Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Airlines Fined for Stranding Passengers for Six Hours

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 06:32 PM
Original message
Airlines Fined for Stranding Passengers for Six Hours
Source: ABC News

There is some good news for travelers and a warning to air carriers heading into the Thanksgiving holiday weekend: The government is getting tough with airlines that strand passengers on airport tarmacs.

The U.S. Department of Transportation fined three airlines a total of $175,000 for their role in the stranding 49 passengers -- and two children held on laps -- overnight in a plane at Rochester, Minn. on Aug. 8 saying that the passengers were forced to spend an "unreasonable period of time" on the airplane.

This is the first-ever fine against an airline for such an incident.

"I hope that this sends a signal to the rest of the airline industry that we expect airlines to respect the rights of air travelers," U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, said in a statement.

-----

Continental Airlines and its regional airline partner ExpressJet, which operated the flight for Continental, were each fined $50,000. Mesaba, now part of Delta Airlines, was fined $75,000.

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/BusinessTraveler/airlines-fined-stranding-passengers-travel-nightmare/story?id=9168606



Good - about time. Maybe this will get their attention!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Chemisse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. Very good.
They may not care about the passengers, but they surely care about money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 06:54 PM
Response to Original message
2. Excellent--there have been some really egregious instances of passenger abuse by the airlines...
... over the past decade or so. There was a planeload of people stuck out in the ice and snow one time as well--they were there for a very long time with overflowing toilets, no baby diapers, the whole shebang because the airline officials/ airport officials didn't want to be bothered with deplaning the passengers until the weather cleared.

I was beginning to think that the airlines and the government both were waiting for someone to actually die under such circumstances before doing something about it.

Hekate

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
3. Slap on the wrist. Should have been a million or more.
They'll just do it again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katandmoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. MSE. This is just a cost of doing business as usual, not a meaningful fine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. "fined three airlines a total of $175,000"
Yeah, that'll really teach 'em! :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pitohui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. well what do you suggest? the airlines are not making a profit, you know
i'm not up on continental/express jet's financials but delta/mesaba haven't made a profit in donkey's years, even a small fine hurts

they needed to be punished, and a fine is a fair way to do it, tempting as it might be to charge the crews w. kidnapping/abduction, we can't really put people in prison for fucking up on the job when it was a true fuck-up rather than an intentional cruelty


i would have suggested that all affected pax receive a pair free first class round trip tix to the destination of their choice, probably cheaper than the fine at the end of the day, but i'm not the judge and no one asked me for my ruling...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Submariner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
5. The fine money should go to the stranded passengers
not govt coffers. That would really torque the dipsticks running the airlines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kdmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. Continental already paid the passengers a fine
From the article:

Besides the fine, Continental also provided a full refund to each passenger and "offered each passenger additional compensation to tangibly acknowledge their time and discomfort," the DOT said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Butch350 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
6. The fines will just be payed by future passengers in air fare!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pitohui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. no they won't because airfares are so low to be competitive
this comes right out of the airlines' pocket and frankly i think it just as well

i do wish the $$$ would go at least partially to the trapped pax, rather than to the gov't
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
djp2 Donating Member (276 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 10:03 PM
Response to Original message
10. I'll go for that!
Penalties should go STRAIGHT to those onboard...paid out of the pockets of the Board of Directors, with triple fine levied against the company if the company reimburses or otherwise raises their compensation (which would ALSO go to those onboard the plane).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kdmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 07:39 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. Continental already paid the passengers a fine
Besides the fine, Continental also provided a full refund to each passenger and "offered each passenger additional compensation to tangibly acknowledge their time and discomfort," the DOT said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
architect359 Donating Member (544 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
13. Fines aside
What I don't understand is why can't these planes just turn back to the terminal and let their passengers disembark? Is it that hard? Even if all the gates are occupied, isn't a delay of this magnitude an exception enough to make room at a gate? An hour or so is painful enough, but six hours? I mean, come on!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
S_B_Jackson Donating Member (564 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a WINNAH!!!!!
While it's easy to rail about the abusive airlines, the real culprit here was the ROCHESTER AIRPORT which refused to open the terminal despite repeated requests/please from the pilot and airlines. Their excuse? "We don't have any TSA examiners to screen the people coming off the aircraft." Which is complete and total bullshit.

Fine the Rochester Airport!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truebrit71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Why would they need to be screened coming OFF the aircraft?
Total bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-21-09 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. Shhhhhhh!!!! You're ruining people's misplaced rage at the airlines....
People love to blame them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
superduperfarleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
15. I'm not picky when it comes to getting a flight, but Continental is the absolute worst.
I remember hearing about this, but I didn't know it was Continental. Doesn't surprise me in the least. At least when they stranded me, I wasn't stuck on the tarmac.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bravo Zulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-21-09 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
17. Airlines often divert flights to Pittsburgh to wait out bad weather
It enables county to show off airport, make some cash
Sunday, November 01, 2009
By Mark Belko, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
With tons of space available at Pittsburgh International Airport, airlines are flocking here -- in bad weather, at least.

More and more carriers, from the United Arab Emirates national airline to Delta, are seeing the airport as a foul weather friend when storms strike the East Coast or other parts of the country.

"We are recognized as kind of a calm port in the storm," said Bradley D. Penrod, executive director of the Allegheny County Airport Authority, which operates Pittsburgh International.

Dozens of times a year, airlines will divert jets from their destinations to Pittsburgh to wait out thunderstorms, snow, fog or other types of bad weather or, in some cases, heavy congestion.

After the loss of the US Airways hub and numerous flight cutbacks, Pittsburgh International is more than happy to accommodate wayward jets. The flights not only generate some cash but give officials a chance to show off the facility and its ability to handle traffic and weather. After all, sometimes the same storm clobbering the East Coast might hit Pittsburgh as well.

While revenue from diversions can be "significant," there's also a hope that airlines redirected here will see the airport as a "well-run safe haven" and at some point consider adding regularly scheduled flights, Mr. Penrod said.

"I think it certainly gives us the exposure to carriers and customers," he said. "We are a public service first. If we can help the traveling public out, at the end of the day we've done our job."

Mr. Penrod is quick to point out that Pittsburgh, with plenty of runway space and little congestion, was handling diversions even during its heyday as a US Airways hub when there were as many 600 flights a day out of the airport.

But he added there has been an "uptick" in such activity in recent years, in part because of horror stories about travelers being trapped on idling jets for hours during storms. Mr. Penrod also served on a federal task force put together to address delays, giving Pittsburgh more exposure.

"I think our diversion business today is based on a little more knowledge of Pittsburgh by the industry and also a carrier's desire to stay out of the news in a negative light because of people being stuck on an airplane," Mr. Penrod said. "They are becoming more proactive."

Through October this year, the airport handled about 150 airplanes diverted from other cities. In all of 2008, it provided shelter for 240 airplanes, including 47 in January alone. The numbers involve only those planes that ended up at airport authority-owned gates, not those leased to individual airlines.

On Christmas Eve last year, the airport took in 16 planes -- a mix of regional jets and Boeing 737s -- at one time during a storm. Mr. Penrod said the record for the most diverted jets handled at any one time in Pittsburgh is 34.

Once on the ground, diverted planes sometimes simply taxi to a gate to refuel and wait out a storm before taking off again. Other times passengers will exit the plane and stay in the terminal until the trouble has passed. During extreme delays, airlines might put up travelers for the night.

Nearly all major U.S. carriers have redirected planes to Pittsburgh, including Delta, Continental, United and US Airways. International carriers Lufthansa and British Airways also have done so.

More could be on the way.

In the spring, Emirates Airlines met with airport officials about handling diversions if its Airbus 380 super jumbo jet, which can hold 490 passengers, encounters bad weather or other problems in New York or Toronto. The Pittsburgh airport even has modified a jetway to accommodate the big airplane in case it lands here.

Two other carriers -- South African Airways and Japan Airlines -- began discussions with the airport about diverting planes to Pittsburgh after bringing dignitaries into town for the Group of 20 summit in September. Both were impressed with the airport and the service they received, Mr. Penrod said.

"They said, 'We're going to put you on our list' because they liked what they saw here," he said. "They had never been to Pittsburgh before the G-20."

Carol Anderson, assistant director of public relations for Japan Airlines, said Pittsburgh is one of six airports designated as an alternate for John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York. It also is an alternate for flights headed across the country if bad weather or an emergency arises en route to the plane's destination.

Ms. Anderson said the airline had the opportunity to check out the Pittsburgh airport during the summit and found that it had "good ground handling support" and could accommodate the carrier's fleet, which includes Boeing 777s and 747s. It also could deal with customs and immigration issues related to international flights, she said.

Michael Boyd, a Colorado-based aviation consultant, said Pittsburgh could see even bigger increases in diverted traffic if Congress passes legislation limiting the amount of time passengers can spend inside idling planes.

Unlike many other airports, Pittsburgh has the gate space to handle large numbers of airplanes, particularly with the US Airways hub gone, Mr. Boyd said. Because of the airport's layout, travelers also can get off planes to eat, use restrooms or shop without having to clear security again. That's not always the case at other airports, he noted.

"If you're going to divert, divert to Pittsburgh," he said.

Pittsburgh also has the advantage of being close to major East Coast airports, making it an easy alternative for pilots during inclement weather or delays, Mr. Boyd noted.

"You're right in the middle of where all the problems are. Philadelphia isn't exactly the garden spot of air travel," he said.

Although the Federal Aviation Administration doesn't require carriers to file formal plans listing what airports they will use for backups, it does mandate that domestic flights carry an extra 45 minutes of fuel in case planes can't make it to their intended destinations.

That leaves Pittsburgh well-positioned to handle diversions from New York or Washington, both of which are within 45 minutes of air time to the airport.

Mr. Penrod said another factor that has helped Pittsburgh become a favorite substitute for airlines is an 11,500-foot runway that can handle virtually any commercial jet.

High fuel costs have made airlines more deliberate in getting airplanes on the ground during delays, even if it means diverting them, rather than having them circle an airport. "It's an operating cost they've got to be cognizant of," Mr. Penrod said.

While Mr. Boyd praises the airport for "very aggressive management" in persuading airlines to divert flights to Pittsburgh, he does not believe the exposure will result in many carriers adding flights on a regular basis.

"That's a whole different demand," he said. "It doesn't hurt , but it doesn't mean I want to fly here now."

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09305/1009914-147.stm#ixzz0aM3cz5EM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC