DOT airline passenger protections to take effect

Thanks to a new rule that takes effect tomorrow, DOT is protecting air travelers from lengthy tarmac delays.

Fast Lane readers may recall the nightmare suffered last summer by 47 people trapped aboard a crowded commuter jet with faulty lavatories for seven hours. All night long, they were just a stone's throw from the comfort and services of Minnesota's Rochester International Airport.

Well, there should be no doubt that airline passengers deserve to be treated fairly, and the rules that go into effect tomorrow are a good step toward ensuring that fair treatment.

Under the new rule, U.S. airlines operating domestic flights must allow passengers to deplane after a tarmac delay of three hours. The only exceptions allowed are for safety or security, or if air traffic control advises the pilot otherwise.

Carriers are also required to provide adequate food and drinking water within two hours of being delayed on the tarmac; they must also maintain operable lavatories and, if necessary, provide medical attention.

These provisions are just plain common sense. Airlines need to treat their customers like human beings.

There are other protections in the new rules, like prohibiting airlines from scheduling chronically delayed flights. After all, if you schedule a flight every day at the same time, and that flight is delayed nine times out of ten, aren't you--in all practicality--telling your customers something that is not true?

I encourage you to read more about the other provisions. I think you'll find some overdue sensibility.

DOT's revamped Air Consumer website makes it easy for travelers to find the information they need

I want to thank the folks at DOT's Aviation Consumer Protection office for their help in formulating this rule, for their vigilant enforcement of our existing rules, and for the enforcement effort I know they will bring to these new rules.

I am proud to work side-by-side with people who know that protecting passenger rights is the right thing to do.

Comments

[Michael E. Bailey]

The new rule on tarmac delays and the other components that go along with it are very badly needed because some airlines had gotten use to treating their passengers more like cattle than people. The new rule will enhance the passengers' transportation experience and will humanize it more. Enforcement of the bumping regulations is anohther important part of the same theme of humanizing air travel. The airlines will provide better service as a result of the new rule. Best wishes, Michael E. Bailey.

[LAX Parking]

Secretary LaHood,

Thank you for instituting these sensible new guidelines governing delayed flights in the US. Carriers do forget sometimes that it's people they're dealing with and not just statistics in their daily routine of meeting flight schedules.

- Dan at Best Parking

[Elizabeth Gilbard]

Thank you Mr. LaHood for telling the airlines to treat travelers humanely. Well done.

[JB Tompson]

I have a question about the increased fines. Will part of the fines be distributed to the passengers who actually had to suffer sitting on the tarmac? If not, why are the passengers suffering and the government profiting? The airline companies are just going to pass the cost of higher fines on to the future passengers anyway.

I don't see a benefit for anyone but the government. Does anyone else?

[jim]

Is there a list somewhere that shows which run/taxiways are still made from tarmacadam aka tarmac? It was my understanding and experience that most all airports have for a long time constructed these areas from concrete.

[Lawrence Koss]

Greetings Mr. LaHood,

I appreciate the intent behind recent regulations restricting the amount of time airline passengers will have to be confined in a plane on the tarmac. STILL, I find the limits placed here grossly insufficient.

With sincere respect, sir, have you and/or your family ever sat on a tarmac for even 1/2 hour - never mind three (3) hours? Do you think you and/or they could handle it?

And am I correct that the new ruling says passengers should be given water and food after two (2) hours? This seems a strange wait when beverage services normally begin on most airlines about 15 minutes after take-off.

Bottom line - while these regulations may have been created to solve a problem, they do NOT sufficiently address the underlying issues that cause the delays in the first place - namely overbooking, poor scheduling and air traffic control. These regulations also do little to truly address physical and psychological well being of passengers.

INDEED, what will the US Department of Transportation do when someone experiences so much anxiety sitting in a stuffy perhaps hot plane on the tarmac for even an hour finally decides to open an exit door? Truly, what would happen if passengers in mass rebelled against the small handful of flight attendants to open the door to get fresh air in the plane - and heaven forbid, for some perhaps jump out? Has this been considered?

In my view, there is no reason why a plane should sit on a tarmac for more than a half hour. At the 1/2 hour point, the plane(s) should be redirected back to the terminal and passengers allowed to deplane. Should the cause for the delay be a matter of "weather," they can wait out the delay in the terminal with its full size restrooms and restaurant capabilities. When the delay is a function of airline error, passengers should be compensated, either via re-booking to another flight without change fee or, in the case of those who choose not to fly, a complete refund.

It is only through THIS degree of regulation, federal penalty and loss of business that the airline industry will be compelled to get its collective act together. As it is, the industry treats most passengers - i.e, those in coach seating - as mere "cattle" with the industry itself having degraded to little more than an interstate bus experience.

In sum, unless you and your family are personally willing to sit on a tarmac for three hours - the first two without water and food - I would offer this new regulation lacks "teeth" to do the job.

Sincerely

Lawrence N. Koss

[Lawrence Koss]

While I appreciate this "first step", these new rules don't go far enough for me, NOR do they address the very root cause of airline delays and tarmac time in the first place.

Following is an email sent to Mr. LaHood requesting that the allowable tarmac time be reduced from three (3) hours to 1/2 hour and that beyond mere symptomatic remediation, the DOT addresses more substantively the core issues of airline organization and airport management that have led to this situation.

****

Greetings Mr. LaHood,

I appreciate the intent behind recent regulations restricting the amount of time airline passengers will have to be confined in a plane on the tarmac. Still, I find the limits placed here grossly insufficient.

With sincere respect, Mr. LaHood, have you and/or your family ever sat on a plane on a tarmac for even 1/2 hour - never mind three (3) hours? Do you think you and/or they could handle it?

And am I correct that the new ruling says passengers should be given water and food after two (2) hours sitting on the tarmac? This seems a strange wait when beverage services normally begin on most airlines about 15 minutes after take-off.

Bottom line - while these regulations may have been created to solve a problem, they do have NOT addressed the underlying issues that cause the delays in the first place - namely overbooking and poor scheduling. These regulations also do little to truly address physical and psychological well being of passengers.

INDEED, what will the US Department of Transportation do when someone experiencing so much anxiety sitting in a stuffy, perhaps hot plane on the tarmac for even an hour finally decides to open an exit door? Truly, what would happen if passengers in mass rebelled against the small handful of flight attendants to also open the entry door to get fresh air in the plane - and heaven forbid, for some perhaps jump out? Has this been considered?

In my view, there is no reason why a plane should sit on a tarmac for more than a half hour. At the 1/2 hour point, the plane(s) should be redirected back to the terminal and passengers allowed to deplane. Should the cause for the delay be a matter of "weather," they can wait out the delay in the terminal with its full size restrooms and restaurant capabilities. When the delay is a function of airline error, passengers should be fully compensated, either via re-booking to another flight without change fee with hotel accommodations if necessary or, in the case of those who choose not to fly, a complete refund.

It is only through THIS degree of regulation, federal penalty and loss of business that the airline industry will be compelled to get its collective act together. As it is, the industry treats most passengers - those in coach seating - as "cattle" with the industry itself having degraded to little more than an interstate bus experience.

In sum, unless you and your family are personally willing to sit on a tarmac for three hours - the first two without water and food - I would offer this new regulation lacks enough "teeth" to do the job.

Sincerely

Lawrence N. Koss

[Bob Grochowski]

Mr. Secretary,

As a frequent traveler and one who was once stuck on a runway for over five hours and then another three hours on a connecting flight, I appreciate any effort made to limit the abuse airlines inflict. Your new proposals go a long way in encouraging the carriers to consider consequences when making random and extremely inconsiderate decisions. Thank you sir.

Respectfully,

Bob

[Annabel Garza]

Well, this is all good until the airlines figure out the loop holes. I recently traveled yesterday and the pilot opened the door and stated her needed to to "reset" the 3 hour time clock.

We opted to get off to use the airport restrooms and after 6 minutes....we returned and the plane door was closed again.

No announcements were made.....but basically you have to stay in the boarding area.....so what is the use?

They are finding ways around this.

[Nick]

This is a very good policy. Great move!