First of all, I haven't encountered any AA
staff with an attitude. On the other hand, I flew UA
in 1996 when the F/As were negotiating a contract. Since they had passed on joining the ESOP and were regretting working for the pilots and the mechanics, they were pulling major attitudes.
Second, when an airline says it has a load factor of 75%, it doesn't mean that every flight is 25% empty. It means that most flights are full or have only a few empty middle seats, and the remaining flights are 2/3s empty.
So, for those flights that are full or nearly full, adding seats will add revenue, particularly on those flights that are overbooked.
On the one hand, I agree that the legacy carriers ought to quit chasing the leisure flyer and solely concentrate on the business flyer. But I'm not sure that would work. I think people now have a mindset that an airline seat is just a commodity, regardless what an airline does or doesn't do with its in-flight service.
A friend of mine is a pilot with AA
. We once figured out that even removing 10 seats from an F100, AA
could get more revenue on a flight from ORD
if on that flight, only 3 more people bought refundable tickets, i.e., business fares.
But even when AA
puts the seats back in the MD
-80s, I'm still going to fly AA
. I've watched enough "Airline" to know that I don't want to fly with drunks and people who think screaming at CSAs is the only way to get some service.