alt Hacker NewsStill wouldn't change a thing. The gate keeper has no say into who gets let on the plane and who doesn't, they are there just to enforce the decision.
The only way to get this solved is if in the executive meetings one person goes "Our processes that bumps people resulted in xxxxxx cost, that's too much".
The way those costs are incurred doesn't matter, if its direct compensation or fines, but unless you can attach a price tag to it, nothing will change.
Replies
You misunderstood the point they tried to make. If a gate attendant was told to punch someone in the face, they still wouldn't. They'd probably get fired for not punching someone in the face, then win some civil suit for their lost income.
If rejecting people from flights without explanation was socially considered the same way as punching in them the face, they wouldn't do that, either.
> The gate keeper has no say into who gets let on the plane and who doesn't, they are there just to enforce the decision.
No, that's not true. He is literally, physically, the gate keeper: To pass the gate, he has to let you pass. Now, you could insert another gate keeper into the scenario at the entrance to the airplane, or some turn-style with a scanner etc. but that wouldn't change the basic argument, just make the scenario a little more complex.