Ethics

Hello and welcome to my blog—PMGT 611- Anatomy of Project Organizations. As part of my Master’s coursework at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, I am tasked to analysis different project management lessons and/or scenarios. Each time I learn valuable lessons while gaining a little insight into myself.

  

This leads us into this week’s discussion topic: Ethics.  Here is the ethical scenario proposed:

An airline often charges higher fares for one-way tickets than round-trip tickets, and for direct flight tickets to its hub than for flight connections from its hub to another destination. So some travelers buy round trip tickets and only go one way, and some end their travel at the hub instead of taking the connection (a "hidden city" itinerary), to save money. The airlines call this breach of contract: They have punished travel agencies for tickets that aren't properly used, they sometimes demand higher fares from travelers caught, and they have seized some travelers' frequent-flier miles, saying they were fraudulently obtained. (Lussier & Achua, 2013 pg. 97)

Now, this is a very perplexing situation. Honestly, I haven’t traveled by airlines much. I was unaware of thee “hidden city” environment of ticket pricing. “Hidden City travel is when a traveler wants to go to a city that costs more to fly to directly than another city that uses the real destination as a connection” (Marshall, 2015). Doing some research, I actually discovered that there is a major court case about the situation.

“In the lawsuit, United and Orbitz call Skiplagged ‘unfair competition’ and say it promotes ‘strictly prohibited’ travel” (Bort, 2014). Curious about how a judge would rule, I quickly search for the case result, if any. I discovered an article in CNN Money which states the case was dismissed. “Chicago Judge John Robert Blakey of the Northern District Court of Illinois said the court didn't have jurisdiction over the case because Zaman didn't live or do business in that city” (Gillespie, 2015). I decided not to pursue further “google” searches since the question of ethics was directed for me to answer. So here is my take.

First, in order to probably understand my stance and the question of ethics, I wanted to define ethics. “Ethics are the standards of right and wrong that influence behavior” (Larson & Gray, 2014 pg. 55). Reviewing the scenario, my first response was in favor of the travelers.

What right does the airline have to penalize a passenger for not continuing their travel? The ticket was bought and paid for, so it is the passengers right to use anyway they chose. In addition, the airlines aren’t physical harmed as they received payment and only had to deal with an empty seat for the final leg of travel. And besides, the airlines make enough profit from consumers.

However, when given some time to consider, I can play devil advocate and see the other side.

At first, I believe the airlines had no harm. However, in truth, with reduction in ticket prices the airlines have lost revenue with my behavior. Is it right to take advantage of a situation for my own gain? Some could argue yes. I, for one, would rather follow the agreement of the ticket purchase. As a United representative stated, “This practice violates our fare rules, and we are taking action to stop it to help protect the vast majority of customers who buy legitimate tickets” (Bort, 2014).  In a sense, the ethical justification used by many in this argument could fall under distortion of consequences. Distortion of consequences “is the process of minimizing the harm caused by the unethical behavior” (Larson & Gray, 2014 pg. 58). Travelers feel it is no big deal and the airlines can handle the price difference. Maybe they can, but the airlines are a business. And a business has the right to set the pricing and conditions of their product or service. I enjoyed this analogy: “The closest analogy that I can come up with is card-counting in blackjack: it’s not cheating, and it’s not illegal, but the casinos have a right to prohibit it in their own interest” (Marshall, 2015). If the travelers do not like the situation, their voices can be heard in another way; do not use the airline. This sends the message and the airlines, if happens enough, would respond with price adjustments. The market will correct the situation.

In truth, why doesn’t the airlines just do something about their pricing?

Ok, so here are my answers to the questions to this scenario:

1-      Not using the full travel of a ticket breaks airline rules but not the law, so it's not illegal, unless travelers lie about what they are doing. But is it ethical and socially responsible behavior of travelers?

a.       No. In truth, isn’t the traveler “lying” about their intentions when purchasing the ticket?

2-      Is it ethical and socially responsible for airlines to charge more for less travel?

a.       It is up to the airlines to set the price. The airlines are business organizations, operating to make a profit. If the travelers do not like the conditions, let your voices be heard by not using the airlines’ services.

3-      Is it ethical and socially responsible to punish people who break the ticket rules?

a.       Once again, I believe it is up to the airlines to set their policies and for travelers to either abide by them. Or seek another mode of travel.

4-      Is reinforcement theory effective (does it motivate you and others) in today's global economy?

a.       Reinforcement Theory “proposes that through the consequences for behavior, people will be motivated to behave in predetermined ways” (Larson & Gray, 2014 pg. 95). Yes, this is effective, however not 100%. People (consumers and/or travelers) are required to abide by the policies of the business or suffer the consequences. I believe most of the population does comply. Take, for example, Apple IPhones and other products. By using Apple phone and products, you abide by their policy which forbids apps not approved by Apple. Most people abide. Some people “jail-break” their phones. If caught, you could suffer the consequences. However, some people are willing to take that chance.

5-      Is reinforcement theory ethical and socially responsible, or is it manipulative?

a.       I believe it is ethical. If a person does not want to follow certain rules, they are free to bring their business elsewhere, or not do business at all. Manipulative would be the hidden rules and/or policies that are enforced but not disclosed. Once the airlines discovered the problem with “hidden cities”, they can specifically add that to the policies of ticket purchase. Now, if discovered, the traveler can be held liable. The question is how do you find out if a person is ultimately using this technique? It would be about as hard as finding someone counting cards in a casino. The casino trains specialist to spot these actions. The airlines can possibly do the same.

Damien

References

Bort, J. (2014). Orbitz and united are suing a 22-year-old who figured out how to game airlines. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2014/12/31/skiplagged_founder_fights_lawsuit_from_united_and_orbitz.html

Gillespie, P. (2015). Judge throws out united airlines lawsuit against 22-year-old. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/01/investing/united-airlines-lawsuit-skiplagged/

Larson, E. W., & Gray, C. F. (2014). Project management: The managerial process (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Lussier, R. N., & Achua, C. F. (2013). Leadership: Theory, application, & skill development (5th ed.). Mason, OH: Cengage/Thomson South-Western.

Marshall, J. (2015). Ethics quiz: Is “Hidden city” flying unethical? Retrieved from https://ethicsalarms.com/2015/01/02/ethics-quiz-is-hidden-city-flying-unethical/