In business travel news, the rumor mill is swirling about the possible merger of United Airlines with US Airways.

I happen to find this absolutely ludicrous.

You take two struggling airlines to form a larger, more struggling airline.

And then, the most ludicrous story of the week (and this is where I get angry), Spirit Airlines announcing that August 1 they are going to start charging for carry-on bags, up to $45 a bag. What’s next, they’re going to start charging for landing the plane? It’s unbelievable. I went on CBS last week and called this a Declaration of War on Consumers.

The one job I do not want to have on August 1 is gate agent at Spirit Airlines because the first fights are going be breaking out left and right. Passenger will be saying, “I have to do what?” Talk about flight delays for people refusing to pay the money.

Learn more: Spirit’s New Carry-On Baggage Charges.

Of course they’re going to say, “If you don’t pay you don’t fly,” but then again, if you’ve been flying out of LaGuardia lately, you don’t fly anyway.

The bottom line is, what is going to happen here? Will the other airlines follow suit? Remember this doesn’t kick in until August 1 so there’s no reason for airlines to match this right now. They will literally see if it will fly or not (pun intended).

The amount of revenue that could be generated from this is substantial. Let me give you some numbers that will get you angry: By the end of this year, and this is a conservative estimate, the airlines will be generating between $9 billion and $11 billion in ancillary revenue. That’s for checked bags, pillows, blankets, etc.

Earlier this week I was talking to Gerard Arpey, the chairman of American Airlines. Even he thinks the Spirit charge is crossing the line, and he’s talking from the perspective of an airline that was among the first to charge for check-in bags.

Learn more in our Luggage & Packing section.

So one of the reporters asked him, “Are you going to start charging for carry-on bags?”

He said, “Well, I will never rule it out.” You know why? Because none of the airlines want to leave that much money on the table. They don’t want to leave that much revenue on the table.

Ironically, at Southwest Airlines, which does not charge for checked bags, their shareholders were very concerned. Their investors were concerned that they were leaving $700 million or $800 million in revenue on the table by not charging for checked bags.

But a funny thing happened: They watched the needle move. Their market share increased between 3 and 4 percent, and that 3 and 4 percent far outdistanced the $800 million they were leaving on the table.

Read more from Peter’s Travel Detective Blog

One other thing about Southwest: check their fares. In many cases, they’re not the cheapest airline. And yet, you’re willing to pay for it because you don’t feel you’ve been nickel and dimed. You’re willing to pay for it because you don’t feel you’ve been abused every time you fly.

There’s a lesson, airlines and hotels: Don’t nickel and dime us, and you can probably charge more and we’ll be OK about it. It’s not about being competitive about rate. Everyone wants to do that and there’s no upside to that because we get smart about it, ultimately.

It’s about being competitive over value. And right now, they’re going to your wallet for everything on your plane. I don’t care if they want to sugarcoat it by calling it “a la carte pricing.” It’s a la carte garbage, and we don’t want to pay for it. 

How many people really want to pay to carry-on bags? I don’t. In fact, I think we’re going to be showing up pretty soon at the airport naked holding a bedpan. You know why? Because what’s coming up next is … paid toilets.

Learn more: Ryanair Contemplates Charging For Toilet Use. Get Peter’s response in his post on the Turkish Airlines Crash & £1 Loos.

There was also a big controversy last week about the woman in Tennessee who adopted a 7-year-old boy from Russia.

She didn’t like the way he was behaving for whatever reason, took him to the airport in Tennessee, put him on a United Airlines flight connecting him to Washington, and flew him back to Moscow with a note that said, “I don’t want him anymore.”

Is this like buying a book on Amazon and having a return policy? I mean, Russians are not thrilled about this. In fact, Russia is now threatening to suspend U.S. adoptions in the wake of this, and I don’t blame them. This is not a return policy; this is life.

There are so many options that this woman had. So many opportunities to make it work,  to reach out, to get help. You don’t just go to the airport and dump him on the plane.

That also raises the question, what was the airline doing accepting the kid on the plane?

It’s almost tragic. You have so many child custody cases in which one parent literally wants to kidnap a kid to another country. But the airlines, because of liability, require you that if you are a single parent or any parent taking a minor under the age of 16, you have to show up with a notarized document signed by the other parent giving you permission to fly with that kid.

This kid wasn’t flying with anybody. He was a minor, 7 years old, and they put him on a plane to Moscow going buh-bye. Wow.

By Peter Greenberg for PeterGreenberg.com.

Related links on PeterGreenberg.com:

• Travel Detective Blog
• Turkish Airlines Crash & £1 Loos
• Spirit’s New Carry-On Baggage Charges
• Luggage & Packing section
• Unclaimed Baggage Center: Where Lost Luggage Finds a New Home
• New Passenger Rights Laws Could Shake Up Aviation
• Senate Approves FAA Reauthorization, Includes Passenger Rights & Air Traffic Upgrades