Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Times)   American Airlines supports the troops -- for an extra $300 charge per duffel bag, that is   (washingtontimes.com) divider line
161
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

13021 clicks; posted to Main » and Business » on 12 Aug 2008 at 6:03 PM (14 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



161 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
Pocket Ninja [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2008-08-12 5:42:32 PM  
There's nothing wrong at all with a commercial carrier charging troops for the cost of transporting their freight. What's criminal is that our military a) requires its troops to fly commercially and pay for costs out of pocket and b) makes it difficult for them to claim reimbursement after the fact.
 
Razorwolf
2008-08-12 6:03:03 PM  

Pocket Ninja: There's nothing wrong at all with a commercial carrier charging troops for the cost of transporting their freight. What's criminal is that our military a) requires its troops to fly commercially and pay for costs out of pocket and b) makes it difficult for them to claim reimbursement after the fact.


It's really not difficult at all, and it doesn't come out of pocket. We get these travel cards and it all goes on that. Finance Department pays all expenses incurred as a result of travel. They pay the card directly. My bank account has never even seen official travel expenses. The problem here is this looks more like a way for AA to ding some extra coin out of the government. I found this bit interesting:

"Because the soldiers don't pay a dime, our waiver of the fees amounts to a discount to the military, not a discount to soldiers," said Tim Wagner, spokesman for American Airlines. "Soldiers should not have to pay a penny of it."

Pretty much sums up to, "We know the soldiers aren't paying the fees. We're dinging the government... we're just using the soldiers to do it."
 
Karma Chameleon
2008-08-12 6:06:30 PM  
They shouldn't be charged with extra luggage fees. They should be charged with murder.

/where's my popcorn?
 
evildick
2008-08-12 6:06:32 PM  
Looks like another government supplement to me....
 
Jacobin
2008-08-12 6:06:42 PM  
Well, in fairness, the troops were supposed to secure cheap oil from Iraq and it hasn't worked out, so this is just payback because the airlines are going broke from expensive fuel prices. Because the mission was perfectly planned by our Dear Leaders.
 
Funk Brothers
2008-08-12 6:06:50 PM  
Looks like an American airline is against the War in Iraq/War on Terror. It happened to be American Airlines of all American airlines.
 
Single White Male
2008-08-12 6:08:36 PM  
Besides protect us from terrorists, Nazis, and communists, what did veterans ever do for us?
 
seminole87
2008-08-12 6:08:42 PM  
Really if you were stupid enough to sign up for this ....
 
LegacyDL
2008-08-12 6:08:57 PM  
I thought soldiers flew to Iraq in those C-130s like in Delta Force.
 
TossedSaladMan
2008-08-12 6:10:19 PM  
The troops get enough freebies as it is. They get paid a salary and if they don't like it are free to pursue other occupations. Its not up to private companies to subsidize soldiers.

And if the US govt wants to keep the soldiers happy, they can pony up the baggage fees.
 
LessO2
2008-08-12 6:10:36 PM  

Pocket Ninja: There's nothing wrong at all with a commercial carrier charging troops for the cost of transporting their freight.


You're an idiot.

Pocket Ninja: What's criminal is that our military a) requires its troops to fly commercially and pay for costs out of pocket and b) makes it difficult for them to claim reimbursement after the fact.


Should they land a C-130 at Asslick, MT and Toadsuck, AR and pick up each soldier individually?

Sure, the soldier gets reimbursed, but it's the principle that AA takes and wipes its ass with common decency.
 
katghoti
2008-08-12 6:10:49 PM  
Fark AA and fark their stupid,stupid fees. Why must we suffer when these pissheads can't hedge their bets on fuel like Southwest did. The government needs to charter jets to shuttle soldiers and have strippers on board as well. Our soldiers don't need this shiat! Hey American, at least you can supply free anal lube with each new fee to help it slid in easier. Assholes!
 
Funk Brothers
2008-08-12 6:10:50 PM  

Karma Chameleon: They shouldn't be charged with extra luggage fees. They should be charged with murder.


Wow good idea to bring in more capital for an airline with cash problems. $70 for every person you murder while in air.
 
Malinki
2008-08-12 6:11:16 PM  

LegacyDL: I thought soldiers flew to Iraq in those C-130s like in Delta Force.


We went in C-141's back in my day.
 
Brass Johnson E.G.O.
2008-08-12 6:11:27 PM  
After all the bureaucratic paper shuffling, it's probably costing $30,000 to ship each duffel bag.
 
re-elect_jimmy_carter
2008-08-12 6:12:38 PM  

Single White Male: Besides protect us from terrorists, Nazis, and communists, what did veterans ever do for us?


postal shootings?
 
neehurtz
2008-08-12 6:12:40 PM  
Why do they need need to bring home all those duffles anyway?

i143.photobucket.comView Full Size
 
Goofball_Jones
2008-08-12 6:12:56 PM  

Malinki: LegacyDL: I thought soldiers flew to Iraq in those C-130s like in Delta Force.

We went in C-141's back in my day.


Which guys like me on the MAC bases kept flying...
 
seminole87
2008-08-12 6:14:01 PM  
Imo if a soldier produces the head of a dead Iraqi baby at the security checkpoint, he should be allowed to fly for free.

/takes balls to carry the head of a dead baby around with you
 
Razorwolf
2008-08-12 6:14:08 PM  

LegacyDL: I thought soldiers flew to Iraq in those C-130s like in Delta Force.


Heh... well technically you're right. Commercial airlines don't go past Qatar/Kuwait.
 
bingo the psych-o
2008-08-12 6:14:21 PM  

Karma Chameleon: They shouldn't be charged with extra luggage fees. They should be charged with murder.

/where's my popcorn?


Now now, the soldiers are not responsible, especially when there is such a dire fool as "the Decider" in charge.
 
angelachristine
2008-08-12 6:14:56 PM  
Pocket Ninja: There's nothing wrong at all with a commercial carrier charging troops for the cost of transporting their freight. What's criminal is that our military a) requires its troops to fly commercially and pay for costs out of pocket and b) makes it difficult for them to claim reimbursement after the fact.

It's really not difficult at all, and it doesn't come out of pocket. We get these travel cards and it all goes on that. Finance Department pays all expenses incurred as a result of travel. They pay the card directly. My bank account has never even seen official travel expenses. The problem here is this looks more like a way for AA to ding some extra coin out of the government. I found this bit interesting:

"Because the soldiers don't pay a dime, our waiver of the fees amounts to a discount to the military, not a discount to soldiers," said Tim Wagner, spokesman for American Airlines. "Soldiers should not have to pay a penny of it."

Pretty much sums up to, "We know the soldiers aren't paying the fees. We're dinging the government... we're just using the soldiers to do it."

Not really or at least not anymore than anyone else. They are just saying that the military will have to pay the same as any passenger. If the soldiers had to pay their own fares maybe they would give a break on the fee.
 
JohnBigBootay
2008-08-12 6:15:09 PM  
AA is a business and they don't have to let anyone fly or ship things for free. If the military is going to utilize commercial airlines for their troops they should pay the same as anyone else. I build houses. They fly planes. I don't build free houses for the military either - no freakin' difference.
 
re-elect_jimmy_carter
2008-08-12 6:15:42 PM  

bingo the psych-o: Karma Chameleon: They shouldn't be charged with extra luggage fees. They should be charged with murder.

/where's my popcorn?

Now now, the soldiers are not responsible, especially when there is such a dire fool as "the Decider" in charge.


true. cant blame people for poor career choices.
 
Yes Sound
2008-08-12 6:16:15 PM  

Razorwolf: It's really not difficult at all, and it doesn't come out of pocket. We get these travel cards and it all goes on that. Finance Department pays all expenses incurred as a result of travel. They pay the card directly. My bank account has never even seen official travel expenses. The problem here is this looks more like a way for AA to ding some extra coin out of the government. I found this bit interesting:


This is not necissarily true. The government pays for and schedules all flights directly from one duty station to another. However if you want to for example, fly home when they give you 12 days to report to your next unit, then you have to purchase the tickets out of your own pocket, and they might reimburse you the cost of a direct flight from your current duty station to your next. Thats a best case scenario if you harass admin into actually doing their jobs...

Supposedly some airlines will also waiver the fees if you are on orders and have them with you, but I have yet to see this work.
 
technicolor-misfit
2008-08-12 6:16:57 PM  
Karma Chameleon - They shouldn't be charged with extra luggage fees. They should be charged with murder.

/where's my popcorn?


10/10

When you walk down the street, people are gonna look... and they're gonna say "there goes Karma Chameleon, the best there ever was..."
 
EL_FABREZ
2008-08-12 6:17:33 PM  
Is the military just a form of welfare now? When I have to take a trip for my job I don't try and kike down the extra fees. I pay them, and write them off at the end of the year.
 
scottennis
2008-08-12 6:18:44 PM  
At least the soldiers themselves are not weighing down the planes. When are the airlines going to make travel truly equitable? It's easy. Have every passenger step on a scale with all their luggage and charge them based on the gross weight.
 
seminole87
2008-08-12 6:19:02 PM  
Imo those bastages should have to swim back home.
 
Herb Utsmelz [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2008-08-12 6:19:04 PM  
If it won't fit under the seat, leave it home. Prroblem??
 
SchlingFo
2008-08-12 6:19:22 PM  

JohnBigBootay: AA is a business and they don't have to let anyone fly or ship things for free. If the military is going to utilize commercial airlines for their troops they should pay the same as anyone else. I build houses. They fly planes. I don't build free houses for the military either - no freakin' difference.


You're god damned right!!!

It's farking stupid for anyone to sacrifice anything during wartime.

Those worthless farking coozebags during WWII and their "Victory Gardens". Their conservation of metal. Farking ridiculous. When the troops are overseas fighting, we still need to be "every man for themself" back here in the States.
 
re-elect_jimmy_carter
2008-08-12 6:20:05 PM  

EL_FABREZ: Is the military just a form of welfare now? When I have to take a trip for my job I don't try and kike down the extra fees. I pay them, and write them off at the end of the year.


when hasnt the military been a type of welfare?

really expensive welfare.
 
CasperImproved
2008-08-12 6:20:19 PM  

Pocket Ninja: There's nothing wrong at all with a commercial carrier charging troops for the cost of transporting their freight. What's criminal is that our military a) requires its troops to fly commercially and pay for costs out of pocket and b) makes it difficult for them to claim reimbursement after the fact.


Where do you get the "pay out of pocket" reasoning? The tickets for the flight is provided prior to travel. If you have incidental costs (like extra luggage costs), yes, the soldier has to pay, then get recompensed after the fact. There are also options such as getting per diem for hotel and food requirements prior to travel.

One comment someone made to the news article I first read about this topic on, suggested that the airlines should have a direct billing link to the DOD finance for these type of repeatable and computer documented costs that are becoming a normal part of travel these days. That way, none of the DOD travelers need to pay up front, and then forced to submit for recovery of the costs. DOD may actually be working on this, but it's not an overnight process.
 
Former Lee Warmer
2008-08-12 6:21:05 PM  

TossedSaladMan: The troops get enough freebies as it is. They get paid a salary and if they don't like it are free to pursue other occupations. Its not up to private companies to subsidize soldiers.

And if the US govt wants to keep the soldiers happy, they can pony up the baggage fees.


Wow. Not only did you not read the article, you didn't even bother to read any of the above comments.
 
Toolahedron
2008-08-12 6:21:24 PM  
Should they land a C-130 at Asslick, MT and Toadsuck, AR and pick up each soldier individually?



exactly.

We carry most troops in military/contracted aircraft to the AOR, but there are always exceptions to the rule. Also, if they're flying from one place in the states to another, troops frequently use commercial air. It makes absolutely no sense monetarily to use a military aircraft carry 2-3.
 
Razorwolf
2008-08-12 6:21:38 PM  

Yes Sound:

This is not necissarily true. The government pays for and schedules all flights directly from one duty station to another. However if you want to for example, fly home when they give you 12 days to report to your next unit, then you have to purchase the tickets out of your own pocket, and they might reimburse you the cost of a direct flight from your current duty station to your next. Thats a best case scenario if you harass admin into actually doing their jobs...

Supposedly some airlines will also waiver the fees if you are on orders and have them with you, but I have yet to see this work.


Ah yeah but choosing to fly home is unofficial travel. I pay for those. I don't have three duffel bags when I do it, though.
 
ultraholland
2008-08-12 6:22:42 PM  
USA! USA! USA!
 
shotglasss
2008-08-12 6:23:26 PM  

scottennis: At least the soldiers themselves are not weighing down the planes. When are the airlines going to make travel truly equitable? It's easy. Have every passenger step on a scale with all their luggage and charge them based on the gross weight.


Won't work. John Q. Public who is 5'10 and weighs 170 with 150 pounds of luggage shouldn't have to pay the same amount as John Z. Fatass who weighs 320 and takes up 3 seats.
 
j0ndas
2008-08-12 6:23:54 PM  
If soldiers are going to travel commercial, they should expect to pay extra for carrying their baggage with them. It's not unfair, airlines have to make a profit and fuel prices haven't dropped so much yet they can afford to be generous.
 
Malinki
2008-08-12 6:24:33 PM  
A bags are way better than duffels anyway.
 
ldasil
2008-08-12 6:25:23 PM  

Razorwolf: Pretty much sums up to, "We know the soldiers aren't paying the fees. We're dinging the government... we're just using the soldiers to do it."


They're not using soldiers to get money out of the government. They're charging every passenger for extra luggage regardless of who they are or who ultimately ends up paying for it.

I'll complain about all these fees as much as the next guy, but who cares about this? So they use a card or pay and get reimbursed just like any employee on business travel. Big deal.
 
deltabourne
2008-08-12 6:25:52 PM  
Wait, why is our trillion dollar army using commercial carriers to transport troops? Isn't that what we pay millions of dollar per transport plane for?
 
technicolor-misfit
2008-08-12 6:26:19 PM  
LessO2 - Pocket Ninja: There's nothing wrong at all with a commercial carrier charging troops for the cost of transporting their freight.

You're an idiot.

Pocket Ninja: What's criminal is that our military a) requires its troops to fly commercially and pay for costs out of pocket and b) makes it difficult for them to claim reimbursement after the fact.

Should they land a C-130 at Asslick, MT and Toadsuck, AR and pick up each soldier individually?

Sure, the soldier gets reimbursed, but it's the principle that AA takes and wipes its ass with common decency.

Hey if you want to start handing your shiat over to soldiers, I'm sure they won't mind. You can park at the airport or near a base and drive them wherever they want to go.

You can hang out at the EZCash places and just hand them dough willy-nilly. You can build a bunkhouse in your backyard and let soldiers crash for free for as long they'd like and you can even serve them complimentary meals. You can take your girlfriend or wife down to the bar and tell her to suck off every G.I. in sight.

In fact, why aren't you doing all of this already??? Have you no decency?
 
re-elect_jimmy_carter
2008-08-12 6:26:26 PM  

shotglasss: scottennis: At least the soldiers themselves are not weighing down the planes. When are the airlines going to make travel truly equitable? It's easy. Have every passenger step on a scale with all their luggage and charge them based on the gross weight.

Won't work. John Q. Public who is 5'10 and weighs 170 with 150 pounds of luggage shouldn't have to pay the same amount as John Z. Fatass who weighs 320 and takes up 3 seats.


reed gooder
 
srtpointman
2008-08-12 6:26:38 PM  

Razorwolf: Pocket Ninja: There's nothing wrong at all with a commercial carrier charging troops for the cost of transporting their freight. What's criminal is that our military a) requires its troops to fly commercially and pay for costs out of pocket and b) makes it difficult for them to claim reimbursement after the fact.

It's really not difficult at all, and it doesn't come out of pocket. We get these travel cards and it all goes on that. Finance Department pays all expenses incurred as a result of travel. They pay the card directly. My bank account has never even seen official travel expenses. The problem here is this looks more like a way for AA to ding some extra coin out of the government. I found this bit interesting:

"Because the soldiers don't pay a dime, our waiver of the fees amounts to a discount to the military, not a discount to soldiers," said Tim Wagner, spokesman for American Airlines. "Soldiers should not have to pay a penny of it."

Pretty much sums up to, "We know the soldiers aren't paying the fees. We're dinging the government... we're just using the soldiers to do it."


EXACTLY. I have a government travel card. We use it for our lodging, our luggage and any other expenses while on official duty. I turn in my paperwork and the gov pays the credit card company. I've never paid out of pocket for any flights the military has sent me on. They're just trying to make the airlines look like bad guys.
 
Herb Utsmelz [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2008-08-12 6:26:43 PM  

shotglasss: Won't work. John Q. Public who is 5'10 and weighs 170 with 150 pounds of luggage shouldn't have to pay the same amount as John Z. Fatass who weighs 320 and takes up 3 seats.


Many airlines, such as Southwest, will charge fatasses for an extra seat. Their term is a "person of size" (POS).
 
Razorwolf
2008-08-12 6:28:00 PM  

ldasil: Razorwolf: Pretty much sums up to, "We know the soldiers aren't paying the fees. We're dinging the government... we're just using the soldiers to do it."

They're not using soldiers to get money out of the government. They're charging every passenger for extra luggage regardless of who they are or who ultimately ends up paying for it.

I'll complain about all these fees as much as the next guy, but who cares about this? So they use a card or pay and get reimbursed just like any employee on business travel. Big deal.


I'd be with you on that if not for the quote I extracted FTFA.
 
Malinki
2008-08-12 6:28:26 PM  

srtpointman:
EXACTLY. I have a government travel card. We use it for our lodging, our luggage and any other expenses while on official duty. I turn in my paperwork and the gov pays the credit card company. I've never paid out of pocket for any flights the military has sent me on. They're just trying to make the airlines look like bad guys.


Wow do you guys have it easy these days.
 
burninbeaver
2008-08-12 6:28:36 PM  
What's crazy to me is how much these commercial carriers charge the Government for a ticket. When I was in the Air Force I had to go to Alaska for an exercise and my round trip ticket cost $1300. I took leave the last week I was there and my girlfriend flew up, on her dime, for $200. It just doesn't make any since to me.

So I guess now they are charging the government the full fare plus $300 for baggage? That's crazy
 
Global Logistics
2008-08-12 6:29:34 PM  
being military myself, ive been on many commercial flights, bringing my bags, however, i dont think charging us for the extra bags is all that correct and right... we are told what to bring, so in that case they should charge the government for that extra bag considering the government wanted us to go to town joe-blow to find terrorists and pack up 5 bags of useless uniforms with minimal camoflauge capabilities... if not the government, send the bill to bush, maybe he'll stop sending troops out and about for retarded "democratic" realignments throughout the world.
 
Displayed 50 of 161 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all



Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

More Farking, less working

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.