

How stupid. I'm not in the airline industry but even I know that there has to be a certain number of crew for passenger safety. On a large plane, one attendant can't man all the passengers. If that plane is going down or has any malfunctions while in the air, it's the flight attendants that know what to do. If there are belligerent people on the plane putting other people in uncomfortable or unsafe situations, it's the flight attendants that know what to do.

I don't think all flight attendants are great, but they have a job for a reason. And the fact that most flights don't even serve anything anymore and they still have their jobs means they have other responsibilities outside of passing out peanuts.

They also get paid next to nothing so I don't blame them for not wanting to fly to Miami.

+1

SIL is a flight attendant. She's essentially trained as an in-flight EMS and conflict/emergency manager. Serving drinks is a completely secondary part of the job.

[Anonymous]

I'm certain a computer program set to increase fares as demand increases can also set a cap on prices. Thus avoiding price-gouging. It's exhausting explaining this to people who lack a rudimentary understanding of computer programming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You'd think in an emergency situation they could fly the planes with less flight attendants. Just say they aren't offering snacks, drinks, etc. Sit down and don't ask for anything. I always think there are too many on flights, but I realize it's a union thing.

How stupid. I'm not in the airline industry but even I know that there has to be a certain number of crew for passenger safety. On a large plane, one attendant can't man all the passengers. If that plane is going down or has any malfunctions while in the air, it's the flight attendants that know what to do. If there are belligerent people on the plane putting other people in uncomfortable or unsafe situations, it's the flight attendants that know what to do.

I don't think all flight attendants are great, but they have a job for a reason. And the fact that most flights don't even serve anything anymore and they still have their jobs means they have other responsibilities outside of passing out peanuts.

They also get paid next to nothing so I don't blame them for not wanting to fly to Miami.

+1

SIL is a flight attendant. She's essentially trained as an in-flight EMS and conflict/emergency manager. Serving drinks is a completely secondary part of the job.

This. There are FAA regulations for a reason. FA's are there for comfort, sure. But they are also there to carefully coordinate an evacuation in an emergency, and offer first aid during a medical emergency. There are prodcedures in place, and they all require, and are implemented with, a certain number of FAs depending on the aircraft. The airline doesn't decide this, the FAA does. There isn't the option of "oh, lets just do it this way, because a hurricane/snowstorm/flood/wildfire/anything"

I'm a flight attendant, and it is exhausting explaining this to people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm certain a computer program set to increase fares as demand increases can also set a cap on prices. Thus avoiding price-gouging. It's exhausting explaining this to people who lack a rudimentary understanding of computer programming.

Exactly. It's pretty basic and so obvious it's some algorithm doing its job. Once the company becomes aware, it is adjusted.

People really like to let their ignorance show sometimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm certain a computer program set to increase fares as demand increases can also set a cap on prices. Thus avoiding price-gouging. It's exhausting explaining this to people who lack a rudimentary understanding of computer programming.

But you don't set a cap on prices if it's true increased demand caused by something not humanitarian-related (a golf tournament, huge concert, etc.). And the computer can't determine that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You'd think in an emergency situation they could fly the planes with less flight attendants. Just say they aren't offering snacks, drinks, etc. Sit down and don't ask for anything. I always think there are too many on flights, but I realize it's a union thing.

How stupid. I'm not in the airline industry but even I know that there has to be a certain number of crew for passenger safety. On a large plane, one attendant can't man all the passengers. If that plane is going down or has any malfunctions while in the air, it's the flight attendants that know what to do. If there are belligerent people on the plane putting other people in uncomfortable or unsafe situations, it's the flight attendants that know what to do.

I don't think all flight attendants are great, but they have a job for a reason. And the fact that most flights don't even serve anything anymore and they still have their jobs means they have other responsibilities outside of passing out peanuts.

They also get paid next to nothing so I don't blame them for not wanting to fly to Miami.

Flight attendants aren't just trained in serving pretzels and bloody marys. If there is a problem with the plane, they are the ones who are going to get you off of the plane, safely, so that you can see your family again.

[Anonymous]

This thread reminds me of the Devil Wears Prada hurricane / plane scene:

https://www.nytimes.com/video/movies/100000003385796/the-devil-wears-prada-scene-get-me-out-of-here.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm certain a computer program set to increase fares as demand increases can also set a cap on prices. Thus avoiding price-gouging. It's exhausting explaining this to people who lack a rudimentary understanding of computer programming.

Why shouldn't prices rise to meet demand? Price mechanisms are a signal to the market that it needs to increase supply. Think about Uber and its surge pricing. When demand increases, Uber increases prices to entice more drivers onto the road to meet the increased demand. Increasing prices for flights should, if you believe the iron laws oof economics, induce airlines to increase flights where demand is highest. This is the same for other commodities. Water supplies are low, prices rise, market players respond by increasing the amountof water available on the market, stabilizing prices.

See John Stossel:

http://www.theledger.com/opinion/20170906/stossel-case-for-disaster-related-price-gouging

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm certain a computer program set to increase fares as demand increases can also set a cap on prices. Thus avoiding price-gouging. It's exhausting explaining this to people who lack a rudimentary understanding of computer programming.

But you don't set a cap on prices if it's true increased demand caused by something not humanitarian-related (a golf tournament, huge concert, etc.). And the computer can't determine that.

That's not an excuse. Price gouging went on for almost a day before the cap was set in place. American was certainly aware of the "humanitarian-related" demand because they sent the emails saying weather could affect flights and they were waiving change fees. So save $100 on change fee but pay $2000 more for your flight. Thanks American!

[Anonymous]

Oh yes, I can't remember. How did Miranda priestly get home?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm certain a computer program set to increase fares as demand increases can also set a cap on prices. Thus avoiding price-gouging. It's exhausting explaining this to people who lack a rudimentary understanding of computer programming.

Why shouldn't prices rise to meet demand? Price mechanisms are a signal to the market that it needs to increase supply. Think about Uber and its surge pricing. When demand increases, Uber increases prices to entice more drivers onto the road to meet the increased demand. Increasing prices for flights should, if you believe the iron laws oof economics, induce airlines to increase flights where demand is highest. This is the same for other commodities. Water supplies are low, prices rise, market players respond by increasing the amountof water available on the market, stabilizing prices.

See John Stossel:

http://www.theledger.com/opinion/20170906/stossel-case-for-disaster-related-price-gouging

See "humanitarian-related reasons" if you can find them in your book. And yes, I understand economics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm certain a computer program set to increase fares as demand increases can also set a cap on prices. Thus avoiding price-gouging. It's exhausting explaining this to people who lack a rudimentary understanding of computer programming.

Why shouldn't prices rise to meet demand? Price mechanisms are a signal to the market that it needs to increase supply. Think about Uber and its surge pricing. When demand increases, Uber increases prices to entice more drivers onto the road to meet the increased demand. Increasing prices for flights should, if you believe the iron laws oof economics, induce airlines to increase flights where demand is highest. This is the same for other commodities. Water supplies are low, prices rise, market players respond by increasing the amountof water available on the market, stabilizing prices.

See John Stossel:

http://www.theledger.com/opinion/20170906/stossel-case-for-disaster-related-price-gouging

How high does the price need to be before airlines are willing to fly into areas where major hurricanes are about to hit?