> optimize for the greater good

Greater good my posterior. The grandma was in the wrong place at that time because they optimised the experience to extract the most money out of the flying public. They were boarding the people who paid extra, and since she didn't they couldn't let her board. Because if they do why would anyone pay extra for their "higher class" more expensive tickets. They could have said "passport?" and then pointed her towards the gate. But doing so as a policy would net the corporation less profit. So they don't.

In other words the grandma's distress was by design. You can avoid the indignity of turned away from the gate by coughing up more money. She quite literally "didn't know her place" both in the queue and in the hierarchy.

▲

gruez an hour ago | parent [-]

>They were boarding the people who paid extra, and since she didn't they couldn't let her board. Because if they do why would anyone pay extra for their "higher class" more expensive tickets.

The class conflict/"corporate profit" angle doesn't make any sense because even in communism you'd still need to board people in different groups (eg. people who are disabled and/or need assistance first, then people at the back, all the way to the front), thereby creating the issue described in the OP.

▲

krisoft an hour ago | parent [-]

It makes every sense. andsoitis claimed that the process is optimised for "greater good". My observation is that it is not. It is optimised for profit. That's it.

If there were some change they could enact which improves the "greater good" (whatever that is) at the cost of profit, they wouldn't. Simple as that.

> or need assistance first

yeah. Like a grandma with a tenuous command of the language and four kids. :)

> thereby creating the issue described in the OP.

I'm sure a fictional airport organised by other principles would have other problems. Doesn't change a bit that the current airport you can experience is optimised for profit, and not for "greater good".

	▲	gruez 17 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		>If there were some change they could enact which improves the "greater good" (whatever that is) at the cost of profit, they wouldn't. Simple as that. Right, nobody thinks airports/airlines are altruistic organizations, but this specific complaint doesn't make any sense because the specific decision to board by sections is for the greater good. A moshpit where everybody boards at once benefits no one. In this case, "greater good" and "maximize profit" overlaps. >yeah. Like a grandma with a tenuous command of the language and four kids. :) Usually this would be handled by the airport, not the airlines. Moreover airports usually have criteria for which people can get assistance, and they can only help people that they think need assistance. It's easily to identify someone in a wheelchair, less easy to identify "grandma with a tenuous command of the language" without engaging in sterotyping/racial profiling.