« Back to blog

DOT Speaks: Consumer Bill of Rights, sort of

There is nothing like Christmas and snowstorms to make the DOT try to push out initiatives to easy the burden of flying.

Alas, 4 days before Christmas and the day after a large snowstorm blasted the eastern US, the DOT announces new regulations to try and force airlines into decent customer service.

Here's the release: http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2009/dot19909.htm

The main rule is that airlines can't keep passengers on a plane for more than 3-hours on the tarmac without offering to deplane them. This is the main part of the Passenger Bill of Rights that some folks have been pushing lately. I said in an earlier post that I wasn't thrilled with the idea in action, although in principle it has some merits.

My sense is there are enough loopholes in this new rule that will allow airlines to plead operational incompetence instead of negligence if they can't manage to deplane passengers within the 3 hours. Of course, on the margin, it will help airlines be more aware of those situations. My fear is that airlines are doing the best they can to keep people from sitting on the tarmac, but that they just don't have control over it. The result will be just more cancellations (either pre-emptively, or after passengers have already sat there for a few hours). But we'll have to see it in action to assess if it has an impact at all, for better or for worse.

The other rules aren't bad either -- here's the full list:

• Prohibits airlines from scheduling chronically delayed flights, subjecting those who do to DOT enforcement action for unfair and deceptive practices; 
• Requires airlines to designate an airline employee to monitor the effects of flight delays and cancellations, respond in a timely and substantive fashion to consumer complaints and provide information to consumers on where to file complaints;
• Requires airlines to display on their website flight delay information for each domestic flight they operate;
• Requires airlines to adopt customer service plans and audit their own compliance with their plans; and
• Prohibits airlines from retroactively applying material changes to their contracts of carriage that could have a negative impact on consumers who already have purchased tickets
.
Now for my annotation:
1) Prohibiting airlines from scheduling chronically delayed flights is sorta silly. I mean, yes, it is a good rule. But all the airlines have to do is extend the scheduled time of a flight, and voila, it is less late. If this rule causes an impact, I think we're likely to see a 4 hour flight from LGA to BOS. Who will that benefit? How about the DOT/FAA step-in and actually prevent airlines from collectively scheduling way more flights than many airports can handle. That, too, would be a good public service!

2) Large airlines already have this and it hasn't proven super-effective, but many now it will be more permanent and senior.

3) Again, most every airline already does this.

4) As if they don't have customer service plans! Well, I suppose maybe they don's and that's why service has been so bad all these years??

5) Right. So now they have to wait a little longer to charge us more fees.

Overall, a good step forward and I'm happy to see it didn't take an act of Congress. The Legislature should not need to get involved in these things, the FAA/DOT should be able to write some smart regulation themselves when necessary.

If anyone sees these rules in action, please do tell!

Safe Holiday Travels,

Evan

Posted by Evan 

Comments (2)

Jan 06, 2010
studentrob said...
>> 1) Prohibiting airlines from scheduling chronically delayed flights is sorta silly....If this rule causes an impact, I think we're likely to see a 4 hour flight from LGA to BOS. Who will that benefit?

Four hours from LGA -> BOS? It's a 40 minute flight and rarely delayed by so many hours.

Promoting openness and honesty will benefit us travelers. If all flights from LGA to BOS are scheduled to be four hours because they are frequently delayed, then I am going to take a train instead. Also, being realistic about flight times may call more attention to the real issue, airport capacity. Right now delays are hidden and hard to find. Thanks to you guys, this will change!

Jan 06, 2010
Evan said...
Yes, 4-hours is an exaggeration, but 30-60 minutes is not for many of these flights. Agreed that more time in the schedule might influence people to take the train, but many of these flights don't present such easy alternatives.

I actually did a whole detailed analysis on this particular rule for an AP article which is to be published shortly. I'll post my findings in addition to the AP article in the next few days.

As a teaser: Newark, LaGuardia, or JFK were the departing or arriving airport on EVERY SINGLE flight that would trigger this rule for year to date 2009. Not surprising, but yet very telling. Perhaps some of the blame needs to rest with Port Authority?

Leave a comment...