Let’s get something straight: it’s not “business class” and “economy”; it’s “first class” and “second class.” It was while I was recently waltzing around Pearson International’s Terminal One when I began to notice the subtle truth of international travel: airline classism. It started with the Air Canada Maple Leaf Lounge, as its frosted glass doors stared down at me. I wondered why I, an Air Canada passenger, couldn’t enter. But this was only the beginning.
When I boarded the plane, those in first class were already warmly tucked in, indulging in fresh orange juice and reading the Globe and Mail. While waiting to move along, I noticed a few other glaring differences. A quick phone call to their head office the next day confirmed a multitude of disparities: larger seats, better food, hot towels, fine china, personal televisions, free alcohol, abbreviated check-in, faster luggage retrieval, and-most importantly- a steward-to-passenger ratio of 12:1 in “business class,” compared to 35:1 in economy/second class.
Paying for better, friendlier service is using money as a tool to be discriminated against positively, which isn’t intrinsically wrong. It’s just something about immaterial benefits, like getting better service, accelerated check-in, and preferred seating, which get to the heart of the matter. Although we are living in the 21st century, and our history has seen countless class revolutions, humans are still ranked in terms of financial worth.
But, while it is true that our society is inevitably class-divided, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to reduce classism. We should let the business class retain the fine china and hot towels they pay top dollar for. However, we should eliminate blatant cases of economic inequality resulting in discomfort for the majority of passengers, those sitting in the back of the plane.
It may seem that I am just bitter because I can’t have what they do. But, in fact, I believe people should at least have the option of getting more if they can afford it. Realistically, if at check-in I was given the chance to mingle in first-class, I would jump at the offer. I’d love to eat yummy food, not have my knees puncture the seat in front of me, or experience the quietude a screaming baby’s absence provides. Consequently, I can’t object to people who would prefer to spend their money on comfort.
What I’m taking issue with is something much larger, more permanent and unavoidable: social inequality. It is timeless and is even manifest in the most equitable societies we know of. Maybe this phenomenon became so obvious to me because in the aircraft setting there are such clear dividers between the haves and have-nots (not the least of which includes the infamous dividing curtain, and its cousin, the chiding flight attendant reminding you to “please remain in your designated cabin, sir”).
I discussed this dilemma with a friend, and he argued that by paying so much more, those in first class are actually subsidizing the cost of all those passengers in economy. This suggestion underlies a very disappointing reality-that we’re dependent on this upper class to allow us the very things we think we’re affording ourselves. Although it may induce pangs of longing when we are closed off from the lounge, classism must be accepted as a reality.
I need to remind myself while waiting for my peanuts and pop that this problem is only natural and completely good, and maybe even thank the airline gods for creating an obvious setting to let my eyes notice a subtle but complex social phenomenon.
