In his regular Salon feature "Ask the Pilot," Patrick Smith takes on the concept of passengers' bill of rights legislation, an idea with renewed momentum after JetBlue and Delta's recent debacles.
Essentially forcing passengers to stay on a plane sitting on the runway for ten hours is utterly ridiculous, Smith agrees, but wonders whether market solutions aren't preferable to government intrusion in the form of legislation.
His argument thus:
[over the flip; cross-posted]
Sen. Barbara Boxer and Rep. Mike Thompson of California will formally introduce versions of the oft-called Passenger Bill of Rights to the U.S. Congress in the next few weeks. Their legislation would, among other things, offer passengers the option of leaving any airplane delayed on the ground more than three hours after its doors are closed.
That certainly sounds reasonable, but although the proposal is well intended, it's wrongheaded for at least a couple of reasons. First, deplaning even one passenger requires a return to the gate, the possible offloading of luggage, and the very real danger of a flight missing its departure slot, subjecting those who remain to a substantially longer wait. It's never fun, but there are times when sitting on a plane for three and a half hours is the better alternative.
But more important, let me ask you this: Is the call center at my bank obligated under federal law to answer its phones in a certain amount of time? When UPS delivers a package late, is it beholden by an act of Congress to make amends? And so on. I'm not one of those people who believe the free market should be left to its own Darwinian devices every time, but it sets a bad precedent, and it's a very slippery slope, once we start legislating what is effectively customer service.
And let me ask you, Patrick: if you display pique at treatment by your bank, does the teller have the right to detain you for questioning by federal officials under the theory that you are a security risk?
Say you're in Hour 7 of sitting on a runway, confined to a plane. Claustrophobia is setting in as you sit squeezed in your middle seat. You have listened to hours of pilot updates with short shelf lives, and you feel there is no end in sight. You approach a flight attendant and demand to be let off the plane. What are some possible consequences for this action?
The airline may suffer some financial penalty by having to issue vouchers, pay for a mea culpa ad campaign, etc. But you could be arrested. See a rundown here.
I'm not necessarily an advocate for legislation mandating remedies to customers by airlines who essentially hold customers hostage. In general - in a pre-9/11 world, actually - the financial threat to airlines by hordes of irate customers and hours of negative news coverage would be enough. (Delta had to be cringing that one of its trapped passengers was infotainment host Joe Scarborough, whose substitute host played a voice mail message for the audience of Scarborough reporting on his interminable wait. Upon his return, Scarborough devoted a segment on his and other passengers' travails, mentioning Delta by name.)
Traveling home from San Jose recently, I had an issue with TSA officials at the security line: first they ransacked my purse, then kept the conveyer belt running while I scrambled to scoop up my belongings as bags behind mine piled into my stuff. I finally yelled "STOP IT!" in utter frustration. They did stop the machine and apologized.
But later I thought I was lucky not to have been pulled aside and forced to undergo some unfriendly Q&A by a TSA official and perhaps miss my flight home. Now, who knows the likelihood of this happening. But there are enough stories about passengers on planes expressing disapproval with service only to have a flight attendant's complaint cause them to be arrested once the plane lands. It seems that merely raising one's voice is enough to court trouble. Now, we would prefer civility - but should uncivil complaints rise to the level of potential criminal behavior?
The fact that any flight attendant can use his or her own judgment about what constitutes risk to other passengers probably makes their job much, much easier. I imagine that most of us are loath to issue forceful complaints while subject to their total control, and conform our behavior accordingly. (Now, what type of society does this describe?)
So we should by all means have a discussion about a Passengers' Bill of Rights. We may or may not require one. (I am curious to hear airline executives explain how a plane should come to sit on the runway and be repeatedly de-iced - that's confidence-inspiring - only to become permanently moored in the ice. But I digress.)
More more importantly, we desperately need a review of the power airline pilots and flight attendants have to deliver us into an unwelcome governmental embrace.here