Strengthening air passenger protections the right thing to do

I've talked a lot on this blog about airline consumer protections. Well, today we announced a new rule that significantly strengthens those protections.

This rule sets a hard time limit for passengers stuck on the tarmac. After that limit, U.S. airlines must allow passengers on domestic flights to go back to the terminal.

Airline passengers have rights, and airlines have the obligation to respect those rights. Passengers want--and deserve--to be treated fairly, and these new rules will require airlines to do just that.

What does the new rule do?

• U.S. airlines operating domestic flights must let passengers off the plane after remaining on the tarmac for more than three hours.
• Reasonable exceptions are allowed for safety or security or if air traffic control advises the pilot in command that returning to the terminal would disrupt airport operations.
• Carriers are required to provide adequate food and potable drinking water for passengers within two hours of the aircraft being delayed on the tarmac and to maintain operable lavatories and, if necessary, provide medical attention.

This rule didn't just come out of nowhere. It was adopted in response to a series of incidents in which passengers were stranded on the ground aboard aircraft for lengthy periods, and also in response to a high incidence of flight delays and other consumer problems.

In one of the most recent tarmac delay incidents, DOT fined Continental Airlines, ExpressJet Airlines and Mesaba Airlines a total of $175,000 for their roles in a nearly six-hour ground delay at Rochester, Minnesota, this summer. Although the rule seeks to make sure passengers won't have to endure that kind of stranding again, DOT first proposed it back in November, 2008.

And we're not done looking out for airline consumers yet. We plan to begin another rulemaking to strengthen protections even further.  Among the areas we're considering are:

• A requirement that airlines submit to the Department for review and approval their contingency plans for lengthy tarmac delays
• Reporting of additional tarmac delay data; disclosure of baggage fees
• Strengthening requirements that airline ads disclose the full fare consumers must pay for tickets

Look, I've said air travelers can consider this new rule a holiday gift, but it goes way beyond that. Everyone at this DOT knows protecting passenger rights is really just the right thing to do.

Comments

[Susan Magosin Slavinsky]

I can not thank you and the Department enough for your work on airline passenger rights. I travel frequently with my young sons and elderly parents, all of whom have frequent tolietring, food/drink and most importantly medicine needs. I have always done my best to be prepared for long delays, including planning diapers, drinks, etc. but this is truly the best news/best present as it just is not possible to plan for extended delays crammed into an airplane. Thank you so so much!

[Dan Young]

I agree the Airlines should limit the tormac time and 3 hours seems reasonable. The fines however should compensate the travelers who are inconvienenced not the federal government.

Dan Young
Frequent traveler and one who has been held on a plane for more than 3 hours more than once.

[Vince DeMattia]

For the most part, this business of having passengers sit on planes for long periods of times... started with the heavy emphasis on the departure and arrival times performance statistics. So, they loaded the passengers on the planes... pulled away from the gate after unhooking the ground cable from the plane (which automatically sent the departure time into the system). And, thennnnn... proceeded to stay on the tarmac for long periods of time... not to mention the burning of huge amounts of jet fuel, in the process. Wouldn't it be better, just to tell folks... flight such and such will be delayed for an hour and 40 minutes, and let them wait in the airport gate area? And, let them communicate with the tower to get this done... let the tower tell them it's ok to board, then ok to leave the gate in keeping with when they'll actually be able to take off. I think so... and if your department makes it big news that you're going to encourage, if not demand, that the airlines do that. The heck with departure time records. They're not useful... they're only motivation for this "tarmac waiting" foolishness. Heck... the fuel savings ought to be enough to do this. Thank you.

[Barry Graham]

I got to a wedding in Florida a few years ago because JetBlue flew when others canceled. My concern is that with this rule in place, even airlines like JetBlue will stop doing what's right for the customer and will just cancel indiscriminately, which is wrong for the customer. This law is fine but should accompanied by one that prevents airlines from canceling flights due to snow that is hours away.

[Barry Graham]

I do like the part about airlines having to disclose full fares for tickets. It's really bothersome when you see a price advertised and it doesn't include all the taxes and fees. In fact why not extend this to every consumer business in the USA (e.g. shops and restaurants), so that, just like in almost every country, the price you see is the price you pay.

[Michael E. Bailey]

It is great to have someone who is looking out for the passengers. This has been needed for awhile. And I also like it that you will be moving toward airline full disclosure in pricing of tickets and baggage handling. It would be good to go alittle further and ask the airlines how much of the money we pay for tickets and baggage charges actually goes to aircraft and airport terminal operations and how much to executive pay. golden parachute retirement packages, stock options and Board of Directors compensation. I do need to fly from time to time and so far never experienced a delay on the tarmac but it is great to know that if and when such things happen, the airline passengers now have rights. Thank you and best wishes, Michael E. Bailey.

[Barry Graham]

Could you also enact a law that makes it mandatory for airlines to provide special meals when they provide meals? Some like JetBlue already do, they make sure that all of their snacks are kosher. My preferred airline does not offer special meals in first class, even when then they are providing free meals for other passengers. I wrote to the department about this and after investigating they sided with the airline, claiming this was reasonable - even though we don't get a discount for not being served the same expensive meal that others are being served.

[LB Hagen]

New airline flight delay rules will cause major traveler problems and adverse consequences
-
http://roanokeslant.blogspot.com/2009/12/airline-travel-nine-thousand-dollars.html
-
LBHagen@RoanokeSlant.org

[Ryan Harder]

Now if only the government could move this fast to improve the ATC system and pilot duty time limits!
The best way to protect the consumer in this case is not to hinder the airlines financially but to actually improve a broken and outdated system. Not only will the airlines be punished for lack of funding for implementation of the ATC system that would help alleviate these delays they will also lose out on a very good competitive edge between carriers that already have guidelines in place to take care of the customer. This will no doubt only end up affecting the consumer negatively through increased fares to deal with fines and increased frustration from customers now that it is a requirement to return to the gate at a mandated time. Time and money would have been much better-spent on subsidization of the industry and improving old technology.

[BarryGraham]

Slightly on a tangent but having just read that they are still trying to find out what went wrong on the Air France flight, I found this URL

http://www.stormingmedia.us/48/4828/A482814.html

which talks about remote storage of black box data. If we can have wireless internet on flights now, surely we can now stream blackbox data to secure, on the ground servers?

[LB Hagen]

Obama Owes Thousands of Fliers $27,500 Each
-
http://roanokeslant.blogspot.com/2010/01/obama-owes-thousands-of-fliers-27500.html
-

[Neill Kennedy]

I really wonder if the Secretary of Transportation read the "rules" he mentions above. The "rules" do not in any way, shape or form require that the "U.S. airlines must allow passengers on domestic flights to go back to the terminal." The so called "Airline Passengers Bills of Rights" rules go into effect April 29, 2010. From 4/29/10, the airlines and airports have six (6) months to submit their plans for how they will handle passengers if flights are delayed more than 3 hours on the ground. It is also in the rules that after 3 hours, if the pilot determines the flight will leave within 30 minutes after the 3 hour period, the pilot can decide to keep the passengers on the plane. It is also up to the pilot and airport management to decide if it is "safe" to take the passengers off the plane. Nothing will change until at least October 2010 when the airlines have to submit their contingency plans. Then the plans have to be reviewed and approved by US DOT, and the back and forth wheeling and dealing will begin. As is typical of our politicians, these new rules are "eye wash" to give the impression something was done, when in fact, airline passengers will be left sitting in planes on the tarmacs.
Another issue the uninformed press does not understand, and the airline CEO's will not discuss publicly, is that
all pilots know the status of weather events either at point of departure or destination, and they know even before they leave the gate whether or not the flight will be cleared for take off. The pilot is in constant touch with ATC and national weather reports. BUT the planes have to leave the gate within a certain window of time, or the airline is charged additional gates fees. And this is why the planes sit in the tarmac...if the pilot returns to the gate, more gate fees are charged. The pilot is on the job being paid whether he/she sits or flies...so do you really think they care?
For anyone interested, here is the link to the regulation:
http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480a7413a

[Neill Kennedy]

Maybe the Secretary of Transportation should actually read the new rules. Contrary to his statements above, there are no provisions in the new rules that require that "U.S. airlines must allow passengers on domestic flights to go back to the terminal." The so called "Airline Passengers Bills of Rights" rules go into effect April 29, 2010. From 4/29/10, the airlines and airports have six (6) months to submit their plans for how they will handle passengers if flights are delayed more than 3 hours on the ground. It is also in the rules that after 3 hours, if the pilot determines the flight will leave within 30 minutes after the 3 hour period, the pilot can decide to keep the passengers on the plane. It is also up to the pilot and airport management to decide if it is "safe" to take the passengers off the plane. Nothing will change until at least October 2010 when the airlines have to submit their contingency plans. Then the plans have to be reviewed and approved by US DOT, and the back and forth wheeling and dealing will begin. As is typical of our politicians, these new rules are "eye wash" to give the impression something was done, when in fact, airline passengers will be left sitting in planes on the tarmacs.
Another issue the uninformed press does not understand, and the airline CEO's will not discuss publicly, is that all pilots know the status of weather events either at point of departure or destination, and they know even before they leave the gate whether or not the flight will be cleared for take off. The pilot is in constant touch with ATC and national weather reports. BUT the planes have to leave the gate within a certain window of time, or the airline is charged additional gates fees. And this is why the planes sit in the tarmac...if the pilot returns to the gate, more gate fees are charged. The pilot is on the job being paid whether he/she sits or flies...so do you really think they care?
For anyone interested, this is the link to the "rules"
http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480a7413a

[Neill Kennedy]

Mr. Secretary: Regarding your blog comment "Everyone at this DOT knows protecting passenger rights is really just the right thing to do." Believing in this, and actually doing something tangible about it are two very different things. I find it disconcerting that on your own blog, you post such empty comments. Why don't you post the real information about these so called new "rules" and stop trying to give the impression something for the benefit of airline passengers. I would implore you to actually read the docket.

[Neill Kennedy]

The so called "Airline Passengers Bills of Rights" rules go into effect April 29, 2010. From 4/29/10, the airlines and airports have six (6) months to submit their plans for how they will handle passengers if flights are delayed more than 3 hours on the ground. It is also in the rules that after 3 hours, if the pilot determines the flight will leave within 30 minutes after the 3 hour period, the pilot can decide to keep the passengers on the plane. It is also up to the pilot and airport management to decide if it is "safe" to take the passengers off the plane. Nothing will change until at least October 2010 when the airlines have to submit their contingency plans. Then the plans have to be reviewed and approved by US DOT, and the back and forth wheeling and dealing will begin. As is typical of our politicians, these new rules are "eye wash" to give the impression something was done, when in fact, airline passengers will be left sitting in planes on the tarmacs.
Another issue the uninformed press does not understand, and the airline CEO's will not discuss publicly, is that all pilots know the status of weather events either at point of departure or destination, and they know even before they leave the gate whether or not the flight will be cleared for take off. The pilot is in constant touch with ATC and national weather reports. BUT the planes have to leave the gate within a certain window of time, or the airline is charged additional gates fees. And this is why the planes sit in the tarmac...if the pilot returns to the gate, more gate fees are charged. The pilot is on the job being paid whether he/she sits or flies...so do you really think they care?