More airline industry scumbaggery

Following hard upon Ryanair's kind offer to bill its customers twice for flights they already had bought and paid for, now it looks like Aer Lingus are getting on on the act of treating their customers like cash cow cattle.

From tomorrow, they intend to charge customers 3 euro just to reserve their seat on flights to the UK and Europe.

Then in May, once the charges have been established, they intend to hike the costs to 10 euro for pre-booking in the first five rows and 15 euro for pre-booking exit row seats.

But the killer in relation to these new stealth taxes is why Aer Fungus are doing it. To extort their customers? Of course not. To maximise unearned profits? Absolutely not.

They are introducing these charges "in response to customer demand." Okay, hands up everyone. Who rang up Aer Lingus and said, "Wouldn't it be great if you charged me a completely unjustifiable fee to book my seat on the plane?"

Anyone?

Didn't think so. It's just your national airline behaving like grasping scumbags, not unlike their 'rivals' Ryanair. And then lying about it by telling us that somehow, we all asked to be charged more for this nonsense.

This is on top of them charging for baggage like Ryanair, and then hiking that charge within a mere two months by 25%.

The National Consumers Agency are bleating about this, of course. But what we really need is an airline regulator with teeth to tell these thieving, scumbag airlines where to shove their never-ending list of bullshit charges that inflate the advertised cost of an airline ticket from, in one instance I bought, 1 cent up to well in excess of 50 euro.

Still cheap at the price? Not when you consider the squalid conditions of checking in or landing at Dublin airport, not when you are continually disturbed throughout your flight with trolley dollies trying to sell you shit like scratchcards that no one wants, and not when the plane lands miles, often even a country away, from the advertised destination.

Child-free aviation

As my first flight of the year approaches, I am filled with trepidation at hurling myself into the pit of contemporary human misery that is air travel today.

Nothing can ever habituate you to the squalid overcrowding of Dublin airport, the terrorist frisk-downs at destination airports on arrival and on return, or to the contemptible service standards of certain low-cost airlines, where everything has a price and the customer has no value whatsoever.

But I could, with the assistance of prescription pharmaceuticals, somehow manage to handle all of the above if only someone in the aviation industry would hear my plea and provide child-free flights.

There has been reports that a smoking airline might be about to set up in business. But frankly, and I speak as a smoker here, that idea is really pretty disgusting in the context of recycled air.

That's not what the customer wants or needs. We would like to be treated like human beings, and at least in my case, we would welcome the offer, even if we had to pay a little extra, to fly without the accompaniment of colicky newborns and their sleep-deprived, frazzled parents, especially on long-haul flights.

Next week, I have a short hop. Even if I get allocated next to a mewling, puking brat, I can flee their presence within a couple of hours.

But later in the year, I may be flying much further afield. And no amount of tranquilisers, airport bar gin and tonics, or over the counter sleeping tablets will be able to take the edge off the shrill caterwaul of someone else's infant for hours on end at 40,000 feet.

The O'Leary's and Willie Walshes of this world are supposedly innovating air travel daily, constantly seeking to open up new opportunities for diversifying airline income.

Well, if they value making an extra few quid, let someone speculate on raising prices on long-haul flights that are guaranteed over-twelves only?

I appreciate that sometimes people HAVE to travel. Granny's funeral and so on. But surely it is always possible not to mention preferable to leave a young infant behind? Even older children do not enjoy hours on end stuck in a seat in a cramped jet airliner.

So if it is Granny's funeral, and you can prove it, then alright, take the child with you. But won't someone give me the option of catching the next, child-free, flight too?

And if it's not Granny's funeral, then please, leave your rugrats at home with someone, or better still, holiday locally. It's better for the environment, better for your stress levels and better for the general sanity of the rest of us who didn't volunteer to bear witness to your offspring's marathon ability to tantrum.

Bill Hicks was right. But then again he usually is...