DOT limits on tarmac delays eliminate stressful waits for fliers

As millions of Americans prepare to head home for the holidays, air travelers can be thankful for one less travel stress: lengthy tarmac delays.

Last year around this time, I announced landmark airline passenger protections to put an end to unreasonably long tarmac delays that had in some cases left travelers stranded without access to food, water, or working lavatories.

Since our rules establishing fundamental rights for airline passengers went into effect this past spring, lengthy tarmac delays have dropped to almost zero. We’ve also sought to expand consumer rights through a second proposed rulemaking that would require airlines to fully disclose fares and extra fees and provide better compensation for bumping passengers from oversold flights.

Anyone who has flown before knows the stress and uncertainty that can accompany air travel. By giving consumers more options, information, and most importantly, basic rights to fair treatment, we are trying to make air travel easier and more convenient for everyone.

Of course, our work to establish fundamental rights for airline passengers has--predictably--attracted criticism from some in the airline industry. These critics claim limits on tarmac delays are excessively disruptive and are causing more flight cancellations.

But, as DOT’s airline data show, our airline consumer protections have accomplished the goal of reducing extended airline delays without causing any tangible increase in flight cancellations.

Passenger protections seek to get this plane in the air or to a gate with less delay

Recently, a pair of airline consultants cooked up a report alleging that our rule limiting tarmac delays was responsible for thousands of cancelled flights between May and September. That is simply not true. In fact, the same airline consultants’ report admitted that 4,793 of the 5,068 additional flight cancellations they counted in May–September 2010 were cancelled before the plane even left the gate, which means they have nothing to do with limits on tarmac delays.

To look at the impact of the tarmac delay limits on flight cancellations, we can simply look at the number of flights cancelled after tarmac delays of more than two hours--the instances in which planes may have returned to the gate to comply with the tarmac delay rule. In 2009, 220 flights were cancelled after delays of two hours or more compared with 225 flights in 2010: a difference of 5 flights.

If five flights doesn’t sound like a significant increase, that’s because it isn’t--especially considering there were nearly 9 million domestic passenger flights in the U.S. in 2009.

What is significant, however, is the major decrease we’ve seen so far in extended tarmac delays. The drop in extended delays has been stark: in May to September 2009 there were 535 tarmac delays over three hours; compared with just 12 in May through September 2010. That tells me we are heading in the right direction.

Air travelers can be assured – and so can our critics – that the DOT is not going to back down when it comes to protecting flyers’ rights.

Safe travels to all of you this Thanksgiving holiday.

Comments

[Joe]

I would like to comment on your statement that cancellations where not due to the delay rule because they were cancelled prior to a delay. This is simply false. Airlines have and will continue to cancel flights before departure due to the delay rule. The fact of the mater is that cancellations are up considerably and the only thing that has changed is the tarmac delay rule. This lack of knowledge about how the airline industry works is the problem with stressed travellers. I am never stressed when I travel, I get fair compensation for my issues when airlines have them. This bill of rights does very little to change the quality of air travel in the US.

[brian g]

for those of us that live in high density areas and are taking intercity buses instead of planes (or trains) to get home this holiday season, it would be great to have HOV/HOT/bus lanes on some freeways, especially I-95 between Boston - NY - Philly - DC. The expansion in recent years of intercity bus travel should go hand in hand with improvements in infrastructure that will encourage it as a viable form of transportation and for those of us who are students or on limited budgets, a cheaper alternative to Amtrak, which at least for my trip today from Baltimore to NYC costs about 4 times as much for a trip that is perhaps only one hour by train than by bus.

[dennis]

I am all for decreased tarmac delays. I was once stuck on the runway for three hours...and they do not even let you off.
It's about time.

[Michael E. Bailey]

Rights of airline passengers are important and tarmac delays were a major problem before the new rules went into effect. I have seen flights delayed on the ground for up toan hour this past year, but have never seen one that was over two hours so far. The one time when a flight was an hour or so late leaving the airport in Phoenex for the flight to Sacramento to go on to Los Angeles International, the airline changed peoples tickets to let them fly on flights leaving Sacramento on time for Burbank and Ontario. As it happened, the Flight from Phoenex left Sky Harbor Airport about an hour late and was about two hours late into Sacramento. They were about to cancel the flight but didn't. It left Sacramento for Los Angeles without a full load of passengers because most people changed their tickets for other flights to neighboring airports. But things have gone pretty smoothly under the new rules. Best wishes, Michael E. Bailey.