1. Airline delays on the tarmac - the rules are changing
Imagine, you’ve been sitting in a
cramped airline seat for seven hours
– long enough to fly from New York
to London. Now imagine that the
entire time you’ve been sitting there
you have not left the ground. That’s
what happened to passengers on a
Northwest Airlines flight scheduled
leave Detroit. And it happened again
to passengers on a Delta flight out of
New York. Think that’s bad? How
about the 11 hour wait on the tarmac
for folks on a Jet Blue flight. To
make matters worse, no drinking
water was available during some of these delays which might have been a good thing as
some of the toilets on these planes had also stopped working. Unfortunately, these
situations are happening all too often and now, the government is doing something about
it.
After years of proposals for a Passenger Bill of Rights, the U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) is doing something about it. As of April 29, 2010 U.S. airlines
must change their policies when it comes to tarmac delays and more. In short, the DOT is
requiring air carriers to adopt contingency plans for lengthy tarmac delays and to publish
those plans on their Web sites. They will also require air carriers to respond to consumer
problems and to adopt customer service plans and to publish those plans on their web
sites, as well as audit their own compliance with their plans. In addition they will require
air carriers to publish information on flight delays on their web sites. The new regulations
also deem continued delays on a flight that is chronically late to be unfair and deceptive
in violation of 49 U.S.C. 41712.
But wait, there’s more. The Government wants your opinion. We’ll get to that soon.
On December 8, 2009, the DOT issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) which
allowed airlines, airports, travel industry associations and the general public to view
proposed rules and comment on them. The DOT received 21 comments. Of these, 10
comments were from members and the rest were from consumers and consumer
associations. To nobody’s surprise, the airlines, for the most part, thought the proposed
rules went too far and the consumers didn’t think the rules went far enough.
The comments submitted to the DOT brought up a variety of issues which concern the
traveling public. The DOT listened and is again asking for your input. The Department
plans to seek comment on ways to further enhance protections afforded airline passengers
in a forthcoming notice of proposed rulemaking by addressing the following areas: (1)
Review and approval of contingency plans for lengthy tarmac delays; (2) reporting of

2. tarmac delay data; (3) standards for customer service plans; (4) notification to passengers
of flight status changes; (5) inflation adjustment for denied boarding compensation; (6)
alternative transportation for passengers on canceled flights; (7) opt-out provisions where
certain services are pre-selected for consumers at additional costs (e.g., travel insurance,
seat selection); (8) contract of carriage venue designation provisions; (9) baggage fees
disclosure; (10) full fare advertising; and (11) responses to complaints about charter
service.
Some rules have basically been decided. First, an assurance that, for domestic flights, the
air carrier will not permit an aircraft to remain on the tarmac for more than three hours
unless the pilot in command determines there is a safety related or security-related
impediment to deplaning passengers (e.g. weather, air traffic control, a directive from an
appropriate government agency, etc.), or Air Traffic Control advises the pilot in
command that returning to the gate or permitting passengers to disembark elsewhere
would significantly disrupt airport operations. According to the DOT document,
“Passengers on flights delayed on the tarmac have a right to know that there is a
reasonable limit and that the limit will be enforced by the Department. We conclude that
a three hour time limit is the maximum time after which passengers must be permitted to
deplane from domestic flights given the cramped, close conditions on aircraft and the
typical scheduled time for these flights. We have not selected a maximum delay time of
less than three hours because taxi times of an hour or more are not unusual at certain
large airports.”
Second, there is little, if any dispute that passengers stuck on an aircraft during a lengthy
tarmac delay deserve to be provided some type of food, potable water, working
lavatories, and, if necessary, medical care. The DOT believes a two-hour time limit is a
reasonable maximum time after which carriers should ensure that passengers
experiencing a tarmac delay are provided food and potable water. Carriers, of course, are
free to establish an earlier time at which they will provide these services.
In response to the proposed regulation for airlines to designate an Advocate for
Passengers’ Interests located at its system operations center as well as at each airport
dispatch center, the National Business Travel Association (NBTA) had what might be
considered a surprising comment. NBTA characterizes this proposal as
micromanagement of airline customer service and unnecessary to meet the needs of its
business travelers. NBTA maintains that an air carrier’s response to cancellations and
delays is a key factor by which purchasers make their buying decisions, and opposes a
mandate that airlines create new customer service positions at each airport.
FlyersRights.org defers to the Department and the airlines to determine the best use of
airline manpower to mitigate the effects of flight delays, cancellations and lengthy tarmac
delays. As a compromise, the DOT has decided to require carriers to designate an
employee to monitor performance of their flights from one location and not at individual
airports.

3. The DOT document is fairly long but worth the read if you travel by air somewhat
frequently. And how many times have you been delayed at an airport or stuck on an
unmoving airplane and felt completely helpless. Here is your chance to be heard.
The DOT is taking your comments until January 29, 2010 at regulations.gov.