seahawk wrote:Should it not be up to the 2 parties signing a contract how such issues are handled? Maybe I want to take the risk of being removed for operational reasons in return for a cheaper ticket on some flights and willing to pay extra for the guarantee to not be removed on others. The government needs to keep its hand out of contract made between 2 private parties. They only should force airlines to offer an optional protection against overbooking, nothing more.
The government (or some other sort of independent/impartial organisation) needs to get involved if one party holds all the cards. There are still members on this thread arguing that Airlines can remove passenger whenever they decide to. How can passengers stand up for themselves when the airlines tell them "get off or we will call police/security to remove you"? Not everyone has the time/energy/financial resource to hire a lawyer and go through the legal process to defend their right after they have been removed from a flight inappropriately.
You proposal of cheaper ticket for "non-secure" ticket has some issues in real life 1. When passenger book flights, via different means, it is almost certain that some of them will not be informed about the non-secure nature of the ticket. 2. This kind of tickets will likely create a false impression of inferiority-will ground agents try as hard to accommodate and reschedule them? 3. What stops airlines from deliberately overbooking flight based on the number of non-secure tickets sold so that they shaft these passengers onto less popular time/less convenient (e.g. one stop rather than direct routes)?
Finally-one shouldn't need to pay extra to guarantee a place on a flight-this is what the ticket is for! Airlines should not be enabled/empowered by any means to charge extra for delivering what they are meant to.