Airline fines and delays: The world didn’t end

by Tom Johansmeyer on

How many planes were stuck on the tarmac for more than three hours in May? You can count ’em on one hand: five. This is the second lowest result since the feds began monitoring this metric back in October 2008. A year earlier, 34 planes sat on the ground loaded with passengers for more than three hours, according to data from the Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics.

May 2010 was the first full month in which the airlines faced stiff fines for keeping passengers out on the tarmac too long. Staying out there for more than three hours exposes carriers to fines of up to $27,500 per passenger.

Four of the five delays in May went to United Airlines on the same day and to the same destination: May 26, 2010 to Denver. They were diverted to Colorado Springs for weather-related reasons. The other delay belonged to Delta. There have been no fines yet, because the matters are still being investigated.The Air Transportation Association, which represents many of the top airlines in the country, says the positive results for May are the result of airline efforts to improve and good weather – not the threat of fines. The association says that declines in waits of more than three hours have been “in decline for over a year,” according to a USA Today report.

While the association claims these factors had a greater impact than the threat of fines, the steep year-over-year drop, the fact that there were only four in April and the plunge to current levels from 25 in March all suggest that the hefty costs associated with stranding passengers have all played a role.

Airline concerns that the new rule would lead to high rates of cancellation seem unfounded, as only 1.2 percent of flights were canceled in May 2010, a slight up-tick from 0.9 percent in May 2009.

Says Kate Hanni, director of FlyersRights.org, which advocated for the stricter rule: “I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so.”

Australian flight attendants object to airline ad of flight crew sponging down airplane

by Scott Carmichael on

Using sexy flight attendants to advertise an airline is nothing new, but the Flight Attendants Association of Australia says it has had enough of them. According to the FAAA, the ads are demeaning, and increase the risk of sexual harassment. One of the clips that triggered their outrage can be seen above.

The clip, made for Russian low cost airline AviaNova, shows the flight crew stripping down and sponging off the airplane. A spokeswoman for the FAAA said:

“It is a sad reflection of the attitude of the airlines’ executives, dare I say more than likely middle aged males, towards cabin crew, in particular female cabin crew, by portraying them in such a demeaning, distasteful and irrelevant manner.”

Now, I’m partly in agreement with her, but to paint airline executives as a bunch of middle aged males shows an equal amount of disrespect, as many of these ads come from the airline PR firm, and I highly doubt the airline executives specifically asked for something with some skin – PR and marketing people don’t need help from airline executives to know that sex and partial nudity sells.

The FAAA is going to take the issue to the International Transport Federation, but I suspect that they have more important issues to deal with than asking airlines to stop promoting themselves in the most effective way possible.

The Russian carrier is by no means the first to resort to this tactic, using looks and fashion to sell airplane tickets dates back to the 60’s and 70’s when airlines would pick attractive flight attendants for their planes, and feature them in commercials. In recent years, carriers like Ryanair and VivaAerobus have even commissioned calendars showing off their cabin crew.

%Gallery-79586%

On Your Side by Christopher Elliott helps with travel customer service issues

by Scott Carmichael on

In the travel world, Christopher Elliott is a bit of a hero – on his blog, he regularly saves passengers from lost tickets, rental car horrors and other travel mishaps.

Since there is only one Christopher Elliott, he’s started a site designed to aid travelers in resolving some of their own problems. On Your Side is built as a blog and Wiki, which means anyone can add and edit information. The current content covers airlines, car rental companies, cruise lines and online travel agencies.

Each entry provides things like the mailing address, phone number, an overview of the company, rules and regulations and even shortcuts on how to get an operator on the phone. For some companies, the site also lists executive customer service contacts.

I’ve spent about half an hour going through the site and am amazed at how comprehensive a lot of the content is. Next time you find yourself with a customer service issue with a travel company, check out On Your Side and see whether a well written complaint letter can resolve all your problems. The site is easy to navigate, and by signing up, you can add your own information to it. My only minor complaint is that there is (currently) no mobile version, making it less useful if you need quick access to information on the go. Other than that, kudos to Christopher Elliott for creating On Your Side.

[Image from Flickr/AComment]

Airline fees: Please don’t lie, don’t be moronic

by Tom Johansmeyer on

As much as you may hate ancillary fees on airlines, they’re clearly making a difference. The nickel-and-diming of the average passenger was good for a whopping $7.8 billion last year … up 42 percent from 2008. Airlines are making serious cash on inconvenient fees, which means they aren’t going away. The coming travel market recovery (look for it in 2011) will put more asses in seats and, of course, more bucks in the airline industry till. What was $7.8 billion last year only has the potential to become much, much larger.

And that could be the problem.

It might not be easy to sympathize with the airlines, companies with well-entrenched reputations for being among the most poorly run enterprises since the dawn of capitalism. But, at least when they were on the ropes (for real this time … right?), we could stomach that the ancillary fees were a survival mechanism. When revenue per available seat-mile starts to come back, passengers will become increasingly offended by the price tags popped on blankets and baggage and everything in between.Fortunately, there is a silver lining in all this: anything we feel is totally irrelevant. Airlines will charge what they can charge. Since ancillary fees are a market-wide trend, we’ll have to get used to them. Some airlines aren’t heading down this road with zeal, but they may not go to your desired destination, making the offer of goodwill moot.

And, if the extra charges were slashed, ticket prices would just increase for no apparent underlying reason, and we’d all have to share in the cost of the blanket that the gump in seat 11D feels he needs to stay warm.

The real issue, it seems, isn’t prices – they are what they are. Instead, passengers would be happier less pissed if the airlines were a bit more transparent. Notes Tim Winship of SmartTraveler.com:

The word “sneaky” appears prominently and often in consumers’ grumbling about fee-for-all pricing. And more substantively, adding injury to insult, consumers can’t make meaningful price comparisons if they don’t have ready access to all-inclusive prices from all airlines, whether it’s on the carriers’ own websites or on the site of an online travel agent.

Full fee disclosure is something the airlines should have done proactively, from the beginning. Soon, they may have no choice-as mentioned above, the DOT has included language in its proposed passenger-protection legislation that would mandate up-front disclosure of all fees associated with a particular ticket price.

The winning (or at least non-losing) formula for airline pricing seems to be simple: don’t be stupid, don’t lie and don’t charge people for the lav.

Mother attempts to flush newborn baby down airplane toilet

by Scott Carmichael on

A 25-year-old medical student has been arrested in Northern India after attempting to flush her newborn baby down the toilet.

The woman was flying home from Turkmenistan when she gave birth in the bathroom. Upon landing, she left the plane, leaving the baby in the toilet.

The entire toilet had to be removed, and surgeons at a local hospital used a saw to remove the newborn from it. According to doctors, the baby is in critical condition.

The mother was arrested in the airport and has been transferred to a local hospital where she was reunited with her baby.

Once doctors declare her fit, they’ll investigate her motives, but it appears she had been studying medicine in Belarus and did not want to return home with a baby.

[Image from Flickr/dpstyles]