If We Help Save the Airlines (Again)

We need to stop bailing out the industry and look for permanent solutions like expanding high speed commuter rail lines between cities (kind of like the northeastern states around New York and Washington D.C) Trains take a little longer but take less maintainence than commercial aircraft and use less fuel.

Kevin Mitchell represents corporations that want lower fares. He's paid by those corporations to keep fares lower for Business Travelers where the Corporations pay their travel.

The Coalition for an Airline Passengers Bill of Rights does not recognize, nor does anyone in the beltway that he is a Consumer Advocate.

He has fought our Airline Passengers Bill of Rights and not supported the real passengers who pay for their own tickets.

It's deplorable to call this a "Rough Patch". The airlines are in a "Free Fall" and absent a complete intervention by our Government we will see air transportation falline apart.

We are in a crisis of great magnitude.

"Smart Regulation" is what's necessary and it goes way beyond Passengers Rights. But allowing people off of aircraft after 3 hours is the least they can do.

Water and food should be supplied if they cannot.

Kate Hanni

PS: We are asking for OPTIONAL DEPLANEMENT not manditory.

Kate

I'm all for a "passenger bill of rights" -- for passengers flying aboard *any* airspace -- U.S. or foreign.

My wife and *3 minors* have been stranded in Munich for *2 days* following mechanical difficulties which rendered the *well known* U.S. carrier's plane inoperable.

She and the American students -- all minors -- traveling with her were *split up* this morning as some were permitted to fly back to the U.S. as *standby* passengers while my wife and 3 other students (minors) are forced to remain in Germany (minus their luggage which was on the flight they were not able to board.)

When I contacted customer service of this well-known American airline the representatives I spoke with noted their company had no offices or desks in Munich and that their company had some sort of "agreement" with another well-known European airline in which that other airline would take care of their passengers.

Clearly, this situation is not working out well for the benefit of passengers and it seems to offer this American airline an "out": they are not responsible for their stranded passengers -- the other airline with whom they have an agreement is supposed to handle it.

As bad as this situation is, I think it's important to mention that this is the *second year* my wife (a teacher) and her student group have been split up with gross indifference by a major American carrier.

My wife will be contacting my local congressman and U.S. senators this week.

We will be filing complaints with the appropriate government agencies.

We will be making financial claims for the costs incurred with long distance phone calls and any lost personal effects.

And, at the end of this process, it is quite possible that we will file a lawsuit against the airline for the emotional suffering their incompetence and indifference caused.

John - Quit Crying over spilled milk. A Lawsuit for emotional suffering? Haven't you ever been inconvenienced by a delay due to wether, crews, or maintenance before? Would you rather that the airline take off with a faulty aircraft?

We should pour no more public cash into private airlines. The business press regularly skewers airline management, and well they should. Most of the people who run our industry would not be hired to push a broom anywhere else. It is a waste of taxpayer money - all the cash put into airlines after 9-11 simply went in the pockets of executives. Shareholders lost their shirts in bankruptcies and those of us who work at most carriers took massive cuts in pay and benefits and lost our pensions entirely. Public funds should instead be used to actually provide real oversight rather than trusting airline management, all of whom are cutting every corner they can.
Airline Flight Attendant

Having traveled extensively both overseas and domestic. I can tell you that international carriers have better customer service than the American carriers. Meals are given in coach and every effort is made to make the ride pleasant in coach. Why do the international carriers have consumer rights and not the American ones?

A few comments:

- On domestic tickets, taxes and fees added an average of 15.9% in 2007, which is at the very low end of the range cited.

- It is easy to find examples of individual tickets that have very high
tax rates (even 100% or higher). However, when discussing the economic
impact of taxes (or a tax holiday), what matters is the average ticket
tax (or the total tax collection, which is the average times no. of tickets sold).

- Estimates of taxes cited by the Air Transport Association are generally
higher than the actual average. This is because they assume a "typical ticket"
with a connection in each direction, which overstates the actual impact
of ticket taxes.

- The 7.5% is a domestic tax only. This is replaced by $15.40 on international flights (or $30.80 on a round-trip ticket, since the tax is paid in both directions). You don't pay both, which the article seems to imply. A fixed amount of $30.80 is much cheaper than paying 7.5% for most international tickets.

Joakim Karlsson
Professor
Division of Aviation
Daniel Webster College

The answer may lie in history. I challenge some astute, energetic researcher to dive into the writings and testimony of David S. Gorrell, founder of the ATA. He is the one individual who called for regulating the air industry in 1938. Why? The industry then was as it is now -- a mess. Most people have forgotten that the industry started de-regulated and operated as such for more than a decade. And it's performance both financially and servicewise was terrible. Added to that, the safety record was a threat to travel. When it was regulated in 1938, service became the competitive edge because the ticket price and revenue were largely predictable and manageable. What a world that would be.
We've got to put down the doobie of free market theories as they pertain to this industry. When it was regulated, it made money, when it was not, it lost money. How hard is that relationship to grasp?

Steve Filson
Not a Professor
Man on the Street

If the US reverts to regulation of air routes and air fares it will mean fewer Americans can afford to fly. Prior to deregulation of the industry in the late 1970s only 25% of Americans flew the friendly skies. Remember the Jet Set? Today 75% of Americans can afford to fly. Regulation is not the answer... even Ted Kennedy knows that since he was a big proponent of abolishing the Civil Aeronautics Board.

Airline Tax Holiday

Admittedly the airline industry is in turmoil. Some of that is deserved as US airlines have been inefficient beasts for too long. However, the taxes that each of us currently pays for sitting on a plane is far too great. One must agree that excessive taxation on any product or service only serves to artificially retard growth or even profit in that industry.

We can either decrease (if only temporarily) the tax from tickets to drive business in the industry or the government can pay, yet again, on the backside to bail out carriers. A bail out! What!! Why should the government bail them out, you ask? We must have multiple carriers in the US in order to serve smaller markets and keep the overall market competitive.

You and I can pay for it any way we like because ultimately we'll either pay for it in the ticket or in our taxes each year. BUT... I think we're better served to reduce the tax and let the airlines get healthy rather than let the problem escalate to the point that the gov't must intervene directly into the failing airlines to improve the situation.

One further point to consider. A ticket from the US to London on most major carriers for a November (low season) departure is currently averaging $350 plus taxes equal to $600+ bringing the price of the ticket to over $950+. Now some of this is fuel surcharge and some of it is USD currency devaluation (i.e. it takes more dollars to pay the British pound portion of the taxes)but the bulk is US taxes and could be reduced to spur travel.

-Another guy on the street who flys a lot!

What I don't understand is why European carries can be so well run and Americans ones can't. It has nothing to do with regulations or unions. Ryanair and EasyJet are pan European airlines which rarely charge more than a 100 dollars (even after exchange) for a flight. With a bit of careful planning you can fly all over Europe for almost nothing.

Also Lufthansa is one of the few airlines left that serve food on "domestic" flights anymore. Most don't anymore.

How does not collecting the taxes federally -- but also not allowing the airlines the benefit of keeping the revenues going fix this problem, again? This whole concept makes no sense.
Oil costs too much to sustain airline operations. Air fare NEEDS to cost more. It needs to to run their businesses. The passenger doesn't need another discount -- the business needs some serious help. Did you know the airlines have to pay for TSA airport staffing (i.e. security screeners' salaries)? The airlines need a holiday from all the taxes, security fees, regulatory obligations imposed upon them! The ticket should cost the same -- it's just about where else the money has to go, too.

wait....if oil exploration companies can get subsidies from our government, with our tax dollars... and the CEO of that company can get billion dollar bonuses the same year....I'm more concerned about the allocation of federal funds.... not if the funds are available.

Hello- Thanks to everyone for reading Traveler's Check. I think Steve and Moose have probably gotten us back to the real issue lurking here: Should the U.S. airline industry be regulated? If it were, the consequences would likely be draconian, both positive and negative. I have no idea how that would look -- and strongly suspect most others do not either. But it certainly makes for an interesting debate.

On another note, a reader points out that I should have disclosed Vaughn Cordle's other employment, as a 777 pilot for a major airline. When I posted this blog, I knew Cordle had been a pilot for many years, but with his primary work focused at Airline Forecasts, and the furloughs across the industry, I was not certain whether he was still flying in the cockpit. Well, we chatted and he is, at least for now. So consider that affiliation disclosed. Best, Justin