[PHXFlyer]

DOT 199-09
Monday, December 21, 2009

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced a new rule that significantly strengthens protections afforded to consumers by, among other things, establishing a hard time limit after which U.S. airlines must allow passengers to deplane from domestic flights.

Full DOT press release can be found here.

Link to download Docket DOT-OST-2007-0022 (pdf format). Warning! Do not attempt to read this 81 page document whilst driving or operating heavy machinery.

Interesting comment in a related story on MSNBC.com:

And some will argue that rather than punishing airlines for delays, the Obama and past administrations would have done better modernizing the antiquated U.S. air traffic control system, which many industry observers believe is the root cause of most delays in the first place.Perhaps, at least, they’ll apply any fines they collect toward that long-delayed project.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

PHX quoted the following...

And some will argue that rather than punishing airlines for delays, the Obama and past administrations would have done better modernizing the antiquated U.S. air traffic control system, which many industry observers believe is the root cause of most delays in the first place.

On its face one can't argue with this statement. What I have a problem with is when the airlines (and probably some on this board) take it one step further and, with a straight face, say the government has no right to demand that airlines be "realistic" with their timetables and when it comes to selling tickets involving connecting flights. The airlines, and their group of blind followers, want to be able to use the absence of a modernized air traffic control system as an excuse to perpetrate almost every conceivable form of consumer fraud upon the public as they can. And my guess is they will fight the proposed DOT rules all the way to the Supreme Court and through their paid "agents" in Congress.

As to the matter of selling tickets wherein there is an unrealistic connecting time between flights: I give credit to American Air. Their on-line site contains warnings when the connecting times are short. I haven't seen this repeated by any other US-based airline. Still, in my view, American Air is nothing more than a prisoner transport service, with flight attendants, and gate agents, acting as guards. Too many of their staff lack the basics of human decency.

[ID-NJ]

Ditto, quite agree with both your points!

[jimworcs]

The problem with this type of rule making, rather than legislated rights is that they can be changed at any time. By the time the lobbyists and put a fortune into the accounts of the Senators and Representatives, the ruling will probably be completely watered down. However, it is definitely progress.

The ruling on ridiculous "fantasy schedules" is much needed. Really, the FAA should not award "slots" which the airline cannot possibly meet. The morning rush at JFK makes a mockery of the timetable. It is simply not possible for the schedule to be met and the airlines and airports know this.

Frankly, piecemeal rule making isn't the way to go. A wholescale re-regulation is what this industry needs.

[cortney]

ok so this JUST happend to us. this is where i have a problem with this new law about getting passengers off. I worked a flight, we landed on time and everything. we were at an airport where you off load passengers onto a bus on the tarmac. anyway we were then told nobody could get off the plane. the airport had shut down all ground operations and nobody could be outside because of a VIP coming in. we sat on the plane for about 2.5-3 hours. now this was in no fault of the airline and they couldn't get us to a gate due to the airport closing down ramp operations. what is the airline to do in this case???

more times i have been stuck on an international carrier for 3+ hours and at international destinations over us carriers. i believe this should be a law for ALL carriers. not just US carriers

[jimworcs]

First, the fact that your delay was under 3 hours means that the rule would not have applied. In fact, the rule would help the airline in these circumstances. The airline can put pressure on the airport, precisely because it is a rule that they cannot keep people hostage for over 3 hours. Without the rule, the airline would have no scope to address the problem with the airport. Frankly, there is no VIP who can justify the airport taking such actions.. it is OUTRAGEOUS.

In all my years of travel, I have never been held on the ground in any international airport more than 45 minutes, except in the USA. If you google airport horror stories, you will not find too many reports of this happening elsewhere. This seems to be a perculiarly American problem...

[cortney]

but if it were going over 3 hours (almost but not quite) the airline couldn't do anything. the airport shut down the operations, the airports know about this rule. i sat on an air india plane (barf lol) for 3.5 hours while they worked on a mechanical problem then last month 3 hours as they waited for other passengers while they yelled at us that we were late checking in even though it was our lufthansa flight that was late due to weather.

this "VIP" we saw the aircraft land. it was a United States of America a/c so it belonged to the government lol, delays caused by them lol

[jimworcs]

Even the President is not VIP enough for me to cause a 3 hour delay. By all means shut down operations an hour before landing and half an hour after, but 3 hours is ridiculous. I don't care who it was. As it happens, I was at Birmingham Airport when Birmingham hosted the G8 conference. President Clinton and the Heads of State of the top 8 industrial nations, plus the Chinese and Russian Presidents came through Birmingham Airport. It was not closed for 3 hours. Ludicrous.

In both the case you cite and the notorious incident which triggered the rule change, the airline would have found the rule helpful rather than a hindrence. In the case of the recent event, where it was a ground handling company which was intrangisent, the airline could point to the rule to force them to act. It is just a pity that it doesn;t have the power of legislation.

[Jetliner]

The problem that I don't think Kate Hanni realized with this is the number of cancelations that will now happen. The plane sits due to local traffic congestion. That 3 hour mark comes up, and now the plane has to go back to the gate. But now they loose their place in line for takeoff, and have to start over. Sorry, flight canceled. And I know some of you will disagree. Wait and see.

[jimworcs]

The issue Jetliner is this. The airlines deliberately schedule flights together in airports which don't really have the capacity to handle the flights. They know this, but for competitive reasons they continue to do it. It is particularly acute at JFK, LaGuardia, Atlanta and Chicago but is endemic throughout the system.

The airlines will simply have to make more realistic scheduling so that the slightest hiccup doesn't result in chaos. This is the reason why this problem is so endemic in the US, and less prevalent elsewhere. Slots in other countries are managed and controlled (indeed, they are bought and sold in some countries). It is false to put the blame for this entirely on the infrastructure. The airlines themselves create their own schedules which are simply not realistic. They fight tooth and nail attempts by the FAA to control this. The FAA is now however taking a harder line on this and has recently implemented changes in New York area to manage this, in the face of bitter opposition by the airlines.