[Senate Hearing 115-154]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-154
QUESTIONS, ANSWERS, AND PERSPECTIVES ON THE CURRENT STATE OF AIRLINE
TRAVEL
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION OPERATIONS, SAFETY, AND SECURITY
of the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 4, 2017
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
28-641 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi BILL NELSON, Florida, Ranking
ROY BLUNT, Missouri MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
TED CRUZ, Texas AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JERRY MORAN, Kansas BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
DEAN HELLER, Nevada CORY BOOKER, New Jersey
JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MIKE LEE, Utah GARY PETERS, Michigan
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
CORY GARDNER, Colorado MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
TODD YOUNG, Indiana CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
Nick Rossi, Staff Director
Adrian Arnakis, Deputy Staff Director
Jason Van Beek, General Counsel
Kim Lipsky, Democratic Staff Director
Chris Day, Democratic Deputy Staff Director
Renae Black, Senior Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION OPERATIONS, SAFETY, AND SECURITY
ROY BLUNT, Missouri, Chairman MARIA CANTWELL, Washington,
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi Ranking
TED CRUZ, Texas AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JERRY MORAN, Kansas BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
DEAN HELLER, Nevada CORY BOOKER, New Jersey
JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MIKE LEE, Utah GARY PETERS, Michigan
SHELLEY CAPITO, West Virginia TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
CORY GARDNER, Colorado TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
TODD YOUNG, Indiana MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on May 4, 2017...................................... 1
Statement of Senator Blunt....................................... 1
Statement of Senator Cantwell.................................... 2
Letter dated May 3, 2017 to Hon. Roy Blunt and Hon. Maria
Cantwell from Carl Blake, Associate Executive Director,
Government Relations, Paralyzed Veterans of America........ 2
Statement of Senator Nelson...................................... 6
Article, dated May 2, 2017, from CNN Money entitled
``American Airlines is cutting more legroom in economy
class''.................................................... 7
Statement of Senator Wicker...................................... 47
Statement of Senator Klobuchar................................... 49
Statement of Senator Blumenthal.................................. 51
Statement of Senator Thune....................................... 53
Statement of Senator Inhofe...................................... 57
Statement of Senator Markey...................................... 59
Statement of Senator Hassan...................................... 61
Statement of Senator Heller...................................... 62
Statement of Senator Cortez Masto................................ 65
Statement of Senator Capito...................................... 67
Statement of Senator Duckworth................................... 69
Witnesses
Ginger Evans, Commissioner, Chicago Department of Aviation....... 10
Prepared statement........................................... 11
Scott Kirby, President, United Airlines.......................... 13
Prepared statement........................................... 14
Sharon Pinkerton, Senior Vice President, Legislative and
Regulatory Policy, Airlines for America........................ 27
Prepared statement........................................... 28
Sara Nelson, International President, Association of Flight
Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO....................................... 30
Prepared statement........................................... 32
Sally Greenberg, Executive Director, National Consumers League... 36
Prepared statement........................................... 38
Appendix
Response to written questions submitted to Scott Kirby by:
Hon. Bill Nelson............................................. 73
Hon. Cory Booker............................................. 74
Hon. Tammy Baldwin........................................... 74
Hon. Tammy Duckworth......................................... 75
Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto.................................. 77
Response to written questions submitted to Sharon Pinkerton by:
Hon. Bill Nelson............................................. 77
Hon. Cory Booker............................................. 78
Hon. Tammy Duckworth......................................... 79
Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto.................................. 80
Response to written questions submitted to Sara Nelson by:
Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto.................................. 81
Response to written questions submitted to Sally Greenberg by:
Hon. Tammy Baldwin........................................... 82
Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto.................................. 83
QUESTIONS, ANSWERS, AND PERSPECTIVES
ON THE CURRENT STATE OF
AIRLINE TRAVEL
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 4, 2017
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety and
Security,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:35 a.m. in
room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Roy Blunt,
Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Blunt [presiding], Thune, Wicker,
Fischer, Sullivan, Heller, Inhofe, Capito, Gardner, Nelson,
Cantwell, Klobuchar, Blumenthal, Markey, Booker, Peters,
Duckworth, Hassan, and Cortez Masto.
STATEMENT OF HON. ROY BLUNT,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSOURI
Senator Blunt. The hearing will come to order.
We're certainly pleased to have our witnesses today and
members of the Committee. We're going to all try to minimize
the time we spend talking so we can maximize the questions and
what we can learn from those.
It is certainly impossible to ignore the public outcry with
incidents that have involved passengers as recently, I believe,
even as yesterday. One of the most widely reported incidents,
of course, was at Chicago with United Flight 3411. Lots of
lessons to be learned, and I'm sure we're going to hear what
some of those lessons learned, both with the airport and the
airline and the industry, are today in looking at what
happened.
Senator Cantwell and I, along with Chairman Thune and
Senator Nelson, sent an immediate letter, and that letter said
the last thing a paying airline customer should expect is to be
physically taken off an airline. The purpose of today's hearing
is to follow up on the letters we sent, the responses we got,
and really to find out what went wrong and what we are going to
do to be sure that doesn't happen in the future.
This is the year where FAA reauthorization needs to occur,
between now and September the 30th. Part of this hearing is to
determine what's going to be taken care of without the Congress
and what needs to be taken care of in the Federal law itself.
So I'm going to turn to Senator Cantwell for her opening
comments and then we'll go to all of you.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and before I
start, I just want to enter into the record a letter from the
Paralyzed Veterans of America discussing the challenges they
have faced as disabled passengers when they fly, if I could do
that.
Senator Blunt. Without objection.
[The information referred to follows:]
Paralyzed Veterans of America
Washington, DC, May 3, 2017
Hon. Roy Blunt,
Chairman,
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety, and Security,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Maria Cantwell,
Ranking Member,
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety, and Security,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Blunt and Ranking Member Cantwell:
Paralyzed Veterans of America respectfully requests to submit this
letter for the record of the May 4, 2017, Senate Commerce, Science, and
Transportation Committee, Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety,
and Security hearing, ``Questions, Answers, and Perspectives on the
Current State of Airline Travel.'' One of Paralyzed Veteran's core
missions is to advocate for the civil rights of our members. As a
result, we are strongly committed to improving the air travel
experience of all passengers with disabilities.
The passage of the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) in 1986 broadly
established the civil right of people with disabilities to access air
travel. The ACAA was the result of a U.S. Supreme Court decision in
Department of Transportation vs. Paralyzed Veterans of America, 477
U.S. 597 (1986). In this case, the Court held that air carriers were
not subject to section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended, unless they received direct Federal financial assistance.
Following this decision, Paralyzed Veterans and the larger disability
community turned its attention to Congress and advocated for a statute
that would end disability-based discrimination in air travel.
The ACAA is a civil rights law that protects not only members of
Paralyzed Veterans, veterans with catastrophic disabilities, but also
the rights of all individuals living with disabilities to access air
travel. Prior to passage of the ACAA, people with disabilities were
routinely forced to travel with an attendant at their own expense,
whether they needed the assistance of an attendant or not; required to
sit on a blanket for fears that they might soil the seat; or refused
passage. The ACAA has provided passengers with disabilities improved
consistency and increased access to air travel. Through this law,
passengers with disabilities are provided the opportunity to preboard,
if additional time or assistance is required in boarding the aircraft;
timely assistance in boarding and deplaning from trained air carrier
and contract personnel; accessible in-flight communications; stowage of
assistive devices; and seating accommodations.
Although access for passengers with disabilities has improved since
the passage of the ACAA, disability-related problems in air travel
remain widespread. Members of Paralyzed Veterans routinely incur bodily
harm in boarding and deplaning aircraft; and their wheelchairs,
particularly power wheelchairs, are often damaged while stowed. In
addition, members have expressed difficulty in receiving appropriate
seating accommodations on aircraft and often encounter air carrier
personnel and contractors who are not appropriately trained in
assisting passengers with catastrophic disabilities. Consequently, some
of our members and other individuals with disabilities choose to drive
long distances rather than risk injury or damage to their mobility
devices.
The difficulties encountered by passengers with disabilities on a
regular basis, across airlines, often have profound consequences. For
example, in the March 2016 issue of Paralyzed Veterans' PN Magazine,
Paralyzed Veterans of America Gateway Chapter President Stan Brown
recounted a 2009 air travel incident that resulted in a visit to the
emergency room. The incident reflects the problems that occur when air
carriers and their contractors do not listen to passengers with
disabilities:
``They started to unstrap my top from the aisle chair. I've got
no control, and they don't understand that. . . . I kept
saying, `Don't do that. I'll fall out.' They did it anyway, and
I tumbled out of the chair right in the front of the plane.''--
Stan Brown \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Jennifer Best, Security Rules, PN, March 2016, at 26, 29.
Fortunately, Mr. Brown did not sustain major injuries from the
fall.
The consequences of air travel problems are of course not unique to
people who use wheelchairs. People who are deaf, blind, autistic, and
those with other disabilities also have trouble accessing needed
accommodations. Not receiving proper guide assistance or announcements
can mean missed flights and opportunities.
Passengers who have disability-related problems may file complaints
directly with air carriers. In 2015, domestic and foreign air carriers
reported that passengers filed 30,830 such complaints \2\ This
represents a nearly twelve percent increase over 2014 despite a 4.75
percent increase in enplanements.\3\ U.S. air carriers account for the
vast majority of disability-related complaints filed (26,401).\4\ Top
complaints with U.S. carriers for passengers with paraplegia or
quadriplegia include failure to provide assistance and seating
accommodations.\5\ In addition, DOT reported receiving 862 complaints
related to disability in the most recently completed calendar year.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Department of Transportation, Annual Report on Disability-
Related Air Travel Complaints Received During Calendar Year 2015,
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/
2015%20Summary%20Report.pdf.
\3\ Id.
\4\ Id.
\5\ Department of Transportation, 2015 Summary Totals for U.S.
Carriers (Appendix B), https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/
files/docs/2015%20Summary%20Totals%20for%
20US%20Carriers.pdf.
\6\ Department of Transportation, Air Travel Consumer Report (Feb.
2017), https://www.trans
portation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/2017FebruaryATCR.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the ACAA, DOT must investigate every complaint filed with the
agency. DOT remedies do not allow passengers to receive monetary
damages or other relief. The agency can issue cease and desist orders
and civil fines. Civil fines are often invoked only in situations
involving a pattern or practice of discrimination. Unlike most civil
rights laws, the ACAA lacks a guaranteed private right of action. Thus,
people with disabilities generally receive little resolution to
complaints.
People with disabilities, including those with catastrophic
disabilities, must have improved access to safe and efficient air
travel. Otherwise, people with disabilities will continue to be left
behind, and unable to compete in today's job market or enjoy the
opportunities available to other Americans. It is simply unacceptable
that catastrophically disabled veterans may be unable to safely travel
to receive needed health care, participate in recreation, or visit
family members due to concerns for their health, safety, and dignity.
Paralyzed Veterans has worked for more than three decades to
improve the air travel experience for our members and all passengers
with disabilities. Recently, we have worked with partners in the
disability community to develop suggested reforms to further this goal.
Consequently, we were pleased that disability-related provisions were
included in both the House and Senate versions of the FAA
Reauthorization in the 114th Congress.
The Aviation Innovation, Reform, and Reauthorization Act of 2016
(H.R. 4441), included a requirement for DOT to move ahead with issuing
pending regulations, including those governing access to lavatories on
single-aisle aircraft, the definition of a service animal, and seating
accommodations. The Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act
of 2016 (S. 2658), included four provisions directly aimed at the
concerns of passengers with disabilities. The first provision involved
a requirement for the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to review
ACAA training policies. The second provision involved dissemination of
best practices to improve airport accessibility. The third provision
addressed the feasibility of in cabin wheelchair restraint systems. The
final provision concerned the creation of an advisory committee on the
air travel needs of passengers with disabilities.
We were pleased that the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of
2016 (Public Law 114-190) included two of these provisions.
Specifically, Section 2107 required GAO to submit a report to Congress
about air carrier personnel and contractor training programs, including
variations among policies between air carriers, how frequently since
2005 DOT has requested corrective action following reviewing a training
policy, and the actions taken in response. After the report is issued,
DOT must develop and disseminate best practices that will improve
training. We are pleased that GAO is currently engaged in completing
this requirement and has consulted with disability stakeholders
regarding its efforts.
Section 2108 of the FAA Extension requires DOT to issue a
Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for certain pending ACAA
regulations by July 2017. These regulations include whether accessible
lavatories should be required on single-aisle aircraft of a certain
size, seating accommodations, and service animals. This requirement is
particularly important in light of the outcome of a 2016 negotiated
rulemaking conducted by DOT.
In May 2016, DOT convened the Advisory Committee on Accessible Air
Transportation (ACCESS Advisory Committee) to conduct a negotiated
rulemaking.\7\ The disability community was represented by a diverse
group of organizations including Paralyzed Veterans, American Council
of the Blind, National Association of the Deaf, National Council on
Independent Living, National Disability Rights Network, and National
Federation of the Blind. The issues included in the negotiation
involved in-flight entertainment and communications, accessible
lavatories on single-aisle aircraft, and the definition of a service
animal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ ACCESS Advisory Committee, https://www.transportation.gov/
access-advisory-committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After seven months of negotiations between air carriers, original
equipment manufacturers, the disability community, researchers, and
other allied groups, a consensus was reached on access to lavatories on
single-aisle aircraft and in-flight entertainment. We expect DOT to
move forward in issuing regulations in line with these agreements,
later this year. We also expect DOT to issue proposed rules governing
the remaining issues covered by Section 2108 of Public Law 114-190.
These regulations, along with other current and pending ACAA
regulations, are vital to the health and safety of veterans and other
passengers with disabilities. We were dismayed by DOT's recent decision
to allow a one-year delay in the requirement for domestic air carriers
to report the number of wheelchairs and scooters enplaned and deplaned
on their aircraft.\8\ Under the rule, air carriers will also be
required to report the number of assistive devices that were
``mishandled.'' This decision was made without a formal request for
stakeholder comment on the delay. We were pleased that members of this
Subcommittee formally expressed their concerns about the delay directly
to Secretary Chao.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Reporting of Data for Mishandled Baggage and Wheelchairs and
Scooters Transported in Aircraft Cargo Compartments; Extension of
Compliance Date, 82 Fed. Reg. 14,437 (Mar. 21, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to moving forward with and protecting vital ACAA
regulations, passengers with disabilities need Congress to act to
improve the ACAA and the air travel process. We hope that the remaining
provisions included in S. 2658 will be included in the Senate's 2017
FAA Reauthorization. These provisions which address airport
accessibility, the feasibility of in-cabin wheelchair restraints, and
the creation of an advisory committee addressing the experience of
passengers with disabilities are common-sense measures to improve air
travel for people with disabilities.
We further believe that additional provisions should be included in
the Senate's Reauthorization to advance access for passengers with
disabilities. Specifically, we propose harmonizing aspects of the ACAA
statute with definitions and protections included in the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA), as amended. This includes the definition of
disability and prohibited discriminatory actions.
One of the most important changes needed to the ACAA statute
concerns enforcement. The statute must be amended to require DOT to
refer alleged violations that are matters of general importance to the
Department of Justice. Furthermore, the statute must be amended to
include a private right of action.
Unlike other civil rights laws, including section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and the ADA, the ACAA does not
explicitly allow people with disabilities to enforce their civil rights
via the court system, if needed. Prior to 2001, some courts had held
that the ACAA allowed for a private right of action. Following the U.S.
Supreme Court's decision in Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275
(2001),\9\ however, the Second,\10\ Tenth,\11\ and Eleventh \12\
Circuits have ruled that there is no private right of action under the
ACAA. Passengers with disabilities must seek remedies, if any, that may
be available under state law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ In Sandoval, the Court held that a private right of action
should not be implied absent obvious congressional intent.
\10\ Lopez v. Jet Blue Airways, 662 F.3d 593 (2d Cir. 2011).
\11\ Boswell v. Skywest Airlines, Inc., 361 F.3d 1263 (10th Cir.
2004).
\12\ Love v. Delta Airlines, 310 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also support improving accessibility within aircraft for people
with disabilities. Unlike other forms of transportation, aircraft have
few accessibility features for people with disabilities, including
those who are deaf, blind, or have cognitive or mobility impairments.
Even if a person with a disability is able to choose a seat that best
meets his or her needs, neither the seat nor the path to reach the seat
meet any accessibility standards, other than a requirement for lowering
of armrests on some seats.
In order for a person with a permanent disability such as a spinal
cord injury to board or deplane an aircraft, he or she has to be
transferred from his or her customized wheelchair to an aisle chair
prior to entering the aircraft. This process may involve one or more
contractors or airline employees physically lifting and maneuvering the
passenger onto the aisle chair. Once strapped into the aisle chair, the
passenger is then pulled backwards onto the aircraft and down the aisle
to his or her seat. Within the confines of the cabin, the individual is
then transferred to an aircraft passenger seat, where he or she will
most likely remain until the process is repeated when the individual
departs the aircraft.
Until such time as aircraft are fully accessible and passengers
with disabilities are able to travel by air without any more difficulty
than any other passenger, we must improve the assistance and service
they receive. Thus, we propose a requirement for hands on training for
personnel who provide physical assistance in moving passengers with
disabilities. This specifically includes personnel who are assisting in
transfers to aisle chairs and aircraft passenger seats. Although
current regulations require training to proficiency, the experience of
Paralyzed Veterans members shows that too many of these personnel are
not sufficiently trained. We also support increased civil fines for
damage to wheelchairs or other mobility aids or injury to passengers.
All passengers with disabilities have the right to a dignified air
travel experience. Thus, we propose that the Secretary of
Transportation establish an Airline Passengers with Disabilities Bill
of Rights using plain language to describe the basic civil rights and
responsibilities of air carriers, their contractors, and people with
disabilities under the ACAA. These civil rights should be transmitted
to passengers who self-identify as a person with a disability and
should be widely available from air carriers. Their personnel and
contractors must also be trained on these rights, which are unique to
the experience of passengers with disabilities.
While many air passengers are concerned about flight delays,
overbooking, lost luggage, or cramped seats, people with disabilities
likely have all of these concerns plus many more. Will my wheelchair be
broken when I arrive? Will I be injured trying to get off of the
aircraft? Will I be informed of gate changes? Will I be left alone
without needed assistance? As a nation, we have made a lot of progress
in improving the air travel experience for passengers with
disabilities, but these real questions are important reminders that
more remains to be done.
We appreciate the opportunity to express our concerns about the air
travel experience of passengers with disabilities. We are eager to work
with the Subcommittee to improve air travel for people with
disabilities. If you have any questions, please contact Heather Ansley,
Associate General Counsel for Corporate and Government Relations.
Respectfully,
Carl Blake,
Associate Executive Director, Government Relations
Paralyzed Veterans of America.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Chairman Blunt, for convening
this hearing, and thanks to the witnesses for being here to
discuss the many important topics that are being raised today.
It would be safe to say that all of us were deeply
disturbed by the images of Dr. Dao, bloodied and dazed, being
dragged from the aisle of a plane last month in Chicago. For a
passenger who presented no threat to safety or security of a
flight to be treated that way is completely unnecessary and
unacceptable. United has acknowledged as much, and we owe it to
the traveling public to make sure that this doesn't happen
again.
The United incident in Chicago has not been the only
airline incident to gain national attention recently, and we
need to look at the policies and procedures across the entire
industry to help address and improve the experience for the
flying public. You need to ask yourselves as providers: Are you
prioritizing those shareholder profits over the basic needs of
consumers?
The airline industry as a whole needs to explore sensible
ways to fix the traveling experience for passengers. As our
commercial air system continues to grow, airports are more
congested, travelers have fewer options--the flying public
understands because they see it every time when they fly--the
seats are fuller and becoming smaller, by the way; tempers are
flaring; and if you run into trouble, if your flight is
canceled, or you miss a connection, you're out of luck.
Airplanes are flying full, and, in many cases, seats aren't
available to accommodate displaced passengers, and capacity, in
many cases, is rising slowly, if at all, as competition has
disappeared, even as those 83 percent of seats being filled. In
the state of Washington, Sea-Tac International has been one of
the fastest growing airports for three consecutive years, and
passengers have been feeling that squeeze as well. We've had
hearings here about how we're addressing that from a TSA and
Homeland Security perspective.
But as a result of the industry's growth in passengers, too
many airports are facing long lines at security, and they are
facing crowded terminals and gateways. So we need to do our
part and make sure the flying experience for the public is also
focused on the needs of the flying public. We need to find
improvements at our airports that will allow for room and
competition, and I believe that we need to make sure that our
airports have access to our customers.
I do appreciate the steps that United and their partners in
the many industries are taking to improve passenger experience,
and as airlines have brought in record profits, they have made
some investments back into their product. But the fact that
we're here today to hear about is that across the industry, we
need to continue to take more steps toward improving the
passenger experience.
I know that when my former colleague was here, Senator
Boxer, we talked about those elements of a Passenger Bill of
Rights, just making sure when passengers were delayed on
runways or held on flights for an extraordinary amount of time,
that they just got basic needs taken care of, like access to
water or food, and making sure that they had clear
understanding of their rights. I think it may be time for a new
Passenger Bill of Rights to make sure that we're focusing on
the consumer experience, making sure that consumers aren't
left, that we are doing things that are appropriate and
necessary to make sure that they are protected in these
incidents.
So thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having this hearing.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Senator Cantwell, and Senator
Nelson, the Ranking Member of the Full Committee is here.
Senator Nelson, if you'd like to make a few comments before
we start, that would be great.
STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would, because
of the gravity of this situation.
What happened to Dr. Dao is just simply unconscionable, and
I'm sorry, Mr. Kirby, that you're sent here as the President,
number two, to be the sacrificial lamb. It ought to be your
CEO, who I know personally and who is a wonderful person and
who has overcome great personal medical challenges and was
beginning to get such a good reputation. But anybody who has
served in the military understands that the captain of the ship
is, in fact, responsible, and it ought to be the CEO.
For the life of me, barring any safety reasons or security
reasons, which was certainly not the case here, no passenger
should ever be treated like this on an airline. Now, I
understand that you've made several changes following the
incident, and we all appreciate those efforts, but this is a
subtext and a foretelling of larger issues, because the airline
industry in this country has become anti-competitive and
consumers are being hurt in the process.
Talk to most any passenger, and they feel like they're
being treated as self-loading cargo rather than the way they
should be, as very valued customers. They feel taken advantage
of, and they're getting sick and tired of it. You talk to
anybody that travels. What I'm worried about--is this a
consequence of all the mergers so that we only have a handful
of airlines, and they basically don't have the competition?
So many of the passengers now have become self-described
detectives by using their cell phone to record incidents where
their fellow passengers are being unfairly or unjustly treated.
And I take no pleasure in beating up on the airlines, but in
this case, it is warranted, and it's a good thing we're having
this hearing because of what it portends for the future.
So all of us have experienced firsthand or we've heard from
folks back home about incidents--the explosion of fees, such as
checked baggage, priority boarding, assigned seating, that are
not always clear. We tried to straighten out some of this in
last year's FAA bill. We're going to get another crack at it
this year.
The IT systems of airlines are failing and causing
prolonged confusion and delays, and passengers with
disabilities--and that's why I'm glad you put in the disabled
veterans' letter--they're having to deal with poorly trained
personnel or the wheelchairs are mishandled and damaged. And
then to add insult to injury, just yesterday, we learned that
American Airlines--and I wish we had had the CEO of American
here--we learned that American Airlines is getting ready to buy
100 new Boeing 737 jets--they call them Max Jets--and they're
going to cram another 10 seats in.
So in an article--and I will enter this into the record,
Mr. Chairman, with your permission.
Senator Blunt. Without objection.
[The information referred to follows:]
CNNMoney (Seattle)--May 3, 2017
American Airlines is cutting more legroom in economy class
by Jon Ostrower
Just when you thought your legroom in economy class couldn't get
tighter.
American Airlines (AAL) is planning to decrease the front-to-
backspace between some of its economy class seats by another two
inches.
The airline says it plans to add more seats on its coming Boeing
(BA) 737 Max jetliners. To do that. it will shrink the distance between
seats. also known as pitch from 31 inches to 29 inches on three rows of
the airplane. and down to 30-inches in the rest of its main economy
cabin.
American isn't the only big airline heading in this direction.
United Airlines (UAL) is considering a similar move, according to a
person briefed on its evaluations. United declined to comment.
The move signals a new step in the shrinking of U.S. airline
cabins. and comes even as carriers are promising to improve overall
customer service.
With the change, American will become the first large U.S. carrier
to offer legroom with a pitch that's nearly on par with Spirit and
Frontier, whose seats are at an industry-minimum 28 inches.
By comparison. economy class pitch on Delta Air Lines (DAL) and
United ranges between 30 and 31 inches, while JetBlue Airways (JBLU).
Southwest Airlines (LUV) and Alaska Airlines (ALK) have between 31and
33 inches.
Related: American Airlines eliminating in-seat screens on new jets
The one advantage the big U.S. carriers still have over their
lowest-fare rivals was a few more inches in economy.
The bathrooms on American's 737 Max jets will also be smaller, one
person familiar with the planning said.
The new Max jets will have more than 170 seats. two sources said,
compared to 160 on its existing 737-800s. The airline said it is
keeping its extra-legroom ``Main Cabin Extra'' economy seats, as well
as its 16 first class seats.
These new single-aisle aircraft will go into use later this year
and will primarily be flown on routes in North America.
Fliers will still pay regular economy fares for the 18 seats with
two inches less leg room. Two of those three rows of 29-inch pitch will
be in the back of the plane and a third farther forward. These seats
won't be part of its new basic economy fares, which sell for less
because fliers don't get access to overhead bins. a seat assignment or
frequent flier miles.
An American spokesman said the airline will add 40 Max jets to its
fleet by the end of 2019. It has 100 on order. The airline also said it
might make similar changes to its existing fleet of 737-800s after the
Max arrives. but no decisions have been made.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
As the big airlines match each other move for move, the risk is
that 29 inches becomes the standard for flying economy in the United
States. American has been a bellwether before for the airlines. For
instance, it was the first big U.S. airline to introduce bag fees in
2008.
Airlines have enjoyed strong profits and low fuel prices after a
decade of consolidation. They're adding seats now to help offset rising
employee wages.
``This is one of the best economic environments the U.S. airline
industry has seen in decades.'' said Harteveldt. ``There is no need to
race to the bottom.''
Correction: A previous version of this story misidentified the rows
that would be condensed
Senator Nelson. American Airlines is cutting more leg room
in the economy class. They say that in ordering these Boeing
737 Max Jetliners, that they'll shrink the distance between
seats, which is known as pitch, from 31 to 29 inches. In this
article, it points out that, right now, Delta, American, and
Southwest are 31 inches, United is 30, Spirit is 28, and
American buys these new jets with 10 more seats cramped in--I
wonder how you'll handle, Ms. Nelson, flight attendants having
to deal with 10 more passengers cramped in--29 inches. It'll
only be rivaled by Spirit at 28, and Virgin has 32 inches, and
Jet Blue has 34 inches. But Jet Blue and Virgin aren't the big
four.
So while these are certainly not new complaints, they seem
to be getting worse in the public's eye, and the fact is that
we wouldn't be sitting here today if the traveling public
believed that the airlines cared more about them than they're
caring about the Do-Re-Mi, and this is happening, and you all
need to face it.
Two years ago, the Democrats on this committee released a
report on the airlines' lack of transparency on the growing
number of fees charged to passengers that called on the
airlines to stop nickel-and-diming the traveling public. And
what's happened since? Fees continue to go up while the
airlines fight behind the scenes in Washington to kill any
proposal. We had that where they killed some of them in last
year's FAA bill. Some of them we got in.
But compounding all of this is the fact that many consumers
don't have a lot of choices if they are fed up with the service
at their local airport. So where is the competition? According
to one recent study of the U.S. Travel Association, the big
four currently control over 50 percent of the seat capacity on
flights out of 155 airports. That doesn't sound real
competitive to me. So here we are with an industry facing self-
inflicted PR problems sitting before us asking for our
forgiveness and to allow them to fix their own problems.
Mr. Chairman, I am a strong believer in being saved and
redemption, and I truly hope the airlines are sincere and their
corrective actions match their words. But when I see 10 more
passengers being crammed in to the same size aircraft, I have
questions. So I think most Americans would want to return to
the friendly skies.
With that said, let this Senator be clear. If I have
anything to do with it as the Ranking Member of the Full
Committee, this Committee is not going to sit back with a wait-
and-see approach. We've acted in a bipartisan fashion in the
past to protect the flying public, and we're prepared to do so
again when we begin later this year on the FAA authorization
bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
We have with us today Ginger Evans, who is the Commissioner
of the Chicago Department of Aviation; Scott Kirby, the
President of United Airlines; Sharon Pinkerton, Senior Vice
President of Legislative and Regulatory Affairs for Airlines
for America; Sara Nelson, the International President of the
Association of Flight Attendants; and Sally Greenberg, the
Executive Director of the National Consumer League.
So we are pleased that you're here. We look forward to your
testimony. We have your testimony, but would love to have you
handle your 5 minutes however you want. But we will run that
clock pretty tight, so in no more than 25 minutes, we'll go to
questions.
Commissioner Evans, we'll let you start.
STATEMENT OF GINGER EVANS, COMMISSIONER,
CHICAGO DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION
Ms. Evans. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Blunt, Ranking
Member Cantwell, and members of the Committee for asking me to
be here today to testify on the important issue of safety at
our airports. We can all agree that the events that took place
on the night of Sunday, April 9, 2017, were completely
unacceptable. And, on behalf of the Chicago Department of
Aviation, I want to offer Dr. Dao and his family my sincerest
apology.
As someone who has spent more than three decades in the
aviation industry, that a passenger at one of our airports was
injured in this way is deeply saddening and personally
offensive to me. This is not how we do business and these
actions will not be tolerated. As the Commissioner of Chicago's
Department of Aviation, overseeing both O'Hare and Midway
International Airports, the safety and well-being of the flying
public remains our highest priority. It is imperative that our
employees interact with passengers in a manner that not only
protects their safety, but also conveys dignity and respect.
We have strong security plans in place, coordinated with
our partners in the Federal Government. These plans establish
roles and responsibilities for a multilayered security response
system. This system works together to prevent terrorist threats
and breaches of security, while ensuring continued confiscation
of weapons, explosive detection, and general security for
persons working in and traveling through our airports.
These plans help ensure that more than 100 million
passengers safely travel through O'Hare International Airport
and Midway International Airport each and every year. We
continue to adapt our safety and security policies, procedures,
and practices in order to respond to new and changing threats,
both external and internal.
However, based on my review, the security officers involved
in the incident on United Flight 3411 broke from our standard
procedures and failed to provide Dr. Dao and his family the
respect we demand be given to all of the traveling public
flying in and out of Chicago. These actions are not condoned by
the Chicago Department of Aviation.
To address what occurred, we initiated an immediate
administrative review. Based on that review, four personnel
were put on leave. The interviews and findings of our
administrative review were given to the City of Chicago's
Office of Inspector General. The details of the communication
and actions during the response to the request for officers are
now the subject of an expedited disciplinary investigation by
the Inspector General.
Our immediate review showed that the actions of these
officers were not in accordance with the Chicago Department of
Aviation's directives. Our policy is clear that force should
only be used when absolutely necessary to protect the security
and safety of our passengers. Our policy states, and I quote,
``The safety of innocent persons and bystanders must be given
primary consideration whenever the use of force is
contemplated.'' Further, my department launched a separate
review of our security resources and policies to identify
changes that might clarify and strengthen security roles and
procedures.
While we cannot reverse what took place, as a department,
we are taking action to ensure this never happens again. We
have moved quickly to institute several changes that I would
like to share with you today.
First, United Airlines announced that effective April 12,
they will request officers only for issues involving safety and
security. We are working with our other tenant airlines to
standardize this policy and ensure complete consistency
throughout our two airports.
Effective April 10, Chicago Department of Aviation airport
security officers will no longer board aircraft unless there's
an immediate medical issue or imminent physical threat on board
with great bodily harm at risk. The Chicago Police Department
will continue to take the lead in responding to disturbances on
aircraft, which they have done very ably, while the main duty
of airport security officers will continue to be to enforce
Federal regulations governing airport safety and security in
restricted areas of the airport. While the airport security
officers are specifically trained on airfield perimeter patrol
and aircraft movement areas, they are not designated law
enforcement authority at our airports.
Third, we are in the final stage of obtaining an
international aviation security expert to partner with us to
conduct a comprehensive review of our security program,
including policies, procedures, staff functions, facilities,
and technology, to ensure that we are not only meeting current
best practices but also thinking forward and positioning
ourselves to respond to the ever-changing security environment.
While these measures represent an important step forward,
more work remains to be done. We will continue to assess both
our staff and our facilities to meet our most important mission
of safely supporting each and every passenger that moves
through our airports. We are also initiating a very
comprehensive plan with our airline partners to modernize and
improve Chicago O'Hare for the purpose of serving our customers
more comfortably.
In closing, I'd like to state once again that we are deeply
sorry for the events that took place on April 9. We are
redoubling our efforts to strengthen our security systems,
policies, procedures, and training programs to ensure they work
together to keep all of our passengers safe.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Evans follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ginger Evans, Commissioner,
Chicago Department of Aviation
Good morning.
Thank you, Chairman Blunt, Ranking Member Cantwell and members of
the Committee for asking me to be here today to testify on the
important issue of safety at our airports.
I think we can all agree that the events that took place on the
night of Sunday, April 9, 2017 were completely unacceptable. And, on
behalf of the Chicago Department of Aviation, I want to offer Dr. Dao
and his family my sincerest apology.
As someone who has spent more than three decades in the aviation
industry, that a passenger at one of our airports was injured in this
way is deeply saddening and personally offensive. This is not how we do
business and these actions will not be tolerated.
As the Commissioner of Chicago's Department of Aviation, overseeing
both O'Hare and Midway International Airports, the safety and well-
being of the flying public is and has always been our highest priority.
It is imperative that our employees interact with passengers in a
manner that not only protects their safety but also conveys dignity and
respect.
In Chicago, home to two of the country's biggest airports and one
of the world's busiest airports, we take security and safety very
seriously. Furthermore, managing these large and complex operations in
the current global environment demands the highest safety standards.
We have strong security plans in place, coordinated with our
partners in the Federal Government. These plans establish roles and
responsibilities for a multi-layered security response system that
engages Federal Officers, including the Transportation Security
Administration, Federal Air Marshals, Customs and Border Patrol, and
the FBI, Chicago Police Officers and aviation security officers to
respond to different levels of concerns and issues.
This system works together to prevent terrorist threats and
breaches of security, while ensuring continued confiscation of weapons,
explosives detection and general security for persons working in and
travelling through our airports.
These plans help ensure that more than a hundred million passengers
safely travel through O'Hare International Airport and Midway
International Airport each year. We continue to adapt our safety and
security policies, procedures and practices in order to respond to new
and changing threats, both external and internal.
However, based on my review, the security officers involved in the
incident on United flight 3411 broke from our standard operating
procedure and failed to provide Dr. Dao and his family with the respect
we demand be given to all of the traveling public flying in and out of
Chicago. These actions are not condoned by the Chicago Department of
Aviation.
To address what occurred, we initiated an immediate administrative
review for the purpose of determining if there was sufficient reason to
place the officers on leave. One of the officers was placed on leave
April 10, two others were placed on leave April 12, and a supervisor
was placed on leave on April 18. The interviews and findings of our
administrative review were given to the City of Chicago Office of
Inspector General (OIG). The details of the communication and actions
during the response to the request for officers are now the subject of
an expedited disciplinary investigation by the City of Chicago's
Officer of Inspector General (IGO).
Our immediate review showed that the actions of these officers were
not in accordance with the Chicago Department of Aviation's standard
operating procedures. Our policies are clear that force should only be
used when absolutely necessary to protect the security and safety of
our passengers. Our policy states that ``the safety of innocent persons
and bystanders must be given primary consideration whenever the use of
force is contemplated.''
Further, my department launched an additional review of our
security resources and policies to identify changes that might clarify
and strengthen security roles and procedures to ensure nothing like
this happens again. In addition, we have provided requested documents
and communications to the public and press to ensure full transparency
about these events.
While we cannot reverse what took place, as a department we are
taking action to ensure this never happens again. We have moved quickly
to institute several changes in our policies, procedures and training
programs that I would like to share with you today.
(1) Following this incident, it has become clear, and all
stakeholders agree, that neither the Chicago Police Department
nor airport security officers should be called to aircraft to
deal with any customer service matters including overbooking
situations. United Airlines announced that effective April 12,
that they would call airport security and CPD only for issues
involving safety and security. We are working with other
airlines to standardize this policy to ensure consistency.
(2) Effective April 10, Chicago Department of Aviation Airport
Security Officers will no longer board aircraft, unless there
is an immediate medical issue or imminent physical threat on
board.
The Chicago Police Department will continue to take the lead in
responding to disturbances on aircraft, while the main duty of
airport security officers (ASOs) will continue to be to enforce
Federal regulations governing airport safety and security in
restricted areas of the airport. While ASOs are certified peace
officers specifically trained on airfield perimeter patrol and
aircraft movement areas, they are not the designated law
enforcement authority at our airports.
We've also made changes internally regarding how calls are
dispatched through the O'Hare Communications Center to ensure
that, as stated above, Chicago Police Department officers will
be the lead responders for disturbances onboard aircraft.
3.) We are in the final stage of obtaining an international aviation
security expert to partner with us to conduct a comprehensive
review of our security program--including policies, procedures,
staff functions, facilities and technology--to ensure that we
are not only meeting current best practices but also thinking
forward and positioning ourselves to respond to the ever-
changing security environment.
This thorough review will give us an outside perspective on our
policies and practices that will help us improve and better-
serve our passengers.
While these steps representative an important step forward, more
work remains to be done. We will continue to assess both our staff and
our facilities to meet our most important mission of safely supporting
each and every passenger that moves through our airports.
In closing, I'd like to state once again that we are deeply sorry
for the events that took place on April 9.
We will continue to strengthen our security systems and policies to
ensure they work together to keep all of our passengers safe.
We are re-doubling our efforts to strengthen our policies,
procedures and training programs, and to learn from this incident and
ensure that something like this never happens again.
As we move forward, we will take action based on the City of
Chicago Office of Inspector General's review, and we will release our
own report with further findings and policy actions.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Commissioner.
Mr. Kirby?
STATEMENT OF SCOTT KIRBY, PRESIDENT, UNITED AIRLINES
Mr. Kirby. Chairman Blunt, Ranking Member Cantwell,
Senators, thank you for the opportunity to address the
Subcommittee on this important matter today. My name is Scott
Kirby, and I am the President of United Airlines, here today
representing our 87,000 employees.
On April 9, our airline broke the public trust in an
incident that should have never happened. I apologize again to
Dr. Dao, his family, to every passenger on Flight 3411, and to
all our customers and employees around the world, and I'm very
sorry for our company's inadequate response to the initial
incident. No customer should have ever been treated the way
that Dr. Dao was.
We promised to complete a full analysis of what happened on
Flight 3411, including where we fell short and the actions we
needed to take to change the customer experience at United. One
week ago today, we released our report, which identified four
key failures.
First, we called on law enforcement when a safety or
security situation did not exist. Second, we booked crew at the
very last minute, even though Flight 3411 was full. Third, we
failed to provide our employees with the authority to offer
enough compensation or alternative travel options to give the
incentive to a passenger to give up a seat. Fourth and perhaps
most importantly, our employees did not have the authority to
do what was right for our customers. A series of United
Airlines' policies put our employees, law enforcement, and our
customers in an impossible position.
In an industry like ours, safety is always our top
priority, and rules are critical to ensuring a safe operation.
But in this instance, where safety wasn't the issue, we let
rules and operating procedures stand in the way of common
sense.
Our report announced several immediate and near-term
changes that we're making to prevent an issue like this from
happening again and to improve the customer experience. First,
unless safety or security is an issue, we will never again ask
a customer to give up their seat once they're on board or ask
law enforcement to remove a customer from a flight.
We're giving our employees more authority to offer up to
$10,000 to customers when we do have an oversold situation.
When a customer chooses to give up their seat, we'll have a
team dedicated to finding them alternative travel options. And
when crew needs to travel on a flight, we'll ensure they're
booked at least an hour before departure. At the same time,
we've also eliminated the red tape around lost bags by
instituting a no-questions-asked, $1,500 reimbursement for
permanently lost luggage.
This is a turning point for United Airlines. I do believe
that we're a better airline today then we were before because
of this terrible incident. And we'll be a better airline
tomorrow as these changes are fully implemented. All of us at
United are working incredibly hard to re-earn your trust and
the trust of our customers around the world and to provide our
customers with the respect and service that they deserve.
Thank you, and I look forward to answering any questions
that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kirby follows:]
Prepared Statement of Scott Kirby, President, United Airlines
Chairman Blunt, Ranking Member Cantwell, Senators, thank you for
the opportunity to address the Subcommittee on this important matter.
My name is Scott Kirby. I am President of United Airlines.
On April 9, our airline broke the public trust in an incident that
should have never happened.
I again apologize to Dr. Dao and his family, to every passenger on
Flight 3411, and to all our customers and employees around the world.
And I am very sorry that our company's immediate response was so
inadequate. No customer should ever be treated in the way that Dr. Dao
was.
We promised to complete a full analysis of what happened on Flight
3411, including where we fell short, and the actions we needed to take
to change the customer experience at United.
On April 27, we released our report which is submitted for the
record. In it, we identified four key failures.
First, we called on law enforcement when a safety or security issue
did not exist.
Second, we rebooked crew at the very last minute even though flight
3411 was full.
Third, we did not provide our employees with enough authority to
offer enough compensation or travel options to incentivize a passenger
to give up a seat.
Fourth, and perhaps most important: our employees did not have the
authority to do what was right for our customers. A series of policies
put our employees, law enforcement, and our customers in an impossible
position.
In an industry like ours, safety is our top the priority and rules
are critical to ensuring a safe operation. But in this instance, where
safety wasn't the issue, we let rules and operating procedures stand in
the way of commonsense.
In tandem with releasing our analysis, we announced several changes
we are making immediately to become more customer-focused; to reduce
incidents of involuntary denial of boarding to as close to zero as
possible; and to avoid putting our customers, employees and partners
into impossible situations due to policies we control. They are the
following:
1. United will limit the use of law enforcement to safety and
security issues only. We will not ask law enforcement officers
to remove customers from flights unless it is a matter of
safety and security. This policy was implemented on April 12.
2. United will not require customers already seated on an
airplane to give up their seat involuntarily, unless safety or
security is at risk. This policy was implemented on April 27.
3. United will increase customer compensation incentives for
voluntary denied boarding to up to $10,000. Compensation levels
are being increased to up to $10,000 for customers willing to
volunteer to take a later flight. This policy went into effect
on April 28.
4. United will establish a customer solutions team to provide
agents with creative solutions. We will create a team to
proactively identify and provide gate agents with creative
solutions. These could include using nearby airports, other
airlines or ground transportation to get customers and crews to
their final destinations. We expect the team to be operational
by June 2017.
5. United will ensure crews are booked onto a flight at least
60 minutes prior to departure. Unless there are open seats, all
crew members traveling for work on our aircraft must be booked
at least 60 minutes before departure. This policy was
implemented on April 14.
6. United will provide agents with additional annual training.
United will provide annual training for frontline employees to
enhance their skills on an ongoing basis. These trainings will
equip employees to handle the most difficult of situations.
This training will begin in August 2017.
7. United will create an automated system for soliciting
volunteers to change travel plans. Later this year, we will
introduce a new automated check-in process, both at the airport
and via the United app, that will gauge a customer's interest
in giving up his or her seat on overbooked flights in exchange
for compensation. If selected, that customer will receive their
requested compensation and be booked on a later United flight.
8. United will reduce its amount of overbooking. United has
evaluated its overbooking policy. As a result, adjustments have
been made to reduce overbookings on flights that historically
have experienced lower volunteer rates, particularly flights on
smaller aircraft, and the last flights of the day to a
particular destination.
9. United will empower employees to resolve customer service
issues in the moment. Later this year, United will launch a new
``in the moment'' app for our employees to handle customer
issues. This will enable flight attendants and gate agents to
compensate customers proactively--with mileage, credit for
future flights or other forms of compensation--when a
disservice occurs.
10. United will eliminate the red tape on lost bags. We will
adopt a new, no-questions-asked policy on permanently lost
bags. In these instances, United will pay a customer $1,500 for
the value of the bag and its contents. This process is expected
to be in place in June 2017.
This is a turning point for United.
I do believe that we are a better airline today than we were
before--because of this terrible incident. We will be a better airline
tomorrow as these changes are fully implemented.
We will work incredibly hard to re-earn your trust and the trust of
our customers around the world, and to provide our customers with the
respect and service that they deserve.
Thank you.
Attachment
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Mr. Kirby.
Ms. Pinkerton?
STATEMENT OF SHARON PINKERTON, SENIOR VICE
PRESIDENT, LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY POLICY,
AIRLINES FOR AMERICA
Ms. Pinkerton. Good morning, Chairman Blunt, Ranking Member
Cantwell, and members of the Subcommittee. My name is Sharon
Pinkerton. I'm the Senior Vice President of Policy at Airlines
for America.
We appreciate the opportunity to be here today. We want the
traveling public and this committee to know that the nation's
airlines are listening. Like you, we found the events that
transpired around the April 9 incident unacceptable. The
industry fully accepts that it is our responsibility to ensure
that such behavior and disrespect of a passenger can never
happen again.
We also know that deep regret and apologies, however
sincere, are no substitute for meaningful solutions and action.
To meet that responsibility, our carriers immediately reviewed
why and how this situation developed and, importantly, where
necessary, are making systemic changes based on that review,
and these aren't superficial changes. They range from changes
in overbooking policies, the processes in place for
decisionmaking, and enabling frontline employees more
discretion in managing certain situations.
Just a few examples of the concrete steps that a variety of
carriers are taking: completely eliminating or reducing
overbooking; ensuring that no passenger is involuntarily
removed from a flight for another passenger; renewing their
focus--and I think this is very important--on training for all
customer-facing staff to make sure they're taking care of
passengers, not just getting them safely from point to point;
and, finally, providing passengers with more transparency and
understanding about what their rights are as consumers.
While these are some of the policy changes already being
implemented, carriers are continuing to review a broad array of
policies to improve customer service, because we know
passengers have choices in who they fly. Carriers compete not
only on price but also on customer service. So every one of the
800 million passengers who fly U.S. carriers annually deserve
both a safe and pleasant experience.
The results of competition, which I've heard a lot about,
can be directly seen in our record-breaking improvements in the
2016 DOT customer service metrics for better on-time flight
arrivals, better flight completion, and nearly 100 percent
properly handled bag delivery. When our operational service
metrics improve, it's no surprise that so does customer
satisfaction. This relationship has been shown in independent
surveys that J.D. Power has done, which recently reported that
``North American airline satisfaction has climbed to a 10-year
high.''
While we've made progress, I know we need to improve. For
context, I do think it's important to recognize that the
turmoil of the bankruptcies in this industry, 9/11, mergers
that many carriers went through impacted our employees. They
lost pensions. So many carriers weren't making the necessary
investments in their product and their people. We've got some
catching up to do.
The financial stability of the last 6 years has enabled the
industry to make record investments of up to $1.5 billion per
month in the customer experience. That investment includes: new
contracts for employees, new and cleaner planes, and new
service, which is all driving the improvements we see today.
This committee, we hope, should recognize the facts, the
official data, that clearly show that airline competition is
intense. In fact, it's thriving. More people are flying today.
They're doing so at lower prices to more destinations than
ever. Consumers have seen enormous and quantifiable benefits
from a thriving and competitive marketplace. Just last month,
the Bureau of Transportation Statistics reported that the
fourth quarter 2016 average fare was down 26 percent from 2000,
and if you include ancillary fees, 22 percent down. Since 1995,
real fares declined 23 percent, and if you include ancillary
fees, still down almost 20 percent.
In addition, communities across America have seen benefits
from the thriving competitive aviation marketplace. While all
types of U.S. airports have gotten more air service over the
last several years, 176 small and non-hub airports have seen
more seats in their market. In addition to seats, airlines have
added 198 new routes in 2016 and 151 in 2017. Flyers have seen,
on net, a net expansion of 54 nonstop routes to and from U.S.
airports.
Senators, this industry does good things for people by
connecting them to their families and friends and being an
enabler of business. We hope that the recent but rare, although
unacceptable, incidents don't completely eclipse the dignity
and respect shown by airline employees to millions of travelers
every day.
Airlines recognize the onus is on us to foster a customer
centric culture at each airline. We commit to you and the
traveling public that this industry will continue to work
diligently and quickly to address any actions needed to ensure
that all passengers are treated with dignity and respect.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Pinkerton follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sharon Pinkerton, Senior Vice President,
Legislative and Regulatory Policy, Airlines for America
Good morning Chairman Blunt, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members
of the Subcommittee. My name is Sharon Pinkerton and I am the Senior
Vice President of Legislative and Regulatory Policy at Airlines for
America (A4A). We appreciate the opportunity to be here today. We want
the traveling public and this Committee to know: the Nation's airlines
are listening.
Like you, we found the events that transpired around the April 9
incident unacceptable. The industry fully accepts that it is our
responsibility to ensure that such behavior and disrespect of a
passenger can never happen again. We also know that deep regret and
apologies, however sincere, are no substitute for meaningful solutions.
To meet that responsibility our carriers immediately reviewed why
and how this situation developed and, importantly, where necessary, are
making systemic changes based on that review. These are not superficial
changes. They range from changes to overbooking policies, the processes
in place for decision making and enabling front line employees more
discretion in managing specific situations.
Seven examples of concrete steps a variety of carriers are taking
surrounding this specific issue are:
1. Completely eliminating or reducing overbooking;
2. Prohibiting use of law enforcement to remove passengers from a
flight, except in cases of safety or security;
3. Ensuring that no passenger is involuntarily removed from a flight
for another passenger;
4. Ensuring that crews traveling must be booked at least 60 minutes
prior to departure;
5. Giving gate agents the discretion to offer higher amounts of
money as an incentive for customers to voluntarily take a
different flight;
6. Airlines are renewing their focus on training for all customer-
facing staff to make sure they are taking care of passengers,
not just getting them from point to point; and
7. Efforts are underway to provide passengers more transparency and
simplified information about their rights as consumers.
While these are the policy changes already being implemented,
carriers are continuing to review a broad array of policies to improve
customer service because we know passengers have many choices of
airlines in what is a highly competitive marketplace. We compete not
only on price, but also on customer service. The 800 million passengers
who fly on U.S. carriers annually deserve a safe and pleasant
experience. The results of competition can be directly seen in our
record-breaking improvements in the 2016 Department of Transportation
(DOT) customer service metrics for on-time arrivals, flight completion
and nearly 100 percent bag delivery.
When our operational and service metrics improve, so does customer
satisfaction. This relationship is shown in independent surveys
including J.D. Power reporting ``North American Airline Satisfaction
Climbs to 10-Year High'' in 2016 and The American Customer Satisfaction
Index stating ``Airline customer satisfaction was up again in 2017''.
So, while we have made progress, we know we need to improve. It's
important to recognize, that the turmoil of bankruptcies in this
industry meant that many carriers weren't making the necessary
investments in their products and people. The financial stability of
the last six years has enabled the industry to make record investments
of up to $1.5 billion per month in the customer experience. That
investment includes new contracts for employees, new planes and new
service and is driving the improvements we see today.
This Committee should recognize that the facts, based on official
data, clearly show airline competition is alive and well. In fact, it
is thriving with more people flying, doing so at lower prices and to
more destinations than ever. Consumers have seen enormous and
quantifiable benefits from a thriving and competitive aviation
marketplace. Just last month the Bureau of Transportation Statistics
(BTS) reported:
The fourth-quarter 2016 average air fare was down 26.5
percent from the average fare in 2000, the highest inflation-
adjusted fourth quarter average fare recorded in the 21 years
since BTS began collecting air fare records in 1995; and
Since 1995, inflation-adjusted fares declined 23.4 percent.
In addition to consumers, communities across America have seen
enormous and quantifiable benefits from a thriving and competitive
aviation marketplace:
U.S. Airports of all sizes have realized air service gains
over the past two years with 176 Small- and Non-Hub markets
seeing available seat numbers grow; and
Airlines added 198 new U.S.-based routes in 2016 and have
added 151 more in 2017. Over two years, flyers have seen a net
expansion of 54 nonstop routes to/from U.S. airports.
This industry does good things for people by connecting them to
their families and friends and being an enabler of commerce. We hope
that rare, but unacceptable incidents do not completely eclipse the
dignity and respect shown by airline employees to millions of travelers
every day. Airlines recognize that the onus is on each carrier to
foster a customer-centric environment. We commit to you, and to the
traveling public, that the industry will continue to work diligently
and quickly to address any actions needed to ensure that all passengers
are treated with dignity and respect.
Airlines strive for perfection and the ultimate industry goal is to
provide a safe, efficient and enjoyable travel experience for all
passengers every time they fly and carriers will continue to work and
invest in delivering on that commitment each and every day.
Thank you, we appreciate the opportunity to testify and look
forward to your questions.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Ms. Pinkerton.
Ms. Nelson?
STATEMENT OF SARA NELSON, INTERNATIONAL PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATION
OF FLIGHT ATTENDANTS--CWA, AFL-CIO
Ms. Nelson. Thank you, Chairman Blunt, Ranking Member
Cantwell, and members of the Committee, for the opportunity to
testify today.
The Association of Flight Attendants represents 50,000
flight attendants at 20 airlines, and we partner with the
Communications Workers of America, who represent nearly 20,000
customer service agents. Together, we help tens of thousands of
flights get up in the air safely and even often sometimes
inspire smiles.
But in order to recognize the realities of aviation today,
we must look back to the events of September 11, 2001.
Following the grief of losing our friends and flying partners,
our profession and industry changed forever. Over 100,000
aviation jobs were lost nearly overnight. Most airlines entered
bankruptcy and some did not emerge. We lost, on average, 40
percent in pay. Pensions were terminated. Work rules were
eviscerated. Staffing was cut to minimums, and many of the
amenities of flying were removed as we had fewer tools to
appease weary travelers.
Airlines lost billions of dollars, and for nearly 10 years,
the driving force was to cut costs in every area but executive
compensation. Cabin interiors were redesigned with smaller
seats closer together. Bankruptcies gave way to airline mergers
to cut capacity in the industry so that planes are fuller than
ever with more seats, less leg room, and carry-on baggage at
all time highs as check baggage fees drove more luggage to the
airplane door.
Flight attendants are working anywhere from 25 percent to
50 percent more hours on the job to make ends meet, while
fatigue studies commissioned by Congress show that cabin crew
are not getting enough rest. Even though ticket prices are 40
percent below 1980 levels when adjusted for inflation, airlines
are making money again through capacity cuts, ancillary fees,
and reduction in fuel prices.
Today, U.S. carriers must also compete with predatory gulf
carriers, who enter the U.S. market and boast lavish amenities
because they are subsidized with over $50 billion from their
governments. As long as our government fails to enforce the
open skies agreements that prohibit this, the burden of cost
cutting will hit further on employees and consumers.
American announced just this week the airline is adding
more seats to the aircraft by reducing leg room to 29 inches.
This is going to have a direct impact on flight attendants, who
will have to answer to angry passengers enraged by the lack of
room. Meanwhile, these same flight attendants are reporting
they are sick from toxic uniforms and contaminated cabin air.
And Wall Street was in an uproar when their pay was adjusted to
an industry average a few weeks ago at the rate that might
cover a family's utility bill because shareholders whined it
might be taken out of their returns.
When Delta had another IT crew scheduling meltdown that
left passengers stranded for nearly a week, the flight
attendants without a union contract were left on duty in excess
of 24 hours, facing passengers and having to de-escalate
tensions while standing on hold to get through to the company
for more than 10 hours.
Every day, flight attendants working at U.S. airlines that
are based in the U.S. help tens of thousands of flights and
millions of passengers travel safely to their destination and
without incident. This has become more challenging in recent
years, with task saturation at boarding and staffing cut
significantly to FAA minimums.
There is a rising tension on board in our flights, in our
experience, exacerbated by a national narrative full of
disrespect for authority, decency, and decorum, and fewer of
aviation's first responders to manage it. Deescalating conflict
between passengers has become a significant portion of the work
flight attendants perform on each flight. Without recognition
of our role and authority in the cabin, we are very concerned
about the dangerous conditions flight attendants may be facing
at work.
When flight attendants simply attempt to do safety
compliance checks, they are greeted with refusal and the
response, ``What are you going to do, drag me out of here?'' We
don't have the option to call for help from authorities in the
air, and on the ground, we are experiencing some authorities
refusing to respond because they don't want to end up on the
news, either.
Flight attendants are caught in the middle, and safety and
security will suffer. Aviation safety regulations didn't
materialize out of thin air. It was a deadly crash of British
Air Tourist Flight 28M in 1985 where some deaths were
attributed to seat configuration at the exit rows and children
seated there who couldn't get the exits open that led to the
requirements in exit row seats. Six years later in 1991, U.S.
Airways Flight 1493 crashed with Sky West Flight 5569 and
further exit row requirements were identified as necessary.
When tragedy strikes, we make changes and vow never again.
We have to mean it. Now, flight attendants are challenged,
ignored, or chastised for these safety checks. Cabin crew are
left to wonder what's worse, failing to comply with Federal
regulations as part of our job, or doing the safety sensitive
work and ending up on the evening news or facing discipline
from management because someone didn't like the instruction
they gave.
The reality is that the vast majority of passengers come to
the plane with kindness in their hearts and a desire to have a
peaceful, uneventful flight. Look at the focus on aviation. It
is a fascinating topic for the public and garners more
publicity than almost any other industry. Our airlines, the
crews, and passengers fly to every corner of the Earth when
some can only dream of crossing borders. It is one of our
greatest symbols and expressions of freedom.
Our U.S. industry generates $1.2 trillion in economic
activity and supports 10 million jobs, and for these reasons,
it continues to be a target of those who wish to wage war
against America. We can't afford to get this wrong. We can't
afford to dismiss safety and security. Flight attendants cannot
effectively do our jobs without passengers recognizing the
necessity of following crew member instructions.
Thank you so much for the opportunity to be here today.
There is so much more to discuss about staffing, surveillance
of crew movement, security concerns, and all of the realities
of aviation today, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Nelson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sara Nelson, International President, Association
of Flight Attendants-CWA, AFL-CIO
The Communications Workers of America (CWA) represents 700,000
workers in private and public sector employment in the United States,
Canada and Puerto Rico. CWA members work in telecommunications and
information technology, the airline industry, news media, broadcast and
cable television, education, health care and public service, law
enforcement, manufacturing and other fields.
In aviation, the CWA represents 30,000 Passenger Service Agents at
American Airlines, Envoy and Piedmont. These agents are cross-trained
and work between the ramp, ticket counter and gates. Their jobs include
assisting passengers, loading and unloading baggage, guiding aircraft
to and from the gates, de-icing and cleaning the planes.
The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA (AFA), an autonomous
sector of the CWA, serves as the expert voice from the aircraft cabin
with 50,000 flight attendant members at 20 airlines including mainline,
niche, regional, international and charter airlines.
For the purpose of this written statement, we are organizing our
remarks into the specific job categories Flight Attendants and Customer
Service Agents.
In the Cabin--Flight Attendants
Flight attendants are Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
certified to carry out cabin safety checks, crew coordination,
passenger briefings, and all related safety, health and security
regulations related to the aircraft cabin. Every effort is made to
avoid emergencies, but when they happen flight attendants are charged
with an immediate response to ensure the safety of all passengers
onboard the aircraft. The role of aviation's first responders and last
line of defense in aviation security is performed by cabin crew members
who cannot effectively do their jobs without passengers recognizing the
necessity of following crew member instructions.
Every day, flight attendants working at U.S. airlines or based in
the U.S. help tens of millions of passengers on thousands of flights to
safely travel to their destination without incident. This has become
more challenging in recent years with task saturation at boarding and
significant staffing cuts down to FAA minimums in domestic markets. The
changes to the aircraft cabin with smaller seats closer together and
record-high load factors through reduced capacity have led to greater
human contact in the confined space. There is a rising tension on board
our flights and fewer of aviation's first responders to manage it. De-
escalating conflict between passengers has become a significant portion
of work flight attendants perform on each flight. Without recognition
of their role and authority in the cabin we are very concerned about
the dangerous conditions flight attendants may be facing at work.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The horrific viral video from Republic flight 3411, operating as
United Express, and the force used by the Chicago Aviation Security
Officers led to a mob mentality Internet attack on the front-line
employee of United Airlines who had no role in the shocking event
itself. Such an event of violence should never take place against any
person on our planes--we all know this and we also know it can never
happen again. The reality is that under the leadership of Oscar Munoz,
United Airlines has transformed in a very short period of time.
Employees are engaged, management is showing a respect for workers
through good relations with unions, which has also resulted in improved
contracts and the reverse of outsourcing begun by the former CEO.
The attack against United and the frontline employees was wrong. It
has been pervasive at the airports, on the planes, on several media and
broadcast television stations, and even in our schools, churches, and
neighborhoods. It is demoralizing and has created incredible anxiety
for flight attendants and other airline employees coming to work. It
was especially challenging as the spread of incredible misinformation
and misrepresentation of the facts could not be challenged without a
vitriolic attack against the people of United Airlines. This
reverberated for aviation workers throughout the industry. Flight
attendants had no role in this event and never would. We are aviation's
first responders and last line of defense. We save lives.
It is important for the world to look at flight attendants and see
the hero who revived someone's son, daughter, mother, father, sister or
brother from a heart attack.
. . . to see the crew of three flight attendants delivering a
baby in flight even through complications during the birth and
without a single passenger being aware that at the same time
these heroes were expertly handling a potential security
threat.
. . . to see the flight attendant who was responsible for
saving the lives of an entire airplane as she revived both
pilots from unconsciousness following a decompression.
. . . to see the flight attendant who, despite sustaining
injuries during a crash landing returned repeatedly to the
burning aircraft to pull people to safety.
. . . to see the flight attendant who, with his crew, contained
a bomb and stopped a terrorist act.
There are thousands of examples of heroic acts performed by flight
attendants and millions of examples where, every day, a flight
attendant is seen as someone's hero. Aviation connects people as
diverse as the communities we serve around the country and the world,
every creed and conviction, background and belief. Flight attendants
care for and safely usher passengers to the big business deal, the
family vacation, the times of celebration, times of grief and times of
battle. Respect for our work is critical.
Flight attendants need clear direction and support in doing our
jobs. We are charged with keeping a safe cabin, yet we are challenged
daily when instructing passengers according to our training and
required safety procedures. We are encouraging our members to
``continue to lean on each other to maintain the best of who we are. We
can't be second guessing ourselves when we need to protect the safety
of the flight. We make every effort not to react to attempts to provoke
us and stay focused on our mission as aviation's first responders.''
The fallout from these viral video events is creating damage that
we believe is far-reaching and threatens aviation safety and security.
We have reports of passengers allowed to remain onboard refusing to
comply with crewmember safety instructions during boarding jeering and
harassing at crewmembers across the country. We have reports of airport
security refusing to respond to passenger incidents of threats, assault
or failing to comply with crewmember safety instruction. We have
aviation ``experts'' encouraging the public on TV to continue to film
the crew and broadcast it, which offers free video surveillance of crew
movement and tested disruptive tactics for terrorists. This has to stop
before the consequences are tragic.
We need regulators, lawmakers, and airline management to provide
clear instruction to the public about the necessity of flight
attendants in aviation safety. Flight attendants are caught in the
middle between the role we must play to help ensure the safest aviation
system in the world and the ``us against them'' mentality created by
these viral video events and the response to rushed public judgment
quickly rendered without all of the facts.
We recognize the need to study the conditions in air travel today
and respond to the concerns of the millions of people who buy tickets
on our airplanes. But we also need to make sure we are not creating a
system where people are able to dismiss their responsibility as
travelers who must comply with regulations and policies in place to
keep them safe.
Airlines originally hired ``stewardess'' to make flights
comfortable and stress-free for passengers. As the aviation industry
grew, so did the role and responsibilities of flight attendants. It
wasn't until 1952 that the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) required
airlines to provide flight attendants for the safety and security of
passengers. In September of 2001, the role of flight attendants
profoundly changed as we added the last line of defense in aviation
security to our responsibilities.
After nearly a decade of financial struggles, the increased use of
regional carriers to supplement route structures and a series of high
profile consolidation travel transformed from a glamorous luxury to a
necessary mode of transportation. Flight attendant utilization
increased significantly when airlines moved from a ``staffing for
service'' standard to staffing at FAA minimums.
Flight attendants are dealing with an increasing range of demands
due to this reduced staffing. The boarding process is especially
stressful as the passengers look for bag storage while flight
attendants perform both safety and service related duties. While
dealing with customer service, flight attendants must remain ever
vigilant for anything ``out of the ordinary'' which could be a threat
to the safety and security of the flight.
In light of the recent events, airlines have begun to implement
changes to policies and procedures to improve the passenger experience.
We urge everyone to resist a ``knee jerk'' reaction and take time to
thoroughly review any proposed changes to prevent unintended
consequences. All stakeholders must be involved in this process. Let us
note too that studies show front line employees are helping to turn out
passenger satisfaction metrics including more on-time arrivals, fewer
lost bags and less customer complaints. While we identify concerns, we
also want to recognize the wonderful passengers on our planes who have
taken the time to recognize our work and thank us for our efforts.
As a result of pressure from crewmembers and AFA, Federal law
affirms flight attendants' authority in the cabin of an aircraft and
expressly prohibits passenger interference in these duties. 49 U.S.
Code Sec. 46504 states, ``An individual on an aircraft in the special
aircraft jurisdiction of the United States who, by assaulting or
intimidating a flight crewmember or flight attendant of the aircraft,
interferes with the performance of the duties of the member or
attendant or lessens the ability of the member or attendant to perform
those duties, or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be
fined under title 18 imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both.
However, if a dangerous weapon is used in assaulting or intimidating
the member or attendant, the individual shall be imprisoned for any
term of years or for life.''
Passengers are required to comply with crewmember instructions and
we encourage them to wait for crewmember instructions before inserting
themselves into incidents to prevent situations from escalating. We
care deeply for our passengers and providing them a safe journey. It is
also critically important for our security in a post-9/11 world that we
keep calm in the cabin and recognize our mutual interest in maintaining
procedures that keep us all safe.
At the Airport--Customer Service
In 2001, following the 9/11 attacks, President George W. Bush
signed into law the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, which
provided sweeping reforms to airport security protocols. Included in
the Act was an amendment, Section 114, offered by former Senator John
Kerry (D-MA), setting Federal penalties for interfering with airport
and airline personnel who have security duties.
In January 2017, the Department of Transportation (DOT) and
Department of Justice (DOJ) confirmed in a letter to Congressman John
Garamendi (D-CA) that the original intent of Senator Kerry's amendment
was to include gate agents, ramp personnel and airline workers with
access to aircraft or other secure areas because they have security
functions.
As a result, an assault on agents would be a Federal criminal
offense. 49 U.S.C. 46503 provides that ``[a]n individual in an area
within a commercial service airport in the United States who, by
assaulting a Federal, airport, or air carrier employee who has security
duties within the airport, interferes with the performance of the
duties of the employee or lessens the ability of the employee to
perform those duties, shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not
more than 10 years, or both.''
Passenger service agents at every airport in the Nation were
reassured that ``airport rage'' incidents they face as they perform
their critical safety roles could be properly dealt with. Not only
would offenders be charged but also prosecuted. Unfortunately, that is
not the case as we have seen in numerous examples and as daily verbal
and physical assaults continue.
Passenger service agents have a variety of responsibilities
depending on the airline and size of airport. They play a vital role in
ground operation including both ``above the wing''--providing customer
service to all passengers--and ``below the wing''--loading planes and
ensuring they are handled with care.
At many airports, agents are cross-trained and go back and forth
between the ramp, ticket counter, and gates. Their job responsibilities
can include handling and tagging checked bags, check-in process at the
gates and kiosks, working at ticket counters, operational support,
loading and unloading the aircraft, guiding aircraft to and from gates,
de-icing, and cleaning, prepping and securing the aircraft for the next
flight.
Federal regulations require air carriers to comply with security
measures set forth in the Transportation Security Administration (CFR)
Part 1544. This CFR requires U.S. carriers to adopt and carry out an
approved security program. The Transportation Security Administration
(TSA) is responsible for ensuring that required security measures are
carried out. Passenger service agents have the responsibility to comply
with these regulations when doing their job. Passenger service agents
receive training including online computer work, classroom training,
and on-the-job training but no specific training on managing air rage.
Agents' jobs are stressful and challenging. While working inside
the airport, agents encounter angry passengers who blame them for
mishaps. Working outside loading and unloading planes is physically
demanding. In both areas, agents are pressured to avoid flight delays
at all costs.
Passenger service agents have reported incidents where they are
verbally and physically assaulted. Agents have been attacked, hit, had
luggage and equipment thrown at them, been pulled over counters and
been spat upon. Since the carriers offer absolutely no training on
dealing with violent passengers, they rely on intervention from other
agents, employees, and even passengers. Passenger service agents report
that rage is at an all-time high and employees sometimes feel like
companies reward passenger's bad behavior especially now that
passengers are using the threat of posting videos to social media.
Sometimes the airport police get involved but in many cases, the
carrier takes over to assist the passenger and not their hardworking
employee. Too often, passengers face no consequences and in fact, are
often escorted to their flights by airline supervisors. We have
recently received reports of passengers who have exhibited disruptive
or criminal behavior being boarded on flights where flight attendants
have far fewer options to contain the problem and far greater
consequences if the behavior continues or escalates.
Customer behavior in the airport also affects the safe operation of
flights and should be treated in a consistent manner. Given the
patchwork of protocols to deal with assaults on passenger service
agents at airports across the country, it is critical that a clear and
mandated process is developed and shared with carriers, police/airport
security, airports, and the agents to assure immediate attention
warranted by a Federal assault.
It is urgent that this protocol and education be developed and
mandated by the DOT and distributed to carriers, local and airport
police/security, airports, and the agents. It is only through clear
national protocols and education that passenger service agents will
know how to deal with abusive passengers; that airports and carriers
have clear procedures to quickly manage these situations and take
appropriate action; and that passengers understand the penalties for
assaulting passenger service agents.
The mandate must include clear instructions for educating
passengers on the Federal penalties of assaulting an ``airport, or air
carrier employee who has security duties within the airport''; training
passenger service agents on how to de-escalate hostile situations and
procedures for filing Federal charges; having airport management,
airline supervisors and airport law enforcement focus on protecting and
supporting agents and filing Federal charges; and ensures the presence
of law enforcement personnel who are able to file Federal charges in
the case of an assault on a passenger service agent.
While we certainly understand, given the news lately, the interest
in protecting passengers, we urge Congress to also consider the serious
assaults that passenger service agents deal with every day. CWA will
continue to speak out on behalf of our members who are simply doing
their jobs and following the rules. These aviation workers deserve to
work in a safe environment free from assaults by irrational and irate
passengers. We ask Congress to protect these workers.
Recommended Policy and Regulatory Changes
AFA-CWA believes several steps can be taken to assist with
supporting flight attendants and passenger service agents in performing
safety duties and trust in aviation:
Public statements from regulatory bodies, Congress and
industry leaders about the need to follow crewmember
instructions to keep aviation safe and secure.
Increase flight attendant and passenger service agent
staffing and provide de-escalation tools and techniques.
A study of evacuation standards, including the reality of
today's aircraft cabin configuration.
Improved reporting of safety and security concerns to the
proper authorities and enhanced enforcement of Federal laws
pertaining to passenger treatment of flight attendants and
passenger service agents.
Banning the use of voice communications in the aircraft
cabin.
Develop guidance for use of portable electronic devices on
aircraft.
Announcements in the gate area reinforcing safety
regulations, the role of the flight and cabin crew and
reminders about videotaping for personal use only.
Involve the representatives of frontline aviation workers in
any proposed policy or regulatory changes.
AFA and CWA are committed, in concert with our airline partners, to
maintaining the safest mode of transportation in the world, through an
efficient and friendly aviation experience.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Ms. Nelson. We'll see if we can
get to this so much more here in a minute.
Ms. Greenberg?
STATEMENT OF SALLY GREENBERG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
CONSUMERS LEAGUE
Ms. Greenberg. Good morning, Chairman Blunt, Ranking Member
Cantwell, members of the Aviation Subcommittee. I'm Sally
Greenberg, Executive Director of the National Consumers League,
and we appreciate the invitation to be here today.
Three weeks ago, America saw the shocking video of David
Dao's violent removal from United Flight 3411, the predictable
result of a lack of effective competition and consumer
protection in the U.S. airline industry. What happened on that
flight symbolizes a problem that is not unique to United.
Indeed, as subsequent incidents on American Airlines and Delta
and countless others which did not go viral, demonstrate power
in the airline industry has become dangerously unbalanced. It's
time for Congress to take action to assure consumers that the
next time they fly, they won't become the unwitting star of
their own viral video.
How have we gotten to this point? In a word, competition,
or, more specifically, the lack thereof. In the last decade
alone, mergers have reduced nine large airlines to four:
American, Delta, Southwest, and United. Together, these four
control more than 80 percent of all domestic flights. At a
staggering 93 of the top 100 airports, only one or two airlines
control a majority of the seats. According to the GAO, from
2007 to 2013, 1.2 million scheduled domestic flights were
eliminated. As the big four carriers gobbled up competitors,
smaller communities, in particular, were hard hit by this march
toward oligopoly.
For example, in 2008, San Antonio lost approximately 600
jobs when AT&T relocated its corporate headquarters to Dallas.
The company actually said in a press release, ``Being
headquartered near leading air transportation facilities is
critical to global companies like AT&T, as the airline industry
continues to consolidate and reduce hubs and flights.''
The industry has also sought to generate profits by
literally squeezing passengers. Last year, average load factors
topped 80 percent for the eighth consecutive year, and the
average distance between rows, as Senator Nelson has described
in great detail--the average distance--before regulation, it
was 35 inches, and today, it's about 31 inches. American
Airlines, as Senator Nelson has indicated, is set to even
reduce those distances to smaller sizes. So Americans are
getting bigger. We're getting heavier, and we are being crammed
into smaller and smaller spaces.
So all of this consolidation has resulted in higher prices
for consumers, despite what you might hear this morning. A Wall
Street Journal analysis of air fares, including add-on fees,
found that from 2007 to 2014, a period coinciding with the
worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, the price of
the average round trip domestic flight increased nearly 16
percent. These independent numbers stand in contrast to
industry claims that it's never been better or cheaper to fly.
There are steps that Congress could take and should take in
the near term to address the worst impacts of the lack of
competition. First, as the United incident vividly illustrated,
airline bumping policies can lead to shockingly negative
outcomes for consumers. Involuntary bumping should never occur
in a competitive market. So airlines should be required to
maintain interline agreements with other airlines to ensure
that paying passengers who are bumped make it to their final
destination with as little delay as possible.
Second, the power imbalance between airlines and their
passengers can no longer lie solely with the airlines. For
example, consumers should be made aware in clear and
conspicuous language of their rights at the time that they
purchase their tickets via posters at the gate and at ticket
counters. Passengers need access as well to the legal system to
hold airlines accountable for their promises.
Third, there seems to be no limit to outrageous charges for
basic necessities, such as guaranteed seats, a piece of
luggage, or the need to reschedule a flight. NCL along with 10
other national consumer and passenger organizations supported
and do support Senator Markey's and Senator Blumenthal's Fair
Fees Act, which would prohibit airlines from charging
cancellation, baggage, and other ancillary fees that are
unreasonable or disproportionate to the cost incurred by the
air carrier.
The DOT should also strengthen its consumer protection
policies to match or exceed those that are available to
consumers in the European Union for things like compensation
for delays, cancellations, or involuntary bumping. Finally,
Congress should pass a comprehensive Passenger Bill of Rights
which addresses these and other pressing consumer protection
priorities, such as minimum seat standards and fair policies
overall.
In conclusion, consumers are angry. They're frustrated. We
need members of this subcommittee to be in our corner to
promote consumer rights and protections and to restore some
semblance of balance and fairness between passengers and the
airlines.
Thank you to members of the subcommittee for inviting the
consumer perspective. I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Greenberg follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sally Greenberg, Executive Director,
National Consumers League
Good morning Chairman Blunt, Ranking Member Cantwell and members of
the Subcommittee. My name is Sally Greenberg and I am the Executive
Director of the National Consumers League (``NCL''). Founded in 1899,
NCL is America's pioneering consumer advocacy organization. Our
nonprofit mission is to promote social and economic justice for
consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. On behalf of NCL
and the millions of Americans who travel by air every year, thank you
for inviting me to testify today.
Three weeks ago, America saw in the shocking video of Dr. David
Dao's violent removal from United Flight 3411, the predictable result
of the lack of effective competition and consumer protection in the
U.S. airline industry. To be clear, what happened on that flight
symbolizes a problem that is not unique to United. Indeed, as
subsequent incidents on American Airlines \1\ and Delta \2\ and
countless others before which did not ``go viral'' demonstrate,
consumers are increasingly forced to choose between giving up their
basic rights or not traveling by air.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Rosenberg, Eli. ``American Airlines Suspends Flight Attendant
After Altercation Over Stroller,'' New York Times. April 22, 2017.
Online: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/22/business/american-airlines-
video-stroller.html
\2\ Stingl, Jim. ``Stingl: Urgent trip to restroom gets man kicked
off Delta flight,'' Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel. April 26,
2017. Online: http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/columnists/jim-stingl/
2017/04/26/stingl-need-pee-gets-man-kicked-off-delta-flight-milwaukee/
100885528/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a country where millions of consumers regularly depend on
airlines to get them to business and family obligations, not traveling
is simply not an option. So, consumers subject themselves to the whims
of an industry that routinely demonstrates that customer service is a
luxury that only the well-heeled can afford. The rest of us are
relegated to ``cattle class,'' paying exorbitant fees for
``privileges'' like bringing a carry-on bag onboard or sitting in an
actual, guaranteed seat and, in some cases, risking involuntary
ejection from the airplane by the airline's version of a bouncer.
It is time for Congress to step in and restore consumers' rights in
the airline industry. Only through Congressional action can American
consumers be assured that the next time they fly, they won't become the
unwitting star of their own viral airline video.
I. Unchecked Consolidation in the Airline Industry Has Led to Higher
Prices, Fewer Flights, and Worse Service
There is a lack of effective competition to hold down the cost of
flying and promote good customer service. Since deregulation in the
late 1970s, there have been no fewer than 40 airlines mergers. In the
last decade alone, mergers have reduced 9 large airlines to 4--
American, Delta, Southwest, and United.\3\ Together, these 4 control
more than 80 percent of all domestic flights.\4\ At 40 of the 100
largest U.S. airports, a single airline controls a majority of the
market, as measured by the number of seats for sale, up from 34
airports in 1995. At a staggering 93 of the top 100 airports one or two
airlines control a majority of the seats, an increase from 78 airports
in 1995.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Airlines for America. ``U.S. Airline Mergers and
Acquisitions.'' Online: http://airlines.org/dataset/u-s-airline-
mergers-and-acquisitions/
\4\ Martin, Hugo. ``Justice Department approves Alaska Airlines'
acquisition of Virgin America,'' Los Angeles Times. December 6, 2016.
Online: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-alaska-virgin-20161206-
story.html
\5\ Associated Press. ``Airlines carve U.S. into markets dominated
by 1 or 2 carriers.'' July 14, 2015. Online: http://
www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-airlines-local-monopolies-20150714-
story.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This lack of competition has had negative impacts on consumers and
communities across America. One reason that Dr. Dao may have been so
insistent on not being bumped from United 3411 is that his was the last
available flight from Chicago to Louisville that day. Decreasing
competition is a big reason why Louisville, like so many other small
and mid-sized cities, is underserved by the network airlines. According
to the Government Accountability Office, from 2007 to 2013--a period
that coincided with major mergers between Southwest and AirTran, Delta
and Northwest, United and Continental, and USAirways and American \6\--
1.2 million scheduled domestic flights were eliminated. Smaller
communities in particular were hit hard by the adverse effects of
airline consolidation. Scheduled departures at medium and small hub
airports decreased by nearly 24 percent and 20 percent,
respectively.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Airlines for America. ``U.S. Airline Mergers and
Acquisitions.'' Online: http://airlines.org/dataset/u-s-airline-
mergers-and-acquisitions/
\7\ United States Government Accountability Office. Airline
Competition: The Average Number of Competitors in Markets Serving the
Majority of Passengers Has Changed Little in Recent Years, but
Stakeholders Voice Concerns about Competition, GAO-14-515. June 2014.
Pg. 35. Online: http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/664060.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These service reductions have negative impacts not just on
consumers, but also on the communities who lose service. For example:
In 2008, San Antonio lost approximately 600 jobs when AT&T
relocated its corporate headquarters to Dallas, citing the need
for access to more direct flights as a key reason for the
move.\8\ In its press release announcing the move, AT&T stated
that ``[b]eing headquartered near leading air transportation
facilities is critical to global companies like AT&T as the
airline industry continues to consolidate and reduce hubs and
flights amid higher fuel prices and industry economic
pressures.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Poling, Travis and Pack, William. ``AT&T leaving San Antonio
for Dallas,'' San Antonio Express-news. June 28, 2008. http://
www.chron.com/business/article/AT-T-leaving-San-Antonio-for-Dallas-
1758611.php
\9\ ``AT&T Corporate Headquarters to Move to Dallas,'' AT&T press
release. June 27, 2008. Online: https://www.att.com/gen/press-
room?pid=4800&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=25882
In 2013, Decatur, Illinois lost 75 jobs when Archer Daniels
Midland moved its headquarters to Chicago, citing the need for
``efficient access to global markets,'' and ``better access to
transportation'' for its top executives.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Polansek, ``Archer Daniels Midland pricks Chicago for new
headquarters,'' Reuters. December 18, 2013. Online: http://
www.reuters.com/article/adm-headquarters-chicago-idUSL2N0J
X13X20131218
Veritiv, a Fortune 500 distributor of packaging, print, and
publishing products and solutions, moved 50 high-paying jobs
from Cincinnati to Atlanta in 2015 after Delta abandoned
Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport. ``The
airport here is not suitable for business travel,'' said
Veritiv CEO Mary Laschinge at the time.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Hussein, Fatima and Williams, Jason. ``Fortune 500 boss: CVG
reason for leaving,'' Cincinnati Enquirer. October 16, 2015. Online:
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2015/10/16/fortune-500-boss-cvg-
reason-leaving/73605974/
As if fewer flights to fewer cities by a dwindling number of
competitors wasn't enough, the industry has also sought to generate
profits by squeezing ever more passengers in its planes' limited space.
Fifteen years ago, average load factors for domestic flights on U.S.
airlines was 70.42 percent. Last year, thanks to consolidation, the
increasing use of small-capacity planes, and advanced technology,
average load factors again topped 80 percent for the 8th consecutive
year.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Bureau of Transportation Statistics. ``Load Factor (passenger-
miles as a proportion of available seat-miles in percent ( percent))
All U.S. Carriers--All Airports,'' Online: https://
www.transtats.bts.gov/Data_Elements.aspx?Data=5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The airlines are also shrinking seat size in an effort to cram more
customers into their planes. The average distance between rows of seats
has dropped from 35 inches before airline deregulation in the 1970s to
about 31 inches today. The average width of an airline seat has also
shrunk from 18 inches to about 16\1/2\ inches.\13\ The shrinking seat
size has caused many medical professionals to raise the alarm over
adverse health problems related to squishing yourself into an ever
shrinking seat like deep vein thrombosis.\14\ To add insult to injury,
airlines are even reducing the size of on-board bathrooms. The reduced
size has created significant concerns for the safety of crew and
passengers as well as accessibility concerns for passengers with
disabilities.\15\ With shrinking seats, aisles, and bathrooms, fuller
planes, and adverse health effects and boarding delays due to
overcrowding, is it any wonder that consumers and crew are increasingly
at the end of their collective ropes when it comes to air travel?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Congressman Steve Cohen. ``Reps. Cohen and Kinzinger, Senators
Blumenthal, Schumer, Markey, Menendez and Feinstein Introduce
Bipartisan, Bicameral SEAT Act,'' Press release. March 9, 2017. Online:
https://cohen.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/reps-cohen-and-
kinzinger-senators-blumenthal-schumer-markey-menendez-and
\14\ ``Safety risk of shrinking airline seats questioned,'' Los
Angeles Times. April 14, 2015. Online: http://www.latimes.com/business/
la-fi-airline-seat-risks-20150414-story.html
\15\ Eng, Dinah. ``Smaller Bathrooms on Planes Pose Challenges for
Passengers,'' New York Times. December 23, 2016. Online: https://
www.nytimes.com/2016/12/23/travel/smaller-airplane-bathrooms-
challenges-for-passengers.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsurprisingly, fewer flights on fewer airlines with more
passengers competing for limited space has resulted in higher prices
for consumers. Over 10 years, average domestic fares climbed 5 percent
after adjusting for inflation according to an Associated Press
analysis.\16\ Even that number excludes the record revenues that
airlines have reaped from so-called ``unbundling,'' a phenomenon
consumers experience in the form of a litany of baggage fees,
cancellation fees, standby fees, seat reservation fees and other forms
of nickel-and-diming. In 2015 alone, American, Delta and United brought
in $14.69 billion in ancillary revenue, a staggering 177 percent
increase from the $5.3 billion they collected from such fees in
2008.\17\ A Wall Street Journal analysis of airfares, including add-on
fees, found that from 2007 to 2014--a period coinciding with the worse
economic crisis since the Great Depression--the price of the average
round-trip domestic flight increased nearly 16 percent to $291.30. \18\
These independent analyses stand in stark contrast to industry claims
that it has never been a better and cheaper time to fly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Koeing, David and Mayerowitz, Scott. ``U.S. airports
increasingly dominated by 1 or 2 carriers,'' USA Today. July 15, 2015.
Online: https://www.usatoday.com/story/todayinthesky/2015/07/15/us-
airports-increasingly-dominated-by-1-or-2-carriers/30152927/
\17\ IdeaWorks. 2016 Yearbook of Ancillary Revenue. September 2016.
Page 4. Online: http://www.ideaworkscompany.com/wp-content/uploads/
2016/09/2016-Ancillary-Revenue-Yearbook-R.pdf
\18\ Nicas, Jack. ``Airline Consolidation Hits Smaller Cities
Hardest,'' Wall Street Journal. September 10, 2015. Online: https://
www.wsj.com/articles/airline-consolidation-hits-smaller-cities-hardest-
1441912457
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The increasing cost of flying is felt even more acutely by
consumers in cities where consolidation has left only one or two
dominant carriers. For example:
Indianapolis was left with just two dominant airlines after
ATA was bought by Southwest and Northwest was absorbed by
Delta. The two airlines now control 56 percent of the seats and
airfares are 6 percent above the national average.
In 2005, U.S. Airways controlled nearly 66 percent of the
seats in Philadelphia. After its merger with American, the
combined airline had 77 percent of the seats. After the merger,
airfares there went from 4 percent below the national average
to 10 percent above it.
From 2005-2015, Delta's control of its Atlanta hub increased
from 78 percent to 80 percent of the available seats. At the
same time, AirTran merged with Southwest, which subsequently
reduced its presence there. As a result, domestic airfares to
Atlanta went from nearly 6 percent below average to 11 percent
above.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Associated Press. ``Analysis sheds light on the impact of
airline consolidation,'' July 14, 2015. Online: http://www.cbsnews.com/
news/analysis-sheds-light-on-impact-of-airline-consoli
dation/
Conversely, when competition increases, fares tend to go down and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
service improves. For example:
Prices in Denver were once 5.6 percent higher than the
national average. When United's market share there dropped from
56 percent to 41 percent, fares plunged to levels almost 15
percent lower that the overall average.
In Seattle, where Delta is aggressively competing with
Alaska Airlines, average fares are $18 below the national
average and Alaska added service to compete.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Lack of Effective Competition Requires Action by Congress to
Restore Passenger Rights
The negative effects of unchecked consolidation in the airline
marketplace has been decades in the making and is unlikely to be solved
by a single piece of legislation, regulation, or the airlines
themselves. However, there are steps that Congress can take in the near
term to address the worst impacts of a lack of competition and restore
balance to the relationship between airlines and their passengers.
First, as the United 3411 incident vividly illustrated, airline
overbooking policies, and the resulting bumping practices, can lead to
shockingly negative outcomes for passengers. Overbooking is a vestige
of a time when consumers could make multiple reservations to maximize
their travel flexibility and cancel their flights without penalty. To
account for this, airlines began overbooking their flights to ensure
that they flew with as few empty seats as possible. Airlines were safe
in assuming that this practice would not actually overbook them as
their planes regularly flew at less than half capacity.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Hargreaves, Steve. ``Why planes used to fly half full,'' CNN
Money. April 29, 2015. Online: http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/29/news/
economy/planes-half-full/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fast forward to today and airlines no longer offer such
conveniences and customer service. Average load factors are regularly
above 80 percent \22\ and planes often reach full capacity. Yet, as the
Dao incident highlighted, overbooking continues to be a standard
operating practice in the industry. In 2016, because of airline
overbooking practices, more than 430,000 passengers were voluntarily
bumped. And while the industry likes to point to the low rates of
involuntary bumping, many of the 40,629 consumers who were
involuntarily bumped in 2016 almost certainly ended up losing hotel
reservations and missing weddings, funerals or important meetings.\23\
That first class ticket holders are typically last in line while those
like Dr. Dao who try to save money get chosen first for involuntary
bumping is just salt in the wound for the vast majority of consumers
who can't afford to fly luxury class.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Waitzman, William. ``No Room on the Plane: Why Airliners Are
So Crowded,'' Barron's. April 15, 2017. Online: http://www.barrons.com/
articles/no-room-on-the-plane-why-airliners-are-so-crowded-1492232384
\23\ United States Department of Transportation. Air Travel
Consumer Report. Pg. 35. April 2017. Online: https://
www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/resources/individuals/
aviation-consumer-protection/278481/2017-april-atcr.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Involuntary bumping should never occur in a competitive market.
Airlines should be competing for customers by offering enticing
compensation to encourage volunteers to take flights that aren't
overbooked. Airlines should be required to maintain interline
agreements with other airlines to ensure that paying passengers who are
bumped (whether voluntarily or involuntarily) make it to their final
destination with as little delay as possible. United's decision in the
wake of the Dao incident to offer up to $10,000 in compensation for
voluntary bumping is to be commended.\24\ Hopefully it won't take
another David Dao incident to get the other airlines to follow suit and
eliminate the need for involuntary bumping altogether. If the airlines
fail to heed the lessons of the United 3411, Congress and the
Department of Transportation (``DOT'') must step in to make sure that
overbooking never results in a paying passenger being violently removed
from a plane against her or his will when he or she poses no safety or
security risk. NCL supports, for example, Sen. Hassan's TICKETS Act of
2017, which would prohibit involuntary bumping after a passenger has
boarded, eliminate limits on compensation for involuntary bumping,
limit carrier overbooking practices, and require prominent disclosure
of carriers' overbook policies.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Wise, Alana. ``United to offer passengers up to $10,000 to
surrender seats,'' Reuters. April 27, 2017. Online: http://
www.reuters.com/article/us-ual-passenger-idUSKBN17T0HC
\25\ Online: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-
bill/947/cosponsors?q=%7B%
22search%22%3A%5B%22s+947%22%5D%7D&r=1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the power in the relationship between airlines and their
passengers can no longer lie solely with the airlines. It has been
well-documented that the airlines' Contracts of Carriage are
indecipherable legal tomes that are not read or understood by
consumers, but which nonetheless absolve the airlines of practically
all responsibility when things go wrong.\26\ They are in all senses
Contracts of Adhesion. This works against consumer protections. We
propose instead that consumers must be made aware in clear and
conspicuous language of their rights at the time of purchase, on their
tickets, and via posters at the gate and ticket counters. When airlines
abuse the trust their customers place in them, passengers need to
regain access to the legal system to hold airlines accountable for
their promises.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See, e.g., Testimony of William J. McGee Before the House
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Concerns ``Oversight of
U.S. Airlines Customer Service.'' Pg. 5. May 2, 2017. Online: https://
transportation.house.gov/uploadedfiles/2017-05-02_-_mcgee_testimony.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, the inexorable march of unbundling--charging for basic
necessities such as a guaranteed seat, a piece of luggage, or the need
to reschedule a flight--must be curtailed. Thanks to the rampant growth
in add-on fees, the cost of ``airfare'' is becoming an increasingly
irrelevant metric. Because the major network airlines are in relative
lockstep when it comes to ancillary fees like baggage, (Southwest alone
among the Big Four airlines doesn't charge cancellation or checked
luggage fees, to their credit) cancellation, standby and other
fees,\27\ competition among the large airlines to offer the best fare
is unlikely to have a significant impact on the overall cost of flying.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ United States of America et al v. U.S. Airways Group, Inc. and
AMR Corporation. Complaint. Pg. 3, Para. 1. August 13, 1013. Online:
https://www.justice.gov/atr/case-document/file/514531/download
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requiring airlines to justify the prices they set for ancillary
fees is a logical first step in reining in this trend. NCL--along with
10 other major national consumer and passenger rights organizations--is
a strong supporter of Senator Markey's and Senator Blumenthal's FAIR
Fees Act.\28\ The bill, which enjoyed bipartisan support in the Senate
Commerce Committee, would prohibit airlines from charging cancellation,
baggage or other ancillary fees that are ``unreasonable or
disproportionate to the costs incurred by the air carrier,'' under
standards to be set by the DOT. The bill would not re-regulate the
airlines, as the industry claims, but would remedy a systemic violation
of the free market system that has been pointed out repeatedly by both
DOT and Department of Justice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ National Consumers League et al. ``Consumer group letter to
Sens. McConnell and Reid on FAIR Fees Act,'' April 5, 2016. Online:
http://www.nclnet.org/letter_fairfees#_edn9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fourth, consumers must once again have the ability to compare
apples to apples when it comes to finding the best deal for their
desired flights. The growth in online travel agents (``OTAs'') in the
1990s was a key driver in reducing the cost of flying because they for
the first time enabled flyers to easily compare fare and schedule
information across various airlines and choose the best deal for their
needs. Unfortunately, as ancillary fees have exploded, it has become
increasingly difficult for consumers to compare true cost of flying
from point A to point B. This is, in a word, anti-competitive.
Under the Obama Administration, the DOT initiated a proceeding to
investigate whether airlines should be required to provide ancillary
fee information to OTAs and metasearch websites. Unfortunately,
Transportation Secretary Chao has put an indefinite hold on that
proceeding.\29\ Consumers should be able to input their specific
requirements in a travel search engine (e.g., traveling from Washington
to Chicago with one checked bag, bringing a pet, need extra legroom)
and get an accurate listing of the costs for flying on various
airlines. Given DOT's likely inaction without Congressional mandate, we
would ask this committee to instruct DOT to promulgate rules requiring
airlines to provide schedule, fare, and ancillary fee data to OTAs and
metasearch sites on an open and non-discriminatory basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Jansen, Bart. ``DOT to stop collecting comment on airfare, fee
proposals,'' USA TODAY. March 2, 2017. Online: https://
www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/todayinthesky/2017/03/02/airline-
fees/98654914/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fifth, the DOT should seek to strengthen its consumer protection
policies to match or exceed those that are available to consumers in
the European Union (``EU''). Under current law, airline passengers in
the EU enjoy substantially stronger consumer protections. For example,
for flights originating in the EU (including flights operated by a U.S.
carrier), when a flight is delayed passengers are entitled to up to
€600 in compensation, plus meals and refreshments, hotel
accommodations, transport to and from the hotel.\30\ By comparison,
under U.S. law, airlines are under no obligation to offer compensation
for delays, even when the delay is due to factors within the airline's
control.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on
compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied
boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing
Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (Text with EEA relevance)--Commission
Statement. Online: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/
?qid=1476179175834&uri=CELEX:32004R0261
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, Congress should pass a comprehensive Passenger Bill of
Rights addressing these and other pressing consumer protection
priorities, such as minimum seat size standards. Such action would be
an important step in addressing the significant imbalance of power that
exists between consumers and the airlines.
In conclusion, I would like to again emphasize the urgent need for
Congress to take action to address the lack of competition that
inhibits free market forces from working effectively to discipline the
airlines' unconscionable treatment of their customers. It should not
require millions of views of a video of a passenger being assaulted on
an airplane to galvanize Congress into taking action. Consumers have
spoken and they are demanding stronger protections from abuses by the
airline industry. American consumers desperately need members of the
Senate Commerce Committee to be in their corner, to protect and promote
consumer rights and protections and to restore some semblance of
balance to airline passengers' relationships to the carriers.
Chairman Blunt, Ranking Member Cantwell and members of the
subcommittee, I appreciate your including the consumer perspective in
this hearing. I look forward to answering your questions.
Thank you.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Ms. Greenberg.
There'll be a number of members here, and we'll try to keep
our question time to 5 minutes in the order that people came to
the Committee, with the exception of the Chairman. If he shows
up, we'll give him the same courtesy we gave the Ranking Member
when he was here.
Mr. Kirby, what kind of flexibility do your gate agents and
your flight attendants have in terms of trying to deal with
overbooking? And while you're dealing with that, it's my
understanding, even in the normal rules, that nobody made an
offer that was the maximum offer that a passenger could be
offered under those rules?
Mr. Kirby. Thank you, Senator. First, this situation was
not because of overbooking. As most of our oversell situations
occur for operational reasons, weight restrictions due to
weather are the most common, where we can't take off with a
full load of passengers or land with a full load of passengers.
In this particular situation, our employees are authorized to
go up to a certain limit, and they concluded on the airplane
that no one was going to go even at that limit. So it's not
clear why they didn't go all the way to the limit.
But what we have done and one of the clear findings from
this is we need to give our employees more tools and more
flexibility. That's why by going up to $10,000 and by creating
this alternative travel desk that can get people to different
destinations that might be close to their home, we really
believe that we're going to be able to drive our involuntary
denied boardings close to zero, and that's one of our goals, is
to get involuntary denied boardings close to zero, where we can
accommodate all the customers in a way that customers view as a
win-win solution.
Senator Blunt. Did you say that more people are taken off
planes or not put on planes because of weight and safety issues
than that you sold more seats?
Mr. Kirby. Yes, sir. The vast majority of our involuntary
denied boardings--at United, about two-thirds of our
involuntary denied boardings come from operational issues,
usually weight restrictions for weather or an aircraft swap,
which is often because of maintenance or because of weather,
where the airplane couldn't arrive at the destination in time
to take the flight. Those operational issues, where you have to
take 20 or 30 passengers off an airplane, are where we have
involuntary denied boardings.
Overbooking usually has one to two passengers that are over
the limit, and, generally speaking, we can get someone to
volunteer by giving them alternative compensation and
alternative travel arrangements. In the vast majority of those
cases, we can get a customer that volunteers, and we view that
as a win-win, that if a customer is willing to accept the
alternative compensation, we've left a customer satisfied.
Senator Blunt. Commissioner Evans, you said that what
happened with the flight that Dr. Dao was on was not in
accordance with your guidelines for the law enforcement or the
police officials. How do you categorize, by the way, the people
that do this job for you at the airport?
Ms. Evans. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Blunt. Push your button and turn your mike on, and
let me sure I've got this right. How do we refer to the people
that got on the plane?
Ms. Evans. They are referred to as aviation security
officers. They are non-sworn, non-armed security personnel.
Their primary responsibility is to enforce the Federal security
laws, so, you know, alarmed doors. They make sure that people
who are in certain areas of the airport have the proper badge.
They patrol the perimeters to make sure----
Senator Blunt. Why do you think they didn't comport to what
you say your procedures were?
Ms. Evans. You know, the details of exactly what was said
is being thoroughly investigated by the Inspector General. In
terms of what they were thinking or why they did what they did,
I have to wait for the findings of that report to know. I
honestly don't know at this point why they----
Senator Blunt. Do you think it's a lack of training?
Ms. Evans. We certainly will enhance our training. I think
that it's such an infrequent event. It really isn't ever an
event. We can't actually find another instance. It's so
infrequent for, in particular, those officers. Normally, it is
Chicago police who boards the plane. We have made it clear in
the future that those aviation security officers will not board
the plane. They are to wait for Chicago police.
We've had--you know, we have six and a half million
passengers a month who go through O'Hare--six and a half
million a month. So this is a very rare occurrence. There's no
question that training for such an infrequent event needs to be
enhanced because of the severity of it. And, certainly, the
directives need to be crystal clear.
Senator Blunt. Ms. Nelson, just one quick question here,
and you will have to be concise or I'll violate my own rule to
try to keep us to our 5 minutes. And I may have to ask it in a
different round, but my question will be: Both United and
Commissioner Evans suggest that people aren't going to get on
planes anymore except with great--let's see, one phrase was
great physical risk. What does that do if you're on the plane
to your ability to deal with a passenger who doesn't want to be
dealt with?
Ms. Nelson. Well, if we are on the plane and someone
doesn't want to be dealt with, we have to advocate through the
flight deck that we have a security concern, and in those
cases, we should be having assistance from law enforcement. Or
there are other tools that the airline can use, and we would be
working together as a team with the flight deck, with the
ground service coordinators, and it may be that the entire
plane needs to be deplaned. So these are some of the tools that
we have today to be able to deal with that. But we do need the
assistance of law enforcement when it is a safety or security
issue.
Senator Blunt. We'll see how this goes and see if I need to
come back to this topic later.
Ms. Cantwell?
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I listened to the testimony across the board, and I just
want you to know that nobody has fought harder during the time
that Wall Street prices drove fuel for airlines up, quadrupling
and costing us. So we were there, and many people came and
participated in those press conferences on what it was doing to
the industry.
I was also there when, last year, or 2 years ago, we put an
FAA bill together and we didn't give flight attendants the same
rest time as pilots. We should correct that this time and make
sure that there is parity.
So I understand the larger challenges to the airline
industry. But it is still no excuse for dehumanizing the
aspects of passenger travel and just making them part of
someone's business plan, and we have to come back and look at
the stress that is being caused in the system as we have
deregulated and put this in this game of monopoly but not
giving the passengers a fair end of the stick.
So I do want to get to you, Ms. Greenberg, about what you
think is in the Passenger Bill of Rights, because I have my own
ideas about what should be in a Passenger Bill of Rights.
But, Mr. Kirby, I just want to make sure I understood you
correctly. Are you saying that Mr. Dao's flight was not an
overbooked flight?
Mr. Kirby. No, ma'am. His flight was overbooked by one, but
we had a customer compensated and removed from the flight
before boarding. The situation with Mr. Dao was not caused by
overbooking. It was caused by putting four crew members on the
airplane after the flight was already boarded, policies that
we've changed so it can never happen again.
Senator Cantwell. What do you consider that, putting four
crew members on a flight?
Mr. Kirby. Well, in this case, it was just wrong. We
booked----
Senator Cantwell. I think it's your definition of
overbooking that was wrong. So you're parsing words here, which
does not give me the faith that you fully understand the
severity of this situation. By that, I mean that the airlines
are treating passengers as an algorithm. They're part of a
computer-based system where when you want to take someone off
the flight, you go to the person, as in Mr. Dao's case, who
doesn't have a frequent flyer, paid the lowest fare, checked in
at the last boarding time, so you basically are picking by
algorithms who you want to kick off of a flight.
And to now think that you would say that overbooking here
at this hearing this morning does not include your crew
members--you have to compensate for the traveling of your crew
members. But you can't, then, get an exemption on, oh, well,
that's not overbooking. So I'm really befuddled by the fact
that you're parsing words this morning in a way that makes me
think that--you know, this is what's going to end up in a
Passenger Bill of Rights. We're going to tell you how you can
and can't operate to protect consumers and the traveling
public. We are not going to turn them into an algorithm with
the cheapest purchased ticket is going to now get booted off
because you're going to continue to communicate this way.
Mr. Kirby. Ma'am, I'm sorry if I'm not communicating well.
We do use the term, overbooking, to mean very specific--where
the airline is selling more seats than there are on the
airplane, and----
Senator Cantwell. And you should compensate in a travel
plan where your crew is part of that and stop using them as an
addition to the overbooking. You need to compensate for them
before.
Mr. Kirby. Yes, ma'am. We----
Senator Cantwell. If you want us to legislate that, we
will, because we're not going to run into the same situation.
Mr. Kirby. Yes, ma'am. We do do that. In this case, what
happened was their previous flight got canceled. That's why
they were being booked at the last minute. When we normally
travel crews, we book them and take a seat out of inventory.
Senator Cantwell. Ms. Greenberg, you mentioned this. What
do you think we should do about this issue as it relates to the
fact that I think they still want a little bit of room here on
changes in flights and schedules and getting crew to a certain
location? What do you think we should do about that?
Ms. Greenberg. Well, I think the issue of overbooking these
days is really a thing of the past. It ought to be, because
every passenger who pays has paid up front for their ticket.
There should be no instances when you paid for a ticket and
you're sitting in your seat and you're taken off the flight. We
don't understand why that needs to happen, since the airlines--
in the old days, the airlines were out of pocket because people
would make reservations on five different flights and wouldn't
show up for perhaps four of them. But now the airlines have
that money in the bank, and so we think that they ought to
accommodate--be accommodating the fact that all those seats are
paid for, and I don't understand why we continue to have this
problem with overbooking and why airlines continue to overbook
and are pocketing those profits sometimes twice over.
Senator Cantwell. And what do you think--any of the
panelists--who should be making these decisions in the context
of--now, we're hearing from the airlines that they're no longer
going to do this, that they're going to compensate people in a
range of, you know, fees. But my question is who's going to
decide that, and who's going to make these decisions along the
way? I just feel like the airlines are basically leaving too
much of this to interpretation at the gate level, and we need
to build a culture within the airlines who are going to have
management who are responsible for these kinds of decisions and
actions, and not just pushing it down either to the flight
attendants or the gate people to enforce.
Ms. Greenberg. One of the things we mentioned in our
testimony is we would like to see a European Union style
system, where you're guaranteed a certain level of compensation
for a flight that's canceled, for a flight that's delayed,
depending on how long the flight is delayed and the distance
that you're traveling. European consumers have far more robust
consumer protections than we do in the United States, and we
don't understand why that should be.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My time is up.
Senator Blunt. Senator Wicker?
STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER F. WICKER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI
Senator Wicker. Mr. Kirby, since this incident in Chicago,
how has business been at United?
Mr. Kirby. Well, sir, while this was a horrible incident
that was terrible and shameful to all of us at United, for the
most part, everything else at United is going really well.
That's one of the things that is also disappointing to us,
because, operationally, United is running the best airline in
history that we've ever run.
Senator Wicker. Well, how are your boardings? Have you had
as many bookings as before?
Mr. Kirby. Sir, it's impossible for us to see in the data--
--
Senator Wicker. Well, how has your stock been in the last 3
weeks since this incident?
Mr. Kirby. Our stock initially went down, but has recovered
since. But our----
Senator Wicker. In fact, it's higher now than it was the
day of the incident. Is that correct?
Mr. Kirby. Yes, sir.
Senator Wicker. You know, I think--what do you think that
says? Well, let me try----
Mr. Kirby. The stock price?
Senator Wicker. I think it says that you've got the
passenger where you want him. I think it says there's not
enough competition in the industry, and people that had to fly
with United before still have to fly with United if they want
to get somewhere, and there really is no choice, so business is
really back where it was.
I remarked to my wife when I saw on TV how much the stock
had dropped if--my disclosing it--if I weren't a public
official, I would have seen it as a buying opportunity, because
it was obvious to me that the passenger has nowhere else to go,
and so it's not surprising to me that your stock has returned,
because, basically, your boardings are going to be about the
same. If the traveling public wants to boycott United as a
result of this outrageous incident, which you say you've
corrected, they really don't have a way to boycott you, do
they?
Mr. Kirby. Sir, there are lots of competition, and they
have a way to boycott us. I would like to think that our stock
recovery is because we truly are going to fix the airline and
make customers at the center of everything we do, and that
commitment that we've adopted is going to help us not only
improve for customers, but it's going to help us improve for
our employees, and that will lead to better results for the
shareholders. We absolutely are committed to improving, and our
customers do have choices. There's great competition in the
U.S. airline industry.
Senator Wicker. Ms. Greenberg, what is your view on that
issue?
Ms. Greenberg. We've got an extremely concentrated industry
with 80 percent of flights across the country being controlled
by four airlines.
Senator Wicker. If I fly out of Chicago, in many instances
there's no place for me to go if I want to boycott United
because of this. Is that correct?
Ms. Greenberg. That's correct. Just to give you a statistic
on that, at 40 of the largest 100 airports, a single airline
controls a majority of the market. At a staggering 93 of the
top 100 airports, one or two airlines control a majority of
seats, an increase from 78 airports in 1995.
Senator Wicker. How are we doing on people with
disabilities, particularly disabled veterans? It's my
understanding that in 2015, more than 30,000 passengers filed
disability-related complaints with the airlines, and in 2016,
862 complained directly to the Federal Government. In 2015, 944
complained directly to the Federal Government.
Ms. Pinkerton, how are the airlines doing in that regard?
Ms. Pinkerton. That's an issue that we have paid attention
to in the last couple of years. In fact, the last FAA extension
bill that this committee passed had two provisions relating to
access for the disabled. I sat in on the first issue that was
mandated, and that was a GAO study to look at how carriers are
training our crew with respect to how they handle wheelchairs,
damaged wheelchairs, et cetera. From that, DOT created new
training that carriers incorporated into their own training.
The second issue was that you all required a rulemaking,
and that rulemaking got underway. It was a negotiated
rulemaking. Carriers sat down with the disabled community and
DOT and engaged in a negotiated rulemaking. We came up with
long-term and short-term solutions. There was agreement. For
the long term, we agreed on a larger lavatory for single aisle
planes. In the short term, there were three things. It was,
again, relating to training and better information, both for
the disabled community about what their rights were, but also
for airline crew. Also, there is a label that will be put on
planes that have an international standard that is like a Good
Housekeeping seal of approval if they meet certain criteria.
And with respect--I know Senator Cantwell is not here, but
she mentioned the paralyzed veterans. We have been ongoing,
having a dialog with them. They've asked us not to talk
publicly yet about what agreements we are coming to. But I can
tell you that those conversations are progressing. So my
response is that we recognize that this is an issue, and we've
been taking it seriously, working on it, and I think that
things are changing.
But if I can, please, take the opportunity to respond to
your concerns about competition, because it's a narrative I've
heard. I think the reason the narrative about there's no
competition doesn't work is because we've got proof that
there's competition, and the proof is--and not according to a
Wall Street Journal article, but according to the Bureau of
Transportation Statistics, fares are lower today than they ever
have been, as a percentage of disposable income. They're down
20 percent from 1995.
We've gotten more seats added. Small--I think you missed my
opening statement, but small and non-hub airports have actually
seen increases in seats. We've added a net of 54 new
destinations. And you were talking about customer service
earlier. The independent studies that J.D. Power and the
American Consumer Satisfaction Index--I think one of the
reasons maybe you haven't seen the stock change is because
people realize that what was a completely unacceptable event
and should never happen again, was extremely rare and is not
indicative of the things that our employees serve to the
traveling public in the 2.2 million passengers and 27,000
flights we fly every day.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Klobuchar?
STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA
Senator Klobuchar. Well, thank you very much, Chairman
Blunt, as well as Senator Cantwell, for holding this important
hearing. I had asked for this hearing, as did many other
Members that are here today because I think everyone was
outraged by this video--deeply disturbing video of Dr. Dao
being dragged off this plane. I think most everyone in this
room, including the airlines executives, now agree that this
should never have happened, and it was a result of a series of
failures and some flawed policies.
Of course, the focus of today's hearing is on not just the
single incident, but to make sure that passengers are treated
fairly and with the respect they deserve. This has been a focus
that I've had for quite a while with the Passenger Bill of
Rights that I pushed hard for and some of these other safety
and cost measures that we've worked on.
I guess I'd start with you here, Mr. Kirby. Clearly, one of
the failures during this flight incident was not offering
passengers greater compensation to volunteer to be bumped when
there were so many overbookings on the flight. Your report
states that the gate agent never offered more than $800, and I
understand United's new policy allows volunteers to be
compensated up to $10,000. Will front line employees be
authorized to offer up to this level of compensation in all
cases, or are there going to be restrictions?
Mr. Kirby. Thank you, ma'am, for the question. Gate agents
will have a certain limit, and then it escalates all the way up
to $10,000, but it does require an escalation of increasing
levels of management, although the gate agents' limits are
greatly increased from where they were before.
One of the other things we're doing is also having annual
recurrent training to help gate agents with this process and
with deescalating situations as well. One of our findings that
was in our report is we didn't do an adequate job of giving
recurrent training to gate agents so that they were able to
deal with this really difficult situation, and our practices on
going to the top of the limit were inconsistent, and this
training, we hope, will get us to consistency with all of our
employees.
Senator Klobuchar. You mentioned in your testimony that
United has made adjustments to its overbooking policies, that
there will be a reduction in overbookings on flights that
historically have experienced lower volunteer rates, smaller
aircraft, last flights of the day. I want to make sure this
will have a real impact. How significant will the reduction in
overbooking be for these flights, and will United continue
overbooking at the same rates for flights outside of these
categories?
Mr. Kirby. Thank you again, ma'am. The kinds of reductions
we talked about--I'll give you one simple statistic. For 50-
seat regional jets, for example, which is where we tend to have
the highest problems, because if you're over by one, it's 2
percent. If you have a 200-seat airplane, you're over by half a
percent. It's harder to get a volunteer with fewer passengers.
So on 50-seat regional jets, about 50 percent of our
flights before were overbooked by one--could be overbooked by
one, and those have now gone to zero. So on small regional
jets, just as a data point, it's about a reduction of half of
the flights. And as to the rest of the system, we will be
lowering it across the board, partly because, you know, the
cost of a denied boarding is now much higher, now that we'll go
up to $10,000.
Senator Klobuchar. All right. I have about two minutes
left, and I have two questions.
So I'll start with you, Ms. Greenberg. In your testimony,
you call airlines' Contracts of Carriage indecipherable legal
tomes. I like that. Do you have a suggestion for how to make it
easier for airline passengers to understand their rights?
Ms. Greenberg. We believe that there ought to be European
style posters around letting consumers know what their rights
are. We believe there ought to be a list of compensation,
required compensation if you're bumped involuntarily, if your
flight is canceled, if your flight is delayed after a certain
amount of time. Those are critical rights and protections
American consumers are not receiving.
Senator Klobuchar. Do you mean those would be things that
would be required to be put up in the airports?
Ms. Greenberg. Right, and that's what you see in the
European Union, and we want those kinds of protections and
transparency and information for consumers in the United States
as well.
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much.
Ms. Nelson, thanks for the work from the flight attendants
on human trafficking in the bill that we passed together. In
your testimony, you discussed disturbing reports of verbal and
physical assaults on flight attendants in the wake of some of
these incidences. You say that flight attendants can get caught
in the middle of an us-against-them mentality. This can make it
harder for them to perform their duties. What additional
support, outside of the training that Mr. Kirby mentioned, do
you think that airlines should give flight attendants to ensure
that they can do their job safely and effectively?
Ms. Nelson. Thank you very much, Senator. One of the issues
that we have seen over the last several years is that the FAA
has moved from instruction on enforce to inform passengers, and
this has put us in a quagmire of doing our safety compliance
checks but not really having the ability to enforce those so
that some people are able to sort of get away with not
following the safety policies that could put everyone else in
danger, and others are not. This is already a problem.
But the biggest problem that we see is that we do not have
the staffing that we used to have prior to September 11, 2001.
So as we have more passengers and capacity has been cut, and so
our planes are fuller than ever, we do not have enough flight
attendants to be able to get to situations and deescalate,
because, frankly, the nation's flight attendants do an
incredible job of deescalating conflict every single day with
all of these flights getting out without incident, and we are
seeing that this is something that we have to deal with every
single day. So if there were more of us to be able to do that
work, we could do it more effectively.
We also see that at the gate, we are now--because there are
minimums on the plane and there are minimums at the gate, we
can't effectively communicate with each other. Also, we have
problems coming down to the airplane door more often because we
do not have the staffing at the gate. The gate agents are not
catching the things that they would normally be catching in the
gate area, and that, then, is creating conflict on the plane.
So these are some of the issues that we are facing, and we
would like to be a part of implementing the policies to make
sure that they're done in a way that works on the plane.
Senator Klobuchar. All right. Thank you very much.
Senator Blunt. Senator Blumenthal?
STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you all for being here today. My view is that today's
hearing is the beginning rather than the end of Congress'
oversight role in protecting not only consumers, but also
people who work on airlines.
I just want to begin, Ms. Nelson, with a question to you
and thank you and everybody who works with you, everybody who
serves on our planes, for their immense service and, often,
sacrifice to the airlines for whom they work and the customers
who rely on them and the many heroic acts that you mentioned in
your testimony.
Can you give me some assessment of air quality in that
cabin? Because a lot of people get on the plane, and they have
no concept of what they may be encountering.
Ms. Nelson. This has been an issue for our union for three
decades. We worked to get smoking off the planes. We worked to
decrease the spraying of pesticides so that people can have
clean air. But we have an issue that's still remaining, and
that is the bleed air that is bled off the engines into the
cabin can become contaminated and can bring poisons or toxins
which will affect the crew, oftentimes at a higher rate because
they are working harder, so their heart is pumping harder.
But this has caused from basic illness and feeling fatigued
and having headaches to long-term effects of memory loss and
inability to function. We have had crews who have actually
become completely incapacitated because of this, and it's an
issue that needs to be addressed. We thank you for working on
this. We need to identify when these things are happening with
sensors on the plane and have a data collection so that we can
scientifically look at the problem and address it in a way to
make sure that everyone is safe.
Senator Blumenthal. These problems affect people who ride
the planes as customers as well as the airline attendants who
work on them.
Ms. Nelson. Our work space is your travel space, and we
want it to be safe, healthy, and secure for all of us.
Senator Blumenthal. And the only difference is that the
airline attendants spend more time and are exercising more so
they're breathing more deeply, but it affects the passengers as
well.
Ms. Nelson. Absolutely. And let's not forget about the
pilots who flying the plane, too.
Senator Blumenthal. And the pilots, and probably more than
anyone, children who are flying, because they have smaller
bodies, smaller lungs, and so what they breathe at the same
concentration is likely to affect them more.
Ms. Nelson. Yes.
Senator Blumenthal. Let me just say to all of you in the
short time I have that I am working on a Passenger Bill of
Rights that will expand the current rights that are in our
statutes. One thing is clear to me from this United episode and
from countless other instances. Now there's the capacity for
them to go viral, but that's only spreading more information
about them. They've always occurred, and they will not be
corrected by the airlines themselves acting voluntarily. We
know that from history.
So the actions by United that have been done so far, which
are only voluntary, and by other airlines, raising compensation
levels, for example, or providing limits on the length of time
airlines can keep passengers stuck on a tarmac, refunds for
lost or damaged bags--many of those kinds of efforts are
completely inadequate, and, again, many are completely
voluntary. Many ought to be made a matter of statute, and they
ought to be expanded, because consumers need real rights, and
that's why I will introduce a Passengers Bill of Rights as this
committee considers an FAA reauthorization bill in the coming
weeks.
I am open to working with you. I've outlined some of the
provisions, which are raising compensation levels from the
present cap of $1,350 to multiples of the ticket price when
passengers are bumped. I understand the airlines' argument that
it has to overbook for profits, but they also have to bear the
financial burden that, right now, is passed to consumers when
those flights are overbooked and the consumers are bumped.
So I will propose legislation that will stop the kind of
bumping we see now and will provide for greater compensation
for passengers, will prohibit taking passengers off planes
involuntarily, and the use of law enforcement for that purpose,
along with other measures, compensation for delays and
cancellations, a right of action by individuals against
airlines with a potential for punitive damages, which will send
a financial as well as moral message, and other steps providing
for greater disclosure of fees and charges in connection with
bags, checked bags, carry-on luggage, and so forth and so on.
That's a rough and incomplete outline, and I'd like the
commitment of this panel that you will work with me on this
endeavor. Is there anyone who would object to any of these
ideas, or at least working with me on them?
Ms. Nelson. We'd be happy to work with you, Senator.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
Ms. Pinkerton. We'd be happy to work with you, Senator. I
would just note that many of the things that you've outlined,
whether it's eliminating the cap on compensation, saying we're
not going to take a person off of the plane, not calling law
enforcement--all of those things are things that carriers have
said voluntarily they're willing to do, and they are doing
those and implementing those today.
Senator Blumenthal. My time has expired.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal.
Senator Thune?
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me thank you and
Senator Cantwell for holding this hearing today, and it's
particularly timely. Unfortunately, there have been recent
incidents that have involved airline passengers going way
beyond even what seasoned travelers have ever seen, and,
obviously, what we saw with the video of the United Express
flight in Chicago three weeks ago really was shocking.
If there's anything positive in all this, I think it's the
fact that many airlines seem to be changing policies as a
result of some internal reviews and some self-examination, and
that's exactly what should happen. I hope all of the attention
that is now being paid to the treatment of passengers will lead
to long-term and meaningful improvements in the passenger
experience. If not, there's going to be increasing interest on
this Committee and in the Congress.
I also want to say at the same time I think it's--I hope,
because it's really important, that passenger frustrations
don't lead to unnecessary confrontation. Safety is still the
paramount consideration in air travel, and the current level of
safety is something of which we all can be proud. We don't want
anyone to resist lawful and appropriate instructions from
airline personnel or others that might impact that laudable
record, and I think everybody probably would agree that
sometimes a little more patience and understanding would go a
long way.
Commissioner Evans, before the recent United Airlines
incident, how common was it for your department's aviation
security officers to board an aircraft, and what types of
situations were they typically dealing with?
Ms. Evans. It is very rare for the aviation security
officers. Normally, Chicago police make those responses. We are
correcting that. This was an aberrant situation. We don't know
of anything similar in our records. Most commonly, the
complaints that come are unruly passengers, someone who won't
obey the instruction of a flight crew or an altercation between
two passengers of some sort. That is the most common type of
disturbance that we get on an aircraft.
It's fairly rare--I commented earlier we have six and a
half million passengers a month through O'Hare. Total
dispatches for disturbances in a month is somewhere between 15
and 20, and on an aircraft, maybe four or five. So in total,
they're fairly rare, you know, a minuscule percentage, and they
have been extremely well handled in the past. So we're terribly
sorry that this one was not handled properly.
The Chairman. Mr. Kirby, that April 9 incident has had a
big impact, obviously, on United Airlines and, frankly, the
whole industry. How confident are you that the steps that you
and your company are taking will actually prevent another
incident like that from occurring?
Mr. Kirby. Thank you, Senator. I'm highly confident that
the situation that occurred here just can't happen again,
because the policies wouldn't allow it to happen again. But
we're going to take it beyond that--and we've used this to be
really a watershed moment for United Airlines--and to go beyond
just preventing this from happening again and to truly put the
customer at the center of everything we do and hope that this
is going to have a silver lining of actually making us--and we
believe it will--make us a better airline today than we were
before by that change of focus.
The Chairman. There are always--and we know this--factors
that are outside of your control. But consumers do have an
expectation that they'll get what they pay for when they buy an
airline ticket. So as a follow up to that question, what steps
is United taking to more generally improve what can sometimes
be a stressful travel experience for your customers, especially
in light of the knowledge that outside factors can upset the
normal operating plan?
Mr. Kirby. Yes, sir. It is true that travel can be a
stressful experience. At United Airlines, while we had a
terrible incident last month, we are proud of the progress
we've made in running a better operation. In 2016, we set new
all-time records, and in 2017, we're setting new records. In
the month of April, we went 145 hours without a single flight
cancellation. That's over 10,000 flights around the world
without a single cancellation.
Our employees are delivering just phenomenal customer
service. I can't walk around the City of Chicago without
hearing from customers about what a great job our flight
attendants and gate agents are doing. We're back to growing.
We're growing 6 percent this summer, which creates more options
for our customers. We feel really good about the future.
But something like this should have never happened, and we
let our rules-based culture, which is appropriate for safety,
get in the way of common sense when it comes to customers, and
that's a change which is going to make things even better.
The Chairman. And it just seems like there ought to be an
operating plan in light of some of these contingencies and
outside factors that are maybe not frequent but certainly
occur.
Very quickly, Ms. Nelson, you and members of your--that are
on the front line of an industry that's seeing more and more
confrontation. So what are the possible consequences if
passengers start questioning or refusing instructions from
flight attendants, from your members?
Ms. Nelson. This could cause a safety problem for everyone
on board. Take, for example, the seatbelt sign, when flight
attendants are informing that you need to be in your seat when
the seatbelt sign is on. We saw recently the incredible
injuries on the flight where the airplane hit clear air
turbulence, and people were thrown through the plane. If you
are up, you can be injuring other people on the plane. So if
you're not following the instructions of the flight attendants,
it can cause harm to other people around.
We also have some very serious concerns about the
videotaping and broadcasting of crew movement and also showing,
frankly, the terrorists, the diversionary tactics that could be
used to divert crew from their safety and security functions
and also to divert crew from being able to instruct passengers
when we need help to contain a security concern. These are some
of our grave concerns, in addition to the fact that there is an
atmosphere out there right now that flight attendants are
facing that is just generally dangerous.
We have reports of people who have touched flight
attendants inappropriately, and when flight attendants have
told them to stop, they have said, ``What are you going to do,
drag me out of here?'' This is not OK. This is what they're
facing on the front lines. We need backing from the regulatory
agencies to say--to talk about the role that we have.
To Sally Greenberg's point about having placards in the
gate area, it needs to be reinforced to follow the crew member
instructions for your safety and security concerns, and we need
more staff to be able to handle these issues and deescalate the
situations, because the reality is when aviation workers across
the industry saw that video, we were horrified, because it's
not a representation of who we are, how we take care of our
passengers every single day, and how we care very deeply about
making this a good experience for the people in our care.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Chairman.
Senator Nelson?
Senator Nelson. And I think that is certainly a true
statement that you said, and if anyone wants to feel good about
an airline, watch the movie, ``Sully,'' about Captain
Sullenberger and the way that crew operated under extremely
dangerous circumstances, which is not a Hollywood made-up
movie. That was real life, and you saw those flight attendants
working with the captain, who's the last one to get off the
plane, the captain.
So, indeed, I want to shift gears a bit--and I know you've
been beat upon, Mr. Kirby, and, of course, people are upset
about all of this that's happened. But let's shift gears a bit.
Let's talk about things that make common sense. So in the past
month, I flew United, and I got to the airport at the appointed
time, and my flight was late, and I looked, and lo and behold,
on the board, there is an earlier flight that is going to my
destination, and it was late.
So I walked to that gate, and, in fact, they were loading
passengers, and, in fact, they had seats. So I said, ``I'm on
the next flight. I would like to go on this flight, if you have
seats,'' and they had seats, but said ``that would be $75
extra.'' Now, I was on official business, and I did not think
that was a good expenditure of Senate funds.
But it was a policy of the airline that made no sense. You
had seats--and, oh, by the way, on the next flight, which was
mine, you didn't have seats. So by me going on the earlier
flight, it would have opened up a seat for the later flight,
and yet I was, according to your policy, going to be required
to pay an additional $75. It's those kind of rules that--maybe
you have a reason for it, but it just doesn't make sense, and
it's not in your interest, either, because you need to
accommodate the traveling public.
I'll give you another example here. Major airlines,
including United, typically charge consumers $200 or more for
changing or canceling a domestic flight. Change fees for
international flights can run many hundreds of dollars. So now
it appears that United has introduced a new type of fare--basic
economy is what you call it--where no changes are allowed at
all, and in that case, consumers would lose the entire value of
the ticket. So when booking, the consumer typically receives
little notice of all these additional penalties.
So what's the correlation for you between change and
cancellation fees and the cost actually incurred by United?
Mr. Kirby. Well, Senator, thank you for your business, and
I apologize for the bad experience that you had on United. I
would say----
Senator Nelson. That's not a bad experience. That is a
policy that you all lost a seat that you could have filled on
an oversold flight.
Mr. Kirby. Yes, sir. I think, actually, our policy in those
situations where we have an off-schedule operation should have
let you get on the earlier flight, but I'll confirm that after
this hearing, what would have been the normal policy.
Our basic economy product, which you also referred to, is
one that--first, we try to clearly communicate to customers the
restrictions associated with that product, and the goal is to
offer low fares, and we're trying to offer our customers
choice. One of the great things in a deregulated environment is
we're offering our customers more choice, and for customers
that are willing to give up some of those restrictions and
accept the restrictions of no changeability, they get a lower
price, and we think that's good for consumers. So far, in our
tests, about 30 percent to 35 percent of customers are choosing
that lower fare, and 60 percent to 65 percent of customers are
choosing the regular economy fare, which costs more but comes
with more restrictions.
I recognize the frustration around change fees. It is part
of our view of what lets us offer low fares for leisure
customers that are bought in advance. We also offer fares that
are fully changeable and that come with no penalties, no
restrictions. They are more expensive. It is part of our
policies, and part of the rationale is by offering customers
choice and by offering them different products, we can let the
customer choose what is most appropriate for them, and it helps
us keep fares low.
Senator Nelson. Does it save you money?
Mr. Kirby. It's not a direct cost when somebody changes, if
that's the question. It does--it was about $900 million of
revenue at United Airlines in 2016.
Senator Nelson. Well, if it doesn't save you money, you may
want to put yourself in the place of the consumer. Things come
up. They need to change their flight. But it then becomes so
prohibitive that they can't, and, therefore, they're
inconvenienced, and if there's not a direct cost associated to
you that you're having to pay, you may want to think of--put
yourself in the shoes of the consumer.
Mr. Chairman, I know we've got lots of members, and I'm
going to stop. What I'd like to do is to insert for the record
for Mr. Kirby some questions about his IT systems, and then to
Ms. Pinkerton questions about airline Passenger Bill of Rights,
and to Ms. Pinkerton and Mr. Kirby questions about interline
agreements.
Senator Blunt. Every member will have a chance to submit
questions for the record.
Senator Inhofe?
STATEMENT OF HON. JIM INHOFE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Nelson, I was enjoying your comments. My daughter-in-
law is a retired flight attendant, and I've heard a lot of
things before, and I could probably add to a few things that
you said. You know, you hear a lot of negative things about the
industry, and it happens--maybe I'm biased, because American
has a huge presence, a huge footprint, in my state of Oklahoma,
in my City of Tulsa.
In fact, I've worked with them over the years when I was
Mayor of Tulsa when things would come up, and my experience
actually has been good in terms of their focusing on using
technology to swiftly inform consumers of any disruption to
their travel. They've actually invested millions of dollars in
airport terminals and all of these things. So there are some
things that are going on that have been good, in my experience.
Ms. Pinkerton, when we talk about the wish to change
things, are there any obstacles that airlines have in not being
able to do some of the things that we might be thinking they
could do? Are there obstacles out there that make it more
difficult to make changes?
Ms. Pinkerton. Well, I would note that the Mercatus Center
has said that the airline industry is the sixth most highly
regulated industry in the country. Some of those things are
safety regulations. I would say that even with some of the
safety regulations, though, the way they're implemented in kind
of a one-size-fits-all, whether that's the flight and duty rule
or the 1,500 hour rule, et cetera--I think that there are some
modifications that could be made so that there's not the
operational impact that we see from some of those rules.
But, really, the things that give us more pause, Senator,
are the economic rules of the industry, the things like full
fare advertising rule that tell us you can't advertise your
product--you have to advertise it all in. We're one of the few
industries that that's required of. And then, of course,
there's a push now to try to force us to do business with
certain people, for example, like Cheapo Air. There's a move
that says you have to give your fares and information to Cheapo
Air, and we'd like to be able to make those decisions ourselves
about who we do business with.
So it's things like that where we'd like to see less
government intervention. I think that a lot of these
rulemakings are well intentioned, but they end up tying our
hands and costing consumers more. We're all here talking about
the consumer, and I think one of the things the consumer really
values is the low fares that we've been able to bring to them
and, of course, more service. So, frankly, the more financially
stable we are and the more freedom we have to do our business,
we're going to be able to lower fares, we're going to be able
to add seats, we're going to be able to pay our employees more,
add more jobs, and those are things that we've been doing
within the last 6 years.
Senator Inhofe. You've got to make those considerations.
I've listened to a lot of really good ideas, I guess, expressed
by people that--and maybe through a Pilots Bill of Rights or
something.
But, you know, look, Mr. Kirby, at what you've done, and I
guess this question would be for you. The tragedy of that
flight--I mean, that's awful to see the pictures and the public
out there--there's a level of outrage that is kind of
unprecedented that I haven't seen before. But what you've done
in 30 days is pretty amazing. You've already settled a lawsuit.
You've increased the incentive for passengers to give up their
seats and a lot of other things.
Look, I've been around here a long time. Maybe we have
solutions here in government, but I don't recall any time that
we've been able to work as fast as you guys have in correcting
a problem. So I want to keep that in mind, and I don't know of
a lot of things that can be done. I am concerned--and I won't
ask you this. I won't ask you because I think it might be
unfair.
So I'll go back to Ms. Pinkerton. Do you think that a lot
of new Federal laws and regulations imposed as a response to
this incident could cause more issues than it would resolve?
Ms. Pinkerton. Well, I absolutely do. A one-size-fits-all
rulemaking approach doesn't work for this industry. We've seen
that time and time again with unintended consequences. The
tarmac delay rule ended up causing more cancellations so people
were more inconvenienced by it. I think what we've seen today
is that airlines recognize that we need to step up on customer
service, and we're willing to do that voluntarily.
Senator Inhofe. Well, it's to your benefit.
Ms. Pinkerton. Absolutely.
Senator Inhofe. I mean, this idea that you have to be
forced to do these things--you're the guy that pays for all
this stuff, and I think everyone would agree to that. When I
was Chairman for a number of years of a committee called the
Environment and Public Works, where all the over-regulations
came--and most of them were EPA regulations.
So what we tried to do was to say any regulation that comes
along--you've got to put a price tag on it. It's going to cost
something. And I would admonish my friends if they're involved
in the various proposed legislation to maybe do the same thing.
You can make these changes, but it's going to cost--you said
just a minute ago the cost of the ticket--that's a huge thing,
and everything that I've heard suggested is going to impact
that. So I think it might be a good idea for anyone who comes
up with these good ideas to give credible evidence as to how
that's going to affect the most important aspect, in my
opinion, to individuals, and that is the cost of their ticket.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Senator.
We're going to work right on through these questions. If
anybody needs to take a break on the panel, as long as you take
those breaks one at a time, we could probably get to you by the
time you get back.
Senator Markey?
STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS
Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Blunt. My experience is that this would be a good
time for everybody to take a break.
[Laughter.]
Senator Markey. I hear you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. But
for all the other passengers, strap in your seatbelts. The ride
could still be rocky before the end of this hearing.
So airline fees are as high as the planes passengers are
flying on, and it's time to stop their rapid ascent. Today,
several airlines charge $200 change and cancellation fees,
which may be greater than the value of the original ticket.
That's on top of charging as much as $25 for the first checked
bag, $35 for the second bag. That's $120 to do a round trip
with two bags. Last year, airlines reaped in $4.2 billion in
baggage fees and $2.9 billion in change and cancellation fees.
That's $7.1 billion in one year.
So passengers are getting tipped upside down at the ticket
counter, and they deserve relief from these excessive fees.
Regrettably, the fee epidemic is only growing. Some airlines
are now charging passengers for carry-on bags, to print
boarding passes, and for blankets to keep their children warm.
That is outrageous. The airlines seem to have replaced the
customer service counter with a customer suffering counter as
they get the bill for each one of these things which they
should expect to come with flying.
Passenger frustration with lack of choice and outrageous
fees continues to rise. That's why I reintroduced the Fair Fees
Act, which ensures that airline fees are reasonable and
proportional to the cost of the services provided, and Senator
Blumenthal and I are introducing that bill. The Fair Fees Act
puts a stop to fee gouging and will help ensure passengers are
flying the fair and friendly skies. My bill will finally ground
these ridiculous fees.
Ms. Greenberg, is it reasonable to charge passengers $200
to change or cancel their flight, even if the passenger changes
their reservations well in advance, even if the passenger
purchased the ticket for less than $200, even if the airline
resells the seat to another passenger at an even higher price?
Is that fair?
Ms. Greenberg. Senator Markey, we think that these airline
cancellation fees are outrageous. They don't reflect the cost
to the airlines of accommodating reservation changes or
cancellations. They actually--as you indicated, they can resell
the seat, perhaps much more expensively than the original cost.
In 2016, they brought in nearly $3 billion in revenue.
Things happen. People's plans change. Somebody might get
sick. You're stuck, and there is no forgiveness for those fees.
I've experienced it. Consumers let us know how frustrated they
are about this, and we support your bill, because we think
there ought to be a relationship between the cost of rebooking
somebody and what the passenger is expected to pay as a result
of a change of plans.
Senator Markey. Ms. Greenberg, this is a standard carry-on
bag. Millions of passengers all across the country are forced
to jam a week's worth of clothing into this bag to avoid paying
an additional $120 if the bags get checked. Is it really
reasonable, Ms. Greenberg, to charge a person $120 to check the
bags that are going back and forth on a week's trip just
because they can't jam it all into one bag?
Ms. Greenberg. No. We agree with the Southwest Airline
president who, several days ago in the House hearing, said,
``We think if passengers travel, they may want to carry their
clothes along, and we ought not charge them for checking a
bag.''
Senator Markey. So some airlines claim they charge bag fees
because checked bags are optional. Ms. Greenberg, is this
carry-on bag a viable option for a passenger traveling from
Boston to L.A. for a week?
Ms. Greenberg. Of course not. You have to carry your
belongings, your toiletries, and so, no, you have no choice but
to check a bag.
Senator Markey. So the bottom line is that these fees are
just not reasonable, and I'm going to fight very hard to make
sure that these fees are checked in this FAA authorization bill
which we will be considering.
Ms. Nelson, could you just give us your view on mobile
devices on planes in the passenger cabin? Could you tell us how
the flight attendants view that?
Ms. Nelson. Yes. The flight attendants' view voice
conversations in the cabin the same as the public views them.
We do not want them on the plane. This will create more
conflict on the plane, and the DOT--or through the FAA
reauthorization bill, we should put the final nail in the
coffin on this and make sure that there are no voice calls in
the cabin. We have very serious security concerns, and we also
have just peace of flight concerns.
Senator Markey. Thank you. I agree with you 100 percent.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Blunt. Senator Hassan?
STATEMENT OF HON. MAGGIE HASSAN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE
Senator Hassan. Well, thank you, Mr. Chair and our Ranking
Member.
And thank you to the panelists here. I know it has been a
long morning.
Look, we all agree that the recent incident in which United
forcibly removed a passenger from the aircraft was
unacceptable, and so what I think a lot of us are trying to do
is now turn to next steps. I do want to acknowledge that United
and other airlines have begun efforts to make reforms so that
this kind of treatment of customers never happens again, and I
thank you, Mr. Kirby, for that.
But to the point some of the other Senators have raised,
this incident does not represent just a one-time occurrence or
a one-time mistreatment. Constituents all across the granite
state, and I'm sure many individuals in this very room, have
experienced routinely unpleasant flying episodes on one of the
major airlines. In fact, just last year, the Department of
Transportation, which tracks incidents like these, received
17,904 complaints across the industry, and those are just the
cases that are reported. And I understand about percentages and
statistics, but if you're one of those 17,904 people,
statistics don't make much of a difference to you.
So it's not acceptable that we have this level of difficult
occurrences, and we can't just throw up our hands and say
that's the way it always has to be, or, in my view and many of
my constituents, can we just say voluntary action by the
airlines is enough. That's why I've introduced, along with some
of my colleagues, the Tickets Act, which would improve
transparency for consumers, review overbooking policies,
guarantee paying customers have a right to fly, and make some
other common sense reforms.
I'm glad that United has made voluntary measures. It sends
a nice message. But it's not the same thing as a guarantee.
Consumers want to know that United won't change its mind later
when the industry changes or the finances change. So I believe
that consumers deserve to fly safely and comfortably,
particularly at a time when the industry is earning record
profits, and, believe me, my constituents are aware of that,
too.
So, Mr. Kirby and Ms. Pinkerton, will you commit to working
with me and my staff as we approach the FAA reauthorization on
measures like those included in the Tickets Act that will
improve air travel for customers?
Ms. Pinkerton. Yes, we're very happy to work with you,
Senator. I do want to urge caution, and I think, as we
discussed previously, many of the items that are in your
legislation do make sense, and that's why carriers have stepped
up and said, yes, it doesn't make sense for us to remove a
passenger from a plane.
That said, I do urge caution in going into this kind of
mandatory, one-size-fits-all approach, because what we've seen
in the past is that there are unintended consequences, and it
does end up increasing the cost of travel, which--and I know
all of the members on this committee feel strongly about
service to their local communities. That gets impacted, too. So
we just need to be cognizant of those impacts.
Senator Hassan. I understand that. You always have to
balance this. But I think a lot of my constituents would say
that airlines treat them in a one-size-fits-all manner, and
that they are not treated as individuals and customers with
rights. We are a democracy, and people's money is supposed to
have value and buy them a certain expected experience, right?
Ms. Pinkerton. We agree.
Senator Hassan. Thank you.
Mr. Kirby?
Mr. Kirby. Yes, ma'am. We absolutely will look forward to
engaging with you and your staff on all these issues.
Senator Hassan. Thank you.
Ms. Greenberg, do you have comments or thoughts on the
Tickets Act?
Ms. Greenberg. Yes. We support the Tickets Act. I think it
offers a lot of very positive benefits to consumers, including
not allowing involuntary bumping; eliminating limits on the
compensation for bumping; limiting overbooking practices, which
we talked about a little while ago--we don't understand why
overbooking happens in this day and age when passengers have
already paid for their flights--and requiring appropriate
disclosures by the carriers. So, yes, we think it's a great
bill, and we look forward to working together with you to get
it enacted.
Senator Hassan. Thank you, and because my time is running
down and it has been a long day, I will submit my other two
questions for the record.
I just want to note not only do I share the concerns about
whether overbooking is still a policy that makes sense in this
day and age, but I'm very concerned that airlines have had
policies that bump the passengers who either aren't frequent
flyer members or have bought the lowest priced tickets first,
and since they are often people who can't afford to buy higher
priced tickets or become frequent flyers, that seems unfair.
Finally, I'll just note, Ms. Nelson, I would look forward
to working with you on some of the issues you've raised on
behalf of flight attendants. We all appreciate the difficult
work you all do and the importance of being able to deescalate
and help people travel safely.
Ms. Nelson. Thank you very much, Senator.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Heller?
STATEMENT OF HON. DEAN HELLER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA
Senator Heller. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Thanks for the
hearing, and I want to thank our panel for being here also. I
recognize and realize this has been a long day, but I would
like to get through my questions.
I guess the first question is I want to make sure that
we're all on the same page, and that is that we realize that
air flight and passenger care does determine the quality of any
trip an individual goes on. The reason I'm saying this is that,
obviously, in a state like Nevada, tourism is an important
function for us. It's just not Las Vegas. It's Hawaii, Orlando,
or wherever--New York, wherever they may want to fly, and I
don't want it lost--the emphasis that air travel is just as
important sometimes as the experience that they may have at
their destinations.
I tell you that to say this. I asked a few years ago a
gentleman from the southern end of Nevada who builds hotels why
he doesn't build hotels in northern Nevada. This was a number
of years ago, and he said that because of the fact that when
you fly into northern Nevada, whether it's the airport at Lake
Tahoe or the airport in Reno, the flight is so turbulent that
he doesn't believe anybody would come back after doing that one
or two times. Now, technology, obviously, has increased
substantially, and it's not nearly as bad as it was 15 or 20
years ago, and that's a good thing.
But here's my reasoning. Last year--and, Ms. Greenberg,
maybe you can answer this. Last year, there was an amendment by
Mr. Schumer on a bill--and I don't recall what bill it was--and
that was that he was going to regulate and determine what the
size of seating should be in an airplane. Do you recall that?
Ms. Greenberg. Yes. There have been several bills
introduced on the shrinking size of seats, the shrinking
aisles, the shrinking baggage area, and the shrinking bathrooms
in airplanes.
Senator Heller. Did your organization have a position on
that?
Ms. Greenberg. We think that this move toward shrinking
space in every conceivable way on the airline is dangerous and
should be prevented.
Senator Heller. Things like leg room and all that?
Mr. Greenberg. Yes, leg room and everything else. It's a
dangerous trend. It makes it harder for passengers to get in
and out. It creates safety hazards if people have to deplane.
And it makes it much more difficult for citizens with
disabilities to get in and out of an airplane. So we do think
there has to be some limits. The airlines don't seem to pay
attention too much to the discomfort of consumers, because
American Airlines--in a stunning display of tone deafness, as
we are preparing for this hearing--today announcing that
they're going to shrink yet again the distance between seats to
29 inches so they can jam more seats on the plane. But,
unfortunately, we don't have a whole lot of control unless we
enact legislation to prevent further shrinking of the cabin
area so more seats can be jammed in delivering more profit for
the industry.
Senator Heller. What's more important, the room in an
airplane with seats or your tray that goes up and down in front
of you? Because they sure put a lot of emphasis on that tray.
What about seating? What's more important, when it comes to
emergencies and getting in and out of the plane?
Ms. Greenberg. Certainly, the distance between seats, I
think, is the thing that I would look at, and also the size of
the bathroom, and the size of the aisles, and the overhead
luggage, smaller spaces are leading to very tense and
frustrating conditions for passengers.
Senator Heller. Mr. Kirby, do you support legislation that
would determine the amount of leg room in an airplane?
Mr. Kirby. No, sir, and the reason is we want to offer our
customers choice. It costs the same to fly an airplane--
essentially almost exactly the same to fly an airplane
regardless of how many seats.
Senator Heller. But it's choice with a cost. It's choice
with a cost. If you want economy-plus, you have to pay more.
Mr. Kirby. Yes, sir, and fares have come down dramatically,
and part of that is putting more seats on airplanes. Some of
the bills wouldn't have that much effect on United, I think,
because most of the bills--we're already compliant with those
minimums. But for some airlines, you would be taking 10 percent
to 20 percent of the seats off airplanes, and since it costs
almost exactly the same to fly the airplane, prices just
economically would go up 10 percent to 20 percent.
One of the great things that's happened for consumers--and
we've talked about it some here today--is declining air fares.
The Bureau of Transportation Statistics said yesterday that
real fares in Chicago in the last--at O'Hare in the last 25
years are down 53 percent, and that's possible because there
are more people on airplanes.
Senator Heller. If you're taller than six feet, do you have
to pay more to get on an airplane than someone that is shorter
than six feet?
Mr. Kirby. No, sir.
Senator Heller. Are you more discomforted when you're
taller than six feet than someone that's shorter than six feet?
Mr. Kirby. Yes, sir.
Senator Heller. How about if you weigh under 200 pounds--or
more than 200 pounds? Are you more comfortable or less
comfortable in one of your seats?
Mr. Kirby. I imagine the larger you are, the less
comfortable an airline or any other seat is.
Senator Heller. Let me tell you why I'm asking that
question. This says American Airlines--and you brought this
up--this is out of CNN--is planning to decrease the front to
back space between seven of its economy seats by another two
inches. American Airlines isn't the only one heading in this
direction. United Airlines is considering a similar move. It
goes on to say that as the big airlines match each other move
for move, the risk is that 29 inches becomes the standard for
flying economy in the United States. Is that going to become
your standard?
Mr. Kirby. Sir, I don't know for sure what our standard
will be. Today, the majority of our seats are 31 inches or more
of pitch. Some of the new seats actually have more personal
space, and, you know, pitch is probably not the right metric
anymore, because there's more personal space with some of the
new seats. But we will endeavor to keep being competitive both
on what customers want and on being able to offer low fares to
our customers that prefer low fares.
Senator Heller. Are you saying that--I apologize. One quick
question. Are you saying that you will not go down to 29-inch
pitch?
Mr. Kirby. I'm not saying one way or another if we'll go to
29. We haven't made any final decisions.
Senator Heller. Thank you.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Cortez Masto?
STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Thank you all for this enlightening discussion today, and I
want to follow up with my colleague from Nevada and ask point
blank--I'm not sure you answered the question. Is United going
to cut leg room or looking at doing that?
Mr. Kirby. Ma'am, we are making some changes to existing
aircraft today. None of those changes that we've announced so
far go down to 29 inches.
Senator Cortez Masto. Right. But does it go down to 28
inches?
Mr. Kirby. No.
Senator Cortez Masto. So you're currently at 31 inches,
correct?
Mr. Kirby. I believe we have some airplanes that have some
rows that are 30 inches. But by and large, we are 31 inches or
more today.
Senator Cortez Masto. And right now, no long-term plans to
go down to 30, 29, 28 inches?
Mr. Kirby. I don't know yet.
Senator Cortez Masto. But you think that's part of customer
choice?
Mr. Kirby. Yes, ma'am. If we were going--at any pitch, 30
inches, 31 inches, today, we, on every airplane, offer seats
that have more leg room, typically up to 34 inches, even in
economy, to give--and large cabins to give customers that
choice, whether they want the lowest fare or whether they want
more.
Senator Cortez Masto. And can I ask--so the larger leg
room--that's usually in the exit rows? Or where else would it
be located on the plane?
Mr. Kirby. It's typically at the front of the economy--it's
at exit rows and at the front of the economy cabin. Not always,
because seating configuration is dependent on where the exit
rows are from a physical location perspective, but as a general
rule, they're at the front of economy and at exit rows.
Senator Cortez Masto. So a person with disabilities has no
choice, then, but to take something at the front of the
airplane, because they normally cannot get back to the back of
the airplane. So they're paying more for that?
Mr. Kirby. No, ma'am. I believe those customers are allowed
to sit in the larger seat--I'm not sure. We can get back to
you. But I believe they're allowed to sit up front.
Senator Cortez Masto. That's good to know. Where you based,
in Chicago?
Mr. Kirby. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Cortez Masto. How did you get out here today,
flying commercial?
Mr. Kirby. I came out, actually, on Sunday because I was
also at the House hearing, and I flew commercial.
Senator Cortez Masto. Do you traditionally fly commercial?
Mr. Kirby. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Cortez Masto. Did you fly your own airline?
Mr. Kirby. In this case, I flew on one of the competing
airlines, because I came from Phoenix, Arizona.
Senator Cortez Masto. Were you in economy or first class?
Mr. Kirby. I was in 17-E in economy.
Senator Cortez Masto. And when you fly your airline, are
you usually in economy or first class?
Mr. Kirby. I'd say it's about 70 percent first class and 30
percent economy.
Senator Cortez Masto. And when you fly economy, are you in
the back of the plane?
Mr. Kirby. I tend to be all over. I have a 1-year-old and a
3-year-old, so we go wherever we can find seats.
Senator Cortez Masto. I have a theory that if we required
all executives to fly on their planes in the back of the plane,
the consumer experience would be much better. It is frustrating
for me to hear that you're all about the consumer when every
time I get on a commercial flight, there is nothing but
complaints from consumers because there is not enough room.
There is not enough leg room. There's not enough choice, even
though you claim to have choice, and that's the unfortunate
part of all of this, and that's why you see the frustration
that you have here from all of us, from many of our consumers,
many of our constituents. There is a problem there.
The other concern that I have is what is happening to the
flight attendants and the crew, because they're bearing the
brunt of that frustration from those consumers who are flying.
So my next question for you is you heard Ms. Nelson talk about
the concerns that are happening right now with the employees
that are on the planes flying every single day, from not enough
staffing to the fact that airlines forget to and stopped
enforcing informing passengers of how they should handle
themselves on the plane to also not enough staffing at the gate
or on the planes themselves to help deescalate situations.
What are you doing in response--particularly United--doing
in response to Ms. Nelson's concerns?
Mr. Kirby. Well, thank you for the question, Senator, and
thank you, Ms. Nelson, for being here with us today. Our flight
attendants are there primarily for safety. That is their
primary role, and supporting them and creating safety for
everyone on that airplane, including the employees and the
customers, is our top priority and it is their top priority.
They're also incredibly important to the product. I tell
our people all the time that the most important part of our
product is not the seat pitch, it's not the meal. It is the
flight attendants who interact with the customers, and they do
remarkable things every day to take care of our customers, and
they have a difficult job.
I have incredible empathy for what Ms. Nelson said. We
spend a lot of time engaged with the flight attendants union.
One of the things I'm proud of at United that has changed--this
is a change, really, in the last--recently, since Mr. Munoz
became CEO--is that we have a great relationship and
partnership. We don't agree on everything, but we respect each
other and we spend a lot of time talking to them on these
issues. Now, some of them we don't always agree on, but we
always listen. We listen respectfully to them and value--and
listen with an open mind and value their input, and we will
continue to do that.
United Airlines will be a stronger airline in the long term
by having a partnership with not just the flight attendants,
but with all of our employee groups. That's one of our critical
goals and one of the things we're proud of that we've really
turned the corner on in the last two years. It is at the core
of everything that we do.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Kirby. My time is up,
and I don't want to keep it going.
But I would like to hear if there's further discussion in
the particular situation with Mr. Dao. I understand United was
contracting out with Republic Airlines. I'd like to know, and I
haven't heard today, specifically, how and what type of
controls and oversight that United has over those contractors,
and what, if anything, you are doing now to take action against
Republic for what happened in that particular situation?
Senator Blunt. Mr. Kirby, you'll take that for the record.
Mr. Kirby. Yes, sir.
Senator Blunt. Ms. Capito?
STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA
Senator Capito. Thank you all for being here today. I was
just trying to figure out what question I want to ask so I make
sure I get the answer. So we're talking about the unfortunate
incident that happened in Chicago, and then the frustrations of
a lot of people surrounding that.
One of the issues that I think, for me--and this is
directed to you, Mr. Kirby--and I think for many of us is
honesty could be the best policy, in that--and I'm going back
to the gate, now. You're back at the gate, and your flight is
delayed, and you can get no information. Why is it delayed? How
long is it delayed? And, you know, in a lot of cases, they
know. The gate agent knows. I could be making alternative
plans. In my case, it would be probably renting a car.
What are your protocols at the gate to alleviate the
frustration that builds when you know you're not getting the
real answer?
Mr. Kirby. Thank you, Senator, and I share that
frustration. It is one of the things we need to improve on.
When I flew out here, my wife actually flew from Phoenix back
to Dallas on another airline, and there were--it was the day
that there were tornadoes in Texas, and she was on a four-hour
delay with a 1-year-old and a 3-year-old and got home at 11 and
was incredibly frustrated because no one could tell her what
was going on.
So it's a problem, but part of the problem is we don't have
good information. I promise you that our gate agents want
nothing more than to tell you what's going on when they have
information. It's----
Senator Capito. But when they have the information, are
they told to give us the information? A lot of times, I think
they're sitting on information. I mean, I understand a
thunderstorm in Dallas. I don't understand that the flight
attendant couldn't get here because they couldn't get a cab
from New York City.
Mr. Kirby. Yes, ma'am. I promise you our gate agents or
flight attendants, if they know--one of the things we're
doing----
Senator Capito. They're empowered to tell?
Mr. Kirby. Absolutely. One of the things we're doing at
United is creating a new app--and all employees will have a
device--for each individual airplane, where they can all talk
to each other. The problem is a lot of times, there's a
dispatcher back in Chicago that might know what's going on, but
in a weather situation, that dispatcher is handling 20 or 30
flights, and they don't--they haven't told the gate--they've
got a complicated process to communicate to the gate or the
flight attendants. And, usually, it's a flight attendant, a
pilot, or a gate agent calling their management and asking, and
then it gets bumped up the chain and comes back down. We've got
to give them more direct communication.
Senator Capito. I would highly recommend that, because I
think that would pull the temperature down a little bit before
you get onto the flight.
Mr. Kirby. I absolutely agree, and we plan to roll that out
this year.
Senator Capito. Well, good. Quickly, on the checked bag
issue that I've noticed recently--and we saw the bag that
Senator Markey had--those things can get quite heavy, and I
worry about it from a safety aspect.
Ms. Nelson, you all, as helping and aiding passengers--but
there are some passengers that can't get their bag all the way
up. There's some passengers when they bring them down, Lord
sakes what's happening to them. Are there protocols around
that, and is that an issue for you all?
Ms. Nelson. It's a huge issue for us, and it is a huge
issue of passenger-to-passenger conflict as well. We have been
working, actually, for many years to try to limit the amount of
carry-on baggage coming on board the flight. We were actually
supportive of United's basic economy, because it's going to
limit the amount of baggage that's coming on the plane, which
is going to cut down on the injuries for flight attendants and
passengers as well and make it a safer flight.
So, yes, we have, absolutely, concerns about this, and we
believe that this is actually something that could be taken on.
We have tried to take it on in the past with having templates
at TSA, where the baggage does not even get through if it
doesn't meet a certain size standard, and this is an issue that
needs to be addressed for safety.
Ms. Greenberg. Senator Capito, if I may just say----
Senator Capito. Yes.
Ms. Greenberg. If the airlines stopped charging $25 to
check luggage you would see that problem diminished
substantially.
Senator Capito. Yes, it definitely drives you to carry on.
I agree with that.
I want to go back to what the Senator before me asked,
because we don't have a main line that comes into Charleston,
West Virginia. We do have one Delta flight. But most of it is
regionals or subcontractors. Do your protocols at United go all
the way to every subcontractor that you have----
Mr. Kirby. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Capito.--flying under the United----
Mr. Kirby. Under the United brand. Our view is whether a
customer is flying on United Airlines or flying on one of our
regional partners, it is the United brand, and we need to hold
it to the same standards. Our customers are buying a ticket
from United Airlines, and we have to hold it to the exact same
standards as we do the main line.
Senator Capito. Well, that's good to know. I think that's
really important.
And then the last comment--I don't know if we have time for
an answer on this. Ms. Pinkerton, you have alluded numerous
times to the plunging fares. When you live in an area that
doesn't have a lot of service, that has regionals, if I want to
fly from Charleston, West Virginia, to D.C. and back, which I
do quite frequently, it's $600 for a round trip flight. I can
fly--probably, if I really hit it good, I could get to Hawaii
on that or maybe even over to Europe if I'm main line to main
line.
You know, I fly in a turbo prop at 17,000 feet, dash,
eight. What are you going to do--how can you justify--I don't
understand the justification for such huge fares on such short
hops in less expensive aircraft, and they're full.
Ms. Pinkerton. Yes, I hear your frustration, but I think
that--you know, first of all, the fares that we talk about are
obviously average fares and not necessarily your location,
specific. But fares are essentially supply and demand, and from
a small town, I think the fares are going to be more expensive.
We do have good competition in this country. We have four
large international carriers and seven smaller domestic
carriers. There are no barriers to entry. It's just a matter of
which carrier wants to take on that service, and is there a
business case for doing so. I mean, that's essentially what it
boils down to, and I think we need to be realistic about that
in this country, about what type of service every small
community can really afford to have.
But we want to grow service, and we are growing service.
What I can say is that the more we regulate pricing--and
especially Senator Markey's idea about regulating pricing--we
used to regulate pricing in this country. In 1974, the flight
from JFK to LAX was $1,480. Today, it's $320. So----
Senator Capito. I could go there twice for my fare.
Ms. Greenberg. Senator Capito, we think competition would
do wonders for your situation in flying to West Virginia, and
we see the big four airlines trying to squelch competition, and
we want that to stop.
Senator Capito. Thank you.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Senator Capito.
Senator Duckworth?
STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY DUCKWORTH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS
Senator Duckworth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I also
would like to thank the Ranking Member for convening today's
hearing.
Mr. Kirby, no one wants United to succeed more than I. I've
been a mileage-plus customer for 30 years. I joined when I was
in college, so since 1986, I've been a mileage-plus member. But
it's clear to me that the mere fact that we're here today, and
that the incident aboard Flight 3411 was embarrassing and
reprehensible--and I hope that you agree with that description
of it.
Mr. Kirby. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
So while United Airlines and the Chicago Department of
Aviation are working out the important steps to correct the
policies that allowed this incident to happen, I am really
interested in how much more airlines can do to reaffirm the
industry's commitment to customer service and complying with
their contracts of carriage.
Ms. Pinkerton, I'd like to talk a little bit about some of
these issues. As the industry representative, I'm interested in
learning more about the reforms you highlight in your
testimony. Will you help compile a list of the reforms your
individual airline members have already taken to improve
customer service and submit them for the record?
Ms. Pinkerton. Yes, I will do that. They are more detailed
in my written testimony, but I'm happy to give you a greater
inventory.
Senator Duckworth. That's wonderful. Thank you.
And, Ms. Pinkerton, your organization successfully
advocated for a delay in implementation of the mishandled
baggage and wheelchair rule that would simply require large
U.S. airlines to report on how often they've mishandled
wheelchairs so that air travelers with disabilities can easily
compare carriers and make informed travel decisions. Did the
airline industry think this was in the consumers' best
interest?
Ms. Pinkerton. Well, I think what you're referring to is
the fact that the Department of Transportation, when the
administration changed, hit the pause button on all
rulemakings. What they said is they're creating regulatory
reform task forces. There's an executive order that requires
rulemakings to essentially be cost beneficial. So I don't think
hitting the pause button on some of these rules was a decision
on the rule, but rather an opportunity to look at the process
and make sure that the administration is going to move forward
and, if so, how.
Senator Duckworth. But Doug Mullen, the assistant general
counsel at Airlines for America, sent an e-mail to the
Assistant General Counsel of U.S. DOT asking that it be delayed
until January 2019, saying, and I quote, ``Industry is facing
some real challenges with both parts of this regulation, and we
need more time to implement it.''
Ms. Pinkerton. Well, I think asking for more time to
implement something is imminently fair. I don't know if you
were here earlier when I went through kind of the list of
things that we have been doing to work with the disabled
community, both on training, on increasing lavatory size, on
information that's being put out to our crews, and the
discussions we're having with the PVA. So this is an area that
we've spent an enormous amount of time on, I can tell you, in
the last 3 years. We take it seriously, and I think that we're
making progress. If we need more time, you know, I think that
that's an imminently reasonable request for more time.
Senator Duckworth. As someone who travels and has traveled
with a wheelchair for over a decade now, I've seen no
improvement, and, if anything, in the last 24 months, I've had
two wheelchairs broken, and I don't see improved training of
anyone, especially your baggage handlers. But let me----
Ms. Pinkerton. Well, I am sorry for that, and we want to
fix that.
Senator Duckworth. It doesn't appear that way, because it
appears to me that you are trying to delay something as basic
as collecting data and making it transparent to the public. I'm
not asking you to come up with special--you know, extra
handling systems. All this rule does is it just says you just
have to report how many wheelchairs you break, and as a
consumer, I would like to be able to--just like I can look and
see that this airline's on-time rate for this particular flight
is 80 percent, and the on-time rate for this particular flight
on a different airline is this, I can choose. The consumer
should be able to choose. You know, I don't----
Ms. Pinkerton. We agree.
Senator Duckworth.--think that that's an unreasonable
thing----
Ms. Pinkerton. I don't, either.
Senator Duckworth.--especially when that's already being
done.
Ms. Pinkerton. Right.
Senator Duckworth. Individuals with disabilities are
people, too, and I have seen wounded warriors on flights to
Miracles on a Mountainside being manhandled off of flights,
further exacerbating their conditions. I have had to sit there
and wait for my wheelchair to show up, and it doesn't show up,
or it comes up in pieces. And, as I said, I've been there most
recently, just within the last several weeks, where a
wheelchair came up broken, and this is multiple airlines.
You know, I think in a perfect world, Congress should not
have to act, and airlines would treat all travelers with
dignity and respect, and I think that's all the people with
disabilities ask for. I don't think--I should think that you
would be wanting to speed up this process, not delay, delay,
delay.
I'm out of time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Senator Duckworth.
Well, thank all of you for responding to questions. Thank
you for the questions you will respond to. The record will
remain open for 2 weeks. During that time, Senators can submit
questions for the record, and when you receive these, you're
requested to submit your written answers to the Committee as
soon as possible.
This concludes the hearing. I thank the witnesses. The
hearing is closed.
[Whereupon, at 12:45 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Bill Nelson to
Scott Kirby
I.T. Systems
Mr. Kirby, we understand that many of the changes described in
United's response to the flight 3411 incident will require changes to
information technology systems.
Question 1. How are these changes to your I.T. systems going, and
when and how will we know they are successful?
Answer. As promised, United has already completed the necessary
I.T. work and successfully deployed an automated system for soliciting
volunteers willing to change their travel plans. This new automated
check-in process is used when a flight may need volunteers willing to
take an alternative flight, ordinarily in exchange for compensation.
The customer indicates during the check-in process that she or he is
interested in potentially volunteering for another flight if there is
ultimately a need and indicates the desired amount in compensatory
travel credit they would be willing to accept. Using the information
provided by willing customers, the system then generates a list of
volunteers for our airport agents' use if a flight is unable to
accommodate all passengers holding confirmed reserved space who are
present for boarding. Customers who have indicated interest via this
process retain the opportunity to opt out of volunteering to relinquish
their reservation when contacted by a gate agent if, for example,
satisfactory alternative travel arrangements are not available. This
program is being rolled out throughout United's network this month
following successful beta testing in Cleveland and Phoenix this summer.
Our new automated system for identifying volunteers is helping United
to better serve our customers, keep our flights departing on time, and
bring instances of involuntary denied boarding to an absolute minimum.
As a result of our efforts, we have had a 92 percent reduction in all
involuntary denied-boardings (IDBs) in September 2017 over September
2016, including 23 days in September with zero DOT-reportable IDBs.
In addition, on July 11 United successfully launched the first
phase of our promised new ``in the moment'' app that enables our flight
attendants to resolve customer issues in real time. This new app has
been deployed to all United flight attendant mobile devices, empowering
them to compensate customers proactively (with mileage, credit for
future flights or other appropriate forms of compensation) when a
service issue occurs. The next phase of this system, providing similar
functionality to United's airport customer service representatives, is
on track to launch later this year. Our new real-time tools are part of
United's commitment to better serve our customers by giving our
passenger-facing employees more options to address customer concerns as
issues arise instead of waiting for customers to contact us for
resolution after their travel is completed.
Question 2. Please describe any other major changes to your
information technology systems and any disruptions these caused.
Answer. Since Mr. Kirby's appearance before the Committee in May,
United has had no major customer service disruptions involving flight
departure delays caused by information technology system changes. In
the second and third quarters of this year, United has successfully
kept the percentage of our flights delayed for localized IT-related
reasons to historic lows.
Question 3. Also, what do you do to help passengers when there is
an I.T. problem that causes disruption to travel plans?
Answer. United implements service-recovery contingency plans to
assist customers in the event an IT-related problem causes travel
disruptions. These contingency plans are similar to those we implement
in irregular operations situations caused by disruptive weather events
or significant air traffic system delays. Should a passenger experience
a cancellation or misconnection as a result of an IT issue or for any
other reason, United does our best to contact the passenger in advance;
confirm the passenger on the next flight we operate that has seats
available in the same cabin when rebooking is necessary; and make
information about the rebooking available through our website, at
airport kiosks and through our airport and contact center agents.
When these situations occur, United makes every effort to transport
passengers to their destinations at the earliest available opportunity,
which may include via travel on another airline, or to make other
suitable arrangements for our customers. Depending on the
circumstances, such as if an outage causing travel disruption were to
become lengthy and widespread, United may also issue a waiver allowing
customers to reschedule or cancel impacted itineraries. United's
customer commitments and obligations during irregular operations are
governed by and outlined in our contract of carriage (see Rule 24--
Flight Delays/Cancellations/Aircraft Changes).
Interline Agreements
Mr. Kirby, the Department of Transportation, along with the
Department of Justice, has agreed to numerous domestic airline mergers
and joint ventures with foreign airlines over the last decade.
Question 4. Given these mergers, and the fact that many of the
large airlines now have intricate relationships with foreign carriers,
how are the major airlines cooperating to minimize passenger
disruption?
Answer. United is a party to the IATA Multilateral Interline
Traffic Agreement (MITA), and has either MITA or bilateral interline
agreements with nearly 150 domestic and international airlines. While
these agreements themselves do not impact the frequency of passenger
disruptions, they do allow United to offer better service to customers
whose travel has been disrupted by providing a significant number of
additional flight options that may transport customers to their final
destinations as close to their scheduled arrival times as possible,
minimizing the severity of passenger travel disruptions.
Question 5. What is the status of interline agreements among the
carriers that could help ensure that passengers get to their
destinations in a timely manner when there is a disruption?
Answer. United maintains nearly 150 active interline agreements
with both domestic and international airlines. The primary purpose of
most of these interline agreements is to facilitate travel-disruption
recovery for our customers.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Cory Booker to
Scott Kirby
Question. Does your airline provide Passenger Service Agents with
training on deescalating techniques and managing hostile situations? If
so, how often does this training occur and how do you measure its
success?
Answer. United has long included instruction on situational de-
escalation in training for frontline personnel for a variety of
situations. In addition, the company recently implemented a
comprehensive, annual ``Customer-Centric Journey'' training program for
customer-facing employees. This includes all members of our Contact
Centers and Airport Customer Service teams that assist our customers on
the ground. This more robust training emphasizes diffusing and
deescalating difficult situations; using persuasive skills to assist
with management of potentially unpleasant conversations, such as those
involving denied boardings; and maintaining a positive demeanor and
calm communication. United continually reviews, assesses, and improves
its training based upon course evaluations, focus groups, and the
performance of its frontline employees.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin to
Scott Kirby
Question 1. Does United Airlines train passenger service agents to
respond to passengers experiencing overbooking or flight cancellation?
If so, please describe initial and recurrent training for agents. In
instances of overbooking or cancellation, are passenger service agents
authorized to offer compensation to passengers?
Question 2. Does your airline train passenger service agents to
deescalate verbal or physical confrontations between agents and
passengers? If so, please describe initial and recurrent training. What
other procedures are in place to deescalate verbal or physical
confrontations between passenger service agents and passengers?
Answer. United has long included instruction on situational de-
escalation in training for frontline personnel for a variety of
situations. In addition, the company recently implemented a
comprehensive, annual ``Customer-Centric Journey'' training program for
all of our customer-facing employees. This includes all members of our
Contact Centers and Airport Customer Service teams that assist our
customers on the ground. This more robust training emphasizes diffusing
and deescalating difficult situations; using persuasive skills to
assist with management of potentially unpleasant conversations, such as
those involving denied boardings; and maintaining a positive demeanor
and calm communication. United continually reviews, assesses, and
improves its training based upon course evaluations, focus groups, and
the performance of its frontline employees.
United's passenger service agents are authorized to offer
appropriate compensation to disserviced customers, and we announced in
April that we have increased customer compensation incentives offered
for voluntary rebooking to up to $10,000. Agents are instructed to
request assistance from their station leadership should a
confrontational situation escalate.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted By Hon. Tammy Duckworth to
Scott Kirby
Question 1. On March 2, the U.S. Department of Transportation
(USDOT) announced a one-year delay of the ``Reporting of Data for
Mishandled Baggage and Wheelchairs and Scooters Transported in Aircraft
Cargo Compartments'' final rule. As originally published, this rule
would require large domestic airlines to report the number of
wheelchairs and scooters they enplane, including any subsequently
damaged, on a monthly basis beginning January 1, 2018.
Disability organizations, including Paralyzed Veterans of America,
fully supported this rule. Airlines for America requested that USDOT
delay implementation based on Administration guidance and unspecified
challenges the industry was experiencing with implementation of the
regulation. Will your airline commit to expediting its compliance with
this rule to meet the original January 2018 deadline?
Answer. The DOT's rule requiring airlines to report statistics on
the enplanement of and any damage to wheelchairs and scooters is part
of a much broader rule that makes significant changes to the way in
which airlines must track and report their overall baggage-handling
performance. That rule impacts reporting regarding all of the hundreds
of millions of checked bags airlines carry annually. When the rule was
published on November 2, 2016, the Department noted that most airlines
had previously advised it that they would need at least 12 to 24 months
after the rule became final to reprogram baggage-tracking systems,
install new equipment at airports, and train employees to comply with
the rule's requirements. DOT initially set an implementation date of
January 1, 2018 for these complex changes, despite the fact that
airlines had informed the Department over the course of several years
that this major change would require an extended period of preparation
to ensure data quality and consistency among carriers.
When the President's chief of staff issued a memorandum to
department heads on January 20, 2017 directing a regulatory freeze
pending review, Airlines for America and Delta Air Lines petitioned the
Department to delay the baggage rule's implementation until January 1,
2019, giving airlines adequate time to conduct the extensive work
necessary for their compliance with it. The Department agreed, with
Secretary Chao noting in her June 7, 2017 letter to Senator Duckworth
that ``the additional time is necessary to ensure that airlines will be
able to submit timely and accurate data on which consumers, including
passengers with disabilities, can rely when making their purchasing
decisions while the Department continues to review the rule about
reporting issues.''
United is working hard, both individually and through its industry
association, to prepare for full implementation of the Department's
data reporting changes for baggage performance along with wheelchair
and scooter handling. We look forward to receiving further guidance
from DOT's Bureau of Transportation Statistics, which produces
technical directives for all new or revised reporting requirements with
specific instructions on what must be reported and how to transmit it
to DOT that United and other carriers will need in order to make
necessary system programming changes. Given the effort required
industry-wide to implement these once-in-a generation changes to the
calculation of baggage statistics across the U.S. industry, which will
enable the public to compare the performance of different airlines.
Unfortunately, it is not feasible for United to meet the rule's
original January 2018 deadline.
As part of United's commitment to full compliance with all aspects
of the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), United follows the procedures
outlined in 14 C.F.R. section 382.125 when wheelchairs, mobility aids,
or other assistive devices must be stowed in the cargo compartment of
our aircraft, including giving them priority over cargo and baggage and
returning them promptly to their owners upon landing, and with 14
C.F.R. section 382.129 when passengers' wheelchairs, mobility aids, or
other assistive devices must be disassembled for stowage. United has
recently invested in 35 new wheelchair lift devices at our hubs and
line stations to more safely transfer wheelchairs to aircraft cargo
areas for stowage with less damage.
As further evidence of our industry's commitment to air travel
accessibility, Airlines for America on behalf of United and its other
members, along with the Paralyzed Veterans of America, are working with
the Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of
North America (RESNA) on a framework for jointly developing proactive
initiatives such as design standards aimed at reducing travel-related
damage to power wheelchairs. The RESNA membership is voting this month
on the establishment of an Assistive Technology for Air Travel
committee as the forum for these cooperative efforts, which is expected
to be approved.
Question 2. In February 2017, USDOT released the latest figures on
disability-related complaints filed directly with airlines. In 2015,
passengers filed 30,830 disability-related complaints as reported by
176 domestic and foreign air carriers, which represents a nearly twelve
percent increase over 2014. In 2016, passengers also filed 862
disability-related complaints directly with USDOT, which is down from
the 944 complaints filed in 2015. Will your airline commit to improved
training to better meet the needs of passengers with disabilities and
other initiatives to increase your airline's compliance with the Air
Carrier Access Act?
Answer. United is committed to ensuring that all customers--
particularly our disabled passengers--are treated with dignity and
respect. All of United's customer-facing and ramp-service employees,
both on the ground and aboard our aircraft, receive robust initial and
annual-recurrent training to ensure United is competently meeting the
needs of our customers with disabilities with professionalism and
respect. Training appropriate to the duties of their roles is provided
to our contact-center customer service representatives, airport agents,
flight attendants and ramp-service employees. This training covers ACAA
obligations, United's policies and procedures, best practices for
assisting customers in safely moving through the air travel process,
proper handling and stowage of travelers' assistive devices, and soft
skills that ensure our passengers' needs are met with courtesy and
discretion. Depending on the employee's workgroup and whether the
training is for newly-hired or tenured employees, United's training may
include classroom, hands-on and computer-based instruction. United has
a longstanding Accessible Travel Advisory Board comprised of
individuals representing several disabilities and groups such as the
Open Doors Organization that meets regularly to discuss issues
pertaining to air travel and accessibility and to offer suggestions and
advice to improve United's products and services. Our Accessible Travel
Advisory Board frequently provides input that is incorporated into
United's employee training programs.
United's complaint resolution officials, who are available to
provide escalated assistance to customers with disabilities at all of
United's locations, receive extensive additional, instructor-led
training to ensure that they are thoroughly familiar with all the
requirements of the ACAA and are experts on United's policies and
procedures with respect to customers with disabilities.
We continuously seek to make ongoing improvements to our training
and performance-audit programs not only to increase United's compliance
with the ACAA but also to improve the overall travel experience for our
customers with disabilities.
Question 3. Over thirty years ago, President Reagan enacted the Air
Carrier Access Act (ACAA). The ACAA prohibits discrimination based on
disability in air travel. Despite progress, too many travelers with
disabilities still encounter significant barriers, such as damaged
assistive devices, delayed assistance, and lack of seating
accommodations. Without improved access for people with disabilities in
air travel many will be unable to compete in today's job market or
enjoy opportunities available to other Americans. What proactive steps
is your airline taking to improve the travel experience for passengers
with disabilities, including veterans, who are catastrophically
disabled?
Answer. United takes our responsibilities under the ACAA very
seriously. We are committed to treating all customers with dignity and
respect, including those with disabilities and those who have served
our country in our armed forces. United's employees and contractors
receive extensive training on their ACAA Part 382 obligations, and we
seeks to continuously improve those obligations by maintaining strong
relationships with numerous disability organizations throughout the
country to keep abreast of the needs of passengers with disabilities
and to assimilate their suggestions into our training and policies. As
part of this commitment, we have a longstanding Accessible Travel
Advisory Board comprised of individuals representing several
disabilities and groups such as the Open Doors Organization that meets
regularly to discuss issues pertaining to air travel and accessibility
and to offer suggestions and advice to improve United's products and
services. The mission of this group is to ensure that United will
continue to offer safe, reliable and accessible transportation for all
our customers, including those with disabilities.
We also partner with a number of disability organizations and
rehabilitation hospitals around the country as part of our ``Project
Airport,'' which provides a simulated travel experience at several of
our hub locations in a safe and less-stressful environment to
individuals who are newly disabled. This project provides an overview
of the ACAA, the TSA screening process, and the experience of boarding
an aircraft with an aisle chair. At some of our airport locations, we
have also partnered with Veterans Moving Forward to allow disabled
veterans with service dogs to come to the airport and become familiar
with our aircraft.
In addition to these partnerships, we maintain an ongoing dialogue
with our partners and stakeholders to identify ways our airline can
continue to improve and better serve our customers with disabilities.
All these efforts are designed to ensure that every step of the travel
experience is within reach for all of United's customers.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto
to Scott Kirby
Question 1. Contracting out services have become a very common
airline practice. This is something I mentioned at the end of my time
during the hearing. In the case of the recent United incident, your own
pilots have emphasized the fact that the employees involved in that
situation were not in fact United's, but were those of Republic
Airlines. I was wondering, how much oversight and control do you have
over the behavior and handling of situations where the travelers
purchased a ticket from United, but gets the services of another
company?
Answer. While United Express carriers operate under their own FAA
certificates and must, by law, maintain operational control of their
airline, each United Express carrier--including Republic--is
contractually obligated to perform in keeping with key service
standards that United has established to ensure our customers
experience a seamless product. These standards define Express carriers'
responsibilities to meet United's customer service requirements and
product-delivery objectives, and are focused on each of our key
customer-facing functions: at the airport, onboard the flight, and upon
arrival at the destination airport. There is a department at United's
headquarters specifically focused on managing the performance and
compliance of our United Express partners. Any changes to the
performance standards that United determines are necessary are made at
the sole discretion of United Airlines, and are not subject to
contractual negotiations.
Question 2. Have there been any discussions about actions you're
taking towards or with Republic Airlines?
Answer. United takes full responsibility for the events of United
Express Flight 3411. We are pleased that United and Dr. Dao have
reached an amicable resolution of the unfortunate incident that
occurred aboard flight 3411. We are implementing the improvements we
announced, which place our customers at the center of everything we do.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Bill Nelson to
Sharon Pinkerton
Airline Passenger Bill of Rights
Ms. Pinkerton, one major problem for passengers is the variance in
consumer assistance practices among airlines. On one airline you may be
able to change flights for a nominal fee; on another you lose the value
of the whole ticket. And if you happen to get stranded by weather or
some other event, it's often like the Wild West for passengers--they
have no idea what they are going to get.
Question 1. Has Airlines for America done anything to put together
a voluntary set of consumer commitments for its members? If you really
want to deal with these issues, some self-regulation seems like a
really good place to start.
Answer. U.S. airlines have long held voluntary Customer Service
Commitments. These commitments, along with airline contracts of
carriage, are available on every major airline's website. The Customer
Service Commitments are clear, well established and easily accessible
to travelers at the click of a button. Beyond the existing Customer
Service Commitments airlines have also recently taken additional steps
to improve customer service, including, but not limited to--
Completely eliminating or reducing overbooking;
Prohibiting use of law enforcement to remove passengers from
a flight, except in cases of safety or security;
Ensuring that no passenger is involuntarily removed from a
flight for another passenger;
Ensuring that crews traveling must be booked at least 60
minutes prior to departure;
Giving gate agents the discretion to offer higher amounts of
money as an incentive for customers to voluntarily take a
different flight;
Airlines are renewing their focus on training for all
customer-facing staff to make sure they are taking care of
passengers, not just getting them from point to point; and
Efforts are underway to provide passengers even more
transparency and understanding about what their rights are as
consumers.
For easy reference, our member airline Customer Service Plans are
accessible at the following links:
Alaska Airlines: https://www.alaskaair.com/content/about-us/
customer-commitment/customer-commitment-overview
American Airlines: https://www.aa.com/i18n/customer-service/
support/customer-service-plan.jsp
Hawaiian Airlines: https://www.hawaiianairlines.com/about-
us/customer-service-plan
jetBlue Airlines: https://www.jetblue.com/legal/customer-
service-plan/
Southwest Airlines: https://www.southwest.com/assets/pdfs/
corporate-commitments/customer-service-commitment.pdf
United Airlines: https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/
customerfirst-print.aspx
I would also point out that differentiation among airlines, the
predicate of your question, is a hallmark of competition, including the
services offered with respect to changing flights or assisting
customers when a disruption occurs. Differing business models by
brands, with varying levels of customer service and amenities, allow a
variety of prices and services to meet the needs of all customers,
whether in the retail clothing industry, hotel industry or airline
industry.
Interline Agreements
Ms. Pinkerton, the Department of Transportation, along with the
Department of Justice, has agreed to numerous domestic airline mergers
and joint ventures with foreign airlines over the last decade.
Question 2. Given these mergers, and the fact that many of the
large airlines now have intricate relationships with foreign carriers,
how are the major airlines cooperating to minimize passenger
disruption? What is the status of interline agreements among the
carriers that could help ensure that passengers get to their
destinations in a timely manner when there is a disruption?
Answer. A4A does not have an opinion on any specific interline
agreement since they are governed by the voluntary contractual
relationship between two or more private entities under the full
approval of government regulators.
However, as a general matter, the well-being and safety of every
traveler is and will remain the highest priority for U.S. airlines.
Airlines will continue to take actions and participate in voluntary
agreements that make sense for their individual business models to make
sure the ultimate industry goal of providing a safe, efficient and
enjoyable travel experience is attained by each passenger.
Airlines operate in an intensely competitive environment and each
competitor knows that their customer service policies will and do
dictate consumer purchasing decisions.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Cory Booker to
Sharon Pinkerton
Question. Does your airline provide Passenger Service Agents with
training on deescalating techniques and managing hostile situations? If
so, how often does this training occur and how do you measure its
success?
Answer. For Airports, we cover the following in the Customer
Service Modules in new hire classes.
What to Do When Things Don't Go As Planned
What Pushes Your Buttons?
Recognizing Your Own Stress, Symptoms of Stress, Maintaining
Our Cool
Dealing with Triggers
Stages of Anger
Choose Words Carefully, Body Language and Non-Verbal's,
Active Listening and Empathy
For those Airports Crewmembers who are qualified as Complaints
Resolution Officials (CROs) and Ground Security Coordinators (GSCs),
below is a summary of what they receive in training re: deescalating
and hostile situations.
CRO
Training on interacting with Customers with disabilities in
stressful or hostile situations
Real play activities for interacting Customers with
disabilities in demanding situations within DOT Rule 382
guidelines
GSC
Training on signs/symptoms of persons who are believed to be
under the influence of drugs or alcohol
Training on use of assertive communication techniques
Training on staying calm in stressful or hostile situations
Rules for personal safety when dealing with an intoxicated
or impaired Customer
Activity for removal of a disruptive Customer
There is both Initial and Recurrent (annual) training for these.
Success in training is measured by demonstration of proficiency and
application of knowledge for the respective programs. Ultimately
success is measured by the actions taken during these situations in the
operation.
______
Response to Written Question by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to
Sharon Pinkerton
Question. In December 2016, USDOT announced that the Advisory
Committee on Accessible Air Transportation (ACCESS Advisory Committee)
convened by USDOT had reached stakeholder agreement on improving access
to lavatories on certain single-aisle aircraft and in-flight
entertainment for passengers with disabilities. Will your organization
urge implementation of these agreements as written? Will your
organization urge USDOT to issue the proposed rules as required under
Section 2108 of the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016
(Public Law 114-190)?
Answer. ``A4A supports and urges implementation of the Advisory
Committee on Accessible Air Transportation negotiated rulemaking
consensus agreement for accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft
and for accessible in-flight entertainment. The consensus agreement was
reached after a lot of hard work and extensive negotiations among all
stakeholders. We will not urge USDOT to issue a supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking based on Regulation Identification Number 2105-AE12
as reported on June 15, 2015 because the Department should focus on
regulatory proposals that have reached stakeholder consensus.''
Background Information:
Section 2108 of the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016
SEC. 2108. AIR TRAVEL ACCESSIBILITY.
Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Transportation shall issue the supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking referenced in the Secretary's Report on Significant
Rulemakings, dated June 15, 2015, and assigned Regulation
Identification Number 2105-AE12.
Secretary's Report on Significant Rulemakings, dated June 15, 2015
Abstract: This is the third of three supplemental notices of
proposed rulemaking SNPRM) to follow-up on air travel accessibility
issues discussed in the preamble of the 2008 Air Carrier Access Act
(ACAA) final rule. (The first SNPRM is RIN 2105-AD96; the second is RIN
2105-AE32.) This rulemaking action would consider (1) whether carriers
should be required to supply in-flight medical oxygen for a fee to
passengers who require it to access air transportation; (2) whether any
safety-related reasons specific to foreign carriers may preclude the
carriage of service animals other than dogs on their flights and
whether certain changes should be made to provisions allowing carriers
to require medical documentation and 48 hours advance notice from users
of emotional support and psychiatric service animals; (3) whether
carriers should be required to provide accessible lavatories on certain
new single-aisle aircraft; (4) whether carriers should be required to
report to the Department annually the number of requests for disability
assistance they receive; and (5) whether to broaden the scope of
passengers with disabilities who must be afforded seats with extra leg
room, and whether carriers should be required to provide seating
accommodations with extra leg room in all classes of service. The
proposed rule would also clarify certain existing requirements
pertaining to the carriage of service animals.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto
to Sharon Pinkerton
Issue #1--Airline fees
Question 1. Have the policies to decouple flight ticket costs and
fees associated with various services like baggage handling, modest
snacks provided, or changing of flights--worked to provide consumers/
fliers any better flying experience?
Answer. Yes, they have. Fares are now cheaper, air service is more
plentiful, competitive offerings have increased and the quality of
baggage handling, inflight food/snacks, entertainment/WiFi, and the
like has improved materially.
Inflation-adjusted domestic fares have fallen 22 percent
since 2000 (17 percent including ancillaries) and, more
recently, we are in the third consecutive year of real declines
in domestic airfares: from 2014 to the first half of 2017
inflation-adjusted domestic airfare declined roughly 10 percent
(the average price paid for ancillary services was flat over
this period). Thus far in 2017, while major every cost--
including most notably labor and fuel--is going up, fares
continue to trend down thanks to the intensely competitive
landscape across the industry.
The supply of seats being offered domestically is at its
highest level in a decade and those offered for international
seats are at an all-time high.
Service quality has improved, as corroborated by the
[attached] findings of the most recent American Customer
Satisfaction Index for air travel (http://www.theacsi.org/the-
american-customer-satisfaction-index) and J.D. Power 2017 North
America Airline Satisfaction Study (http://www.jdpower.com/
press-releases/jd-power-2017-north-america-airline-
satisfaction-study). According to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, in 2016 U.S. airlines recorded their best-ever
year for baggage handling (99.73 percent success rate), their
highest flight completion rate (98.83 percent) since 1992,
their highest on-time arrival rate (81.42 percent) since 2012,
and their lowest-ever rate (0.62 per 10,000 passengers) rate of
involuntarily denied boarding.
Question 2. Are they getting any better value for their hard earned
dollars?
Answer. In addition to seeing fares continue to decline in real
terms, air travelers are seeing service options proliferate as global
network carriers, low-cost carriers and niche or hybrid carriers all
grow, making air travel affordable for those whose options were
previously limited to surface transportation. In fact, survey research
shows that half the American population traveled by airline in 2016, up
from just 1 out of every 5 Americans in 1971. WiFi availability and
speeds are improving rapidly, airlines are restoring meal service on
many flights and enhancing the quality of snacks/meals on many others,
and continually investing not only in new, quieter more fuel-efficient
aircraft but also in kiosk, app and website functionality for
passengers to purchase flights, monitor flight status, check in for
flights, track their bags, modify their itineraries, rebook, etc. As
noted in the attached, ``Scores are higher this year than one year ago
in all of the study factors that measure customer satisfaction.''
Issue #2--WiFi security
Question 3. I have just recently heard concerning details from a
traveler who was hacked, on her laptop, by a well-known malware product
while she was connected with an airplane WiFi. There is no other option
for WiFi service on an airplane--the traveler is captive. Can you
please document for me the protections that are in place, and the
security, or potential lack thereof, that travelers are provided or
warned about by logging onto airline in-air WiFi?
Answer. Unfortunately, I do not have the information or ability to
comment on the specific incident you have referenced. However, as a
general matter, airlines are committed to protecting the privacy and
personal data they receive from customers. The specific commitments and
protections of each policy may differ from carrier to carrier but all
applicable information can be found as part of their respective air
carrier Privacy Policy documents.
Question 4. Can we expect the consumer is provided protection from
various cyber security concerns?
Answer. See Question 3.
Question 5. What recourse do travelers have in cases that I've
heard and read about?
Answer. See Question 3.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto
to Sara Nelson
Issues #1--Airline Policies
Question 1. Do you get input on what policies your airlines
initiate, i.e., size of the seats?
Answer. Generally no. Our involvement in cabin configuration
typically depends on the status of the labor/management relationship.
Size and number of seats is not typically a subject that we receive
more than a courtesy advance notice, unless it is a brand new aircraft.
AFA is always available to our airlines to provide feedback and input.
Our experience is that when airlines involve our union, the product and
implementation of new product is better and works better for passengers
and crews managing the work space.
Question 2. Flight seating situation or overbooking?
Answer. Generally no, although we may be involved in situations
that overlap with safety or security issues.
Question 3. Fees associated with services?
Answer. No.
Question 4. Fee levels?
Answer. No.
Question 5. Boarding policies?
Answer. This varies by carrier. AFA is a good ally for airlines
when developing these policies and again, our experience is that when
AFA provides input and coordinates on implementation the process is
more successful for implementation and practice.
Question 6. Is it possible that one could argue that your members
end up on the receiving end of some traveler's frustration due to
policies they can't truly influence or improve?
Answer. Yes. I believe airlines should rely on AFA's expertise and
knowledge when contemplating any procedural changes. Economic forces
can make this challenging, but we believe that there can and should be
an assessment of impact on safety and security. This may be an area
where an industry common denominator helps alleviate economic forces.
And to reiterate, as the experts in the cabin, any policy will be
better crafted with our input.
Issue #2--Safety and Security of those on airplanes
Question 7. I have been active in working to ensure that victims of
sexual assault or harassment don't have to live in fear or without
justice. And I hear stories and worry about possible incidents that are
against airline staff, mainly flight attendants, as well as passengers.
Do you have a firm sense of the frequency of these incidents that occur
in a given years' worth of air service?
Answer. I hear from members about the increasing frequency of
incidents and we also track reports through our AFA Air Safety, Health
and Security Department. In past, when airlines collected reports in
paper form, AFA would get a hard copy, making it easier for us to keep
track. In today's world, most reports are filed electronically on hand
held report. AFA does not receive copies of electronic reports, unless
Flight Attendants initiate the copy to AFA. It would be helpful if we
were copied as a matter of course. We also conducted a recent survey of
our members regarding passenger on passenger sexual assault.
One out of five responding flight attendants has experienced
a report of passenger on passenger sexual assault while working
a flight.
The most common action taken by an intervening Flight
Attendant was to physically separate the passengers and notify
all flying partners.
Law enforcement was contacted or met the plane less than
half of the time.
Most intervening actions taken must have been due to the
resourcefulness of the intervening involved Flight Attendants
as the overwhelming majority of responders report no knowledge
of written guidance and/or training on this specific issue
available through their airline.
Question 8. What is the process for documenting or investigating
incidents that take place just before or during flights?
Answer. There is no Federal requirement for flight attendants to
report incidents. Company policy dictates what type of reports should
be submitted and how often.
Question 9. What can we better protect everyone's flying experience
or get justice for those who are treated in an inappropriate or
malicious way?
Answer. It seems that consumer choice doesn't support changing the
conditions of today's competitive aviation market, but there are steps
we need to take in aviation to ensure we don't get this wrong.
Staffing at the gate and on the plane needs to increase to
ensure aviation workers have the ability to identify problems
early and the time to de-escalate and resolve them.
It is past time to install cockpit secondary barriers and
follow through with providing crewmember self-defense training
to all cabin crew.
We must tackle the issue of out of context videotaping that
violates the privacy rights of other passengers, showcases
events out of context, escalates tensions and provides free
surveillance of crew movement to terrorists.
We need to address the issue of high energy fires and
mitigate unnecessary risks.
We need to strictly enforce the carry-on baggage policy at
every stage of travel including transit or connection in order
to prevent a conflict over storage space before it begins.
Flight Attendants need clear guidance in dealing with non-
compliant passengers and they need to know management and
regulators support them in following these procedures.
We encourage placards reinforcing the role of crewmembers
and passenger acknowledgement at the point of check-in.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin to
Sally Greenberg
Question. Please describe barriers travelers with disabilities,
including veterans, currently encounter in air travel. Further, please
describe industry best practices that may help close remaining service
gas in air travel for individuals with disabilities.
Answer. While the air travel experience for the average consumer is
far from ideal, the barriers for travelers with disabilities, including
veterans are even worse. Travelers with disabilities face a range of
obstacles while traveling by air, including the threat of damage to
medical equipment such as wheelchairs and a lack of access to lavatory
facilities.
To elaborate, one of the biggest obstacle members of the disabled
community face is the large number of wheelchairs damaged by the
airlines. There have been numerous reports about damaged wheelchairs,
in the media \1\ and from veterans themselves.\2\ This problem has even
affected U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth, whose wheelchair was damaged by
the airlines several times.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fox News. ``United 'destroyed' custom wheelchair worth $42K,
says passenger.'' July 12, 2017. Online: http://www.foxnews.com/travel/
2017/07/12/united-destroyed-custom-wheelchair-worth-42k-says-
passenger.html
\2\ Paralyzed Veterans of America. ``Paralyzed Veterans of America
Challenges Administration Rollback of Protections for Disabled Air
Travelers.'' CISION PR Newswire. July 31, 2017. Online: http://
www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/paralyzed-veterans-of-america-
challenges-admi
nistration-rollback-of-protections-for-disabled-air-travelers-
300496976.html
\3\ Duckworth, Tammy. ``Letter to U.S. Transportation Secretary
Elaine Cho.'' April 17, 2017. Online: https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/
sites/default/files/DoT%20Disability%20Protections
%20Rule.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another obstacle for travelers with disabilities is shrinking seat
and lavatory sizes.\4\ This has had an especially negative impact on
travelers with disabilities who are often forced to dehydrate
themselves or otherwise refrain from using the bathroom for hours due
to single-aisle airplanes lacking accessible lavatories.\5\ In some
cases, even ``accessible'' are not truly accessible and have caused
injury to travelers with disabilities.\6\ When combined with normal
airline delays, the lack of accessible onboard lavatory facilities and
aisle-accessible wheelchairs on board airplanes have even led to
instances where travelers with disabilities were forced to crawl down
the aisle in order to reach a lavatory.\7\ Fortunately, there is
pending legislation, Senator Blumenthal and Senator Markey's Passenger
Bill of Rights, which would require that all airplanes be equipped with
lavatories that meet the needs of passengers with disabilities.\8\ NCL
is proud to support such pro-passenger legislation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ McCartney, Scott. ``Feel Squished? Airlines Are Shrinking
Headroom, Too The distance between your eyes and the seat in front of
you is shrinking.'' Wall Street Journal. December 8, 2016. Online:
``https://www.wsj.com/articles/feel-squished-airlines-are-shrinking-
headroom-too-1481130493
\5\ Eng, Dinah. New York Times. ``Smaller Bathrooms on Planes Pose
Challenges for Passengers.'' December 23, 2016. Online: https://
www.nytimes.com/2016/12/23/travel/smaller-airplane-bathrooms-
challenges-for-passengers.html?_r=0
\6\ Cumming, Malcolm. ``[Not So] Accessible On-Board Lavatories--
Flying Disabled,'' AirlineReporter.com. September 21, 2015. Online:
http://www.airlinereporter.com/2015/09/not-accessible-board-lavatories-
flying-disabled/
\7\ Gray, Melissa and Roth Samuel. ``United Airlines apologizes
after disabled man crawls off flight.'' CNN. October 27, 2015. Online:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/25/us/united-airlines-disabled-man/
index.html
\8\ Office of Senator Edward Markey. ``MARKEY, BLUMENTHAL INTRODUCE
AIRLINE PASSENGERS' BILL OF RIGHTS,'' Press Release. June 26, 2017.
Online: https://www.mar
key.senate.gov/news/press-releases/markey-blumenthal-introduce-airline-
passengers-bill-of-rights
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The first step to fix this problem should be gathering better data
on the frequency that airlines damage wheelchairs. In October 2016, the
Department of Transportation (DOT) finalized a rule which requires
airlines to report all of the wheelchairs that they damage as they
currently are required to do with lost or damaged baggage.\9\ Recently
however, leadership at the DOT chose to delay the implementation of the
final rule at the request of the airline industry.\10\ Travelers with
disabilities, including veterans will not benefit from this important
consumer protection until at least January 2018, much to the
disagreement of consumer and veteran groups like the Paralyzed Veterans
of America.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Jansen, Bart.''Disabled travelers sue DOT to speed airline
reporting about damaged wheelchairs.'' USA Today.
\10\ Paralyzed Veterans of America. ``Paralyzed Veterans of America
Challenges Administration Rollback of Protections for Disabled Air
Travelers.'' CISION PR Newswire. July 31, 2017. Online: http://
www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/paralyzed-veterans-of-america-
challenges-admi
nistration-rollback-of-protections-for-disabled-air-travelers-
300496976.html
\11\ ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto
to Sally Greenberg
Issues #1--Airline mergers
Question 1. Ms. Greenberg, to your knowledge, when was the last
time a large airline merger was not approved by the DOT and DOJ?
Answer. The most recent blocked airline merger occurred in 2001
when Department of Justice (``DOJ'') halted the proposed merger between
U.S. Airways Group and United Airlines.\12\ In deciding to reject the
proposed merger, the DOJ cited concerns regarding ``reduce[d]
competition, raise[d] fares, and harm [to] consumers'' stemming from
the increased market share held by the two airlines.\13\ At the time,
United and U.S. Airways were the second and sixth largest domestic
airlines, respectively. The DOJ was deeply concerned by this
consolidation, and the monopolistic impacts that would occur on
specific routes as a result of the proposed merger.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ ABC News. ``United-US Airways Merger Dead.'' July 27, 2001.
Online: http://abcnews
.go.com/Business/story?id=87893&page=1
\13\ Department of Justice. ``Department of Justice and Several
States will Sue to Stop United Airlines from Acquiring U.S. Airways.''
July 27, 2001. Online: https://www.justice.gov/archive/atr/public/
press_releases/2001/8701.htm
\14\ ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately, the blocking of the United-US Airways merger has
been the exception, rather than the rule in recent decades. Rapid
airline consolidation has occurred under both Republican and Democratic
administrations. In the last decade, 13 airline mergers have occurred,
most notably between Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines in 2009,
and United Airlines and Continental Airlines in 2010.\15\ Today, 80
percent of domestic flights are controlled by just four airlines:
American, Delta, Southwest, and United.\16\ This lack of meaningful
consumer choice allows for the rapid promulgation of excessive fees,
substandard services, and rising prices industry-wide.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Airlines for America. ``U.S. Airline Mergers and
Acquisitions.'' Online: http://airlines.org/dataset/u-s-airline-
mergers-and-acquisitions/
\16\ Klose, Kerry. ``Travel Groups Want Congress to Investigate
Airline Competition (or Lack Thereof)'' Time. February 2, 2016. Online
http://time.com/money/4204413/airline-competition-congress/?iid=sr-
link1
\17\ ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue #2--Airline fees
Question 2. Have the policies to decouple flight ticket costs and
fees associated with various services like baggage handling, modest
snacks provided, or changing of flights--worked to provide consumers/
fliers any better flying experience?
Answer. Unfortunately, instead of consumers receiving a better
flying experience with more choices, the proliferation of so-called
``ancillary fees'' has created a ``cattle class'' where airlines can
charge a deceptively low ticket price and then slam passengers with
add-on fees. For example, a common fee passengers face is the
misleading seat assignment confirmation fee, which can trick travelers
into thinking they must pay to ``confirm'' their seat when in reality
they are only paying to choose their seat early.\18\ Add-on airline
fees today encompass practically every area of the flying experience.
Consumers pay fees for everything from checked and carry-on baggage and
the ``privilege'' of sitting in humanely-sized seats.\19\ In 2015
alone, American, Delta and United collected $14.69 billion from add-on
fees, a 177 percent increase from the $5.3 billion they collected from
such fees in 2008.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Elliott, Christopher. ``As airlines try to monetize seat
assignments, are disabled passengers being left behind?'' Washington
Post. April 20, 2017. Online: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/
travel/as-airlines-try-to-monetize-seat-assignments-are-disabled-
passengers-being-left-behind/2017/04/20/71114994-2460-11e7-bb9d-
8cd6118e1409_story.html?utm_term=.8596dce26f9a
\19\ ``Safety risk of shrinking airline seats questioned,'' Los
Angeles Times. April 14, 2015. Online: http://www.latimes.com/business/
la-fi-airline-seat-risks-20150414-story.html
\20\ IdeaWorks. 2016 Yearbook of Ancillary Revenue. September 2016.
Page 4. Online: http://www.ideaworkscompany.com/wp-content/uploads/
2016/09/2016-Ancillary-Revenue-Yearbook-R.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the airlines claim that it has never been a better time to
fly, DOT has received a 70 percent increase in consumer complaints in
recent months.\21\ This strongly suggests that consumers are
increasingly unhappy with the service they receive from the Nation's
airlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Martin, Hugo. ``Complaints against airlines jump 70 percent
after United's passenger-dragging incident.'' Los Angeles Times. June
14, 2017. Online: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-airline-
complaints-20170614-story.html
Question 3. Are they getting any better value for their hard earned
dollars?
Answer. In spite of historically low fuel prices and historically
high load factors, consumers are paying more to fly. According to an
Associated Press analysis, fares climbed 5 percent in the 10-year
period ending in 2015, after adjusting for inflation.\22\ The true cost
of flying may have grown even more, as the AP analysis did not account
for the proliferation of ancillary fees. These fees take the shape of
baggage fees, cancellation fees, standby fees, seat reservation fees
and other forms of nickel-and-diming. In 2015 alone, American, Delta
and United brought in $14.69 billion in ancillary revenue, a staggering
177 percent increase from the $5.3 billion they collected from such
fees in 2008.\23\ A Wall Street Journal analysis of airfares, including
add-on fees, found that from 2007 to 2014--a period coinciding with the
worse economic crisis since the Great Depression--the price of the
average round-trip domestic flight increased nearly 16 percent to
$291.30.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Koeing, David and Mayerowitz, Scott. ``U.S. airports
increasingly dominated by 1 or 2 carriers,'' USA Today. July 15, 2015.
Online: https://www.usatoday.com/story/todayinthesky/2015/07/15/us-
airports-increasingly-dominated-by-1-or-2-carriers/30152927/
\23\ IdeaWorks. 2016 Yearbook of Ancillary Revenue. September 2016.
Page 4. Online: http://www.ideaworkscompany.com/wp-content/uploads/
2016/09/2016-Ancillary-Revenue-Yearbook-R.pdf
\24\ Nicas, Jack. ``Airline Consolidation Hits Smaller Cities
Hardest,'' Wall Street Journal. September 10, 2015. Online: https://
www.wsj.com/articles/airline-consolidation-hits-smaller-cities-hardest-
1441912457
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately for consumers, these independent studies show that
amid declining customer service standards, the cost to travel by air is
only increasing. If trends continue, we fear that air travel may soon
become unaffordable for many Americans.
[all]