A teenager on his first flight alone was pulled into security and had his trip home canceled after gate agents figure out he was skiplagging, or booking a flight with the layover as the actual intended destination. …
How is that any of the airlines business?? Kid bought a ticket. He has no obligation to use the full ride. I hope he/his family sues and I hope they win.
Actually, if you read the T&Cs on the contract, you really are expected to use the full ride, and the airline is allowed to impose a penalty like this. But it’s at the airline’s discretion, and I think not even the bean counters expect gate agents to enforce it in the most draconian fashion against unaccompanied minors.
This is why they are going to the press with this, because they can’t win the lawsuit. And the Press is the best place to expose behavior that’s legal, but shitty.
I’d bet they reacted like they did specifically because the person is a minor - a minor who is in the care of the airline and who they’re responsible for until they reach the intended destination. If the final flight arrived without the minor on it without it being intended, they would most certainly have some level of liability for the minor’s whereabouts.
An interesting point, I went back to the article and the kid is only described as a “teenager”, but one who would need their own photo ID to get past TSA. That would probably put the kid to be at least old enough to have a learner’s permit.
Most airlines will let a 16 or 17 year old travel domestically on their own, as long a they have ID. While they are technically minors, the airline will not give them any special treatment, and expect them to make their own way on their connection.
I’d forgotten that most Americans don’t have passports. But I’m certain many under 16s fly across the US unaccompanied every year - shared custody agreements must make it conditional in at least a few thousand cases. Is there’s not a standard photo ID card available in the US aside from a passport or drivers license?
Nope, there is no mandatory, national ID for Americans, in large part because people dont trust the Federal government. Also, many people think it would be too similar to the biblical “Mark of the Beast”.
I wish I was kidding.
They’re not mandatory here either, but you do need a form of photo ID to take domestic flights, vote and buy age-restricted products. If you don’t have a passport or drivers license, or don’t want to carry them around, it’s very easy to obtain a PASS card (Proof of Age Standards Scheme). They’re accepted as an official form of ID and are only £15. I had an early version when I was in my teens so I could get child rates on transport, cinema tickets etc. I think they’re a brilliant idea.
I suspect there would be backlash here if they were made mandatory, but not because anyone considers them the mark of the beast. Just your usual privacy concerns.
There’s another factor at play in the US for this sort of thing, ID requirements to vote were used to prevent non-white people from voting, they probably still are in some parts of the country even though it’s illegal. Because of that history any required form of identification here has to be free to acquire while also getting over the other hurdles y’all were discussing(and the other poster is 100% right about the mark of the beast thing). It’s effectively impossible to institute
That’s a really good point and makes a lot of sense. Tbf if I were putting my child on a flight unaccompanied, I wouldn’t want to risk them having to deal with the extra stress of not having the correct ticket though. It’s one thing to take the risk yourself when no one is walking you through the airport, but surely the parents knew the kid wouldn’t be able to to go awol mid journey?
We’re they registers as an unaccompanied minor? I’ve flown solo as a minor without being an UM past the age of like
14
I flew for summer programs pretty much every year of high school and was only an UM once
if you read the T&C
Just because it’s stated in T&C doesn’t mean it’s necessarily legally binding.
Airline T&C are not just any old contract, but they are called the “Contract of Carriage” for the airline and have protections at the Federal level. Anything’s legal standing can be challenged, of course, but airlines do have special protections in this case.
There’s no way the family could possibly sue over this and win.
I agree it’s total bullshit, but there actually is a contract of carriage involved that skiplagging violates, so airlines are within their rights to cancel an itinerary if they catch such a violation. With that said, fuck BS airline policies and fares.
They’re actually enforcing that now? I’ve Skiplagged for years with no issue. Fuck these airlines.
One time I needed to book a one way trip from one country to another. It was like $3000. So, I checked what it would cost for a round trip ticket and it was $2500. Which one would you book?
Why IS skiplagging illegal, anyway? Is there actually a practical reason for it?
It’s not illegal, it’s just against most airlines’ policies because hurts them financially.
The airlines can get fucked. Just another failed industry that the US government has to prop up because “tOo BiG tO fAiL”
So it was paid for either way? Why should they care?
Yes, this is what I thought! Is it because the airlines have lower prices on trips that have a layover? Surely, it would be cheaper still to buy just an individual ticket to a place?
The stat people that punch in numbers find it to be more profitable to offer layover trips cheaper than direct trips.
It costs more to have a plane from Pittsburgh and a second plane from New York fly to London, both less than 100% full of passengers. It costs less to have one plane fly from Pittsburgh to New York, where it will become 100% full on its journey to London.
Therefore, your layover ticket is “wasted” on you when you consider the alternative: you buying a direct ticket while also letting another stranger purchase (and fully use) that layover ticket.
so how does the kid get home?
Few aspects to this:
- Yes, this is sticking it to the airlines. It is also sticking it to other passengers. Airlines generally try to get people on their flights (if only to avoid rebooking) AND accommodate crazy people flying on standby. When someone is “in the airport” because their plane landed it is assumed they are going to get on the plane. When they get done group 20 and that person hasn’t shown up, it triggers a mess of figuring out what to do, who can board in their place, etc. All of which leads to delays for everyone involved
- Airlines are REALLY stupid and pretty much function entirely on the backs of the gate agents. So if a gate agent cared enough to report “something is hinky” then that means they either dealt with a REALLY shitty day or they recognized the name of a no show.
So yeah. Like in almost all cases: Those heroes who “stick it to the corporations” are mostly just inconveniencing other customers and the poor bastards who have customer facing roles.
Seems like the solution to this is to go to the gate for your next flight and tell them you’re not going. Family emergency, you’re feeling sick, suddenly afraid to fly, or no need to even give a reason.
It is shitty to just ghost them for the reasons mentioned here. Just like ghosting is always shitty.
