A recent post by an advocate on X (formerly Twitter) directed at IndiGo Airlines has sparked widespread discussion online, particularly over the airline’s charge labelled as the “Cute Fee.” The advocate, Shrayansh Singh, took to the social media platform to voice his concerns, humorously questioning whether IndiGo charges passengers for being “cute” or if it’s because the airline finds its planes “cute.”
In his post, Singh not only inquired about the Cute Fee but also expressed frustration over additional charges such as the “User Development Fee” and the “Aviation Security Fee.” His post quickly gained attention, with many users joining the conversation.
Dear @IndiGo6E ,
1. What is this ‘Cute Fee’? Do you charge users for being cute? Or do you charge because you believe that your aeroplanes are cute?
2. What is this ‘User Development Fee’? How do you develop me when I travel in your aeroplane?
3. What is this ‘Aviation… pic.twitter.com/i4jWvXh6UM
— Shrayansh Singh (@_shrayanshsingh) August 19, 2024
IndiGo’s Response
IndiGo responded to Singh’s post by explaining that the Cute Fee stands for “Common User Terminal Equipment” charges. These fees are related to the use of airport infrastructure, including metal-detecting machines and escalators. The airline clarified that these charges are levied for the equipment used at the airport.
However, Singh was not satisfied with the explanation. He responded, questioning why such fees were necessary for equipment that he believed should be part of the airport’s security infrastructure, typically maintained by government organizations like the CISF (Central Industrial Security Force). Singh argued that since airports are public utilities, the maintenance costs should be covered by taxes rather than additional fees charged to passengers.
Public Reactions
The exchange between Singh and IndiGo quickly went viral, with many X users chiming in with their opinions. Some sided with Singh, humorously suggesting that airlines might start charging for even more basic services, such as “breathing charges” for oxygen used in the airport or on the plane. Others pointed out that similar fees are common across the world, with some countries charging airport taxes instead of specific fees like the Cute Fee.
One user remarked, “What’s next? Usage charges for fuel nozzles at petrol pumps? We shouldn’t be giving them ideas!” Another added, “Airlines aren’t to blame here. The Cute Fee, User Development Fee, and Passenger Service Fee are all imposed by the Airport Authority to maintain the airports. Airlines are just collecting these fees on their behalf.”
The advocate’s post has sparked a broader conversation about the various fees airlines and airports impose on passengers, highlighting a growing frustration among travellers over what they perceive as unnecessary or excessive charges. Whether these fees are justified or not, the debate underscores the need for greater transparency in how these charges are communicated and applied to travellers.
What are your thoughts on the “Cute Fee” and other similar charges? Do you think they’re necessary, or do they add to the frustration of modern air travel?
