| by |
Kenneth A. Cubbin |
I arrived at the United Airlines gates at Los Angeles
International Airport (LAX) an hour before my flight's scheduled departure to
San Francisco International Airport (SFO) only to find that it had been
canceled. I sighed. "Not again!" I thought.
At the departure gate, I waited my turn at the check-in counter while other
passengers had their travel arrangements sorted out by United Airline's
employees. One particularly irate woman slammed her ticket folder onto the
counter and shouted, "I paid over $200 for this ticket and now you expect me
to go standby for the next flight!"
I felt empathy for the United employee who stoically remained calm while
under verbal assault. It was hardly her fault the woman's flight had been
canceled. Yet this flight was one of many that had been either delayed or
canceled that morning.
Other passengers, exhibiting varying degrees of impatience, anger and
antipathy towards any airline employee, milled around the departure area.
Seating for departure passengers in the United Airlines area at LAX is limited
and people loitered wherever they could find space. Arrival passengers from
other flights fought to make their way through the disgruntled mass. Depending
to whom one spoke, the cause of the disruptions was either adverse weather at
SFO, air-route congestion, or a mixture of both. Just another day of joy for
the unfortunates who need to travel between Los Angeles and San Francisco.
C'est la vie.
Sometime later in Atlanta while on my journey home, Delta Air Lines
canceled the 5:30 afternoon flight to Greensboro, N.C. Passengers who were
supposed to be on that flight were now standing-by for the 7:55 flight.
Unfortunately for them, this flight was also booked to capacity. Their
reactions were a mirror of what I had experienced in LAX.
Delta employees announced over the PA that if volunteers gave up their
seats, they would be compensated with 700 "Delta dollars" and a free night at
a local hotel. Apparently, two other flights to Greensboro that evening were
also fully booked and seats would not be available for those who chose to
forgo their seats. The passenger standing next to me remarked, "What's a Delta
dollar?"
I shrugged. "I guess it's money you can apply to any future Delta flight."
"Well ... what fare does that apply to?" He asked.
"I can't say for sure, but probably their full economy fare rate. Why don't
you ask them?"
"Not me ... I've got to get to work tomorrow!"
A woman with a young infant and all the paraphernalia that is required for
travel with a child sat uncomfortably between two other departing passengers.
Her face was flushed and her hair disheveled. The child lay sleeping in her
arms. I silently applauded her courage at maintaining her composure under such
conditions. To her right, a businessman grimaced as he typed rapidly on his
laptop. I shook my head in sympathy and once again thought of how the
information age has meant that many passengers are now unable to relax and
enjoy their time away from the office. The work is at hand and the office at
the end of the cellular phone. There is no escape.
With so many passengers and so few alternatives, there were many
distraught and angry passengers in the departure gate area. The atmosphere
held all the electricity of a play-off game. With so many people "on the
edge," I felt as though anything might happen. Miraculously, Delta's employees
finally managed to satisfy most people's demands and the flight left on time.
Just another routine day at the "Ant Farm." (That's what I call Atlanta;
people shoulder to shoulder, walking to and from flights and traveling between
terminals in subterranean tunnels).
These personal experiences of mine are merely an everyday reflection of
what is happening at major airports and airlines all over America. Wise people
are now arranging their travel plans to accommodate probable delays and flight
disruptions. The unwary are suffering inconveniences with varying degrees of
indignation and stress. Potential for violence is omnipresent.
Passenger complaints to the Department of Transportation (DOT) are
increasing every day. Voluntary measures airlines undertook last December to
thwart regulatory threats from Congress do not seem to be easing delays,
involuntary bumping or flight cancellations. For example, in March, the latest
month for which statistics are available, nearly 75 percent of American
Airline's domestic flights arrived within 15 minutes of schedule. Continental
and US Airways achieved approximately 81 percent of on-time arrivals. This
means that a large portion of these carriers' flights were late.
Businessmen and women missed meetings, tourists missed connecting flights
and tempers flared. Some economists estimate that lost productivity due to
flight delays and cancellations is affecting the U.S. economy to the tune of
$5 billion per year. A study conducted by college professors — Dean Headly
from Wichita State and Brent Boruen from the University of Nebraska — found
that industry service has been steadily declining in quality relative to
customer performance criteria since airline deregulation. They also suggested
that a link exists between poor customer service and air rage. As a result,
the groundswell to impose further regulations on the airline industry is
gathering steam.
Before airline deregulation in 1978, the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) was
charged with regulating airlines by dictating which routes each could fly and
what fares could be charged. Purportedly, this was to ensure fair profits for
airlines and good service for consumers. The CAB had its regulatory powers
reduced in 1978 and was finally abolished in 1985. After this date, airlines
were free to determine which routes they would serve and what fares they
charged.
So the airlines were now deregulated, right? Wrong!
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the DOT and the FAA still
maintain a tight rein on airlines. Essential air services to certain smaller
communities, although greatly reduced, still depend on public funding.
Airlines still have air fares scrutinized for non-predatory pricing to stop
major airlines forcing out start-up airlines from various markets and
consumers are protected by antitrust laws applicable to mergers and
acquisitions. Airlines must satisfy authorities that they have the wherewithal
to operate an airline before they are issued a Fitness Certificate and minimum
standards for aircraft construction, maintenance and operation are applied.
Airmen, air carriers, air agencies and airports are rigorously certificated
for compliance with regulations. So clearly airlines remain highly regulated
in both direct economic and non-economic terms.
However, none of these regulations satisfy those who would like to see
airlines regulated to provide service quality. In reality, airline traffic
increases have been demand-driven; therefore, consumers need to also shoulder
some of the blame. They want safe, reliable and friendly service to
destinations they deem desirable and at times that are convenient. Oh ... and
they also want to pay bargain-basement prices.
Competing airlines attempt to differentiate themselves on various aspects
of their service; however, there is little doubt that seating comfort in coach
sections has deteriorated since deregulation. Cramming more people into
flights has been one of many methods airlines have utilized to try and contain
costs. Angry people are confined and uncomfortable — and then the airline
offers them liquor.
"Houston — we have a problem!"
In March this year, an International Air Transport Association (IATA)
airline conference in Geneva resulted in a general consensus that air rage has
now displaced hijackers as the top airline worry. Ian Jack, head of security
for British Airways (BA), told Reuters in an interview that, " ... air rage is
the biggest, most significant security threat I have to deal with on a daily
basis ... Bomb warnings, dangerous contents of passenger baggage have become
smaller security threats in proportion to disruptive passengers ... At BA the
number of serious air rage cases by disruptive passengers has increased to 123
in the 12 months to the end of March 1999 from 93 the year before."
While passengers' assault of cabin attendants is a serious issue, a
more worrisome trend is passengers who try to force their way into the cockpit
during flight. Last March, a passenger who forced his way into the cockpit of
an Alaska Airlines flight was only subdued after several male passengers and
the co-pilot joined in the fray. A similar incident occurred on an America
West flight a short time later. Passengers hell-bent to inflict damage to the
pilots and/or the airplane. One can only wonder at how enraged a person has to
become in order to commit such a crime.
The Association of Flight Attendants (AFA) suggests that air rage incidents
are actually under-reported. Adding to the problem is that air rage assault is
a federal offense and some small airport authorities are unwilling or unable
to interfere with air rage suspects. The AFA would like to see an FAA-required
warning added to the present security-based questions that gate agents now ask
passengers before they board their flight. They would also like to see
advertisements inside airports that encourage passengers to keep their cool.
Jeff Zack, a representative of the AFA, summed up the situation succinctly, "
... it only takes one bad incident of air rage to kill everyone on board."
However, recent statistics released by regulatory authorities
actually point to a general decline in air rage incidents. In the U.S., there
were 308 cases of air rage in 1997. In 1999, air rage incidents had decreased
to 178 and in the first quarter of this year, there had only been 25 cases
reported. Although no definitive reasons for the decline are offered, it is
speculated that the increase in prosecution of air rage incidents and a recent
bill enacted by Congress to increase fines for air rage convictions from
$1,000 to $25,000 are possible factors.
I think another contributing factor to air rage is, ironically, our robust
economy. Take a look around any departure lounge. Everywhere there are
business people and tourists talking on cellular phones, consulting daily
planners or doing work on laptop computers. Sure, productivity for the nation
has increased, but passengers' stress levels are being raised to critical
levels — and that's before they get on the airplane. A highly stressed person
has little room left to accommodate the frustrations of flight delays and
other disruptions. What may appear a small problem to one person can be the
straw that broke the camel's back for another and he or she may lash out at
the nearest person. The only logical answer to this is to turn off the
cellular phones, close the laptop computers and try to enjoy the brief respite
from the office. Yeah, right! Tell that to the boss and see what happens!
While politicians are right to increase fines and penalties for incidents
of air rage, they should steer clear of increasing regulation on airlines.
According to the General Accounting Office, ticket prices are 40 percent
cheaper than before 1978 and air services have increased to virtually all
communities across the board (service has increased 50 percent to small
community airports, 57 percent to medium community airports and 68 percent to
large community airports.)
Whether it's grandstanding or a misdirected sense of justice,
politicians love to enact regulations that magnify their importance and
increase their public exposure. Disturbingly, both Republicans and Democrats
are now flag waving and offering to fix a problem that was much of their
making.
For years, the full financial benefits of the Airport and Airways Trust
Fund (AATF) were not directed to maintaining and updating airports and the
airways system. Not surprisingly, the airways system deteriorated to the point
where traffic delays are now more of an expectation than an anomaly. Airports
are operating to capacity and fighting to find ways to offer better service.
In a vain effort to keep up with the game, the FAA has approved inherently
dangerous options of handling increased traffic, such as Land and Hold Short
procedures; this is where aircraft are given a landing clearance to hold short
of a crossing runway where another aircraft is concurrently departing. In a
time when runway incursions remains a serious safety issue, having arrival and
departure traffic potentially conflict in such a manner can only serve to
jeopardize safety.
With passage of AIR-21, a bill that ensures all money in the AATF
will be directed for its original intended purpose, a steady improvement in
the status quo will eventuate. For that I am grateful. However, the airline
industry and airways system is playing a game of catch-up and it is doubtful
whether a situation will ever be reached where excess capacity exists.
Private enterprise will take care of issues if a level playing field is
provided. For example, a new travel company, Biztravel.com, intends to offer
what airlines have refused to do in the past: refunds for late or canceled
flights. Biztravel.com has offered these refunds plus compensation for lost
luggage, seat assignments that are not honored and special meals that are not
served on US Airways, British Airways, Air France, American Airlines and
Continental Airlines. If successful, the momentum of passengers who move away
from carriers which are not covered by Biztravel.com may force similar
offerings across the airline industry. In short, the airline industry may be
forced to pull up its socks and begin compensating passengers for poor
service. The good news is that regulation would be thwarted; the bad news is
that airfares would marginally increase in order to pay compensation. These
are the same results that could be expected if airlines were re-regulated as
in the past.
Some pundits speculate that airline alliances, such as the Star Alliance
and Oneworld, may ultimately lead to higher levels of service for passengers.
In my opinion, the jury is still out on that one since airline industry
dynamics are still in progress. Adam D. Thierer, a spokesperson for the
Heritage Foundation, offers the following suggestions as to how improvements
may be made in the airline industry:
- Airports could be privatized and spending on infrastructure increased;
- A market-based pricing system for takeoff times, slots and gates could
be introduced at airports;
- The air traffic control system could be privatized to reduce
congestion and increase safety;
- Airline passenger taxes and fees could be reduced;
- And foreign competitors could be encouraged to enter the U.S. domestic
market.
I certainly don't have all the answers, although I do recognize from
personal experience that bureaucrats' interference usually only adds ice to
the wing. The airline industry is hyper-competitive and ultimately some
airlines will prosper while others fail. Consolidation and the formation of
alliances in itself may form an oligopoly situation where only a few options
are left for passengers on services between major airports. Once again, this
is the same result that can be expected from re-regulation.
This fact was magnified by the recent announcement that the world's
largest airline, United Airlines, intends to acquire US Airways. Although this
acquisition will have a hard time gaining DOJ approval, this case does
demonstrate how if left to its own resources, the airline industry will evolve
into a few airline alliances serving major markets. However, there should
always be niche airlines serving specialized market segments as long as
present regulations are enforced to prevent predatory pricing by major
airlines. In short, the airline industry is going to consolidate and virtually
regulate itself — I hope.
In this world there are two distinct groups of people: Those who think the
government can fix almost any problem and those who think the government
should stay out of the way. Air rage incidents are decreasing, funding for
airport and airways system improvement is now available, airlines are
consolidating and new innovative companies, such as Biztravel.com, have the
potential to revolutionize passenger service issues. It would serve us all
well to remember that the USA was founded on the principles of freedom and
minimal government intrusion in the lives of its citizens and the way they
conduct business.
My advice to politicians is to leave well enough alone. Improvements,
though long overdue, are underway and introducing further regulations would
only serve to dampen this evolutionary process.
Email this article
