Your turn! The other side explains why we’re so wrong

I’m frequently accused of using this site as a bully pulpit, which is, of course, completely true.

I leverage this little corner of cyberspace to advocate for travelers who don’t have the clout of an elite-level frequent flier or the power of a corporate travel department to support them when they’re on the road.

Still, there’s something to be learned from listening to the other side — the folks responsible for inventing the fees and silly rules you have to put up with, the ones whose elite status affords them god-like treatment, the people who, let’s face it, don’t see the world the same way we do.

I don’t normally hand the mike over to them, for the simple reason that these people have their own forums. Not only do they control immense budgets with which to buy advertising and hire pricey Washington lobbyists, or have access to well-trafficked online bulletin boards in which to commiserate, but my corporate critics have also paid off a good number of my colleagues with favors and free trips. The resulting travel stories are as uncritical as they are uninteresting — which, in the end, renders them unreadable.

In this world, the company — not the customer — is always right. Fees, surcharges and wacky hidden rules are there for your own good. You get what you pay for, so if you snagged a deal on that hotel room or airline ticket, then it’s your fault if something goes wrong. It’s also perfectly acceptable to send the have-nots who lack platinum cards and fancy rollaboard luggage to the purgatory in the back of the plane, while they, the privileged few, are afforded every imaginable creature comfort in first class.

Hey, who ever said life was fair?

While I think these industry apologists are terribly misguided, it’s important to note that when I encounter the opposition, they are almost always polite, if not downright likeable. So as we dissect the other side’s views, I want to be very clear about this: My criticism is aimed at the ideas, not the people making the arguments.

Love the resort employee, hate the resort fee. Almost every time I write about any kind of fee, I get an indignant response from an airline or hotel employee, insisting that I just don’t understand. “Don’t you get it?” they insist. “We have a business to run.”

The latest was a rant by an Orlando-area hotel employee that landed in my “in” box after I ripped hotels who charged mandatory resort fees. He explained that at his condo-hotel property, mandatory resort fees are essential because they cover certain services like the “free” shuttle to the theme parks. The property also offers high-speed Internet connection for guests, and the resort fee pays for newspaper delivery and local phone calls.

What’s more, his hotel can’t just raise rates or charge separately for these services, since it would be impractical from an accounting point of view. “Your article and many of those written by consumer travel advocates, create a lot of animosity between the traveling public and lodging industry,” he added.

His opinion is wrong on many levels, but by golly, he’s entitled to it.

What we can learn: No, it’s not that mandatory resort fees are sometimes justified. They’re never justified. What isn’t justified is any kind of animosity by a guest toward a hotel employee. These workers don’t set these unpopular policies. Don’t beat them up for it.

Shame on me for calling you an airline! The car rental industry bristled when I compared it to the fee-intoxicated airline business in a recent column. Bob Barton, president of the American Car Rental Association, issued a point-by-point rebuttal of my story, which, alas, can’t be published in its entirety for space reasons.

“We are far from perfect, and there is always room for improvement, but to suggest we are remotely coming close to what the airlines are doing is shameful,” he says. “We do not charge you to put your bags in the trunk. We are not going to charge you to put a bag next to you on the seat. We do not charge you to use the entertainment system or require you to buy headphones if you do not have your own.”

Fair enough. No one is claiming rental cars and airlines are identical, but I can understand Barton’s desire not to be lumped in with the a business that’s all but forgotten customer services. Still, there are some striking similarities, don’t you think?

What we can learn: Barton’s comments suggest the travel industry is sensitive to its reputation of serving itself rather than its customers. I believe people like him, and the industry he represents, want to prove us wrong. I’m willing to give him that opportunity. I think we all should.

Who are you calling unfair? Of course, when you criticize airlines, they may think you have something against them (for the record, I don’t – I fly all the time). “Every industry has rules that people think are unfair, but if they understood the reasoning behind them, they wouldn’t feel so screwed over,” wrote one indignant airline employee after I criticized airlines for some of their more irrational pricing practices. “When I return something to a store after 30 days, why can I only get store credit? A re-stocking fee? Why do I have to pay a fee to break my cell phone contract?”

In other words, why am I picking on airlines when other businesses also do the same thing – charge fees for silly things like restocking and breaking a cell phone contract? The answer: Because this is a travel column. (I happily demolish other fees on my general consumer advocacy site, On Your Side.)

The airline employee then helpfully tried to explain the reasoning behind all of the ticketing troubles I mentioned in my story, which, to be honest, just confused me further. Which is to say, I understand that there’s a business reason for these counter-intuitive pricing practices, but I’m still trying to see the logic in it.

What we can learn: I’m as troubled as ever by the way airlines price their tickets, and think some of it should be illegal. But that’s beside the point. At the end of the day, these bizarre practices support an entire industry, and a fix would mean finding a better way of charging for air travel. Which, alas, is a few steps above my pay-grade as a travel columnist.

As a matter of fact, you do belong in the back of the plane. No columns draw more hate mail than my occasional rants about class wars at 36,000 feet. Elite-level fliers are shocked that I dared to criticize some of them for their boorish behavior, disregard for the rules and insistence on being treated better than the rest of us. How could I level such criticisms at the airline’s best customer?

“I’m fed up with you,” exclaimed one reader, who saw the air travel experience from a different perspective; specifically, the vantage point afforded by a leather first-class seat. “Your article on elite fliers seems just as arrogant as the complaints made by some elites.”

Oddly, he proceeded to agree with most of the points I made in the story, stopping only to say that elites do deserve better treatment. “Elites are very valuable customers for airlines, they fly frequently and are mostly loyal to their respective airlines, and therefore deserve some better treatment than, say, some cheapskate who paid $100 for a seat in economy class,” he adds.

The email was actually typical of the kind I get from the elite traveler: Telling me I’m all wrong, then agreeing with most of what I say, but adding that really, they do deserve to be in first class and I don’t.

And perhaps they do belong up front. But that doesn’t mean the poor saps in the back deserve to suffer, either.

What we can learn: Power and privilege can corrupt even the nicest air travelers. When they do, we shouldn’t blame the elites who have lost their bearings, but the airlines who have corrupted them. Who knew travel could turn us into this?

Listening to all of this criticism, it might be easy to conclude that I have it all wrong – that fees and surcharges are necessary, that travel companies are inherently good, that the system works. But a closer look reveals a travel industry that knows it needs to work on its image, to better explain (or change) its practices and that the system is about as broken as it gets.

Put differently, we know we’re right. They know we’re right.

Now, how do we fix it?

(Photo: Bob Fo rnal/Flickr Creative Commons)

  • http://twitter.com/sean_oneill Sean

    Great post. Don’t give up your bully pulpit!

  • Kevin

    Chris,
    I’d be very interested in reading the Bullet Point response from Bob Barton. Anyway to post it up in it’s own column?

    As far as the rest go, Hotels are entitled to their fees for the “free” stuff. The question I’ve got is this: How would it create an accounting nightmare? From my point of view, it appears that every hotel has 2 sets of costs: Cost to Operate their Hotel and the Cost of the Franchise. Unless the Franchise Fee is a % of the Room Rates, then rolling in the Fee makes complete sense from a business standpoint. It keeps all of your Revenue in a single charge and allows you to allocate your costs from there.
    If indeed the Franchise cost is a % of the Room Rates, then unbundling these fees makes perfect business sense. Assuming these fees actually go to covering a known cost(Paper, Internet, etc…), then having the Franchise fee take a % of them does not make sense.

    Airline Employees who defend the fees and such really should learn how to argue before opening their mouth and inserting their feet. He uses the Argument that if people understood the fees then they wouldn’t feel like they were getting screwed over. I agree with that as most people, once they understand the reasoning(assuming it’s actually logical), won’t complain too much over covering an incurred cost. The problem is that the Airlines explained many of these new fees as a result of rising fuel costs a few years back and when fuel went back down, the fees did not go away. THAT is why air travelers are feeling like they are getting screwed over. In addition to that, many of the fees are completely disproportional to the actual cost of doing business. It does NOT cost the airlines $150 to change a ticket. I understand that there is the potential for lost opportunity, but maybe set the rule that changes prior to X amount of time before the flight are not subject to the same change fees. And make that amount of time reasonable.

    I completely agree that elite travelers deserve a little extra for being loyal fliers of a particular airline. Every industry out there rewards more business or repeat customers. BUT, that doesn’t mean that the elite level fliers get to act like complete spoiled brats about it. Plain and simple, we are all human beings and should be treated with a minimum amount of decency and just because you are a frequent flier, you don’t actually own the plane…

  • BillC

    Great article. It is useful to hear from the other side. I still cannot get over how businesses still tries to convince consumers that mandatory fees are ok and cannot be rolled into the price. I don’t mind if they charge for shuttles or internet access or whatever. As a matter of fact, if they offered me a package where I could opt in to obtain these services I just might. As it is now I try to avoid hotels that charge these fees.

  • David

    Chris – Things aren’t always fair. Those flying first class, be it paid with points or cash, deserve to be treated bettter. They deserve to get on first, they deserve better food and they deserve all the perks. They paid for them.

    Look, I don’t complain to Nordstroms because somebody got a better suit than did I because they paid more for it. They get the $2,600 bespoke suit — I got the $600 “off the rack” suit. They deserve the better suit.

    Why is paying more to get a better product such a mystery to some people?

  • Cassivella

    Chris,

    I’m not employed by an airline, hotel, or rental car company. I experience these companies purely as a customer.

    Frequent readers may even think that I am an apologist for these companies.

    Customer happiness is based upon setting an appropriate expectation for the customer and then meeting that expectation, and hopefully exceeding it.

    Infrequently on this blog we see customers who were truly wronged. The airline/hotel/car rental company did not hold up their end of the contract. Someone was entitled to a refund according to the contract, but the refund is not to be found.

    More often, we hear people complaining about something that happened. This incident is usually something completely within their own control to prevent, and it is usually caused by an almost willful ignorance on the customer’s part. For example, someone shopping for the lowest price on an airfare fails to comprehend that lowest priced tickets are non-refundable and therefore not eligible for a refund.

    My biggest problem with this site (and note, I do read it daily still) is that you set unrealistic expectations for customers, and therefore it is harder for a travel company to meet the customer’s expectations, even when the company is following all of the rules.

    Yes, some travel rules are unfair. I don’t really care to get into an argument over whether baggage or resort fees are ethical. The fact of the matter is that these fees ARE. And in the vast majority of cases, all of these fees are fully disclosed to the customer. The customer just chooses to not bother to read his/her side of the contract.

    Yes, non-refundable tickets don’t make sense to a lot of people (personally, I think we should just charge a fair, higher fare that allows the airline to make a foreseeable profit). But, when a customer purchases a non-refundable fare, they should not expect that fare to be refunded in any case. Continuing to post examples where customers are not contractually obliged to a refund, naming the airline by name and thus holding the airline hostage, and then saying when the airline refunds the money that “that was what should have happened in the first place” just sets customers up to be unhappy.

    How about using your massive cosmic travel power to educate the consumer? This is what I remember about your blog when I first started reading it.

    Use these examples to show readers how to properly navigate the world of travel and how they can prevent making the same costly mistakes as the original poster.

    Fight hard for the deserving customer. But look a little harder at the emotionally charged cases. Just saying that something is “the right thing to do” does not make it so. Customers need to uphold their end of the contract too.

    If people would look a little harder, they would see that in their own businesses they have contracts and implied contracts. I had a customer cancel a software training due to weather. The weather was out of control of the customer, yes. But, I still managed to make it to the customer site, and I was willing to train. Since they cancelled the morning of the first day of training, they were obligated to pay for my travel expenses (and to pay for them again when they rescheduled). I cut them a break and did not charge them for the actual training. But, my customers had agreed to these contingencies when they signed my contract.

    So again, I ask that you realize that customers are getting themselves into these situations on their own. If customers were truly angry enough at resort fees, then they should not stay at hotels that charge resort fees. If the tide turns where enough people choose to stay at other properties, then capitalism dictates that the other hotels will stop charging resort fees. Or, if customers continue to tolerate the fees, then the tide will turn where most hotels will be charging resort fees, they will be considered a normal and accepted part of paying for a hotel, and it will be the odd crazy blogger out there complaining about something so commonplace.

    So, to sum, I think you do a great job as an ombudsman for the average traveler, but even posting cases such as the guy who wanted a 10K plus first class ticket for free when he got stuck on the tarmac during the Japanese earthquake kind of undermines your cause.

  • cjr

    “and the resort fee pays for newspaper delivery and local phone calls.”

    I’m trying to recall the last time I actually read the newspaper delivered to my hotel room, or used the phone to make a local call.

    It’s been a long, long time; stop making me pay for stuff I don’t use.

    “but to suggest we are remotely coming close to what the airlines are doing is shameful,”

    No, you, the rental-car industry, come up with your own set of absurdly unique fees to hit customers with.

    ““I’m fed up with you,” exclaimed one reader”

    This kind of comment just shows that I’m better off for being a cheapskate than an elitist dbag.

  • Mary Graham

    Keep up the good work Chris! Everything I just read from “the other side” is the typical response and nothing new to most of us. I just can’t figure out why so many people continue to fly these days (unless of course for business reasons, emergencies etc.) knowing they’re being ripped off, knowing they’ll be treated like cattle, not to mention knowing what’s ahead (TSA) before they even get on the plane. They keep flying and keep complaining. STOP flying, if possible. I can’t think of a better way to send the message we’re fed up.

  • Tom

    I saw that you went to Berkeley. 35 years ago, tuition at Berkeley cost the same as a round trip ticket from San Francisco to Paris. Today, a year at Berkeley costs 30 times what you would pay for a round trip to Paris. Airline fees are annoying and counterproductive, but at least the airlines have been able to keep prices down unlike colleges. When your three little ones are college age, you will understand the difference between $25 for checking a bag, and $25,000 for a year’s tuition at a public university.

  • Harry

    I agree the accounting argument does not make sense and Yes I am an accountant. I have no problem with hotels having to charge more for WiFi or Shuttle costs, just put it in the base rate.

    The surprise mandatory fees leaves a bad taste in the customer’s mouth. It makes the customer feel that the hotel has put something over on them. They feel taken advantage of.

    IF hotel A Charged $120 a night with no fees and Hotel B charged $100 a night plus a $15 mandatory Fee. I would be happier with my stay at Hotel A even though it cost me more money.

    It is all about the customers expectations.

  • Alan

    ” But, when a customer purchases a non-refundable fare, they should not expect that fare to be refunded in any case. Continuing to post examples where customers are not contractually obliged to a refund, naming the airline by name and thus holding the airline hostage…”

    If the point of non-refundability is to save the airlines money, then why not make those non-refundable tickets transferable. with perhaps a small processing fee for changing the passenger data in the reservations system? This frees the carrier from having to worry about extenuating circumstances and notes from doctors, while giving passengers the flexibility of the old-school bearer tickets. All sales could still be final, and so long as the passenger can identify himself properly to the TSA, the airline wouldn’t have to care who occupied that seat.

  • David Z

    Cassivella

    +1000, especially on the unrealistic expectations part. IMHO, that’s what largely caused a lot of these problems.

    Of course, the business arguably shares its part on that for maybe not trying to proactively explain why the methods behind the madness. So to speak.

  • http://nmdfreelance.com Nancy

    Excellent column, Chris.

    The powers that be at the corporate level can find a way to rationalize their money grab, but it’s the consumer that sees it for what it really is. Of course corporate is going to defend their ridiculous fees because they want to maintain the lifestyle to which they’ve become accustomed.

    Why would I, the business traveler who rents a car, have to pay for the shuttle if I’m not going to use it? I’d much rather have the option of paying for internet than getting it for free (though, let’s just say it, the internet at most hotels really sucks) and I don’t always read the newspaper delivered to my door.

    Don’t give me “freebies” and then give me a back door charge for it. Now that I know that’s what the “resort fees” are for, I start asking for these items to be removed from my bill. At one time, people were charged for the safe in their room. Now we can ask it be removed.

  • Doug

    Wait a minute… the airline employee pointed out that we have to pay a re-stocking fee or take store credit if we return a product after 30 days?

    OK, that would be a good point… but then again, if I buy a DVD player within 2 weeks of using it, I don’t have to pay a 200% markup either.

    That’s a load of crap. These idiots should compare apples to apples.

  • BillC

    I had to laugh out loud at the following:

    “The fact of the matter is that these fees ARE.”
    Since they ARE just shut up and accept them.

    This is the type of attitude that makes me avoid those establishments.

    These are not fees, since they are mandatory they are undisclosed additions to the base price of a room/car/ticket etc. As such they should be part of the base price when someone is looking for a service even if the existence of a fee is well known

  • David Z

    Since they ARE just shut up and accept them.

    It’s not necessarily accept them, BillC. Just saying those fees are there for a reason, one which nobody has to accept or agree with.

    And you know, this whole thing doesn’t even have to be one where I’m right and you’re wrong and vice-versa. While it can feel that way, surely there’s sometimes an arguably understandable reason behind that which one emotionally thinks (oxymoron, I know) is wrong?

    Given that both sides (unfortunately) don’t have to understand one another, one challenge is to find what both can possibly agree on. And take it from there.

  • Hal Wylie

    The added fees remind me of buying something via the internet or via a TV offer and paying “shipping and handling.” I suspect that in many cases the S & H fees minus the actual S & H costs covers the actual cost of the product and the price you pay is 100% profit.

    When I travel, it is always at the lowest available fare. When I board a full flight (common), I find 12 first class passengers seated, with 100+ peasants like me pushing past them to find their seat. I can’t imagine why these first class fliers want to be first on – if it was me, I would want to be last on.

  • MVFlyer

    Great column, Chris. Keep up the good work.

    What irks me is the attitude of the folks who send in rebuttals. I fully agree that they deserve equal time, but I really resent the fact that in general, they think we are complete and utter morons. Many if not most of these people are merely spin doctors, trying to convince you that their actions are “for your own good”, when nothing could be further from the truth. “Free” resort shuttles, newspapers, etc. are FREE, including with the price, as a means to entice you to stay and differentiate themselves from the competition. And why is it an administrative nightmare to raise the room rate, but not to add a fee?

  • BillC

    @David Z

    No one from any industry has ever provided a satisfactory explanantion of why a Mandatory fee is not part of the base price of an item or a service. It does not matter what services the business claims to provide for the fee.

    Consumers know why the fees are there. We just have trouble swallowing the reasons given by the travel industry.

  • Steve

    The resort fee rebuttal is hilarious. First he argues that resort fees are necessary to cover the costs of shuttles, internet, etc, when most people aren’t complaining about having to pay for those amenities. They (and I) are complaining about having them broken out into a separate, mandatory fee that is not part of the base rate. Then he cites mysterious “accounting” practices that make it necessary to break out the resort fee from the base rate. If that’s true, how come the cost of providing heat, electricity, cable TV, and water to the room isn’t broken out into a separate fee? How come the cost of paying front desk staff, housekeeping, and maintenance isn’t broken out into a separate fee?

    I’m sorry, but the only reason to have a separate and mandatory resort fee is to deceive your customers into thinking that they’re paying less than they are. It’s just that simple. I resent the mandatory resort fee not because I resent business owners for making a profit or for passing the costs along for the service like shuttles and internet service they provide, but because of that deception.

  • Jonathan

    I have stated it before on this website and I will say it again. These industries had better start setting a standard policy regarding these mandatory fees that is consumer friendly and enforcing them. Otherwise, sometime down the road some Washington politician will see this issue as his golden ticket to being recognized as the leading defender of the little guy and lead Congress into FORCING policies on these industries! Personally, I would lose little sleep if the Federal government were to step in a say that if a fee is classified as mandatory, it has to be included in the price advertised.

  • Ed

    “When I return something to a store after 30 days, why can I only get store credit? A re-stocking fee? Why do I have to pay a fee to break my cell phone contract?”

    Because that’s the way that store has always done business…and that’s the way the cellphone companies have always done business…The problem here is that these airline, rental and hotel fees are relatively new…as the big problem is that there is no perceived value gained by paying these fees, so we are understandably concerned as to what it is we are paying for.

  • Mark K

    @Hal Wylie

    The first class customers are on first for 2 reasons:
    1) The “free” pre-flight drink.
    2) Just like in coach on a domestic flight, the overhead bins in 1st fill up and the last ones on often have no place to put a carryon. Especially when a coach passenger decides that the open bin space in 1st is where he want to put his bag even if he is sitting in row 30. Or when the flight attendants put their bags in the 1st class overhead because the airline has removed the storage space they used to have so they could squeeeze in another row of seats.

  • Mark K

    The only bad thing about the elites on airplanes sitting up front is that they, for the most part, did not pay anything extra to be there. They simply flew enough times on that airline that they received a free upgrade. They are probably flying on the same $100 ticket as the majority of the passengers who are cramed into steerage (sorry, I meant economy) in back. So, in my opinion, no they are not any better than those in economy and do not deserve to be treated any better. The fact that they receive free drinks on most airlines and free food does not mean that they are being treated better, this is just the perks they get when sitting up there no matter how they got there. And, yes, I am occassionally one of those seated up front. But unlike most of them, when I am sitting up front it is because I paid for that seat not because I got a free upgrade.

  • Les

    I’ve gotten into the practice of calling every hotel directly to ask of there are any fees NOT quoted on the web site, what parking costs (usually not a trivial sum) and whether there are any other surprises awaiting. It eliminates the potential for ugly surprises – and sometimes I change my plans.

    A few years ago hospitality industry (in plain English,hotels) magazines used to declaim upon the use of the phone system as a “profit center” – i. e., how to skin your guests who use the phone. One night I checked into a busy hotel near LAX and asked the desk clerk what local calls cost. “You gotta’ cell phone?”, she barked. “Yes.” I said. “Use it!” she said. Thus began the decline and fall of hotel phones as cash registers.

    Being a paid flack for these industries must be entertaining work. Just check your moral compass at the door and tell yourself it pays the mortgage and buys the kids’ shoes.

  • CM

    I hate the idea that I’m a “cheapskate” because I shopped around to find a good price for my airline ticket before buying. Does this apply to other industries as well? If I buy food or other products on sale am I a cheapskate for that too?

  • Carrie Charney

    If the extra fees are taxed at a lower rate than the base price or completely exempt, then I can see why including them in the base price can be a “nightmare” to the accountants.

  • Carver

    @Mark K

    Obviously the airlines disagree with you. And rightfully so. A frequent customer of any establishment is likely to find himself (or herself) the recipient of preferential treatment. Its the proverbial tit for tat. By receiving preferential treatment, the frequent customer is likely to continue patronizing that establishment even when there may be other establishments that, all things being equal, might appear to be a more prudent investment.

    That being said, being a frequent flier doesn’t make one a better person, just a more valuable one to the airline.

  • Carver

    @CM

    Dont’ worry about it. The only people who think you are a cheapskate for getting a good deal on your airfare are some of the overly entitled frequent travelers (often on the bosses dime).