sentence
stringlengths
2
568
label
class label
3 classes
idx
int32
0
5.71k
zero-fare tickets should be compensated by recrediting the passenger with the number of miles used for the journey, plus cash for minor overhead costs.
1unverifiable
200
before talking about something being too harsh for the airlines, we have to decide what to do about the fact the airlines were all against a passenger bill of right.
1unverifiable
201
if they didn't want something that would help it's customers, then customers should push for the harshest punishment possible.
1unverifiable
202
charging extra for all checked bags ultimately causes passenger injuries.
1unverifiable
203
the proposed rule is wise and good and forbids a despicable practice, but misses the larger issue of passenger safety.
1unverifiable
204
charging for all checked bags encourages travelers to overload the overhead bins with large, heavy bags.
1unverifiable
205
passengers are not professional baggage handlers.
1unverifiable
206
baggage handlers don't hoist bags they can barely lift over passengers' heads.
1unverifiable
207
passengers do this or pay $20-$40 extra per bag.
2non-experiential
208
passengers are not as fit as baggage handlers, are not trained at all, and often can not lift their bags into the crowded overhead bins.
1unverifiable
209
"many need wheels to move their ""carry on"" bags through the airport."
1unverifiable
210
passengers frequently drop bags on other passengers while loading or unloading the bins,
1unverifiable
211
these large bags, especially the wheels, hurt when a bag falls on your head.
1unverifiable
212
please require airlines to allow for some generous weight in checked baggage.
1unverifiable
213
the old limit of 75 pounds domestic was really nice,
1unverifiable
214
but even 30 pounds would be more than plenty.
1unverifiable
215
the passengers hate the baggage charge for many reasons.
1unverifiable
216
it's not just the sleazy entrapment the proposed rule addresses.
1unverifiable
217
it is a safety issue and should be regulated as such.
1unverifiable
218
* yes, there should be uniform tarmac delay deadline to return to gate and allow passengers to exit the plane,
1unverifiable
219
and it should be 2 hours, not 3 hours.
1unverifiable
220
because the passenger comfort issue is equally bad on smaller aircraft, or at any airport.
1unverifiable
221
* making the tarmac contingency plan part of the contract of carriage would be much more good, than bad.
1unverifiable
222
explicit written commitments are important, and are a competitive issue that passengers may care about in choosing a carrier for repeated trips.
1unverifiable
223
or too often passengers will be stuck in an aircraft
1unverifiable
224
because the airport will not provide a gate or other opportunity for passengers to deplane, when the time limit is exceeded.
1unverifiable
225
* providing for a separate location in an international terminal is appropriate, to allow deplaning without passing through customs.
1unverifiable
226
it does not seem unduly burdensome, given the length of many international flights and the consequent greater need to provide for passenger comfort during long delays.
1unverifiable
227
* yes, dot should require that passengers be allowed to deplane for gate delays with door still open, or returns to gate for mechanical or emergency reasons.
1unverifiable
228
asking passengers to remain in the immediate gate area to listen for boarding announcements, and expecting as passengers to be accountable to do so at the risk of missing our flight if we fail, is also reasonable.
1unverifiable
229
the costs and operational concerns should be minimal, with all of this kept in mind.
1unverifiable
230
"when an airline ""bumps"" a passenger it is, in essence, ""buying"" that ticket back from the passenger to sell it to someone else, and then ""purchasing"" a new ticket for the bumped passenger on the next available flight."
1unverifiable
231
it follows that the airline should pay the prevailing market rate to purchase back the seat in the full flight.
1unverifiable
232
bumping compensation should apply to all carriers because of the increasing use of regional carriers to serve smaller markets and their no lesser disruptiveness and potential expense to the traveler.
1unverifiable
233
"passengers may lack check cashing privileges away from their home airport, yet face unplanned and likely elevated expenses after being ""bumped."""
2non-experiential
234
they should have a mandatory option of cash payment.
1unverifiable
235
the proposed compensation limits are too low to provide an incentive to the airlines to limit overbooking and may be arbitrarily unfair to certain travelers.
1unverifiable
236
the wall street journal recently re-proposed a 1977 proposal by the late economist julian simon of an auction that would offer bumped passengers a gradually rising reward for giving up their seat.
2non-experiential
237
the arguments are rather compelling.
1unverifiable
238
the airlines will overbook so as to optimize their financial results under any given set of caps,
1unverifiable
239
so some passengers will still be involuntarily denied boarding on overbooked flights.
1unverifiable
240
an auction will more accurately price the delay and the sellers will be left with no complaint that it was involuntary.
1unverifiable
241
an auction would also force the carriers to face the cost of overbooking in customer dissatisfaction and better inform their flight scheduling decisions.
1unverifiable
242
i recall hearing seats being auctioned by progressive increases in the promised compensation by gate agents,
0experiential
243
so perhaps those earlier rules should be revisited.
1unverifiable
244
i support uniform regulations requiring both airlines and ticket agents to disclose all fees online before purchase, for all flights and all carriers.
1unverifiable
245
regulations should be as uniform as possible and applied uniformly.
1unverifiable
246
on a flight with american airlines i was with my sister in law that is deadly allergic to peanuts.
0experiential
247
i asked the flight attendant not to sell peanuts on the flight.
0experiential
248
she came back with the regulation book explaining that the company policy was not to accommodate her.
0experiential
249
i did clearly explain that if peanut dust is in the air it will cause her a sever assma attack.
0experiential
250
they did nothing to help us and did offer to sell peanuts on the flight.
0experiential
251
my sister in law took benadrel and was very scard for the entire flight.
0experiential
252
she did get filled up but didn't have an attack.
0experiential
253
she is very afraid to fly.
0experiential
254
why don't they just serve snacks that don't have the potential to kill someone!!!!!
1unverifiable
255
i would support a full ban of peanut products on any airline.
1unverifiable
256
peanut reactions can be life threatening.
2non-experiential
257
an individual doesn't have to consume the product to have a life threatening reaction.
1unverifiable
258
they can have contact or inhalation reactions.
2non-experiential
259
restricting to certain flights is not enough,
1unverifiable
260
providing buffer zones is a thoughtful gesture, but from a practical point of view does not work.
1unverifiable
261
i am a physician , and author on the subject.
0experiential
262
i have free food allergy online support forums with 3000 members.
0experiential
263
i would be more than willing to work with you in any way on this decision making process.
1unverifiable
264
feel free to contact me with any questions you may have.
1unverifiable
265
here is a link to that study
2non-experiential
266
as this is my focus in a lot of my research,
0experiential
267
and i have had much trouble finding examples.
1unverifiable
268
i also think it should be noted that a lot of airlines do follow some of these rules on their own, and would most likely lose out on a lot of business without adopting such options.
1unverifiable
269
that being said, if i would like to travel on the cheap, realizing that it could come at a cost of worse customer service, in a lot of situations, i'd be willing to live with poorer service for lower prices.
1unverifiable
270
and i'm not doing anything this summer,
0experiential
271
but i have done free market research for different papers and what not for school, and helped a professor with work on f.a. hayek and ayn rand.
0experiential
272
so, nothing specifically about airlines, but markets and regulations in general, and most of what i have read points to all evidence showing regulations being counter-productive.
2non-experiential
273
this comment to me shows that we don't need regulation.
1unverifiable
274
"if people behave the way that bernice does, choosing to no longer fly with an airline that does not provide adequate customer service, these customers ""vote"" with their money saying that this experience needs to be fixed,"
1unverifiable
275
or else we will take our business elsewhere.
1unverifiable
276
it really is in the airlines' best interests to serve customers well in order to retain customers and gain a good reputation to get more customers.
1unverifiable
277
in a competitive industry, being able to separate your company as being better than the rest gives you a huge advantage.
1unverifiable
278
without government control, businesses can, and will, do whatever they please, no matter how bad it is for their cusomers.
1unverifiable
279
that's why we need regulations like this!
1unverifiable
280
i, for one, don't mind seeing tax dollars go for this purpose!
1unverifiable
281
i believe airlines should be forced to fully reimburse confirmed passengers whenever the airline changes flight schedules after booking.
1unverifiable
282
i frequently reserve flights up to one year in advance, in order to secure the lowest price and best seat.
0experiential
283
i do this even though the airline will charge me $150 to change my itinerary for personal reasons once booked.
0experiential
284
however, the airline frequently change flight schedules for confirmed passengers without compensation, nor consideration of passengers' plans.
2non-experiential
285
for example, a trip to europe on united airlines has now been changed 7 times by the airline since i confirmed my reservation in december 2009.
0experiential
286
the resulting changes have added nearly 5 hours to the total trip,
0experiential
287
plus i'm now required to leave at 3am for the airport ,
0experiential
288
and i return after midnight, rather than a more reasonable 10:30pm.
0experiential
289
in addition, united airlines has not offered to waive the change fee, nor provide seats on alternate dates or airline partners.
0experiential
290
if i'm required to pay exorbitant fees to the airlines to change my original itinerary, due to personal circumstances, then the airlines should also be required to compensate inconvenienced passengers in full and provide satisfactory alternate travel arrangements comparable to the original flight schedule.
1unverifiable
291
perhaps this would force the airlines to recognize the hardships they create for passengers when schedules are revised after passengers have already received confirmed flights and make related travel arrangements.
1unverifiable
292
but sadly, too often it is too late then.
1unverifiable
293
i do not back banning peanuts, but even in doubt, a child would get peanuts, when they can produce proof of no such allergy, if in doubt, give something else.
1unverifiable
294
a law that prevents harm, does not have to be a blanket law.
1unverifiable
295
it could be part of a passport.
1unverifiable
296
aa was supposed to send a confirmation to my e-mail address and did not.
0experiential
297
after the flight, i now have to jump through hoops to get a copy of the reservation for my use.
0experiential
298
i needed to call spirit airline directly to get a refund for a paid reservation during their strike instead of having them automatically contact me about refunding my purchase price.
0experiential
299