Block the middle seats or not? This is a critical factor for airlines, and it is possible that what is at stake may not be greater. Airlines are suffering due to the coronavirus pandemic. To discharge enough liquidity to verify the pandemic, airlines will need to lend their most valuable assets.
With survival at stake, is it better to pay to sell each seat on each flight to maximize potential revenue? Or do airlines reduce the ability of flights to convenience and protect their passengers in the hope of retaining their customers?
We’ll take a look at the arguments why it’s best to block middle seats for both airlines and passengers.
Five months since COVID-19 and coronavirus became familiar words, air transport has begun to recover from apocalyptic figures in March and April. However, air travel has still fallen by 75% since 2019 levels. After recovering in recent months, TSA projections have remained solid in recent weeks.
So what can I do?
In their quest to attract travelers, airlines take other approaches. For months, airlines have been promoting their new cleaning practices, those practices vary widely. For example, Delta disinfects aircraft with electrostatic sprayers after both a flight. Meanwhile, American Airlines only uses an electrostatic spray for both one and seven days.
Airlines highlight HEPA filters installed on top-power aircraft. United has even claimed that HEPA filtration systems make “air on board an aircraft cleaner than what you feel in restaurants, grocery stores or even hospitals.”
In fact, HEPA filters are effective at removing waste, such as viruses, from the air. However, the air takes two to 4 minutes to circulate in the cabin. Coronavirus debris can be around the cabin and potentially inhale within critical minutes before air leaks.
The argument presented through some airline representatives is that it is a social distance of six feet on an aircraft. So why do anything other than fill flights at full capacity? This is the position adopted through airlines such as American Airlines, United and Spirit.
American and United soon limited the number of seats sold on board the aircraft, but temporarily abandoned that position as soon as they sold their flights. This change has not worked very well politically for any of these airlines.
Reports of mass theft have turned viral and negative reactions temporarily followed. Chrissy Teigen shared a tweet from a traveler with his 13.2 million followers. He didn’t go around over American Airlines’ recent policy of filling flights at full capacity, and bluntly said that the airline “only cares about cash and doesn’t care if you get sick and die.”
Meanwhile, other airlines know that passengers feel more comfortable having as much area as possible. Alaska, Delta, JetBlue and Southwest have committed to blocking middle seats or the number of seats sold on a flight for at least the next few months.
Make no mistake; it’s an expensive bet. These airlines may lose a lot of profit by not promoting dozens of seats on a flight. However, these airlines are the ones that travelers will praise the most long-term for this commitment.
With airlines spending billions of dollars, some may wonder how airlines can block middle seats. The short answer: thanks to the billions of dollars of partially refundable U.S. Treasury loans through the payroll assistance program.
As wages were covered through the Treasury, it was not known how reasonable prices were for airlines. That’s until an airline executive shows up and says the silent component out loud.
In an interview with Holly Hegeman of PlaneBusiness, American Airlines Vice President of Strategy Vasu Raja revealed some truly revealing statistics. With wages covered and oil at $35 depending on the barrel, American Airline’s return is only 25%. This means that as long as AA does not match a full flight quarter, the airline can expect to earn cash on that flight. And it’s probably a similar scenario for other U.S. airlines.
With parked aircraft and staff prices covered, it would make sense for airlines to fly more when flights are full. After all, the airline only wants to sell about a quarter of the seats on the new flight for profit.
That’s precisely the strategy Southwest has adopted. In this week’s effects call, Southwest announced its policy of adding more flights when the call at a specific address approaches the airline’s 65% limit. Between April and June 2020, Southwest added 6900 more flights. Approximately 80% of those flights reduced their operating prices and helped reduce the airline’s constant prices.
This week we see evidence of what works and what doesn’t. American and United, the two classic airlines that have their full-capacity flights, are cutting flight schedules for August at the last minute.
Meanwhile, Southwest announced Thursday that “customer feedback has been very positive” in blocking intermediate seats. First, the airline had promised to limit capacity to 65% until 30 September 2020. Southwest now extends this policy until October 31, 2020.
Similarly, Delta’s chief executive, Ed Bastian, said polls show that “the space on board the plane, the locked middle seats have the first explanation for why consumers decide on Delta.” Delta’s favorability ratings skyrocketed, and the airline’s Net Promoter Score rose 20 issues from the same time last year to the highest point in history.
Delta has committed to blocking middle seats until September 30, 2020, but the airline plans to continue this policy beyond that date.
Clinical studies on the effectiveness of maintaining flights with open seats to reduce the spread of COVID-19 have not yet been published. And it would be difficult to do this examination ethically because no one needs to be a component of the control group.
Investigators may not deliberately send passengers with flight health problems to verify the number of inflamed passengers with other seating policies. Even if they could, passengers in poor health rejected other degrees of viral particles, making direct comparisons difficult.
Researchers want to take a look at the models to estimate what the middle seat lock is like. In a recent study published through the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Professor Arnold Barnett estimates that the threat of COVID-19 is 79% higher if the middle seat is occupied than if the middle seat is blocked based on the assumptions made in the study.
This is consistent with other studies on the effects of proximity. In a study published in Lancet in early June 2020, researchers estimated that the absolute threat of COVID-19 is 12.8% assuming there is no physical distance. By adding a physical distance of one meter and dressing in masks and glasses, there is a relative relief of 75 to 85% of the threat of infection.
The airline seats are only 18 inches wide, so blocking the middle seat will not allow it to succeed one meter away. However, the researchers found that any distance reduces the risk. And it makes intuitive sense.
Scientists agree that seats in the middle of planes are blocked. Ali Nouri, PhD and president of the Federation of American Scientists, wrote an open letter to American Airlines and United shortly after the airlines revoked their seat blocking decision.
The letter bluntly states the committee’s position: “Its decisions to book full-capacity flights put passengers and passengers in undue danger.” The Federation of American Scientists urges airline executives to “immediately oppose their resolution and their COVID-19 passengers and equipment where possible.”
What does this mean for those in a position to take flight? Travelers can make informed decisions about flight threats, and travelers can ask airlines and governments to help them reduce the threat of flying.
To reduce your threat when organizing, you can opt for an airline that has committed to block middle seats, such as Alaska, Delta, JetBlue, and Southwest. Personally, those airlines are the only ones I’ll do travel ebooking with over the next few months.
In addition to blocking the middle seats, they all give a flexible booking policy. Even before the pandemic, Southwest allowed travelers to cancel or replace non-penalty flights up to 10 minutes before departure, and still does. Other airlines have greater short-term booking flexibility.
As we have seen, the first effects show that the resolution of blocking the middle seats is already paying off for some airlines. And it might not be surprising if those airlines are faster and do better in the long run.
However, to balance physical security with the airline’s finances, government relief to airlines can simply depend on capacity controls. Instead of simply offering a pay bill relief, as is done lately, the government can simply buy the seats in the middle of the airlines. In fact, this proposal has already been made through the pilots’ union of the Allied Pilots Association.
Currently, airlines get a pay cut, regardless of the number or number of flights in service. However, by linking relief to operational flights, airlines can increase the number of flights operating because they are guaranteed at least part of the revenue from those flights.
More flights will mean more convenient flight schedules, which, along with the marginal benefits of fitness, would possibly inspire more passengers to fly rather than drive. This can also simply create a virtuous circle that would help the air recover more temporarily while retaining more aviation work than otherwise.
In recent days, we have noticed that airlines adopt even more competitive mask requirements. Airlines have been tormented by passengers who mistakenly claim medical exemptions from wearing masks. Now the airlines are backing up.
American Airlines and Southwest have a mandatory mask for all passengers over 2 years of age. No medical exemptions are allowed.
Meanwhile, Delta will allow medical exemptions to wear masks. However, the passenger must make a virtual consultation with one of the airline’s doctors before travelling to download this flight authorization.
However, even with these improved policies, flight attendants still have a lot of influence over passengers who do not comply. The use of a mask is a mandate of the Ministry of Transport (DOT), the worst case for a passenger is to be banned through the airline. And the top airlines have admitted that the bans would be temporary.
There is a better solution to these fragmented policies. The DOT would possibly impose a mask for the protection of the flying public. If such a policy is adopted, flight attendants may require compliance, just as passengers will have to wear seat belts and not smoke. Instead of having to worry about a transitional ban, passengers may also be fined for not following the team’s instructions.
As the resumption of air has stalled in recent weeks, airlines will have to explain to each and every reason for airlines to become profitable again. Blocking middle seats makes sense to inspire more passengers to fly and for the fitness of passengers and crew.
So far, the tide is changing in favor of airlines that have proactively blocked middle seats. Southwest and Delta have reported positive effects of their policies to block middle seats, and either airline plans to expand those policies.
Meanwhile, a few weeks after taking the resolution of filling flights at full capacity, American and United are cutting their flights from their August schedule. However, without incentives for change, it turns out that these airlines assume that filling flights at full capacity is the way to survive.
As a virtual nomad for about 3 years, JT travel turns out that credit card rewards can particularly reduce the cost of travel. JT worked for a decade as a tax collector
As a virtual nomad for about 3 years, JT travel turns out that credit card rewards can particularly reduce the cost of travel. JT worked for a decade as a tax accountant before converting his analytical skills into points, miles and credit cards, publishing more than 2,000 articles about The Points Guy. For more than 4 years, it has traveled more than a million miles on 67 airlines, visited 43 countries and maintained an elite prestige with five airlines and 6 hotel loyalty programs.