Originally Posted by
hillrider
+1
Our representatives in Washington are so lame
. Under the current system, there's no incentive not to cancel due to weather; just like until last year there was no incentive not to keep people hostage overnight in an RJ. The 3 hour rule couldn't be done, said the airlines in unison while painting an Armageddon scenario, and look where we're now: hardly anyone is kept hostage anymore and profits are up, way up (not that there's a link, but the "enormous" costs they said the three hour rule would impose on them -- surprise -- were lies.)
Are you done with your irrational diatribe? Several airlines (notably Delta) have warned that this severe weather will, in fact, cost them significant money. For the most part, the airlines still pay the employees even though the planes don't operate. They still pay for overhead expenses, airport expenses, and the like. Of course, they want to operate their schedule as normally as possible.
Yes, the new law has forced airlines to "pre-cancel" flights 24 to 48 hours in advance of a major storm. I think an orderly process is much better than having planes sitting on runways for multiple hours.
Ironically, you posted this in the AA forum, the single airline which is still LOSING money.