Flying with Flu?

A Texas couple recently featured in the Airline Biz blog of the Dallas Morning were required to pay a rebooking fee of $150 per ticket, when their six year old daughter became sick with the swine flu just a few days before the family was to fly on American Airlines. The original price of the tickets were 189$, so the rebooking fee would nearly double the cost of the airfare. The father objected, even offered to provide a note from the pediatrician as proof of swine flu. American Airlines refused to accept the note, and made the following statement attempting to justify their policy "American Airlines says that if someone chooses not to travel because of an illness or another reason, the value of their ticket is governed by the applicable fare rules, which may include a change fee. In those cases, the value of the ticket can be used for future travel, minus the fee. It's one of the risks people take when purchasing lower-fare tickets," said Tim Smith, a spokesman for the airline. Recently an informal poll from tripadvisor.com discovered that 51% of respondents are willing to fly sick with the flu rather than pay a flight rebooking fee. Considering how fast germs spread, especially in such  small areas such as an airport or airplane, this is a remarkably high percentage. "The airplane is like a petri dish in the sky" said Rene Foss, a flight attendant for 25 years. Is it reasonable for airlines to temporarily waive cancelation fees for H1N1-infected passengers who have a doctor's note? At this point in time, people will choose to save money versus health, and this is not good for those air travelers that are flying healthy,as they risk becoming ill. What do you think airlines should do to control disease, and should H1N1-infected passengers be forced to pay rebooking fees? 

Agassi, a Legend?

Eight time grand slam champion, Andre Agassi, admitted his recreational use of crystal meth, during his 1997 season, in his new autobiography. It is worth noting, his drug use is not performance enhancing, rather, recreational. Agassi, widely acknowledged as an all-time tennis legend, successful multi-millionaire, had everything to lose in admitting his usage of the drug. Or did he have nothing to lose? Agassi won a gold medal at the Atlanta Olympics of 1996. However, in late 1997, his ranking dropped to No. 141, one of the most severe drops in ranking any tennis pro has ever done- equivalent to playing in the "minor leagues" of tennis. It becomes obvious now, why, in 1997 Agassi's tennis game became so much worse, a side-effect of his drug use. By 1998, Agassi jumped back up to a top 10 ranking, making the single greatest increase in ATP ranking history. A year later he won the French open, completing a career Grand Slam, and finished 1999 ranked No. 1. After his use in 1997, Agassi salvaged his career, and recovered into the legend he was destined to become. Why, 12 years later, does Agassi admit to using the drug? I'm not able to think of a reasonable explanation for Agassi's admission.  He was not under persecution, or investigation. Is this his form of self-purification? Did he want to feel better about himself? This could have never been announced, and Agassi would go down in history as a tennis legend. Yet, he made a decision to tell everyone. His family, friends, fans, you and me. So how does our view of Agassi change? I would still say that he's pretty good at tennis.