[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




 
    THE AIRLINE PASSENGER EXPERIENCE: WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT CAN BE

=======================================================================

                                (116-56)

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON
                                AVIATION

                                 OF THE

                              COMMITTEE ON
                   TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                     ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                             MARCH 3, 2020

                               __________

                       Printed for the use of the
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
             
             
             
             
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]     

             


     Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-
     transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/
                             transportation
                             
                             
                           ______                       


              U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
43-346 PDF             WASHINGTON : 2021 
                              
                             
                             
                             

             COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

  PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon, Chair
SAM GRAVES, Missouri                 ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
DON YOUNG, Alaska                      District of Columbia
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas  EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
BOB GIBBS, Ohio                      RICK LARSEN, Washington
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida              GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky              DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina         STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania            ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois               JOHN GARAMENDI, California
ROB WOODALL, Georgia                 HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr., 
JOHN KATKO, New York                 Georgia
BRIAN BABIN, Texas                   ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana             DINA TITUS, Nevada
DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina         SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
MIKE BOST, Illinois                  JARED HUFFMAN, California
RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas           JULIA BROWNLEY, California
DOUG LaMALFA, California             FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas            DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania          ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan              MARK DeSAULNIER, California
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida               STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin            STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
GARY J. PALMER, Alabama              SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California, 
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania   Vice Chair
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON,            ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
  Puerto Rico                        ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio                 TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey
ROSS SPANO, Florida                  GREG STANTON, Arizona
PETE STAUBER, Minnesota              DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida
CAROL D. MILLER, West Virginia       LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
GREG PENCE, Indiana                  COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
                                     SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas
                                     ABBY FINKENAUER, Iowa
                                     JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
                                     ANTONIO DELGADO, New York
                                     CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire
                                     ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota
                                     HARLEY ROUDA, California
                                     CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania

                        Subcommittee on Aviation

  RICK LARSEN, Washington, Chair
GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana             ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
DON YOUNG, Alaska                    STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida              STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky              ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania              District of Columbia
ROB WOODALL, Georgia                 DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
JOHN KATKO, New York                 STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina         HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr., 
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania          Georgia
PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan              DINA TITUS, Nevada
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida               JULIA BROWNLEY, California
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin            ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania   GREG STANTON, Arizona
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio                 COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
ROSS SPANO, Florida                  JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
PETE STAUBER, Minnesota              EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
SAM GRAVES, Missouri (Ex Officio)    SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
                                     DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
                                     SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas, Vice Chair
                                     ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota
                                     GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
                                     SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
                                     PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon (Ex 
                                     Officio)



                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page

Summary of Subject Matter........................................   vii

                 STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
  Washington, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation:

    Opening statement............................................     1
    Prepared statement...........................................     3
Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in Congress from the 
  State of Oregon, and Chairman, Committee on Transportation and 
  Infrastructure:

    Opening statement............................................     4
    Prepared statement...........................................     6
Hon. Garret Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State 
  of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Aviation:

    Opening statement............................................    43
    Prepared statement...........................................    45
Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
  Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and 
  Infrastructure, prepared statement.............................    71

                               WITNESSES

Andrew Von Ah, Director, Physical Infrastructure, U.S. Government 
  Accountability Office:

    Oral statement...............................................     9
    Prepared statement...........................................    10
William J. McGee, Aviation Adviser, Consumer Reports:

    Oral statement...............................................    19
    Prepared statement...........................................    21
Lee Page, Senior Associate Advocacy Director, Paralyzed Veterans 
  of America:

    Oral statement...............................................    25
    Prepared statement...........................................    27
Joe Leader, Chief Executive Officer, Airline Passenger Experience 
  Association:

    Oral statement...............................................    31
    Prepared statement...........................................    33
Matt Klein, Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial 
  Officer, Spirit Airlines, Inc., accompanied by Thomas Canfield, 
  Senior Vice President, General Counsel, and Secretary, Spirit 
  Airlines, Inc.:

    Oral statement of Mr. Klein..................................    41
    Prepared statement of Mr. Klein..............................    42

                       SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Letter of March 13, 2020, from Kenneth Mendez, President and 
  Chief Executive Officer, Asthma and Allergy Foundation of 
  America, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio.....    71
Statement of Airlines for America (A4A), Submitted for the Record 
  by Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana.............................    72

                                APPENDIX

Questions to Matt Klein, Executive Vice President and Chief 
  Commercial Officer, Spirit Airlines, Inc., from:

    Hon. Steve Cohen.............................................    77
    Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana..............................    77
    

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                           February 27, 2020

    SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

    TO:      LMembers, Subcommittee on Aviation
    FROM:  LStaff, Subcommittee on Aviation
    RE:      LSubcommittee hearing on ``The Airline Passenger 
Experience: What It Is and What It Can Be''
_______________________________________________________________________


                                PURPOSE

    The Subcommittee on Aviation will meet on Tuesday, March 3, 
2020, at 10:00 a.m. in 2167 Rayburn House Office Building to 
hold a hearing titled, ``The Airline Passenger Experience: What 
It Is and What It Can Be.'' The hearing will examine the U.S. 
airline passenger experience today, how airlines are working to 
improve the air travel experience, and opportunities to invest 
in technologies or innovations that could enhance the air 
travel experience. The Subcommittee will hear testimony from 
the Government Accountability Office (GAO); Consumer Reports; 
Paralyzed Veterans of America; Airline Passenger Experience 
Association (APEX); and Spirit Airlines.

                               BACKGROUND

    I. OPPORTUNITIES FOR INNOVATION

    A decade of sustained profitability provides U.S. carriers 
an opportunity to invest in the passenger experience and 
implement innovative technologies and features. For example, to 
address the challenges faced by passengers with reduced 
mobility, discussed in section V, infra, companies have 
developed ``the world's first expanding aircraft lavatory'' for 
single-aisle aircraft to accommodate passengers with reduced 
mobility.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Stephanie Taylor, New Aircraft Lavatory Concept Is Accessible 
to Passengers in Wheelchairs, APEX (Feb. 12, 2020), https://apex.aero/
2020/02/12/access-aircraft-lavatory-design.



    Other companies have developed glass touch-controlled 
reading lights.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Stephanie Taylor, Schott Reveals Touch-Controlled Reading 
Light, APEX (Feb. 19, 2020), https://apex.aero/2020/02/19/schott-jade-
reading-light-priestmangoode.



    While these innovative technologies have not yet been 
adopted by airlines, they are examples of the types of 
innovations--along with temperature-controlled seats \3\ and 
seats that collect data on parameters such as cushion pressure 
and passenger movement to help inform future seat designs \4\--
available to airlines that could improve passengers' in-flight 
experience.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Marisa Garcia, Lantal Delivers Temperature-Control System for 
Aircraft Seats, APEX (Feb. 5, 2020), https://apex.aero/2020/02/05/
lantal-temperature-controlled-seats.
    \4\ Katie Sehl, Sitting on Air: Lantal's Pneumatic Comfort System, 
APEX (May 16, 2016), https://apex.aero/2016/05/16/sitting-air-lantal-
pneumatic-comfort-system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    II. AVIATION REGULATION

    While the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) provides 
air traffic control and regulates aviation safety in the United 
States,\5\ the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) conducts 
limited economic regulation of the airline industry by 
monitoring compliance with and investigating violations of its 
aviation economic, consumer protection, and civil rights 
requirements.\6\ Much of the DOT's economic regulation of the 
industry is remnants of the former Civil Aeronautics Board's 
regulatory authority, which included the complete regulation of 
airline rates, routes, and services.\7\ Congress mostly ended 
this economic regulation of air carriers with the enactment of 
the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-504).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ See 49 U.S.C.  44701, et seq.
    \6\ See DOT, Aviation Consumer Protection, https://
www.transportation.gov/airconsumer. The DOT prohibits, for example, 
unfair or deceptive practices, such as excessive tarmac delays and 
misleading advertisements. See 49 U.S.C.  41101-02 (economic fitness 
certification),  41712 (prohibition on unfair and deceptive trade 
practices).
    \7\ See Federal Aviation Act of 1958, Pub. L. 85-726.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the realm of consumer protection and civil rights, the 
DOT has broad authority to investigate and prohibit ``an unfair 
or deceptive practice or unfair method of competition'' among 
air carriers and ticket agents.\8\ In addition to monitoring 
industry compliance with DOT requirements, the DOT receives and 
reviews consumer complaints filed with the Department.\9\ If 
the DOT reviews and investigates a complaint and finds that an 
air carrier or ticket agent has violated a DOT regulation or 
order, or otherwise engaged in an unfair or deceptive practice, 
the DOT will take appropriate enforcement action, including 
issuing warning letters or consent orders, seeking injunctive 
relief, or imposing civil penalties.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ 49 U.S.C.  41712.
    \9\ DOT, Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, https://
www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/about-us.
    \10\ 49 U.S.C.  46301. See generally the DOT's message to major 
air carriers (Sept. 25, 2001), available at https://
www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/docs/20010925_0.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On February 20, 2020, the DOT issued a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) intended to clarify the meaning of ``unfair'' 
or ``deceptive'' practices in air travel to align DOT 
definitions with Federal Trade Commission principles, according 
to the Secretary of Transportation.\11\ Among other things, the 
proposed rulemaking would:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ POLITICO Pro Transp., DOT to Propose New Rule on 'Deceptive' 
Practices by Airlines, Ticket Agents (Feb. 20, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LCodify the DOT's longstanding interpretation of 
the terms ``unfair'' and ``deceptive''; \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ DOT NPRM, Defining Unfair or Deceptive Practices, DOT-OST-
2019-0182 at 1 (Feb. 20, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LRequire the DOT ``to articulate in future 
enforcement orders [against airlines or ticket agents] the 
basis for concluding that a practice is unfair or deceptive 
where no existing [DOT] regulation governs the practice in 
question''; \13\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LRequire the DOT ``to state the basis for its 
conclusion that a practice is unfair or deceptive when it 
issues discretionary aviation consumer protection 
regulations.'' \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Id.

    While Airlines for America--the trade association 
representing U.S. carriers--applauded the proposed rule, 
stating it would ``provide greater transparency for both the 
U.S. airline industry and the flying public,'' a National 
Consumers League executive argued the rule will set ``all kinds 
of new bars that [the DOT] would have to get over in order to 
conduct any enforcement actions.'' \15\ The NPRM will be 
available for public review and comment for 60 days.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ Sam Mintz, Morning Transportation, POLITICO (Feb. 21, 2020).
    \16\ DOT NPRM, supra note 12 at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    III. AIRLINE CONSUMER COMPLAINTS

    As noted above, the DOT is responsible for monitoring 
compliance with and investigating violations of aviation civil 
rights and consumer protection requirements. In 2019, the DOT 
received a total of 15,332 consumer complaints--9,547 against 
U.S. airlines; 5,147 against foreign airlines; and the 
remainder against travel agents, tour operators, and 
others.\17\ Of those complaints, approximately:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ DOT Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, Air Travel 
Consumer Report (ATCR) (Feb. 2020) 60-64, https://
www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2020-02/February%202020
%20ATCR.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     L31 percent related to cancellations, delays, or 
misconnections;
     L17 percent related to baggage;
     L12 percent related to reservations, ticketing, or 
boarding;
     L11 percent related to customer service;
     L6 percent related to disability; and
     Lthe remainder related to fares, refunds, 
oversales, advertising, discrimination, and loss, injury, or 
death of animals.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ Id. at 60.

    In 2019, 10 U.S. air carriers reported receiving 2,966,496 
mishandled baggage reports from passengers\19\ and reported 
denying boarding to, or bumping, more than 20,000 passengers 
holding confirmed reservations involuntarily, although the 
latter number is inflated from prior years due to the worldwide 
grounding of the Boeing 737 MAX aircraft.\20\ Reporting U.S. 
air carriers informed the DOT they collectively mishandled 
10,548 wheelchairs and scooters in 2019--for a monthly average 
of 879 mishandled mobility aids.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\ Id. at 36.
    \20\ This figure represents 0.24 involuntary denied boardings per 
10,000 passengers. Id. at 46. ``On March 13, 2019, the Federal Aviation 
Administration ordered the immediate grounding of Boeing 737 MAX 
aircraft operated by U.S. airlines or in U.S. territory based on data 
arising out of the relevant accident investigations. American Airlines 
and Southwest Airlines separately informed the Department that the 
grounding of the 737 MAX aircraft has negatively impacted their 
involuntary denied boarding statistics immediately following the 
grounding.'' Id.
    \21\ Pub. L. 115-254,  441 (requiring airline compliance with the 
DOT's 2016 final rule requiring reporting of mishandled baggage and 
wheelchairs in aircraft cargo compartments). See ATCR (Feb. 2020), 
supra note 17 at 41. The figure for mishandled wheelchairs and scooters 
represents 1.54 percent of the 685,792 aids enplaned in 2019. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IV. U.S. AIRLINES' PERFORMANCE AND CUSTOMER SERVICE

    According to most recent Federal data, approximately 888.6 
million passengers boarded U.S. airlines in 2018--an increase 
of more than 25 percent in passenger levels since the 2008-09 
economic crises.\22\ As described in detail below, U.S. 
airlines have benefited from the annual increases in passenger 
traffic, surging to record profitability. In fact, since the 
economic crises, the U.S. airline industry has become the 
world's most profitable. In 2018, the airlines reported an 
after-tax net profit of $11.8 billion and a pre-tax operating 
profit of $17.6 billion.\23\ As a whole, the U.S. airline 
industry has been solidly profitable for 10 consecutive 
years.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\ U.S. Bureau of Transp. Statistics (BTS), Passengers, All 
Carriers--All Airports, https://www.transtats.bts.gov/
Data_Elements.aspx?Data=1.
    \23\ BTS, 2018 Annual and 4th Quarter U.S. Airline Financial Data 
(May 6, 2019), https://www.bts.gov/newsroom/2018-annual-and-4th-
quarter-us-airline-financial-data.
    \24\ Id. 2018 marked the tenth consecutive annual pre-tax operating 
profit; the sixth consecutive annual after-tax net profit. Id. 
According to Airlines for America calculations, over the course of the 
last 50 years, even in the best years, the profitability of U.S. 
airlines has lagged the U.S. corporate average. See A4A, Presentation: 
Industry Review and Outlook, at 6-7, https://www.airlines.org/dataset/
a4a-presentation-industry-review-and-outlook/. For company-specific 
margins, please see the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings 
of each respective company. For the overall U.S. average, please see 
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Department of Commerce, NIPA (Table 
1.14, lines 1 and 11), available at http://www.bea.gov/iTable/
index_nipa.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition to increased and new ancillary fees 
contributing to U.S. airlines' recent financial performance, a 
series of airline mergers over the last decade has reduced the 
number of large competitors from eight to four, helping keep 
airfares higher and airline costs lower than they would have 
been otherwise.\25\ Still, flying today is lower than the cost 
of air travel 25 years ago. According to U.S. Bureau of 
Transportation Statistics (BTS) data, the average domestic 
airfare, when adjusted for inflation, fell nearly 37 percent 
from 1993 to 2018, from $563 to $345.\26\ This reduction may be 
at least partially associated with the competitive effects 
associated with the entry of low-cost and ultra-low-cost 
carriers into different aviation markets.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\ Delta and Northwest merged in 2008, United and Continental 
merged in 2010, Southwest and AirTran merged in 2010, and American and 
US Airways merged in 2013. See GAO, 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 1, 6, 13-15, GAO-14-515 (June 2014).
    \26\ BTS, Average Domestic Airline Itinerary Fares, https://
www.transtats.bts.gov/AverageFare/.
    \27\ Alexander Bachwich and Michael Wittman, The Emergence and 
Effects of the Ultra-Low Cost Carrier (ULCC) Business Model in the U.S. 
Airline Industry, 62 J. of Air Transp. Mgmt. 155-64 (July 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. CONTRACTS OF CARRIAGE

    Most of an air passenger's rights--beyond those mandated by 
Congress or the DOT--are defined in an airline's contract of 
carriage--``the legal agreement between an airline and its 
ticket holders.'' \28\ These contracts contain provisions on 
everything from how the airline will conduct check-in and 
ticket refund procedures to its responsibilities to a passenger 
when a flight is delayed.\29\ Each airline has its own 
contract, so provisions differ from carrier to carrier. For 
domestic travel, an airline may provide its contract terms on 
or with a ticket at the time of purchase, or elect to 
``incorporate the terms by reference,'' meaning they are 
contained in a separate document that a passenger can request 
or that is available on the airline's website.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \28\ Cong. Res. Service, Airline Passenger Rights: The Federal Role 
in Aviation Consumer Protection 4 (Aug. 17, 2016).
    \29\ See id. See also Bill McGee, Contracts of Carriage: 
Deciphering Murky Airline Rules, USA TODAY (July 12, 2017), https://
www.usatoday.com/story/travel/columnist/mcgee/2017/07/12/airline-
contract-carriage/469916001/.
    \30\ DOT, A Consumer Guide to Air Travel, https://
www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/fly-rights.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    But contracts of carriage can be lengthy and complicated. 
In 2017, the GAO reviewed the contracts of carriage of 11 U.S. 
airlines.\31\ The GAO found that the approximate average length 
of the documents was 40 pages.\32\ Using an automated grade-
level readability test, the GAO found these documents ``require 
a reading level of someone with a college graduate degree.'' 
\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \31\ GAO, Information on Airline Fees for Optional Services, GAO-
17-756, 35 (Sept. 2017), available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-
17-756.pdf.
    \32\ Id. at 35.
    \33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. UNBUNDLING OF FEES FOR OPTIONAL SERVICES

    U.S. airlines' assessment of fees for checked baggage and 
reservation changes alone totaled $7.6 billion in 2018--$4.9 
billion for checked baggage and $2.7 billion for reservation 
changes.\34\ And some U.S. airlines have recently increased 
these fees. For example, on February 21, 2020, United Airlines 
increased its checked baggage fee by $5, resulting in a 
passenger's first checked bag costing $35 and the second bag 
$45, unless the passenger pre-pays for the bag before online 
check-in.\35\ If past behavior is indicative of what is to 
come, competitors could follow suit and raise their bag fees as 
well. For example, when JetBlue Airways increased its bag fees 
by $5 in August 2018, United, Delta Air Lines, and American 
Airlines all raised theirs by $5 within 30 days.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \34\ See BTS, Baggage Fees by Airline 2018, https://www.bts.gov/
node/221236 and BTS, Reservation Cancellation/Change Fees by Airline 
2018, https://www.bts.gov/node/221251.
    \35\ Dawn Gilbertson, United Airlines Raising Checked-Bag Fees, 
Joining JetBlue, USA TODAY (Feb. 21, 2020), https://www.usatoday.com/
story/travel/airline-news/2020/02/21/united-airlines-bag-fees-35-first-
checked-bag-45-second/4831976002/.
    \36\ See id. See also Dawn Gilbertson, No Surprise: American 
Airlines Raises Bag Fees to $30, Matching Delta and United, USA TODAY 
(Sept. 20, 2018), https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/
todayinthesky/2018/09/20/american-increases-bag-fees-matching-united-
delta-jetblue/1189021002/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Over the past decade, in addition to increasing existing 
fee amounts (e.g., checked and oversized bags, ticket 
cancellation), U.S. airlines have introduced a variety of new 
fees for optional services \37\ that were once included in the 
total/base cost of a passenger's ticket, such as seat selection 
and priority boarding.\38\ Consumer advocates have ``raised 
concerns about the lack of transparency regarding optional 
service fees and the full price of airline tickets,'' which 
affect the ability of consumers to compare the total cost of 
planned air travel across several airlines before purchase.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \37\ GAO-17-756, supra note 31 at 10.
    \38\ Id. at 1.
    \39\ Id. at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Despite increased and new ancillary fees, passenger travel 
has continued to grow since 2010.\40\ In its 2017 report, the 
GAO noted that ``unlike the revenues from domestic airfares, 
revenues from most optional service fees are not subject to the 
excise tax that helps fund the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, 
which partially supports the Federal Aviation Administration 
(FAA) . . . .'' \41\ For example, the nearly $5 billion in 
checked baggage fees in 2018 was not subject to the aviation 
excise tax like the base cost of the ticket for air travel.\42\ 
If this ancillary fee were subject to the 7.5 percent excise 
tax, approximately $367 million in excise tax revenue would 
have been deposited into the Trust Fund, the dedicated source 
of funding that helps finance the FAA's investments in the 
airport and airway system and FAA operations, including air 
traffic control services and aviation safety inspections, among 
other things.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \40\ Id. at 18.
    \41\ Id.
    \42\ See id. at n. 18 (describing how Department of Treasury 
regulations specifically exempt baggage fee payments from the 7.5-
percent aviation excise tax).
    \43\ See FAA, Airport & Airway Trust Fund (AATF), https://
www.faa.gov/about/budget/aatf/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. FARE CLASSES

    U.S. airlines divide their economy-class inventory into 
fare classes at different costs.\44\ Beginning in 2015, several 
U.S. airlines introduced ``basic economy'' tickets,\45\ which 
have been called ``the cheapest, least flexible, unfriendliest 
option'' available to a consumer due to all of the restrictions 
entailed.\46\ Passengers purchasing these restricted tickets 
may be ``assigned seats after checking in, meaning that they 
might not be seated with the rest of their travel group; board 
the aircraft last; cannot upgrade seats or class of service; 
and cannot change their flights.'' \47\ Further, some ``basic 
economy'' passengers may be denied access to overhead 
compartments or limited to a single carry-on bag that fits 
under the seat.\48\ Some travelers may, however, take advantage 
of these tickets if they can pack light, bring their own 
snacks, and travel with few expectations, for example.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \44\ Hannah Sampson, Airline Classes Are Complicated. Here's How to 
Know Which One You Need., Wash. Post (Nov. 15, 2019), https://
www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2019/11/15/airline-fares-are-complicated-
heres-how-know-which-one-you-need/.
    \45\ GAO-17-756, supra note 31 at 13. See Hugo Martin, Senator Says 
Basic Economy Seats on Planes Add to Travel Confusion and Airline 
Profits, L.A. Times (Jan. 27, 2018), https://www.latimes.com/business/
la-fi-travel-briefcase-basic-economy-20180127-story.html.
    \46\ Sampson, supra note 44. Others have said, ``[T]he growing 
number of ultra-low-cost carriers along with price conscience travelers 
searching on comparison websites have forced the major legacy carriers 
to introduce these bare-bones tickets in order to compete.'' Peter 
Thornton, A New Look at Basic Economy for Domestic and Short-Haul 
International Travel, AirfareWatchdog (Dec. 20, 2019), https://
www.airfarewatchdog.com/blog/44259587/a-new-look-at-basic-economy-for-
domestic-and-short-haul-international-travel/. Basic economy tickets 
are also sold on Canadian and Mexican airlines.
    \47\ GAO-17-756, supra note 31 at 13.
    \48\ Id.
    \49\ See Thornton, supra note 36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    But these fares sometimes push passengers to ultimately 
purchase more expensive tickets that include the flexibility to 
change flights or roomier seats.\50\ According to one American 
Airlines executive, ``The product is working entirely as we 
expected and so we're seeing the buy-up rates that we expected 
to see and we're seeing the sell-up amounts that we expected to 
see . . . . So basic economy is really, at this point, working 
as designed.'' \51\ United Airlines president Scott Kirby 
similarly said that segmentation of the economy cabin could add 
up to $1 billion in revenue for the carrier within a few 
years.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \50\ Martin, supra note 45.
    \51\ Id.
    \52\ Edward Russell, United Completes Domestic Basic Economy Roll 
Out, FlightGlobal (June 7, 2017), https://www.flightglobal.com/united-
completes-domestic-basic-economy-roll-out/124319.article.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There have been cases when ``basic economy'' policies have 
caused confusion at the airport, both for employees who must 
enforce the policies and for passengers who may have 
unknowingly or mistakenly purchased such a restricted ticket. 
For example, in 2017, American Airlines employees erroneously 
attempted to charge a nursing mother $150 to check a cooler of 
frozen breast milk at the gate because she had purchased a 
``basic economy'' ticket, which limited her carry-on baggage 
allowance.\53\ The airline clarified that the employees were 
not acting consistently with the carrier's policy, which would 
have permitted the passenger to carry the cooler on board.\54\ 
The ``budget-conscious'' passenger felt pressured to leave 
behind 40 ounces of frozen breast milk at the gate.\55\ There 
have been other cases of consumers becoming frustrated with 
these ``budget tickets,'' and several airlines have responded 
by ensuring that communications with customers purchasing a 
``basic economy'' ticket are clear as to how the fares work and 
any associated restrictions.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \53\ Dawn Gilbertson, American Airlines Tries to Charge Mom $150 to 
Check Frozen Breast Milk, USA TODAY (Dec. 14, 2017), https://
www.usatoday.com/story/travel/nation-now/2017/12/14/breast-milk-
baggage-fee/953074001/).
    \54\ Id.
    \55\ Id.
    \56\ See Cadie Thompson, United Airlines Unveiled New Budget 
Tickets--and Some Customers are Furious, Bus. Insider (June 14, 2017), 
https://www.businessinsider.com/united-airlines-basic-economy-tickets-
frustrating-customers-2017-6 (describing instances of public response 
to United's basic economy tickets and several airlines' efforts to 
ensure ticket restrictions are made clear to passengers before and 
after purchase).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The detailed segmentation has also prompted difficulty for 
families traveling together. Parents often do not want to pay 
extra for assigned seats next to their children. But when asked 
about this issue, United Airlines president Scott Kirby said, 
``Look, when you go to a concert, do you think you should pay 
the same price to sit in the nosebleed seats or to sit up 
front?'' \57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \57\ See Brian Sumers, United Airlines President on Turning 
Skeptics Into Believers, Skift (Aug. 27, 2018), https://skift.com/2018/
08/27/united-airlines-president-on-turning-skeptics-into-believers/
?utm_content=76281326&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. DENIED BOARDING

    For decades, airlines routinely overbooked flights to 
compensate for an inevitable number of ``no-shows'' among 
passengers holding confirmed reservations.\58\ However, non-
refundable or non-flexible ticket options and reservation 
change fees have reduced the number of no-shows, and 
overbooking practices result in ``oversale'' situations in 
which airlines are forced to involuntarily deny boarding to, or 
``bump,'' some passengers.\59\ The need to accommodate airline 
flight crews or aircraft maintenance issues can also result in 
denied boardings.\60\ While most denied boardings are 
voluntary--meaning the passenger voluntarily gives up their 
seat and accepts the airline's offer for compensation (e.g., 
cash or an airline voucher)--others are involuntary.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \58\ Tom Chitty, Why Do Airlines Overbook Flights, CNBC (June 21, 
2019), https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/21/why-do-airlines-overbook-
flights-paris-air-show.html.
    \59\ See id. See also GAO, Information on Airlines' Denied Boarding 
Practices, GAO-20-191 (Dec. 2019), https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-20-
191.pdf.
    \60\ See GAO-20-191 supra note 59 at 1.
    \61\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In these situations, airlines must first solicit passengers 
to voluntarily give up their seats before denying boarding 
involuntarily,\62\ and the rules for how an airline will select 
passengers for bumping if there is an insufficient number of 
volunteers vary by carrier.\63\ DOT rules set minimum 
compensation amounts for passengers who are involuntarily 
denied boarding; amounts vary based on fare and the amount of 
time by which the passenger's arrival at their final 
destination is delayed.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \62\ Id. at 6.
    \63\ Id. at 7. Factors for determining how an airline will select 
passengers to deny boarding involuntarily include fare types, check-in 
times, and frequent flyer status. Id.
    \64\ Id. at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A high-profile incident in 2017 raised public questions 
about airlines' denied-boarding policies. In order to 
accommodate off-duty crewmembers traveling on a United Express 
flight from Chicago to Louisville, United Airlines gate agents 
attempted to bump a passenger who had already boarded the 
aircraft.\65\ When the passenger refused to give up his seat, 
airline staff called police officers from the Chicago 
Department of Aviation to physically remove the passenger.\66\ 
As evidenced by several passengers' video recordings, the 
passenger was bloodied and seriously injured as he was 
forcefully removed from the aircraft.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \65\ See Erin McCann, United's Apologies: A Timeline, N.Y. Times 
(Apr. 14, 2017), https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/14/business/united-
airlines-passenger-doctor.html?_r=0 and David Koenig, United CEO Says 
No One Will Be Fired for Dragging Incident, AP Online (Apr. 18, 2017), 
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/04/18/business/ap-us-united-
passenger-removed.html.
    \66\ McCann, supra note 65.
    \67\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In an attempt to prevent such incidents in the future, the 
FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 prohibited, with few 
limitations, an airline from denying boarding to or 
involuntarily removing a passenger from an aircraft after the 
passenger has checked in for the flight and had their boarding 
pass accepted by the gate agent.\68\ The law also directed the 
GAO to review airline policies and practices related to 
oversales of flights.\69\ In its review, the GAO found that to 
reduce the possibility of denied boarding, airlines have 
``reduced their rate of overbooking or eliminated [overbooking] 
altogether,'' \70\ and now solicit volunteers to give up their 
seats earlier in the process (e.g., soliciting voluntary 
passengers before airport arrival), or offer alternative forms 
of compensation (e.g., gift cards or iPads).\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \68\ Pub. L. 115-254,  425(b).
    \69\ Id.  425(f).
    \70\ GAO-20-191, supra note 59 at 15.
    \71\ Id. at 16-17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. WIDESPREAD INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) DISRUPTIONS

    A series of high-profile IT system failures resulting in 
the delay or cancellation of tens of thousands of U.S. flights 
has affected airlines' overall on-time performance in recent 
years. In total, the GAO identified 34 IT outages between 2015 
and 2017, with 85 percent of those outages resulting in flight 
delays or cancellations.\72\ For example, in July 2016, more 
than 2,300 Southwest Airlines flights were canceled, 7,000 more 
were delayed, and nearly all flights were grounded at the 
airline's Chicago-Midway hub due to a the failure of a small 
Cisco router--one of about 2,000--in a Southwest data 
center.\73\ Similarly, Delta canceled 2,300 flights over three 
days in August 2016, after a critical computer system crashed 
due to a power outage and small fire in a Delta data 
center.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \72\ GAO, Information on Airline IT Outages, GAO-19-514 (June 
2019), https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-19-514.pdf.
    \73\ Robert Wall, U.S. Airlines Report Delays Caused by System 
Fault, Wall St. J. (Apr. 1, 2019), https://www.wsj.com/articles/
southwest-airlines-says-systemwide-technology-problem-affecting-
flights-11554117011.
    \74\ See id. See also GAO-19-514, supra note 72 at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While airlines' policies may vary in what they will provide 
their passengers during an IT outage (e.g., food, hotel), 
according to DOT policy, passengers affected by cancellations 
or significant disruptions are entitled to a refund of any 
unused portion of their tickets if they so request.\75\ Under 
DOT policy, an airline's failure to provide such a refund is an 
unfair and deceptive practice.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \75\ GAO-19-514, supra note 72 at 1, 10.
    \76\ Id. See 49 U.S.C.  41712 (prohibiting broadly unfair and 
deceptive practices among air carriers and ticket agents). Airlines or 
ticket agents that violate that proscription may be required to pay a 
civil penalty to the DOT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    V. PASSENGERS WITH DISABILITIES

    According to the most recent Census, 57 million Americans 
(roughly 1 in 5 individuals) have a disability, and more than 
half of these individuals experience issues with physical 
mobility.\77\ While these Americans may face various hurdles in 
their daily life, air travel can often present an additional 
unique set of challenges. For instance, airline passengers with 
disabilities may encounter inaccessible lavatories on aircraft 
or incur bodily harm when boarding or deplaning an aircraft, 
and frequently report lost, damaged, or otherwise mishandled 
mobility aids, such as wheelchairs and scooters.\78\ In 
addition, individuals with certain disabilities, such as 
wheelchair users, require additional assistance or have 
difficulty performing certain actions at airports, such as 
handling their baggage, navigating through crowded terminals, 
and undergoing security screening.\79\ Such challenges can 
prevent passengers with disabilities from enjoying their air 
travel experience, and may lead them to seek out alternative 
means of travel or avoid traveling altogether.\80\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \77\ GAO, Passengers with Disabilities: Air Carriers' Disability-
Training Programs and the Department of Transportation's Oversight, 
GAO-17-541R (May 31, 2017), https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-17-541r.pdf.
    \78\ A Work in Progress: Implementation of the FAA Reauthorization 
Act of 2018: Before the Subcomm. on Aviation of the House 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, 115th Cong. 2 (2019) 
(statement of David Zurfluh, National President, Paralyzed Veterans of 
America).
    \79\ Barbara Twardowski, Flying Tips for Wheelchair Users, from 
Wheelchair Users, N.Y. Times (Mar. 8, 2019), https://www.nytimes.com/
2019/03/08/travel/flying-tips-for-wheelchair-users-disabilities.html.
    \80\ See Zurfluh, supra note 78, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 1986, Congress passed the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), 
landmark legislation specifically focused on preventing 
discrimination against people with disabilities in air 
travel.\81\ Before the ACAA, people with disabilities often had 
no way of predicting the extent of a given airline's or flight 
crew's accommodations.\82\ It was common practice for people 
with disabilities to routinely be forced to travel with an 
attendant at their own expense, even if they did not need 
assistance to fly safely; be required to sit on a blanket for 
fears that they might soil the passenger seat; or simply be 
refused service.\83\ Passage of the ACAA provided people with 
disabilities improved air travel by setting clear standards 
regarding aircraft accessibility, seating accommodations, 
boarding and deplaning assistance, service animals, and 
screening, among other things.\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \81\ Pub. L. No. 99-435.
    \82\ Id.
    \83\ Id.
    \84\ See generally Cong. Res. Service, Overview of the Air Carrier 
Access Act (May 19, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 1990, the DOT promulgated rules under the ACAA defining 
the rights of passengers with disabilities and the obligations 
of air carriers under this law. Among other things, the ACAA:
     LProhibits air carriers from requiring a person 
with disability to travel with an attendant; \85\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \85\ 14 C.F.R.  382.29(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LRequires widebody (twin-aisle) aircraft to 
include accessible lavatories; \86\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \86\ 14 C.F.R.  382.63.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LRequires aircraft of a certain size to have 
priority space for wheelchair storage in cabin; \87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \87\ 14 C.F.R.  382.121(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LRequires airline assistance with boarding and 
deplaning; \88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \88\ 14 C.F.R.  382.95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LProhibits airlines from charging passengers with 
disabilities for providing accommodations; \89\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \89\ 14 C.F.R.  382.31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LRequires airlines to train airline and contractor 
personnel who assist people with disabilities; \90\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \90\ 14 C.F.R.  382.15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LRequires that air carriers designate ``complaints 
resolution officials'' to respond to disability-related 
complaints.\91\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \91\ 14 C.F.R.  382.151.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    VI. EMOTIONAL SUPPORT ANIMALS

    Many people with disabilities use a service animal in order 
to fully participate in everyday life. Under the ACAA, a 
service animal is defined as any animal that is individually 
trained or able to provide assistance to a person with a 
disability; or any animal that assists persons with 
disabilities by providing emotional support.\92\ By law, 
airlines must allow individuals with disabilities to travel 
with service animals, including emotional support animals.\93\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \92\ DOT, Service Animals (Including Emotional Support Animals) 
(Mar. 20, 2018), available at https://www.transportation.gov/
individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/service-animals-including-
emotional-support-animals.
    \93\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The ACAA requirement to allow emotional support or 
``comfort'' animals diverges from the requirements of the 
Americans with Disabilities Act.\94\ This has led to an 
increasing variety of purported emotional support animals being 
used in recent years, including pigs, peacocks, miniature 
horses, snakes, iguanas, and parrots, with air carriers having 
limited ability to restrict some of these animals.\95\ Airlines 
and flight attendants have reported numerous instances of 
purported emotional support animals growling at and biting 
flight crew or passengers and displaying aggression toward 
other purported emotional support animals.\96\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \94\ Cong. Res. Service, The Americans with Disabilities Act and 
Service Animals 3 (Oct. 28, 2010).
    \95\ Id.
    \96\ See, e.g., Ted Reed, `Emotional Support' Dog Bites Flight 
Attendant Who Requires Five Stitches, Forbes (July 23, 2019), https://
www.forbes.com/sites/tedreed/2019/07/23/emotional-support-dog-bites-
flight-attendant-who-requires-five-stitches/#10c1284e2286.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 directs the DOT to 
define ``service animal'' and develop minimum requirement 
standards for both service and emotional support animals.\97\ 
In January, the DOT proposed a rule that would, among other 
things, end the requirement that airlines recognize emotional 
support animals as service animals and thereby allow airlines 
to deny their carriage.\98\ The president of the Association of 
Flight Attendants lauded the proposal and said, ``The days of 
Noah's Ark in the air are hopefully coming to an end.'' \99\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \97\ Pub. L. No. 115-254,  437.
    \98\ DOT, U.S. Department of Transportation Seeks Comment on 
Proposed Amendments to Regulation of Service Animals on Flights (Jan. 
22, 2020), https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/us-department-
transportation-seeks-comment-proposed-amendments-regulation-service.
    \99\ Ass'n of Flight Attendants, Flight Attendants Applaud DOT's 
Clear Rule on Animals in the Cabin (Jan. 22, 2020), at https://
www.afacwa.org/flight_attendants_applaud_dot_rule_
animals_cabin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    VII. UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION

    Federal law prohibits discrimination by both U.S. and 
foreign air carriers against individuals on the basis of race, 
color, national origin, religion, sex, or ancestry \100\ as 
well as disability.\101\ As described above, the DOT is 
responsible for enforcing statutes prohibiting unlawful 
discrimination by airlines against air travelers, monitors 
compliance with DOT regulations, and processes and investigates 
complaints filed with the DOT alleging discrimination.\102\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \100\ 49 U.S.C.  40127(a). See also 49 U.S.C.  41310(a), 41712, 
and 41702 (other provisions that the DOT has interpreted as prohibiting 
discrimination in air travel).
    \101\ See 49 U.S.C.  41705. See also 14 C.F.R. part 382 (the DOT's 
regulation implementing the Air Carrier Access Act of 1968). Part 382 
includes a series of sections describing air carriers' requirements, 
including making airport facilities and aircraft accessible. See, e.g., 
14 C.F.R. part 382 subpart E (``Accessibility of Aircraft''), subpart F 
(``Seating Accommodations''), and subpart G (``Boarding, Deplaning, and 
Connecting Assistance'').
    \102\ See DOT, Passengers' Right to Fly Free From Discrimination, 
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/
Passengers%20Right%20to%20Fly
%20Free%20from%20Discrimination.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In January 2020, the DOT found Delta violated Federal anti-
discriminatory/bias statutes in two 2016 incidents where the 
carrier's flight crews ordered three Muslim passengers off the 
aircraft.\103\ In the first case, the DOT found that, but for 
the couple's ``perceived religion,'' the carrier ``would not 
have removed or denied them re-boarding.'' \104\ In the second 
case, flight crew flagged the behavior of a Muslim passenger, 
and despite the carrier's security office reporting the 
passenger's record had ``no red flags,'' the captain requested 
the passenger be removed after flight attendants expressed that 
``they remained uncomfortable.'' \105\ The DOT found that the 
captain's removal of the passenger after being cleared by 
security was discriminatory.\106\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \103\ David Koenig, U.S. Fines Delta $50,000 for Booting Off 3 
Muslim Passengers, AP News (Jan. 24, 2020), https://apnews.com/
3edb75b25d5863e79a4ea37fd71102b5.
    \104\ DOT Consent Order Issued to Delta Air Lines (Order No. 2020-
1-9) 2 (Jan. 24, 2020), https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/
files/2020-01/delta-air-lines-order-2020-1-9.pdf.
    \105\ Id. at 3.
    \106\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Without admitting or denying these violations, the airline 
consented to the DOT's issuance of an order to cease and desist 
from violating applicable anti-discrimination statutes, and the 
DOT fined the carrier $50,000, mandated civil rights training 
for certain employees, and required the carrier to enhance its 
e-training civil rights program.\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \107\ Id. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 directed the GAO to 
examine airlines' training programs on racial, ethnic, and 
religious non-discrimination for their employees and 
contractors, including how frequently airlines train new 
employees and contractors.\108\ The GAO found that the six U.S. 
airlines selected for the audit did indeed provide such 
training to their newly hired employees, including pilots, 
flight attendants, and customer service representatives.\109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \108\ Pub. L. 115-254,  407. See GAO, Information on Selected 
Airlines' Non-Discrimination Training Programs 1, GAO-19-654R, https://
www.gao.gov/products/gao-19-654r.
    \109\ GAO-19-654R, supra note 108 at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    VIII. AIRCRAFT EVACUATION STANDARDS

    The Federal Aviation Regulations require that the design of 
an airliner, by virtue of the locations and types of emergency 
exits, must permit all passengers to evacuate the aircraft 
within 90 seconds with half the exits blocked.\110\ But recent 
accidents have raised concerns about whether all passengers 
can, in fact, evacuate an airliner in 90 seconds, given 
passengers' propensity to carry on large bags, such as roll-
aboard suitcases, and other behavioral shifts over the last 
decade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \110\ See 14 C.F.R.  25.803, 25.807; 14 C.F.R. part 25, app'x. J.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For example, the National Transportation Safety Board 
(NTSB) concluded that it took at least 2 minutes and 21 
seconds--51 seconds longer than the FAA assumes--for 161 
passengers to evacuate a lightly-loaded American Airlines 767-
300ER after an uncontained engine failure and fire during 
takeoff at Chicago O'Hare in 2016.\111\ The NTSB concluded that 
``evidence of passengers retrieving carry-on baggage during 
this and other recent emergency evacuations demonstrates that 
previous FAA actions to mitigate this potential safety hazard 
have not been effective.'' \112\ This was not an isolated 
event.\113\ The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 directs the FAA 
to review the assumptions and methods for certifying transport-
category airplane designs' compliance with the FAA's evacuation 
requirement.\114\ The FAA convened an aviation rulemaking 
committee last year to conduct that review; the committee's 
work continues.\115\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \111\ Nat'l Transp. Safety Bd., NTSB/AAR-18/01, Uncontained Engine 
Failure and Subsequent Fire, American Airlines Flight 383, Boeing 767-
323, N345AN, Chicago, Illinois, October 28, 2016, at 27 (2018).
    \112\ Id. at 66. The Safety Board found that ``some passengers 
evacuated from all three usable exits with carry-on baggage. In one 
case, a flight attendant tried to take a bag away from a passenger who 
did not follow the instruction to evacuate without baggage, but the 
flight attendant realized that the struggle over the bag was prolonging 
the evacuation and allowed the passenger to take the bag. In another 
case, a passenger came to the left overwing exit with a bag and 
evacuated with it despite being instructed to leave the bag behind.'' 
Id. at 65.
    \113\ For example, in-cabin video footage of passengers evacuating 
Emirates flight 521, a Boeing 777-300 that crash-landed in Dubai in 
2016, shows passengers retrieving large carry-on items from overhead 
bins despite smoke billowing into the cabin from a large fire on the 
wing that eventually destroyed the aircraft. The Aviation Herald, 
Emirates Boeing 777-300 Registration A6-EMW, http://avherald.com/
h?article=49c12302&opt=0; YouTube (Aug. 3, 2016), https://
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUg7zOBB3Ig.
    \114\ Pub. L. 115-254,  337.
    \115\ FAA, Emergency Evacuation Standards ARC Charter, Aug. 29, 
2019, available at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/
committees/documents/index.cfm/document/information/documentID/3983.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition to passengers' propensity to carry on large 
bags, reduced spacing between seats to accommodate more 
passengers per flight may also affect cabin evacuation times. 
According to aviation consultant Bill McGee, who will be 
testifying before the Subcommittee, ``legroom (as measured in 
seat pitch) and comfort (as measured in seat width) have both 
been steadily decreasing since the 1980s.'' \116\ Mr. McGee and 
others assert that tighter seats--with seat pitch as low as 28 
inches and width as low as 16.5 inches in some U.S. airlines' 
aircraft--may pose health issues for passengers (e.g., blood 
clotting, deep vein thrombosis), in addition to making 
emergency egress from a commercial airliner more 
difficult.\117\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \116\ Bill McGee, Airline Seat Size: Will FAA Bring Relief to 
Squeezed Flyers?, USA TODAY (Nov. 15, 2018), https://www.usatoday.com/
story/travel/columnist/mcgee/2018/11/15/airline-seat-size-faa/
2003043002/.
    \117\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 directs the FAA to 
``issue regulations that establish minimum dimensions for 
passenger seats on aircraft operated by air carriers . . . , 
including minimums for seat pitch, width, and length, and that 
are necessary for the safety of passengers.'' \118\ From 
November 2019-January 2020, the FAA conducted testing to 
evaluate the relationship between seat spacing and evacuation 
times at an Oklahoma City facility; \119\ agency staff are now 
analyzing the results of that testing, although action is not 
expected before the second half of 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \118\ Pub. L. No. 115-254,  577.
    \119\ David Koenig, FAA to Test Whether Packed Planes Affect 
Evacuation Time, ABC News (Oct. 17, 2019), https://abcnews.go.com/
Business/wireStory/faa-test-packed-planes-affect-evacuation-time-
66358368.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IX. AIRLINE RESPONSE TO CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019

    Over the past several weeks, the global community has 
closely observed an outbreak of a ``respiratory disease caused 
by a novel (new) coronavirus that was first detected in Wuhan 
City, Hubei Province, China'' and which continues to expand 
internationally.\120\ Last month, the World Health Organization 
named the disease ``coronavirus disease 2019'' (COVID-19).\121\ 
The virus can spread person-to-person and has spread outside of 
China, including to the United States, where the first 
confirmed person-to-person spread was reported on January 30, 
2020.\122\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \120\ CDC, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Summary, 
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nCoV/summary.html (last visited on 
Feb. 19, 2020).
    \121\ Id.
    \122\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In response to the outbreak, the three U.S. airlines 
serving China--American, Delta, and United--have temporarily 
suspended all flights between the United States and China. 
Airlines are generally offering refunds and change fee waivers 
for previously scheduled travel to China. Some Chinese carriers 
continue to serve the United States, although most have scaled 
back or cancelled service given new entry restrictions imposed 
by the United States and reduced demand.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Airline                       Destinations suspended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
American                   Beijing
                           Hong Kong
                           Shanghai
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delta                      Beijing
                           Shanghai
------------------------------------------------------------------------
United                     Beijing
                           Chengdu
                           Hong Kong
                           Shanghai
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As of February 3, 2020, the Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS) has imposed restrictions on entry into the United States 
by passengers who have traveled to mainland China within the 
last 14 days.\123\ Because COVID-19 outbreak is a public health 
crisis, the DOT and FAA roles are limited. While the outbreak 
will have effects on air commerce, it will not affect safety of 
flight or air traffic control procedures. DOT aviation consumer 
protection regulations will continue to apply to canceled 
flights and requests for refunds. Both the DOT and FAA are 
providing support to Federal public health and security 
agencies, such as the Centers for Disease Control, while 
mitigating operational effects on the aviation industry.\124\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \123\ DHS, DHS Issues Supplemental Instructions For Inbound Flights 
with Individuals Who Have Been in China, Feb. 2, 2020, https://
www.dhs.gov/news/2020/02/02/dhs-issues-supplemental-instructions-
inbound-flights-individuals-who-have-been-china?utm_source=hp_
slideshow&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=dhsgov.
    \124\ See, e.g., FAA, Novel Coronavirus Update, https://
www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=94991 (last visited Feb. 26, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               WITNESSES

     LMr. Andrew Von Ah, Director, Physical 
Infrastructure, U.S. Government Accountability Office
     LMr. William J. McGee, Aviation Consultant, 
Consumer Reports
     LMr. Lee Page, Senior Associate Advocacy Director, 
Paralyzed Veterans of America
     LMr. Joe Leader, Chief Executive Officer, Airline 
Passenger Experience Association
     LMr. Matt Klein, Executive Vice President and 
Chief Commercial Officer, Spirit Airlines


    THE AIRLINE PASSENGER EXPERIENCE: WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT CAN BE

                              ----------                              


                         TUESDAY, MARCH 3, 2020

                  House of Representatives,
                          Subcommittee on Aviation,
            Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m., in room 
2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Rick Larsen (Chairman 
of the subcommittee) presiding.
    Mr. Larsen. The subcommittee will come to order. I ask 
unanimous consent that the chair be authorized to declare a 
recess during today's hearing. Without objection, so ordered. I 
also ask unanimous consent that Members not on the subcommittee 
be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at today's hearing 
and to ask questions. Without objection, so ordered.
    Good morning. I want to thank the witnesses for joining the 
subcommittee today for a discussion on the air travel 
experience. According to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation 
Statistics, in 2018, U.S. airlines carried 925.5 million 
passengers to destinations in the U.S. and abroad, the highest 
total since 2003. The FAA's current aerospace forecast predicts 
passenger traffic will increase roughly 2 percent per year over 
the next 20 years.
    In the Puget Sound region, where I am from, the number of 
passenger enplanements is expected to grow from 24 million in 
2018 up to 55.6 million by 2050.
    So, while increased passenger demand creates new economic 
opportunities and enhances the Nation's aviation network, 
longstanding challenges can hinder growth. Over the last few 
years, U.S. airlines have invested in their products, including 
IT solutions, such as smartphone apps, to destress the travel 
experience.
    Today's hearing is an opportunity for this subcommittee to 
examine the U.S. airline passenger experience, hear from 
stakeholders on ways to improve this experience, and consider 
how Congress and the airline industry can foster innovation to 
benefit the flying public.
    Today's witnesses represent a broad range of stakeholders 
with unique insights on the passenger experience, from the 
Government Accountability Office, or GAO, to airlines and 
industry to consumer advocates. And while the subcommittee will 
discuss numerous aspects of the everyday travel experience on 
U.S. airlines, there are a few at the top of my mind today.
    The first is accessibility issues. According to the last 
U.S. Census estimates, 57 million Americans have a disability, 
and more than half of those have mobility issues. Last 
November, the subcommittee held a roundtable to better 
understand this community's air travel experience, including 
challenges with boarding the aircraft, inaccessible lavatories, 
inappropriate screening techniques, and damaged wheelchairs and 
mobility aids.
    As mandated by the 2016 and 2018 FAA Reauthorization Acts, 
the U.S. Department of Transportation initiated several 
rulemakings to improve the accessibility of aircraft lavatories 
and regulate emotional support and service animals.
    And Mr. Lee Page today joins us on behalf of the Paralyzed 
Veterans of America. Mr. Page, thank you for coming. I look 
forward to hearing more about these rules and how Congress can 
work with industry and stakeholders to help fill in the gaps on 
airplanes and airport accessibility.
    Discrimination. Throughout this country's history, 
discrimination has been a pervasive and persistent issue. Far 
too often, viral videos, reports, or personal anecdotes uncover 
unlawful practices across the transportation sector on the 
basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion and 
disability.
    According to GAO, passenger discrimination complaints 
submitted to the DOT went up from an average of 80 per year 
over the past decade to 96 complaints in 2019. Most of these 
complaints were related to racial discrimination. Sadly, this 
startling statistic does not reflect the numerous other cases 
DOT's reporting system has not captured.
    So one of the priorities that I have in Congress is to 
break down barriers for all people to fully participate in our 
economy and society. And the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act 
directed the GAO to assess airlines' nondiscrimination training 
programs for employees and contractors.
    Mr. Von Ah joins the panel from the GAO and will provide an 
update on the agency's work on this study.
    In addition, Mr. Klein, with Spirit Airlines, I look 
forward to hearing more about industry's efforts to reduce 
discrimination.
    I want to just touch on the future of the airline passenger 
experience as well. At the beginning of the 116th Congress, I 
set a forward-looking agenda which prioritizes enhancing the 
air travel experience for U.S. passengers. To do so, Congress, 
the DOT, and industry must work to ensure transparency, prevent 
unfair and inequitable practices, and promote reliable and 
accessible air service for all Americans.
    The last FAA Reauthorization Act included numerous 
provisions to enhance the experience of airline passengers, 
including establishing minimum seat pitch dimensions in a 
commercial aircraft, establishing a DOT aviation consumer 
advocate to help resolve air travel complaints, and requiring 
carriers to improve the transparency with the accommodations 
that they provide passengers caught up in widespread flight 
disruptions, among other things.
    So I look forward to hearing today's testimony from Mr. 
McGee on how recent law will help improve the passenger 
experience, and as well, from Dr. Leader from the Airline 
Passenger Experience Association on industry's voluntary 
efforts to invest in new technologies, equipment, and general 
practices to better serve consumers.
    I am pleased to convene this first hearing today on 
consumer protections in nearly 3 years, to explore the 
important issues facing air travelers today. Over the past 
several years, the Federal Government and carriers have made 
progress in improving the passenger experience. We should 
recognize that. We should all recognize there is much more work 
ahead.
    So my thanks, again, to today's witnesses. I look forward 
to identifying ways Congress can ensure all passengers have a 
safe, comfortable, and dignified travel experience.
    [Mr. Larsen's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
 Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress 
  from the State of Washington, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation
    Good morning and thank you to today's witnesses for joining the 
Subcommittee's discussion on the air travel experience.
    According to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, in 2018, 
U.S. airlines carried 925.5 million passengers to destinations in the 
U.S. and abroad, the highest total since 2003.
    The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) current aerospace 
forecast predicts passenger traffic will increase roughly two percent 
per year over the next 20 years.
    In the Puget Sound region, the number of passenger enplanements is 
expected to grow from 24 million in 2018 up to 55.6 million by 2050.
    While increased passenger demand creates new economic opportunities 
and enhances the nation's aviation network, longstanding challenges can 
hinder growth.
    Over the last few years, U.S. airlines have invested in their 
products, including IT solutions, such as smartphone apps, to de-stress 
the travel experience.
    Today's hearing is an opportunity for this Subcommittee to examine 
the U.S. airline passenger experience, hear from stakeholders on ways 
to improve this experience and consider how Congress and the airline 
industry can foster innovation to benefit the flying public.
    Today's witnesses represent a broad range of stakeholders with 
unique insights on the passenger experience, from the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) to airlines and industry to consumer 
advocates.
    While the Subcommittee will discuss numerous aspects of the 
everyday travel experience on U.S. airlines, there are a few at the top 
of my mind today.
    According to the latest U.S. Census estimates, 57 million Americans 
have a disability, and more than half of those have mobility issues.
    Last November, this Subcommittee held a roundtable to better 
understand this community's air travel experience, including challenges 
with boarding the aircraft, inaccessible lavatories, inappropriate 
screening techniques and damaged wheelchairs and mobility aids.
    As mandated by 2016 and 2018 FAA reauthorization acts, the U.S. 
Department of Transportation (DOT) initiated several rulemakings to 
improve the accessibility of aircraft lavatories and regulate emotional 
support and service animals.
    Mr. Lee Page joins us on behalf of the Paralyzed Veterans of 
America. Mr. Page, I look forward to hearing more about these rules and 
how Congress can work with industry and stakeholders to help fill in 
the gaps on airplane and airport accessibility.
    Throughout this country's history, discrimination has been a 
pervasive and persistent issue.
    Far too often, viral videos, reports or personal anecdotes uncover 
unlawful practices across the transportation sector on the basis of 
race, color, national origin, gender, religion and disability.
    According to the GAO, passenger discrimination complaints submitted 
to DOT went up from an average of 80 per year over the past decade, to 
96 complaints in 2019. Most complaints were related to racial 
discrimination.
    Sadly, this startling statistic does not reflect the numerous other 
cases DOT's reporting system has not captured.
    One of my priorities in Congress is to break down barriers for all 
people to fully participate in the economy.
    The 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act directed the GAO to assess 
airlines' non-discrimination training programs for employees and 
contractors.
    Mr. Von Ah joins the panel from the GAO and will provide an update 
on the agency's work on this study.
    In addition, Mr. Klein, with Spirit Airlines, I look forward to 
hearing more about industry's efforts to reduce discrimination.
    At the beginning of the 116th Congress, I set a forward-looking 
agenda which prioritizes enhancing the air travel experience for U.S. 
passengers.
    To do so, Congress, the DOT and industry must work to ensure 
transparency, prevent unfair and inequitable practices and promote 
reliable and accessible air service for all Americans.
    The latest FAA Reauthorization Act includes numerous provisions to 
enhance the experience of airline passengers, including establishing 
minimum seat pitch dimensions in commercial aircraft, establishing a 
DOT aviation consumer advocate to help resolve air travel complaints 
and requiring carriers to improve transparency with the accommodations 
they provide passengers caught up in widespread flight disruptions, 
among many others.
    I look forward to hearing today's testimony from Mr. McGee on how 
the recent law will improve the passenger experience, as well as from 
Dr. Leader from the Airline Passenger Experience Association on 
industry's voluntary efforts to invest in new technologies, equipment 
and general practices to better serve consumers.
    I am pleased to convene the first hearing on consumer protections 
in nearly three years to explore the important issues facing air 
travelers today.
    Over the past several years, the federal government and carriers 
have made some progress in improving the passenger experience, but 
there is much more work ahead.
    My thanks again to today's witnesses. I look forward to identifying 
ways Congress can ensure all passengers have a safe, comfortable and 
dignified travel experience.

    Mr. Larsen. With that, I understand the sitting-in ranking 
member of the subcommittee does not have a statement, and so I 
will now turn to the chair of the full committee, 
Representative DeFazio of Oregon.
    Mr. DeFazio. I thank the chair, thank him for this hearing.
    Before we get to the subject matter at hand, I just want to 
address briefly the COVID-19 and air travel. Five years ago, 
the GAO recommended that in response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak 
that DOT work with relevant agencies and stakeholders to 
develop a national aviation preparedness plan for communicable 
disease outbreaks. That hasn't happened. Through two 
administrations, it hasn't happened, and now it is a little 
late.
    We have CDC trying to deal directly with the airlines to 
try and get passenger information. There is ongoing conflict 
over that. So last week, the chair and I wrote to Secretary 
Chao and asked that she implement the recommendations of the 
GAO, and put together a task force and become more involved in 
these issues, as CDC shouldn't have to deal with individual 
airlines. Policies should be developed from knowledgeable 
people at FAA or DOT, so we can begin to better track 
passengers.
    Now, that is obviously not the subject of the hearing 
today. The state of air travel--you know, my first term in 
Congress, I introduced a bill called the Airline Passenger 
Equity Act, and some of those things that were in that bill 
have been enacted and some are still out there. There are still 
issues that need to be dealt with for a better passenger 
experience.
    One thing is complaints. Well, there aren't that many 
complaints. Well, GAO says there are, you know, 50 complaints 
to the airlines for every 1 that gets to DOT. Who knows to get 
in touch with DOT? How do you do that? For a while, I had 
gotten a mandate in one or another of the bills that they had 
to post something with an 800 number at the airline ticket 
counters, and DOT had to maintain an 800 number.
    I mean, today, how does anybody know to contact DOT with a 
complaint? We need more transparency there so we get a better 
handle on how many problems and complaints there really are.
    The airlines have record profitability and a big part of 
that profitability is ancillary fees.
    Now, it is interesting that we have laws--I studied 
economics, graduate school, undergraduate--laws of supply and 
demand. The airlines, somehow when it comes to ancillary fees 
or bag fees, the sky is the limit. It is totally elastic. It is 
like there is no point at which passenger bookings fall off.
    In fact, when we were doing the FAA bill in 2018, within a 
month, all the major airlines raised their bag fees by $5. 
United just raised theirs again $5. Are their enplanements 
going to drop off drastically? No. But they say if an airport, 
in order to enhance the airport experience, the crowded 
terminals, the lack of gates which make planes sit idle and on 
the runway for hours sometimes at a time, that if passengers--
you know, the passenger facility charge has been fixed for 20 
years. If that went up by $1 or $2 or, wow, even think of $5 
like the bag fee, no one would ever fly again. They would be 
just totally inelastic. One dollar, won't fly.
    I mean, the truth is, they want control. And even though we 
can make the case to the airlines that--somebody has got to pay 
for this. And we have had the airports do an excellent job this 
last year, starting with the hearing last year, documenting the 
fact, OK, we have to do these projects. Here is an agreed-upon 
project. If we just bond it for 30 years and don't do anything 
else, because we don't have any more bonding authority, here is 
how much interest we are going to pay. Now, if we could 
increase the passenger facility charge, the user fee, by this 
amount, and they give the table and show, you know, with a 
couple of bucks, wow, you cut the interest costs in half.
    And what I say to the airlines is, who is going to pay that 
interest? You are going to pay it one way or another. You are 
going to pay it in a landing fee, a gate fee, a lease fee, 
whatever. Someone has got to pay it. So why waste money? Why 
not raise money in the most efficient way possible and make the 
improvements we need to the system.
    But, you know, we have been stuck on that for quite some 
time. Passengers with disabilities, we had a hearing last fall 
on this. One mishandled mobility aid, or one dropped passenger 
is a tragedy and very difficult for a person with a disability. 
I mean, it is essentially part of their body and it is 
unacceptable.
    My local paper, in fact, did some investigative reporting 
about airlines' resistance to repairing, replacing critical 
essential mobility aids on a timely basis. I think many of you 
have seen the photograph of the guy who is taped to an aisle 
chair.
    This is unacceptable. And, you know, last, we asked DOT or 
DOT has asked the airlines to specify their training 
procedures, how they are replacing or handling the aids that 
are damaged or lost. I have yet to see the results of that. 
Maybe we will hear a little bit about that today.
    And then emotional support animals. I am pleased to see 
that the DOT is taking some action there. Obviously, we get to 
peacocks and turkeys and other animals, this is a little bit 
out of control. There are legitimate needs for emotional 
support and people who legitimately need emotional support and 
have legitimate objects with them. Animals should not be 
penalized because other people are abusing the system.
    And then finally, a serious thing is cabin evacuations. DOT 
is conducting some, I think, inadequate testing with, you know, 
a partial mockup shell of an airplane having to do with 
evacuation times, and dealing with seat spacing and issues like 
that.
    Before I got to Congress, we had had the Manchester Airport 
plane fire, and people were piled up like cordwood trying to 
get out of that plane. They died in a survivable incident. It 
took another 6 years here in the United States to get that one 
seat removed over by the wing, because the airlines didn't want 
to lose the revenue. In fact, they came back 2 years later with 
a fake study that said, oh, it takes longer to evacuate the 
plane if you take out that row of seats. We beat them back on 
that, and we still have that, but I am concerned about it. And 
we have got to start dealing with the behavior of people.
    In the Chicago crash, where it took well over almost 2\1/2\ 
minutes to evacuate a burning plane, people were dragging their 
carry-on bags with them, big bags, and fighting with the flight 
attendants over taking their luggage. We have got to figure out 
how we are going to deal with those problems. And DOT has to 
reevaluate whether or not we can meet the standard, given 
customer behavior, something they haven't taken into account.
    So there is much before us. I look forward to being 
informed by the panel today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    [Mr. DeFazio's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
   Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in 
     Congress from the State of Oregon, and Chairman, Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure
    Thank you, Chair Larsen, for calling today's hearing on the airline 
passenger experience--and what it can and should be.
    I want to start by saying that I am monitoring the spread of the 
coronavirus (COVID-19)--and the aviation sector's role in mitigating 
the disease's spread into the United States. Last week, Chair Larsen 
and I sent a letter to Transportation Secretary Chao urging her to 
implement a five-year-old Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
recommendation in response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak that the 
Department of Transportation (DOT) work with relevant agencies and 
stakeholders to develop a national aviation preparedness plan for 
communicable disease outbreaks.
    This recommendation has not been implemented and had it been so, 
the U.S. Government may be in a better position today to coordinate and 
collaborate with industry in responding to the COVID-19 outbreak. This 
Committee will continue to track this pandemic and its effects on 
public health and our civil aviation industry. We will take actions as 
appropriate and necessary.
    We are here today, however, to discuss the state of air travel in 
the United States. The last opportunity we had to do so in a hearing 
setting came in 2017 after a series of errors by the biggest U.S. 
airlines--a year or more of air travel plagued by major computer 
meltdowns stranding millions of passengers across the country and some 
serious altercations and exchanges with passengers during travel, to 
name a couple.
    We should not wait until the water main breaks before conducting 
important, and necessary, oversight of the airline passenger 
experience, and so I'm pleased we are here today.
    During my first term in Congress, as a Member of this Committee's 
predecessor, the Public Works and Transportation Committee, I 
introduced the Airline Passenger Equity Act of 1987 to keep commercial 
airlines accountable to their passengers. Some of these provisions were 
included in the Airline Passenger Protection Act of 1987, but some 30 
years and several passenger protection bills later, it appears there is 
more work to do.
    U.S. airlines have soared to record profitability in recent years--
with a combined after-tax profit of $11.8 billion in 2018 and another 
$11.8 billion in the first three quarters of 2019. Recent profitability 
is, in part, due to ancillary fees, adding to the cost of air travel 
for many passengers today. In 2018 alone, U.S. airlines' fees for 
checked bags and reservation changes alone totaled $7.6 billion. And 
these fees continue to rise.
    Incidentally, several major U.S. airlines--JetBlue, American, 
United, and Delta--increased their checked bag fees by $5, within a 30-
day span in 2018. These increases, one after the other, all occurred as 
Congress was negotiating the FAA reauthorization bill.
    And just a week ago, United announced it will again up its checked 
bag fee by $5, unless the passenger pre-pays for the bag before online 
check-in. If past behavior is indicative of what is to come, United's 
competitors will soon follow suit and raise their bag fees as well.
    It strikes me as odd that as carriers continue to increase their 
bag fees, passenger demand continues to grow. Yet airlines change their 
views on the law of supply and demand when it comes to increasing the 
passenger facility charge (PFC)--the most effective funding tool our 
nation's airports have to build and maintain their infrastructure. They 
argue that even a dollar increase would cause demand to plummet.
    If we seriously want to talk about improving the passenger 
experience in air travel, we could do a lot on the ground by increasing 
the PFC, which has been totally stagnant for two decades. Until then, 
terminals will remain clogged with passengers; runways and taxiways 
will be in need of additions and rehabilitation; airplanes will sit on 
the tarmac waiting for gates; and we'll miss opportunities to create 
good-paying jobs across the country.
    As the airlines continue to squeeze extra money from passengers, 
what are passengers left with?
    Packed planes. Aircraft load factors are approaching a 15-year high 
(more than 84.5 percent full on average last year).
    Mishandled bags. Nearly 3 million mishandled bag reports were filed 
with reporting U.S. carriers last year.
    Inflexibility. U.S. carriers made $2.7 billion on reservation 
changes and cancellations alone in 2018. I've seen these fees as high 
as $200 each way, plus the difference in cost for the new flight; and 
if flying internationally, a passenger needing to switch dates might 
pay $750 or more.
    Sometimes little or no reasonable recourse. Most of a passenger's 
right are buried in U.S. airlines' contracts of carriage. These 
treatises--40 pages on average--``require a reading level of someone 
with a college graduate degree,'' according to the GAO.
    The traveling experience is even more burdensome for passengers 
with disabilities or reduced mobility. There are many issues to discuss 
on this matter, but one that jumps to the front is airlines' poor 
handling of mobility aids.
    An investigative article published last year in the Eugene 
Register-Guard, a newspaper in my district in Oregon, detailed alarming 
instances of airlines failing to respond meaningfully to complaints of 
wheelchair mishandling and refusing to repair or replace damaged 
wheelchairs.
    According to DOT data--which the public has just started to see 
only after Congress imposed a mandate in the 2018 FAA Reauthorization 
Act--reporting U.S. airlines collectively mishandled 10,548 wheelchairs 
and scooters in 2019. In other words, the airlines mishandled nearly 
900 mobility aids per month.
    The airlines may argue that considered relative to the total number 
of aids that the carriers transported, they mishandled only a couple of 
percent. However, the real number is likely much larger since a lot of 
these incidents are never reported. And I believe even one mishandled 
wheelchair is one too many, as these aids are extensions of people's 
bodies. We must ensure these passengers have a dignified traveling 
experience, from arrival at the airport to their destination.
    We must also ensure the airline cabin is a safe and hospitable 
environment for all.
    Recent press stories describe passengers bringing animals, 
purported to be ``emotional support animals,'' on board aircraft and 
those animals biting flight crew and showing aggression to passengers 
and other service animals. With the introduction of ``comfort'' 
turkeys, possums, snakes, and peacocks, the airport terminal and 
aircraft cabin have become a zoo.
    I was encouraged the DOT proposed a rule earlier this year to start 
the discussion on how to address the abuse of emotional support animal 
policies. It is my hope this process will result in reasonable 
approaches that appropriately protect passengers with support needs 
from discrimination while also ensuring the comfort of other 
passengers.
    Finally, I would like to discuss briefly my concerns regarding the 
safety of passengers in the event of a cabin evacuation.
    In 1985, before I was elected to Congress, 55 people died during 
the botched evacuation of British Airtours flight 28M in Manchester. 
After I was elected, I persisted in response to that tragedy until the 
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) finally adopted spacing 
requirements for exit-row seats in 1992.
    But evacuations continue to be a problem. After a Boeing 767 became 
engulfed in flames following an uncontained engine failure during its 
takeoff roll in Chicago in 2016, the scene in the cabin was a complete 
melee as passengers tried to evacuate the burning plane dragging huge 
carry-on bags with them. To quote from the National Transportation 
Safety Board's report:
    ``In one case, a flight attendant tried to take a bag away from a 
passenger who did not follow the instruction to evacuate without 
baggage, but the flight attendant realized that the struggle over the 
bag was prolonging the evacuation and allowed the passenger to take the 
bag.''
    The FAA says it should take 90 seconds to evacuate a burning plane. 
It took 161 passengers and eight crew two minutes and 21 seconds to 
evacuate the 767 at O'Hare. So that to me begs the question: Are the 
FAA's assumptions valid about how long it takes for cabin evacuations?
    At my insistence, the 2018 law requires the FAA Administrator to 
reassess the assumptions and methods behind certification of evacuation 
times and report to Congress on the matter. I will be checking in with 
FAA Administrator Dickson on the agency's status in meeting this 
important safety-critical mandate.
    With that, Chair Larsen, I again thank you for holding today's 
hearing.

    Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the opening 
comment.
    And I will now turn to our witnesses. I would note that the 
ranking member of the subcommittee does come during witness 
testimony. We will finish witness testimony and then go to the 
ranking member for a statement, just a heads-up on that for 
folks.
    I do want to welcome the panel of witnesses. We have Mr. 
Andrew Von Ah, the Director of Physical Infrastructure at the 
U.S. GAO; Dr. William McGee, aviation consultant for Consumer 
Reports; Mr. Lee Page, a senior associate advocacy director for 
the Paralyzed Veterans of America; Mr. Joe Leader, chief 
executive officer of the Airline Passenger Experience 
Association; and Mr. Matt Klein, executive vice president and 
chief commercial officer of Spirit Airlines, who is also 
accompanied by Mr. Thomas Canfield, senior vice president, 
general counsel and secretary of Spirit Airlines. But I 
understand Mr. Klein will be giving the opening statement, and 
Mr. Canfield is present for possible questions as well.
    So, with that, I want to thank you all for being here 
today. I look forward to your testimony and, without objection, 
all your full statements will be entered into the record. And 
since that is the case, your written testimony has been made 
part of the record, the subcommittee requests that you limit 
your oral testimony to 5 minutes.
    With that, we will proceed with Mr. Von Ah with the GAO. 
You are recognized for 5 minutes.

TESTIMONY OF ANDREW VON AH, DIRECTOR, PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE, 
   U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE; WILLIAM J. McGEE, 
AVIATION ADVISER, CONSUMER REPORTS; LEE PAGE, SENIOR ASSOCIATE 
 ADVOCACY DIRECTOR, PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA; JOE LEADER, 
     CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AIRLINE PASSENGER EXPERIENCE 
ASSOCIATION; AND MATT KLEIN, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF 
   COMMERCIAL OFFICER, SPIRIT AIRLINES, INC., ACCOMPANIED BY 
 THOMAS CANFIELD, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, GENERAL COUNSEL, AND 
                SECRETARY, SPIRIT AIRLINES, INC.

    Mr. Von Ah. Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, 
Chairman DeFazio, members of the subcommittee, thank you for 
the opportunity to discuss our recent body of work on airline 
consumer protections. My remarks today are based on our reports 
issued over the past 3 years on a variety of airline consumer 
issues.
    Specifically, my statement today covers trends in DOT's 
data on airline service, airlines' actions to improve such 
service, and what is known about passenger complaints and 
airlines' practices on accessibility and discrimination issues.
    Our work found that the quality of airlines' operational 
performance has generally improved over the past decade. Rates 
of denied boardings and mishandled baggage have dropped 
precipitously, and on-time performance has remained relatively 
steady, with some modest improvement. Airlines have, for 
example, reduced involuntary denied boardings by investing in 
technology to better predict passenger no-shows, increasing 
compensation to volunteers to give up their seats when needed, 
or reducing or eliminating overbookings altogether.
    They have upgraded baggage tracking technology, and have 
instituted practices to mitigate the impact of delays, such as 
tracking flights that are at risk of being chronically delayed, 
improving communications with passengers through text messaging 
updates, and voluntarily compensating some passengers during 
extended flight delays.
    Nonetheless, when delays or other disruptions occur, they 
can be costly and inconvenient for both airlines and 
passengers. Airlines are required to compensate certain 
passengers who are denied boarding involuntarily and to provide 
refunds for canceled flights. Beyond those requirements, 
however, DOT officials told us that airlines are not obligated, 
though they may choose, to provide accommodations for flight 
disruptions, such as cancellations and delays, unless specified 
in airlines' contracts of carriage.
    In our work, looking at the impact of airline IT outages, 
our review of selected airlines' contracts of carriage showed 
variation in the types of accommodations provided, and under 
what circumstances they will be provided. This can lead to 
confusion and frustration for some passengers who may have 
incurred----
    Mr. Lynch. Would the gentleman move the microphone a little 
closer to his mouth? I am sorry, I am having a hard time 
hearing you. Thank you, appreciate it.
    Mr. Von Ah. Yes, absolutely.
    And may feel that they have not been fully compensated. 
While operational improvements have been a positive for 
consumers, data on complaints tell a bit of a different story. 
Complaints received by DOT have generally increased over the 
last decade, relative to the number of passenger boardings, by 
about 10 percent.
    Flight problems and baggage issues are consistently the top 
categories of complaints. Complaints related to accessibility 
and discrimination, though far fewer, but data shows that 
disability-related complaints to airlines have steadily 
increased this decade from about 19,000 in 2010, to about 
30,000 in 2017, an increase of over 50 percent. And there has 
been an uptick of discrimination-related complaints reported to 
DOT in the last few years.
    Of course, the number of complaints may not reflect the 
full adverse experience of passengers. For example, in our 
recent work examining the accessibility of aircraft lavatories, 
while there may be few complaints, we noted that some 
passengers with limited mobility may take extreme steps to 
avoid using the lavatory altogether, such as severely limiting 
their food and fluid intake in advance of the flight, and 
others may choose not to fly at all. More generally, we have 
found that complaint data are inherently limited, because a 
substantial portion of dissatisfied individuals never complain 
and are, therefore, not represented in the data.
    Our recent work on accessibility and discrimination issues 
is focused on airlines' efforts to provide training on these 
topics to their employees. And we found that all the airlines 
we examined had developed initial and recurring training in 
these areas, though they have been reticent to provide some of 
the details to us. With respect to nondiscrimination training 
in particular, we found that airline trainings varied, and that 
not all airlines covered topics like implicit bias, which our 
work found to be a key principle to include in such training.
    Looking forward, the 2018 FAA reauthorization bill 
contained a number of provisions for DOT with respect to 
consumer protections, including provisions to develop leading 
nondiscrimination practices for airline training, and to 
establish an airline passengers with disabilities bill of 
rights. These efforts are ongoing.
    DOT has also recently taken initial steps to establish 
rules related to the accessibility of single-aisle aircraft 
lavatories, which has been something that they have been 
working on since 1992, I might add, and regulating service 
animals.
    In addition, we have open recommendations to DOT to improve 
its ability to target and measure its consumer protection 
compliance activities, including getting feedback from 
consumers on its efforts to educate them on their rights.
    Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, this concludes my 
statement. I would be happy to address any questions you may 
have. Thank you.
    [Mr. Von Ah's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
Prepared Statement of Andrew Von Ah, Director, Physical Infrastructure, 
                 U.S. Government Accountability Office
 Airline Consumer Protections: Information on the Passenger Experience
    Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the 
Subcommittee:
    Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our body of work on 
consumer protections for airline passengers. Each year, hundreds of 
millions of passengers rely on airlines to get them to their 
destination without incident--including some of the 57 million 
Americans with a disability, who may require additional assistance from 
airline personnel. While airlines maintain that operational performance 
and customer service are improving, citing better on-time performance 
and higher customer satisfaction scores, passengers may still 
experience a range of inconveniences, such as a delayed or canceled 
flight, lost or damaged wheelchair, or unsatisfactory experience with 
airline staff. Moreover, some non-discrimination advocacy organizations 
and others have questioned whether airlines treat all passengers 
equally and without bias, citing incidents where Muslim passengers and 
passengers of color appear to be religiously or racially profiled.\1\ 
The Department of Transportation (DOT) is responsible for ensuring that 
airlines adhere to consumer protections afforded to passengers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) and Muslim 
Advocates, Letter to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), May 
11, 2016. Later, in this statement we provide examples of actions DOT 
took in response to such concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My testimony today is based on prior reports we issued from 
September 2017 through January 2020 on a variety of airline consumer 
protection issues--including airlines' denied boarding practices, 
impacts of airline IT outages, and airlines' disability and 
nondiscrimination trainings, among others.\2\ Specifically, this 
testimony describes (1) trends in DOT's data on airline operational 
performance from 2008 through 2017 and airlines' actions to improve 
such service, and (2) what is known about passenger complaints and 
airlines' practices related to accessibility and non-discrimination 
issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ GAO, Aviation Consumer Protection: Few U.S. Aircraft Have 
Lavatories Designed to Accommodate Passengers with Reduced Mobility, 
GAO-20-258 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 7, 2020). GAO, Airline Consumer 
Protections: Information on Airlines' Denied Boarding Practices, GAO-
20-191 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 10, 2019). GAO, Airline Consumer 
Protections: Information on Selected Airlines' Non-Discrimination 
Training Programs, GAO-19-654R (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 22, 2019). GAO, 
Commercial Aviation: Information on Airline IT Outages, GAO-19-514 
(Washington, D.C.: June 12, 2019). GAO, Airline Consumer Protections: 
Additional Actions Could Enhance DOT's Compliance and Education 
Efforts, GAO-19-76 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 20, 2018). GAO, Commercial 
Aviation: Information on Airline Fees for Optional Services, GAO-17-756 
(Washington, D.C.: Sep. 20, 2017). Across our various airline consumer 
protection reports, our universe of ``selected'' airlines has ranged 
from six airlines in our work on airlines' non-discrimination training 
to 12 airlines in our work on consumer protections and DOT's compliance 
and education efforts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To conduct our prior work, we analyzed relevant DOT data on 
airlines' operational performance and passenger complaints; reviewed 
DOT documents and guidance, and applicable statutes and regulations; 
and conducted interviews with DOT officials and representatives from 
selected airlines and consumer advocacy organizations, among others. 
More detailed information on our objectives, scope, and methodology can 
be found in each of the reports. For this statement, we updated our 
prior analyses on passenger complaints related to accessibility and 
discrimination issues and reviewed DOT's recent rulemakings. We 
conducted the work on which this testimony is based in accordance with 
generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards 
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, 
appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and 
conclusions based on audit objectives. We believe the evidence obtained 
provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on 
our audit objectives.
                               Background
    While U.S. airlines' business practices were largely deregulated 
following the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978,\3\ a number of consumer 
protections are in place at the federal level.\4\ For example, some 
consumer protections are required by federal statute, such as the Air 
Carrier Access Act of 1986 (ACAA), as amended, which prohibits airlines 
from discriminating against individuals based on a disability.\5\ 
Federal statutes have also authorized DOT to regulate certain areas 
affecting passengers. For example, DOT has the authority to stop 
airlines from engaging in unfair or deceptive practices, or unfair 
methods of competition,\6\ and promulgates consumer protection 
regulations under its statutory authorities.\7\ Under these 
authorities, DOT issued three final rules on Enhancing Airline 
Passenger Protections from 2009 through 2016.\8\ These rules have 
addressed long tarmac delays, increased compensation amounts for 
passengers who are involuntarily denied boarding, and required certain 
airlines to post information about their fees and on-time performance 
on their websites.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Pub. L. No. 95-504, 92 Stat. 1705.
    \4\ Although in law airlines are generally referred to as ``air 
carriers'' and ``foreign air carriers,'' we will refer to them as 
``airlines'' for the purpose of this statement.
    \5\ Pub. L. No. 99-435, 100 Stat. 1080 (codified as amended at 49 
U.S.C.  41705). As discussed later, DOT also has specific rules 
against discrimination in air travel.
    \6\ 49 U.S.C.  41712.
    \7\ See e.g., 49 U.S.C.  40101(a), 41702, and 41712.
    \8\ See 81 Fed. Reg. 76800 (Nov. 3, 2016); 76 Fed. Reg. 23110 (Apr. 
25, 2011); 74 Fed. Reg. 68983 (Dec. 30, 2009).
    \9\ See, 14 C.F.R.  399.85, 234.11(b), respectively. If a flight 
is oversold, airlines must request volunteers to be denied boarding. A 
``volunteer'' is a person who responds to the airline's request for 
volunteers and willingly accepts the airline's offer of compensation, 
in any amount, in exchange for relinquishing the confirmed reserved 
space. Any other passenger denied boarding is considered to have been 
denied boarding involuntarily, even if that passenger accepts the 
denied boarding compensation airlines are required to provide. See 14 
C.F.R. Part 250.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Airlines' Operational Performance Has Generally Improved, but 
    Passengers Filed More Complaints and May Experience a Range of 
                             Inconveniences
Rates of Mishandled Baggage and Denied Boardings Generally Declined 
        From 2008 Through 2017, While Airlines' On-Time Performance 
        Remained Relatively Steady
    In 2018, we found that airlines' operational performance--as 
measured by DOT data on denied boardings; mishandled baggage; and late, 
cancelled, or diverted flights--generally improved from 2008 through 
2017, the most recent data available at the time of our review.\10\ 
While rates of voluntary and involuntary denied boardings and 
mishandled baggage generally declined, airlines' on-time performance 
stayed about the same (fig. 1). For example, over the 10-year period of 
our review, the lowest rate of involuntary denied boardings occurred in 
2017. Specifically, in 2017, airlines involuntarily denied boarding to 
about .003 percent of all passengers (or about 23,000 of more than 680 
million passengers)--a slight decrease from prior years. Our more 
recent work on airlines' denied boarding practices found that even 
fewer passengers were denied boarding involuntarily in 2018.\11\ Rates 
of mishandled baggage also generally declined in recent years. For 
example, in 2017 airlines posted a rate of 2.5 mishandled bags per 
1,000 passengers (a rate of .25 percent of mishandled bags per 
passenger enplanement), compared to a rate of 5.25 mishandled bags per 
1,000 passengers in 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ GAO-19-76.
    \11\ GAO-20-191.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 1: Trends in Measures of Airlines' Operational Performance, 2008 
through 2017



    In 2019, we identified a number of factors that can cause airlines' 
operational issues. For example, passengers might be denied boarding 
when airlines overbook their flights (i.e., intentionally sell more 
seats than are available on a flight) or have to substitute smaller 
aircraft than what was originally scheduled due to maintenance 
issues.\12\ We also found that outages associated with airline IT 
systems--which are used for flight and crew planning, passenger 
reservations or check-in, or for providing flight information to the 
Federal Aviation Administration--can cause flight delays and 
cancellations.\13\ While we found some outages caused minimal issues, 
the impact of others was more substantial. For instance, in 2016, an 
outage in one airline's system that is used to check in and board 
passengers resulted in the cancellation of 2,300 flights over 3 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ GAO-20-191.
    \13\ GAO-19-514.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Rate of Passenger Complaints Generally Increased From 2008 Through 
        2017
    While airlines' operational performance generally improved, we 
found in 2018 that the number of passenger complaints reported to DOT, 
relative to passenger boardings, generally increased from 2008 through 
2017 for 12 selected airlines, peaking in 2015 and declining somewhat 
in later years.\14\ Specifically, in that work we found that the rate 
of passenger complaints reported to DOT, relative to passenger 
boardings, increased about 10 percent, from about 1.1 complaints per 
100,000 passengers in 2008 to 1.2 complaints per 100,000 passengers in 
2017.\15\ Complaints about operational issues discussed above--which 
make up three of DOT's 15 complaint categories--accounted for about 
half of all complaints for the 12 selected airlines from 2008 through 
2017. More specifically, in 2018 we found: \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ We limited our analysis of passenger complaints in 2018 to 
``selected'' airlines that were required to report operational data to 
DOT in 2017--the most recent year of available data when we started our 
review--because they were the largest U.S. domestic passenger airlines 
in 2016. For additional information see GAO-19-76.
    \15\ Later in this statement, we discuss some limitations of DOT's 
complaint data.
    \16\ GAO-19-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Flight problems generally accounted for an average of 
about 33 percent of all complaints. This category includes complaints 
related to delays, cancellations, and missed connections, among other 
things. From 2008 through 2017, the rate of complaints in this category 
generally increased.
      Baggage issues generally accounted for an average of 
about 15 percent of total complaints. Complaints were largely related 
to lost, delayed, or damaged bags. The rate of baggage complaints 
generally decreased over our time period.
      Denied boardings generally accounted for an average of 
about 4 percent of total complaints. Complaints were related to 
airlines' failure to solicit volunteers or providing compensation below 
the required amount. Rates of complaints about denied boardings 
generally stayed constant over our time period.

    Two of the remaining 12 complaint categories tracked by DOT 
accounted for about a quarter of passenger complaints. One category 
related to reservations, ticketing, and boarding, and the other related 
to customer service--such as airline staff having a poor attitude or 
refusing to provide assistance, and unsatisfactory seat assignments. 
Each of these categories generally accounted for an average of about 13 
percent of all complaints over the 10-year period.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ The remaining 10 categories account for 22 percent of all 
complaints and relate to issues such as fares and ancillary fees and 
advertising.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representatives from Selected Airlines Cited Technological and Other 
        Actions Taken to Improve Service
    Our previous work identified actions taken by airlines or DOT in 
response to such operational issues.\18\ DOT's actions are primarily 
related to establishing regulations about operational issues. For 
example, while DOT does not prohibit airlines from overbooking flights, 
it has set compensation amounts for passengers denied boarding 
involuntarily. DOT has also issued regulations related to returning 
mishandled baggage within 24 hours, tarmac delays, and prohibiting 
chronically delayed flights.\19\ Examples of airlines' actions are 
listed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ GAO-20-191 and GAO-19-76.
    \19\ A chronically delayed flight is any domestic flight that is 
operated at least 10 times a month, and arrives more than 30 minutes 
late (including cancelled flights) more than 50 percent of the time 
during that month. 14 C.F.R.  399.82.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Reducing denied boardings. In 2019, we reported that 
selected airlines have taken a range of actions, aimed at reducing 
involuntary denied boardings.\20\ Some of these actions also provide 
additional incentives for passengers to volunteer to be denied 
boarding. Actions include reducing or eliminating overbookings; 
improving software to better predict passenger no-shows; requesting 
volunteers earlier (e.g., at check-in instead of at the gate); 
increasing compensation for volunteers; and conducting reverse auctions 
to solicit volunteers.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ GAO-20-191.
    \21\ In a reverse auction, airlines solicit information from 
passengers on compensation amounts they would willingly accept in 
exchange for voluntarily giving up their seats and taking another 
flight. Airlines can then use that information to select passengers 
with the lowest amount of required compensation to be denied boarding 
voluntarily.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Less mishandled baggage. As we reported in 2018, 
representatives from almost all airlines we interviewed reported 
investing resources to improve baggage-handling efforts and minimize 
the effects to passengers whose bags are lost or delayed.\22\ Among 
other actions, airline representatives told us they upgraded baggage 
technology; modernized the claims process, so passengers could complete 
forms on-line; and instituted replacement baggage programs, where 
passengers can get a replacement bag at the airport. One airline also 
invested several million dollars to use radio frequency identification 
technology to track bags, as well as allowing passengers to track their 
baggage via an application on their smartphone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\ GAO-19-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Efforts to minimize flight disruptions. In 2018, we also 
reported that selected airlines had taken numerous actions to improve 
on-time performance or mitigate challenges for passengers associated 
with flight delays and cancellations.\23\ For example, one airline 
began tracking flights that were ``at-risk'' of meeting DOT's 
definition of a chronically delayed flight, so it could, among other 
things, swap crews or substitute aircraft and avoid these types of 
delays. Other airlines told us they use technology, such as text-
messaging updates, to communicate with passengers during delays and 
cancellations or increased the number of circumstances for which 
passengers are compensated during delays and cancellations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\ GAO-19-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Passengers May Experience Inconveniences When Operational Issues Occur
    Our prior work has shown that passengers may be affected to varying 
degrees by airline operational issues, and that incidents can be costly 
and disruptive for some passengers. Airlines are required by DOT 
regulations to provide compensation or certain amenities to 
inconvenienced passengers under certain circumstances. For example, 
some passengers who are denied boarding involuntarily are entitled to 
compensation, with the amount varying based on certain factors.\24\ 
Airlines are also required by DOT's interpretation of the statutory 
prohibition on unfair and deceptive practices to provide refunds for 
canceled and significantly delayed flights, if a passenger chooses to 
cancel his or her trip.\25\ Beyond those requirements, DOT officials 
previously told us that airlines are not obligated to provide 
accommodations for flight disruptions, such as cancellations and 
delays, unless specified in an airline's contract of carriage, although 
as mentioned above, some voluntarily choose to do so in certain 
situations. This may result in significant inconveniences for 
passengers, who may incur costs for lodging, meals and transportation. 
However, according to our prior work, available information about the 
number and magnitude of these effects is largely anecdotal and cannot 
be quantified.\26\ Furthermore, our review of selected airlines' 
contracts of carriage in February 2019 showed variation in the types of 
accommodations airlines provide and circumstances in which they will be 
provided, when operational issues occur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\ See 14 C.F.R. Part 250. Compensation levels vary based on, for 
example, the type of flight (e.g., foreign or domestic) and on the 
availability of alternative transportation offered by the airline.
    \25\ DOT has not specifically defined what amounts to a significant 
delay; individual airlines may or may not set their own thresholds for 
a significant delay in their contracts of carriage. Such contracts 
govern what, if anything, a passenger is entitled to, although airlines 
may--and in our recent work, we found do sometimes--offer additional 
accommodations to inconvenienced passengers. See GAO-19-514.
    \26\ GAO-19-514.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Civil Rights Complaints Have Recently Increased, and DOT and Most 
                     Airlines Have Training Efforts
Disability-Related Complaints Have Increased Steadily, While 
        Discrimination-Related Complaints Have Seen a Recent Increase
                         disability complaints
    According to the 2010 U.S. Census, 57 million Americans (roughly 1 
in 5) have a disability, and more than half of those 57 million 
Americans have mobility issues. Furthermore, older Americans are 
representing an increasing share of the U.S. population. As the 
population continues to age, the likelihood of this group needing 
assistance may increase. Without accommodations--such as effective 
communication of flight information, accessible seats, appropriate 
boarding assistance, and careful handling and stowage of wheelchairs 
and other assistive devices--people with accessibility or mobility 
issues may face challenges when flying, or they may be unable to fly 
altogether.
    As previously mentioned, the ACAA prohibits airlines operating in 
the U.S. from discriminating against individuals on the basis of 
disability in the provision of air transportation.\27\ Under this law, 
DOT has promulgated regulations requiring that airlines provide 
passengers with disabilities (1) assistance in enplaning and deplaning; 
and (2) compensation for lost, damaged, or delayed wheelchairs or other 
assistive devices.\28\ In contrast to all other complaints that 
passengers submit directly to airlines, DOT regulations require that 
airlines report annually to DOT the number of all disability-related 
complaints they received.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\ Pub. L. No. 99-435, 100 Stat. 1080 (codified as amended at 49 
U.S.C.  41705).
    \28\ 14 C.F.R.  382.131.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In our May 2017 report, we provided information showing that 
disability complaints reported to airlines and DOT generally increased 
from 2005 through 2015.\29\ More recent data shows that passenger 
complaints reported to U.S. airlines continued to increase (see table 
1). In particular, we found that complaints reported to airlines on 
disability issues increased by about 50 percent from 2010 (19,347) to 
2017 (29,662), the most recent year for which data are available. Based 
on our review, the vast majority of passengers chose to file their 
disability complaints directly to the airlines. Notably, the number of 
passenger complaints on disability issues reported to DOT from 2010 
through 2019 ranged from 572 to 944 and averaged about 780 complaints 
per year. Complaints reported to DOT rose in 2019, after peaking in 
2015 and declining the three following years. In 2017, the last year 
data are available for both, complaints reported to airlines and DOT 
were most commonly related to failure of airline staff to provide 
assistance, seating accommodation issues, and service animal issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\ This analysis looked at complaints to U.S. airlines, as well 
as foreign airlines that fly to, from, and within the U.S.

     Table 1: Disability Complaints Reported to U.S. Airlines and the Department of Transportation (DOT) by
                                  Passengers, Calendar Years 2010 through 2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Disability complaints    Disability Complaints
                             Year                                   to U.S. airlines              to DOT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010..........................................................                   19,347                      572
2011..........................................................                   18,953                      628
2012..........................................................                   20,584                      741
2013..........................................................                   21,965                      683
2014..........................................................                   24,044                      784
2015..........................................................                   26,401                      944
2016..........................................................                   27,842                      865
2017..........................................................                   29,662                      840
2018..........................................................            Not available                      826
2019..........................................................            Not available                      904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: GAO presentation of DOT data. GAO-20-475T
Note: DOT has not yet published its Annual Report on Disability-Related Air Travel Complaints for 2019 and 2020,
  which would include passenger complaints to airlines for 2018 and 2019, respectively.

    As we have previously reported, the number of complaints may not 
fully reflect the inconvenience experienced by passengers or would-be-
passengers with accessibility issues. Some may choose not to fly and 
others may have to take inconvenient or uncomfortable precautionary 
measures to avoid using the aircraft lavatory.\30\ For example, in our 
recent work examining the accessibility of aircraft lavatories, 
stakeholders we interviewed told us that some passengers severely limit 
their food and fluid intake in advance of the flight, risking 
dehydration; use a catheter; or wear a protective undergarment. 
Furthermore, because lavatories accessible by the aircraft's onboard 
wheelchair are not required on most aircraft (i.e., single-aisle 
aircraft) \31\ and there may not be an expectation that the lavatory be 
accessible by an onboard wheelchair, passengers may not see grounds to 
complain or may not take the time to submit a complaint. More 
generally, in our prior work, we found that complaint data are 
inherently limited because a substantial portion of dissatisfied 
individuals do not submit complaints and are therefore not represented 
in the complaint data.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \30\ GAO-20-258.
    \31\ Under DOT regulations, only aircraft with more than one aisle 
(twin-aisle aircraft) in which lavatories are provided are required to 
have at least one wheelchair accessible lavatory. 14 C.F.R.  382.63.
    \32\ GAO-19-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       discrimination complaints
    A number of federal statutes also prohibit or have been interpreted 
by DOT to prohibit airline discrimination against airline 
passengers.\33\ Federal statute also allows airlines to refuse to 
transport any passenger if the airline determines that the passenger 
is, or might be, a threat to safety.\34\ According to DOT guidance, 
this determination is made by the pilot in command of the aircraft or 
certain other specified airline personnel and cannot be arbitrary, but 
must be based on specific facts and circumstances known at the 
time.\35\ In its guidance, DOT has unequivocally provided that a 
passenger's status in a protected class (e.g., race, ancestry, national 
origin, or religion) cannot be the determinative factor in an airline's 
decision to deny boarding or remove a passenger from a flight.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \33\ See GAO-19-654R for a list of relevant statutes.
    \34\ See 49 U.S.C.  44902(b). See also 14 C.F.R.  91.3(a) 
providing that the pilot in command of an aircraft is directly 
responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of the 
aircraft.
    \35\ DOT, Passengers' Right to Fly Free from Discrimination 
(Washington, D.C.: January 2017).
    \36\ DOT, Passengers' Right to Fly Free from Discrimination, 
(Washington, D.C.: January 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Our August 2019 report showed that the total number of passenger 
complaints reported to DOT against U.S. airlines alleging 
discrimination generally declined from 2010 through 2015, but began to 
increase starting in 2016. Moreover, updated data for 2019 show a 
further increase, with 96 complaints filed (table 2). According to our 
analysis, from 2010 through 2019, DOT received, on average, 80 
discrimination-related complaints a year, most commonly about racial 
discrimination. Despite the recent increase in the total number of 
discrimination complaints, they account for a small percentage of total 
passenger complaints DOT receives, as well as total passenger 
boardings. For example, in 2019, of the 9,547 complaints DOT received 
against U.S. airlines, 96 alleged discriminatory treatment.

 Table 2: Discrimination Complaints Reported to the Department of Transportation (DOT) Against U.S. Airlines by
                                          Passengers, 2010 through 2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Ethnicity     National
                   Year                       Race   or ancestry     origin      Religion      Other      Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010......................................       24           54           10            5           25      118
2011......................................       34           25           27            1           19      106
2012......................................       40            8           15            7           13       83
2013......................................       50            1            2            2            5       60
2014......................................       42            4            8            1            5       60
2015......................................       43            0            6            2            3       54
2016......................................       57            0           10            6            8       81
2017......................................       56            4            7            3           11       81
2018......................................       53            1            8            1           14       77
2019......................................       60            4           11            6           15       96
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: GAO presentation of DOT data. GAO-20-475T
Note: ``Other'' includes complaints about discrimination on the basis of color, age, or sex, among other things.

    As noted above and previously reported, DOT's discrimination 
complaint data does not capture passenger complaints reported directly 
to airlines.\37\ In 2018, we reported that DOT officials estimated 
that, across all complaint categories, for every passenger complaint 
they receive, airlines receive about 50.\38\ While we have previously 
requested discrimination complaint data from selected airlines, they 
have generally declined, citing the proprietary nature of this 
information.\39\ Since 2017, DOT has disaggregated discrimination 
complaints into sub-categories, such as racial or religious 
discrimination, and published this data in its Air Travel Consumer 
Report.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \37\ On its website, when discussing how to file a complaint, DOT 
recommends that passengers initially file a complaint with the airline. 
However, the website also states that if the passenger is not satisfied 
with the airline's response, they may want to then file a complaint 
with DOT. In our November 2018 report, we recommended, among other 
actions, that DOT assess its procedures and training materials for 
coding airline passengers' complaints to help ensure that they are 
consistently coded and that potential consumer protection violations 
are properly identified. DOT concurred with all six recommendations and 
cited actions they had begun taking to address them, such as developing 
new training materials for coding passenger complaints.
    \38\ GAO-19-76.
    \39\ One airline provided us information on discrimination 
complaints it received from passengers relative to total passenger 
boardings, which showed a relatively constant rate between November 
2017 and December 2018. See GAO-19-654R.
    \40\ DOT issues a monthly Air Travel Consumer Report, which informs 
the public about the quality of airlines' services. This action was 
taken to increase transparency, in part, in response to LDF and Muslim 
Advocates' letter referenced earlier in our statement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOT and Airlines Have Ongoing Training Efforts on Disability and 
        Discrimination Issues
    We previously identified actions that DOT and airlines have taken 
that are intended to ensure that no passengers are discriminated 
against on the basis of disability or other protected class. Our work 
primarily examined airlines' efforts to train staff and contractors. 
However, our work also identified other airline actions (both proactive 
and reactive) taken to enhance compliance with consumer protections in 
these areas. For example, one airline developed a wheelchair tracking 
system in response to a DOT enforcement action to help reduce incidents 
of lost or mishandled wheelchairs.
    DOT requires that airlines provide their employees and contractor 
staff who interact with the traveling public training on the proper and 
safe operation of equipment used to accommodate passengers with a 
disability, as well as on boarding and deplaning assistance.\41\ While 
not required, DOT encourages airlines to implement comprehensive non-
discrimination trainings to help prevent discrimination. DOT has also 
developed training materials, available on its aviation consumer 
protection website, for airline employees and contractor staff. These 
materials include brochures, digital content, and videos on the rights 
of passengers with disabilities, as well as tips on providing 
wheelchair assistance at airports and onboard aircraft. In 2017, DOT 
also developed guidance for airline personnel on non-discrimination 
topics.\42\ The material included scenarios for recognizing 
discriminatory behavior and provided examples of how to ask additional 
questions or conduct additional screening in a non-discriminatory 
manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \41\ Airlines operating aircraft with 19 or more passenger seats 
are required to provide such training. See 14 C.F.R.  382.141(a)(1).
    \42\ See DOT, Guidance for Airline Personnel on Non-Discrimination 
in Air Travel (Washington, D.C.: January 2017) and DOT, Passengers' 
Right to Fly Free from Discrimination (Washington, D.C.: January 2017). 
These materials were developed, in part, in response to concerns raised 
by advocacy organizations referenced earlier in our statement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     training on disability issues
    In 2017 we reviewed disability training programs for 12 selected 
airlines and found that they all had disability-related training 
requirements for their staff and contractors, with some variations in 
the content and format.\43\ Over the course of that work, each airline 
demonstrated that it had, as required, initial and recurrent training 
for its employees, contractors, and complaint resolution officers 
(CRO).\44\ All 12 selected airlines used a mix of training, including 
classroom-based training, computer-based training, situational 
scenarios, and hands-on training, such as wheelchair handling and 
lifting passengers into aisle seats to assist in boarding for specific 
groups. We also found that these selected airlines generally consulted 
with disability organizations when developing ACAA training programs. 
Some airlines also voluntarily implemented quality assurance programs 
to improve and sustain their disability-training programs' performance. 
Another step some airlines have taken, though not required by the ACAA 
or its implementing regulations, is the creation of a disability board, 
which serves as a forum for increasing awareness among their workforce 
about disability issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \43\ We did not visit each airline or review all training 
materials; rather we asked each airline to submit outlines or summaries 
that described its disability-training regime. GAO-17-541R.
    \44\ See 14 C.F.R.  382.141, 382.143, and 382.141(a)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 training on non-discrimination issues
    In 2019, we reported that representatives from all six U.S. 
airlines we selected for review told us they provide non-discrimination 
training to employees, although not all contractor staff receive that 
training.\45\ These representatives told us they provide initial non-
discrimination training to newly hired employees who interact with 
passengers--including, for example, pilots, flight attendants, and 
customer service representatives--and that most regularly update the 
training based on current events or changes in policy. Airline 
representatives provided high-level examples describing the content of 
their trainings, but with one exception, they declined to provide more 
specific information, citing the sensitive or business proprietary 
nature of such materials.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \45\ GAO-19-654R.
    \46\ Airlines have no legal requirement to provide us with their 
non-discrimination training materials or to make such materials 
available to the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We found some similarities and differences in what representatives 
reported their trainings covered. For example, representatives 
generally stated that non-discrimination trainings--which were 
typically embedded in larger training programs and combined in-person 
and web-based modules--emphasized treating all individuals fairly and 
without bias, regardless of race, ancestry, or religion, among other 
things. Most also said trainings covered implicit bias--a term that 
refers to attitudes or stereotypes about groups of people that 
unconsciously affect a person's understanding, actions, and decisions--
and half said they have used DOT's guidance discussed above, with some 
airline-specific modifications.
Airlines and DOT Have Taken Initial Steps in Other Consumer Protection 
        Areas
    In our recent work on aircraft lavatories, we found that some U.S. 
airlines voluntarily installed lavatories accessible by the aircraft's 
onboard wheelchair for some of their single-aisle aircraft.\47\ 
However, we found that these aircraft only constituted about 4.5 
percent of the eight selected airlines' combined single-aisle fleet. 
According to airline representatives, providing lavatories accessible 
by the aircraft's onboard wheelchair may reduce the number of revenue 
generating seats in the aircraft cabin, which can increase airlines' 
costs and result in higher fares for consumers. In lieu of lavatories 
accessible by the aircraft's onboard wheelchair, airline 
representatives said they have added certain features--such as assist 
handles or grab bars, and accessible call buttons or door locks--
designed to increase access to certain lavatory functions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \47\ GAO-20-258.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    DOT has recently issued three notices of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 
designed to improve the accessibility of aircraft lavatories, regulate 
service animals, and clarify DOT's authority to stop airlines from 
engaging in unfair or deceptive practices. For example, in January 
2020, DOT issued an NPRM to solicit comments on short-term 
accessibility improvements on single-aisle aircraft through the 
installation of accessibility features within the lavatory, such as 
those mentioned above, without changing the size of lavatories.\48\ In 
addition, DOT announced its intention to issue an advance NPRM to 
address long-term accessibility improvements and to solicit comments 
and gather information on the costs and benefits of requiring airlines 
to increase the size of the single-aisle lavatory on new aircraft 
models to accommodate a wheelchair as well as an assistant. In 2008, 
DOT noted that accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft would 
benefit passengers with disabilities, but also expressed concerns that 
revenue loss and other cost impacts could be too great for the 
airlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \48\ 85 Fed. Reg. 27 (Jan. 2, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 included a number of ongoing 
requirements for DOT in the airline consumer protection area. For 
example, DOT is responsible for developing leading non-discrimination 
practices for airlines, in consultation with airlines and other 
consumer advocates.\49\ In addition to our recently published work, we 
have ongoing work examining airport accessibility for passengers with 
disabilities, as well as DOT's enforcement approach to consumer 
protections. We anticipate issuing reports on the results of this work 
later this year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \49\ To help inform DOT's leading practices, we identified key 
considerations for developing and presenting non-discrimination 
training programs, such as demonstrating management commitment for 
trainings and including key non-discrimination principles, such as 
implicit bias, in training content. See GAO-19-654R.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the 
Subcommittee, this completes my prepared remarks. I look forward to 
answering any questions you may have.

    Mr. Larsen. Thank you very much.
    Mr. McGee, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. McGee. Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and 
subcommittee members, on behalf of Consumer Reports, the 
independent, nonprofit consumer organization, thank you for the 
opportunity to address the concerns of millions of American air 
travelers. Three years ago, I appeared before this committee 
after the infamous Dr. Dao incident, in which a paying 
passenger was literally dragged off a United Airlines flight. 
We heard promises that day, but conditions have not improved 
much for air travelers since then.
    A wave of mega mergers since 2001 has left just three major 
network airlines, American, Delta, and United, plus major low-
cost carrier Southwest. Many of us warned such lack of 
competition would leave Americans at the mercy of an oligopoly, 
resulting in worse service, higher fares, and fewer hubs and 
nonstop flights, and that is what has come to pass in many 
markets. Aircraft cabins are more fully packed than at any time 
since World War II, with passenger load factors at 84 percent, 
straining the system to capacity. Seats are tighter as airlines 
shoehorn ever more passengers in, and the nickel and diming of 
fees has exploded. Ancillary revenue reached $75.6 billion 
worldwide last year.
    Statistics indicate that involuntary denied boardings 
increased by 57 percent last year, with almost 21,000 
passengers bumped against their will, enough to fill Capital 
One Arena. That is why we still advocate banning any forced 
bumping of ticketed passengers.
    But a central question was never addressed: Why Dr. Dao? 
What internal airline calculations determined who will be 
permitted to board and who will be bumped, or worse, dragged 
off? This is an industry in desperate need of transparency. 
Consider, searching through multitudes of flights and fares can 
be mind-numbing, due to extraordinarily complex pricing. This 
is especially hard, because most travelers fly less than once a 
year, and the airlines don't make it easy to comparison shop. 
Fees can be even more opaque. Sometimes you can't obtain fees 
prior to booking, even for basics like checking bags, picking 
seats, changing flights, or even carrying on a bag.
    It is common now for airlines to black out seats at 
booking, leaving fewer available for selection, thus scaring 
customers into paying more. Indeed, basic economy is designed 
to attract shoppers and then pressure them by up-selling.
    When a flight is delayed, who will be rebooked and who will 
not? When it is canceled, who will get a hotel room and who 
will sleep on the airport floor? If you are not in a premium 
class or an elite frequent flier, watch out.
    Even safety itself is opaque. There is no transparency on 
the critical maintenance and repairs outsourced to El Salvador, 
Brazil, and China, often under far less stringent oversight.
    Lengthy contracts of carriage provide few rights and 
guarantees. That is why we still advocate for a comprehensive 
passenger bill of rights with guaranteed accommodations during 
flight delays and cancellations, transparency of fares and 
fees, and safe, healthy aircraft seating.
    Because the 1978 Airline Deregulation Act overrules most 
State consumer protection laws, DOT plays a particularly 
essential role in protecting passengers, but, unfortunately, 
has largely abdicated that role.
    Consider, in 2017 it cited limited public benefit and 
withdrew two key rulemakings, while new rulemakings have 
dwindled. For 2 years, DOT's Aviation Consumer Protection 
Advisory Committee held no meetings. Then DOT appointed someone 
from the American Enterprise Institute with no history of 
consumer advocacy as the consumer representative.
    Enforcement authority is falling far short, as DOT issues 
record low fines. Last year, DOT fined American roughly $77,000 
for a tarmac delay, and Delta, roughly $68,000. For 
corporations that generated more than $44 billion each in 
revenues in 2018, that is no deterrent.
    In 2016, Congress, led by this committee, directed DOT to 
review, and if appropriate, establish a policy to ensure 
families with kids 13 and under sit together without paying 
extra fees. For years, DOT was virtually silent, so we filed a 
Freedom of Information Act request. DOT finally forwarded 136 
complaints to us, stating publicly it was unnecessary to act, 
quote, ``based on the low number.''
    We analyzed those complaints and were horrified to find 
cases with children as young as 1, 2, and 3 years old assigned 
seats away from family. Other children were autistic, suffered 
seizures, or had life-threatening nut allergies. Such policies 
also guarantee chaos during emergency evacuations and put 
children at risk for in-flight sexual assaults, which the FBI 
says are rising. Shocked by DOT's inaction, we created an 
online portal and soon forwarded over 600 complaints, more than 
four times DOT's original total. DOT should fulfill this 
committee's mandate, and we are urging major airlines to fix 
this themselves, joined by more than 125,000 individuals who 
signed our petition. We also support the Fly Together Act.
    Other critical safety issues that haven't been effectively 
addressed include FAA's troubling oversight of aircraft 
maintenance outsourcing to foreign repair stations, echoing its 
failed oversight of Boeing 737 MAX. That is why we support the 
Safe Aircraft Maintenance Standards Act.
    FAA's emergency evacuation testing has failed to account 
for seismic changes: Record passenger loads, tighter seats, 
larger passengers, more disabled, more carry-on baggage, 
distracting electronics, oversized, untrained support animals, 
and, of course, children seated apart from families. FAA's 
refusal to close a 67-year-old loophole and require children 
under 2 to be properly restrained on commercial flights.
    Recent media reports highlighted raging battles----
    Mr. Larsen. Mr. McGee, you need to wrap up.
    Mr. McGee. Sure. All too often, DOT serves the interests of 
airlines, not the flying public. Congress should enact 
meaningful passenger rights protections and provide greater 
safety oversight. We applaud the subcommittee for its 
continuing efforts.
    I will be happy to answer any questions. Thank you very 
much.
    [Mr. McGee's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
  Prepared Statement of William J. McGee, Aviation Adviser, Consumer 
                                Reports
    Good morning, Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and 
Subcommittee Members. On behalf of Consumer Reports,\1\ the 
independent, nonprofit consumer organization, thank you for the 
opportunity to speak today regarding the concerns of millions of 
American air travelers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Consumer Reports is an expert, independent, non-profit 
organization, founded in 1936, that works side by side with consumers 
for a fairer, safer, and healthier world, fueled by our trusted 
research, journalism, advocacy, and insights. We reach nearly 20 
million people each month across our print and digital media 
properties, and we use our labs, auto test center, and survey research 
center to rate thousands of products and services annually. We have 
been active for decades on a wide range of policy issues advocating for 
the interests of consumers, including protecting their safety and 
rights in air travel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Three years ago I appeared before the House Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee,\2\ at a marathon 4.5-hour hearing to discuss 
``Oversight of U.S. Airline Customer Service''--and specifically the 
state of domestic airline policies in the wake of the infamous ``Dr. 
Dao incident,'' in which a paying passenger was literally dragged off a 
United Airlines flight outsourced to a regional carrier. Consumer 
Reports would like nothing more than to report that conditions have 
improved for airline passengers since then. But unfortunately, 
discontent among the nation's travelers with the state of air travel 
has been increasing, and for good reason.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ ConsumerReports.org; ``Testimony of William J. McGee, House 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,'' May 2, 2017, 
advocacy.consumerreports.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Consumers-
Union-McGee-05-02-2017-House-airline-hearing.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Massive industry consolidation since 2001 has not produced the 
higher levels of customer service that were promised by airline 
executives during the wave of mega-mergers that absorbed America West, 
Continental, Northwest, TWA, US Airways, and other carriers and have 
left the country with just three major network hub-and-spoke airlines--
American, Delta, and United, and one major point-to-point carrier, 
Southwest. These were the mergers that many of us vocally opposed right 
here in the House and Senate,\3\ as we warned that a lack of robust 
competition would leave American air travelers at the mercy of an 
airline oligopoly resulting in lower levels of service, fewer hub 
airports, fewer nonstop flights on many routes, and higher fares on 
routes not served by Low Cost Carriers. Simply put, due to 
consolidation airline executives are responding less and less to the 
needs of customers, who no longer have the kinds of meaningful choices 
they once did.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ E.g., advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/cu-to-raise-
concerns-about-american-airlines-us-airways-mergers-potential-impact-
on-consumers/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    What's more, in recent years aircraft cabins have become more fully 
packed than at any time since World War II, with the most recent annual 
passenger load factors averaging 84%,\4\ straining the system to 
capacity on a daily basis. Seats have never been tighter, as legroom 
pitch and width continue to shrink while airlines attempt to shoehorn 
ever more passengers into aircraft. And the nickel-and-diming of fees 
has never been higher or more pervasive; in 2018 Consumer Reports 
conducted a nationwide survey that found a third of respondents had 
recently experienced an unexpected airline fee in the previous two 
years, and half of those went over budget due to such fees.\5\ And 
these fees continue to get higher. A report released by a leading 
aviation marketing firm just two weeks ago estimated that airline 
ancillary revenue reached $75.6 billion worldwide last year.\6\ In 
fact, airline financial reports indicate that the primary source of 
profits of some airlines is ancillary fees, with base airfares becoming 
increasingly secondary.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation 
Statistics, ``Estimated Full Year 2019 and December 2019 U.S. Airline 
Traffic Data'', January 17, 2020, www.bts.gov/newsroom/estimated-full-
year-2019-and-december-2019-us-airline-traffic-data.
    \5\ https://www.consumerreports.org/fees-billing/protect-yourself-
from-hidden-fees/.
    \6\ IdeaWorks Company, ``CarTrawler Global Statistics of a la Carte 
Revenue,'' February 18, 2020, www.ideaworkscompany.com/february-18-
2020-press-release.
    \7\ E.g., IdeaWorks Company, ``CarTrawler Ancillary Revenue Series 
for 2019,'' July 24, 2019, www.ideaworkscompany.com/wp-content/uploads/
2019/08/2018-Top-10-Airline-Ancillary-Revenue-Rankings.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This monetization of every aspect of air travel--from checked bag 
to boarding order to seat selection--has led to new challenges and 
complications. As I will discuss in greater detail below, airline 
seating and pricing schemes have created a situation in which families 
with children discover that they are required to pay additional fees or 
upgrades in order to ensure they will be seated together. This creates 
situations that many parents find inconceivable, and it creates safety 
and security concerns for all travelers.
    Many promises were made by executives from United and other 
domestic airlines at that hearing in 2017, though few tangible 
improvements ended up in airline Contracts of Carriage. Statistics 
released by the U.S. Department of Transportation just two weeks ago 
\8\ indicate that between 2018 and 2019, involuntary denied boardings 
increased by 57%, with 20,868 passengers bumped against their will last 
year, enough to fill the Capital One Arena. That's why Consumer Reports 
continues to advocate for a clear prohibition on involuntary 
relinquishment of ticketed seats--except for compelling safety or 
security reasons--and clear guidelines for ensuring that 
relinquishments are truly voluntary, in exchange for appropriate 
compensation. But amazingly, one of the most central questions of all 
concerning Dr. David Dao has never been addressed: Why him? What 
internal airline calculations determine which passengers will be 
permitted to board and which will be involuntarily bumped--or worse, 
dragged off a flight?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ U.S. Department of Transportation, Air Travel Consumer Reports, 
www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/air-
travel-consumer-reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Involuntary bumping is just one manifestation of much more systemic 
problems for consumers. From the passenger's perspective, this is an 
industry in desperate need of transparency. Nearly every aspect of the 
customer experience is mired in mystery. Consider:
      When booking a trip weeks or even months in advance, the 
search through the multitudes of flights, with potentially billions of 
fares available on flights worldwide is mind-numbing, a process 
economists have described as one of the most complex pricing mechanisms 
on the open market. It has spawned cottage industries advising how, 
where, and even when to shop, down to the best hour of the week. The 
experience can be especially confounding to the millions of air 
travelers who fly less than once a year. And the airlines make it 
difficult to comparison shop.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ See advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/comments-of-
consumers-union-and-us-pirg-to-dept-of-transportation-re-ensuring-
access-to-reliable-airline-flight-information/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Fees can be even more opaque than fares. In fact, 
sometimes it can even be impossible to determine the full amount of 
fees prior to booking. Many of these fees are not optional; they are 
charged for basic services such as checking bags, selecting seats, 
changing flight reservations, or even carrying on a small bag.
      When passengers select seats, it's common now for 
airlines to block out seats throughout the cabin, leaving fewer seats 
available, a practice that can result in scaring consumers into paying 
more to secure seats or upgrading to more expensive classes. Indeed, 
the uncomfortable product known as Basic Economy is designed to attract 
shoppers and then pressure them by upselling.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ U.S. Senate, Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation, 
Sen. Bill Nelson, Ranking Member, ``New Fares and Fees Take Flight: 
Basic Economy and New and Increased Fees Continue to Confuse Airline 
Travelers,'' January 2018, www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/
44126719-3475-49f6-a974-df2b21e22e10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      When a flight is delayed, which passengers will be 
quickly rebooked and which will not? When a flight is cancelled, which 
passengers will be given accommodations, and which will sleep on an 
airport floor? For those not in premium classes or elite members of 
frequent flyer programs, there is no transparency on such decisions, 
and often little communication.
      Even safety itself is opaque. There is no transparency on 
the outsourcing of critical scheduled maintenance and repairs for U.S. 
airline fleets to facilities in foreign locations such as El Salvador, 
Brazil, Mexico, China, and Singapore, often under far less stringent 
oversight, yet with the full blessing of the Federal Aviation 
Administration.

    I spent seven years working in airline flight operations 
management, and I don't know that any front-line industry employees can 
answer these questions, because airline systems are now intentionally 
opaque, with Contracts of Carriage that provide travelers with few 
rights and guarantees. They are lengthy, filled with legal jargon, and 
designed to protect the airline, not passengers. They typically promise 
only that airlines ``may'' rather than ``will'' accommodate passengers 
fairly. This is why for years now Consumer Reports and others have 
advocated for a comprehensive, consistent Passenger Bill of Rights, 
similar to what the European Union has effectively enforced for 16 
years now.\11\ It should include standardized accommodations during 
flight delays and cancellations; up-front transparency for flights, 
fares, and fees; and effective standards for safe and healthy aircraft 
seating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ European Union, Air Passenger Rights, europa.eu/youreurope/
citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/index_en.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Because the federal preemption clause of the 1978 Airline 
Deregulation Act overrules nearly all state consumer protection laws, 
the federal Department of Transportation plays a particularly essential 
role in protecting airline passengers. But unfortunately it's a role 
the DOT has largely been abdicating in recent years. Consider:
      In 2017, the Department cited ``limited public benefit'' 
and withdrew two key proposed rulemakings on airline pricing 
transparency, a move strongly criticized by Consumer Reports and other 
consumer organizations.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ U.S. Department of Transportation, ``DOT Withdraws Two 
Proposed Rulemakings,'' December 7, 2017, www.transportation.gov/
briefing-room/dot9117.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The Department's Notices of Proposed Rulemakings--which 
allow the flying public, consumer advocates, and other interested 
parties to offer comments on critical aviation issues--have trickled 
down to a fraction of the NPRMs put forth under past Administrations. 
Ironically, one of the few NPRMs in that trickle is a notice issued 
just two weeks ago that proposes to restrict the Department's oversight 
of unfair and deceptive airline practices.\13\ We are particularly 
concerned that, as is noted in the NPRM, the impetus for this proposal 
came from the trade association for the airlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ U.S. Department of Transportation, ``Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking: Defining Unfair or Deceptive Practices,'' February 20, 
2020, www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/
notice-proposed-rulemaking-defining-unfair-or-deceptive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      For two years, the DOT's Aviation Consumer Protection 
Advisory Committee did not hold quarterly meetings, as its predecessor 
committee had for many years. When the ACPAC was finally reconstituted 
in 2019, the DOT appointed as the consumer representative an adjunct 
fellow from the American Enterprise Institute, who had no previous 
history of advocating for consumers. This was a stark departure from 
the very purpose of establishing the committee.
      For three years now, Consumer Reports has joined other 
consumer organizations in requesting a meeting with Secretary Elaine 
Chao to present our concerns about these issues, just as we have met 
with every other DOT Secretary in recent years. To date that request 
has been denied.

    As for the Department's enforcement authority, all too often the 
punishments fall far short of the offenses, according to independent 
analysis.\14\ In 2019, the DOT issued just eight enforcement actions 
against airlines, a record low number. And in 2018 it levied just $1.8 
million in such fines, a new low in dollar amounts. For example, the 
hard-fought tarmac delay rules that were enacted a decade ago to end 
the airline practice of holding passengers captive on airport 
taxiways--often for hours on end, without food or water or even 
lavatory access--were initially quite effective, but in recent years 
tarmac delays are steadily increasing. This is hardly surprising, 
considering that last year the DOT fined American Airlines roughly 
$77,000 per delay for 13 flights, and Delta Air Lines roughly $68,000 
per delay for 11 flights. For corporations that generated $44.5 billion 
and $44.4 billion respectively in annual revenues in 2018, there 
clearly is little fear of DOT oversight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ ``It's Official! Airline Fines Hit a Record Low in 2019,'' 
Christopher Elliot, January 3, 2020, chriselliotts.com/government-
airline-fines-hit-record-low/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Perhaps the clearest example of the Department's deliberate 
inaction is an issue Consumer Reports has been closely following for 
four years. In 2016, Congress, led by this committee, directed the DOT 
to ``review, and if appropriate, establish a policy'' to ensure U.S. 
airlines allow families with children 13 and under to sit together 
without paying additional fees.\15\ After two years of virtual silence 
from the DOT, in 2018 Consumer Reports filed a Freedom of Information 
Act request.\16\ After another year's delay, the DOT finally forwarded 
136 consumer complaints to us, while stating publicly that it was 
unnecessary to take action--``based on the low number of complaints.'' 
\17\ We analyzed those complaints and were horrified to find they 
included cases involving children as young as 1, 2, and 3 years old 
assigned seats away from their parents; other children seated 
separately were autistic, suffered seizures, or were susceptible to 
life-threatening nut allergies.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ Congress.gov; ``FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 
2016,'' July 15, 2016, www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ190/PLAW-
114publ190.htm.
    \16\ Consumer Reports, ``Family Seating FOIA,'' September 23, 2019, 
advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/consumer-reports-letter-to-house-
transportation-committee-dot-reply-to-family-seating-freedom-of-
information-act-request/.
    \17\ U.S. Department of Transportation, ``DOT's Review of U.S. 
Airline Family Seating Policies,'' September 17, 2019, 
www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/review-
us-airline-family-seating-policies.
    \18\ Consumer Reports, ``Letter to Congress,'' September 23, 2019, 
advocacy.consumerreports.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Family-seating-
FOIA-CR-letter-to-House-TI-9-23-19-FINAL-4.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Seating children apart from their families also creates a 
disruption during an emergency evacuation, posing a threat to all 
passengers. Furthermore, a 2018 FBI report \19\ stated that inflight 
sexual assaults are on the rise, with children particularly vulnerable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\ FBI, ``Sexual Assault Onboard Aircraft,'' April 26, 2018, 
www.fbi.gov/news/stories/raising-awareness-about-sexual-assault-aboard-
aircraft-042618.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Shocked by the DOT's refusal to act, we established our own online 
portal and within weeks had received and forwarded in excess of 600 
complaints, more than four times the DOT's original total. Many of the 
individuals who reached out to us were clear they did not know about 
the DOT's complaint system, and surely would have complained earlier if 
they were aware of it.
    We continue to urge the DOT to fulfill its mandate to protect the 
safety of airline passengers by developing the sort of rule this 
committee envisioned in 2016. In the meantime, we are urging the major 
airlines to fix this themselves, and are joined by more than 114,000 
individuals who signed a petition on the subject in just one week.\20\ 
Last week, we wrote to American, Delta, and United reminding them how 
they can fix this consumer protection issue on their own and ensure 
that children sit with family members on planes. Furthermore, we also 
support H.R. 5292, the Fly Together Act,\21\ introduced by Rep. Ann 
Wagner and Rep. Anthony Brown, that would force DOT's hand, taking away 
its flexibility to decide if a rule is ``appropriate'' and requiring it 
to issue such a rule. We hope this issue can be addressed without 
further legislation, but appreciate the introduction of the bill 
nonetheless.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ Consumer Reports, ``Airlines: Kids Should Sit with Their 
Parents!'', action.consumerreports.org/
fees20200219petition_airlinefamilyseating.
    \21\ www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/5292/text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We also are concerned about other critical safety issues that have 
not been effectively addressed by the DOT and its component, the 
Federal Aviation Administration. These include:
      The FAA's lack of proper oversight of aircraft 
maintenance outsourcing to foreign repair stations, which echoes the 
well-documented debacle of the FAA's oversight of the Boeing 737 MAX 
development. This is why we strongly support H.R. 5119, the Safe 
Aircraft Maintenance Standards Act.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\ www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/5119.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The FAA's emergency evacuation testing has failed to 
actively take into account seismic changes in air travel extending over 
the past two decades, including record-high passenger loads; tighter 
seats; larger passengers; increases in carry-on baggage due to checked 
bag fees; distracting electronics; the influx of oversized, untrained 
emotional support animals; and of course, children being seated apart 
from their families.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\ Consumer Reports, ``Consumer Organizations Letter to DOT and 
FAA on Passenger Emergency Evacuation Tests,'' October 21, 2019, 
advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/consumer-organization-letter-to-
dot-and-faa-on-passenger-emergency-evacuation-test/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The FAA's refusal to close a 67-year-old loophole and 
require children under 2 to be properly restrained on commercial 
flights.

    At Consumer Reports we hear continually from passengers expressing 
frustration at not being heard by indifferent airline executives. In 
recent weeks, journalists and social media have highlighted raging 
battles over whether passengers can recline their seats when it crowds 
passengers sitting behind them.\24\ While passengers fight with each 
other or with flight attendants, the real culprits are the airlines 
that intentionally make seats tighter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\ E.g., CNN.com, ``Her Reclined Seat was Repeatedly Punched,'' 
February 29, 2020, www.cnn.com/2020/02/18/us/plane-passenger-reclined-
seat-cnn/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In abdicating its critical role to protect and defend the rights of 
airline passengers, all too often the Department has taken steps that 
serve the best interests of the aviation industry, not the best 
interests of the flying public and taxpayers who fund the system. 
That's why it's imperative that Congress enact meaningful passenger 
rights protections and provide greater safety oversight. And we applaud 
the Aviation Subcommittee for its continuing efforts.
    I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you 
very much.

    Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
    I now want to recognize Mr. Lee Page of the Paralyzed 
Veterans of America. Mr. Page, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Page. Thank you, Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member 
Graves, members of the subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans of 
America----
    Mr. Larsen. Mr. Lee, I just want to be sure that we can 
hear you. Just pull the microphone or someone can help out and 
pull the whole box forward.
    Mr. Page. Can you hear me now? OK.
    Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, members of the 
subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans of America thanks you for the 
opportunity to testify regarding air travel experience of 
passengers with disabilities.
    It has been more than 30 years since Congress passed the 
Air Carrier Access Act. This law protects the civil rights of 
passengers with disabilities in air travel. Although it 
improved our experience, the process is far from seamless, and 
at times, is even unsafe. PVA members routinely report being 
physically harmed in boarding and deplaning aircraft and their 
wheelchairs, particularly power wheelchairs, are often damaged 
while being stored. They also often encounter air carrier 
personnel and contractors who are not appropriately trained in 
assisting passengers with catastrophic disability. We believe 
most problems result from lack of training, inaccessible 
aircraft, and inadequate enforcement of the law.
    Commercial air travel is the only mode of public 
transportation in which a wheelchair or scooter user must 
surrender their assistive device in order to travel. Passengers 
must rely on air carrier personnel or contractors to properly 
store these devices, and help them board and deplane the 
aircraft. For many wheelchair users, this is where the problems 
in safely accessing air travel truly begin.
    Air carriers use several different types of aisle chairs to 
help passengers with disabilities board and deplane the 
aircraft. An aisle chair is a small narrow wheelchair that 
cannot be pushed by its passenger. Aisle chairs are often 
poorly designed and in disrepair. In some cases, the aisle 
chair can harm the passenger, because it does not have proper 
padding, which can lead to skin abrasions, bruises, or sores.
    Furthermore, airline assistants are typically not properly 
trained in how to physically lift or transfer a person from a 
wheelchair to an aisle chair. They are also too often 
unfamiliar with the securement straps.
    On my most recent flight, I had a problem with the aisle 
chair and the people who came to assist me. The aisle chair 
that was used did not meet my needs. The footrest was too 
small, and my feet kept falling off the aisle chair as I was 
being brought into and out of the plane. Also, the seat straps 
were not sufficient to keep me in a secure seated position. As 
a result, my hip and lower backside hit every armrest all the 
way back to my assigned seat. At my seat, the personnel tried 
to lift me up over the fixed armrest into my seat, but they 
were not strong enough and ended up dropping me on the armrest 
as I slid into the seat.
    Passengers with limited mobility must also worry about the 
storage of their assistive devices. Damage to wheelchairs can 
be a trip-altering event, as well as pose significant health 
concerns for passengers who depend on it for mobility. 
Customized wheelchairs are not easily replaced if damaged.
    Although my wheelchair is typically returned to me without 
significant damage, this is not always the case for some of our 
PVA members, particularly those who use power wheelchairs. 
Damage to assistive devices is typically a result of improper 
loading and securement within the cargo area of the aircraft. 
Damage ranges from minor tears to fabric upholstery to a 
complete electrical power breakdown, rendering the chair 
useless to operators. Repair often takes time, leaving the 
passenger stranded until it can be fixed.
    Disability access is almost nonexistent on most commercial 
aircraft. The aisle width of the plane is typically smaller 
than that of the individual being transported on the aisle 
chair. This means the passengers are bumped and scraped from 
row to row to get to their seat, wherever that might be on the 
aircraft.
    Lack of accessibility also extends to the lavatories on a 
vast majority of single-aisle aircraft. A January 2020 GAO 
report on the accessibility of U.S. aircraft lavatories for 
people who have limited mobility found that although accessible 
lavatories are available, carriers do not often choose to 
acquire them.
    When passengers with disabilities encounter disability 
discrimination, they are left with few remedies. Administrative 
remedies available through the Department of Transportation are 
quite limited. In response to a complaint I filed following my 
most recent trip, I received 10,000 bonus miles from the 
carrier. Systematic change is what is needed, not more bonus 
miles.
    Disability-related provisions included in the study on 
lavatory access in the FAA Reauthorization Act represents an 
important step forward in efforts to improve air travel 
experience for passengers with disabilities. However, these 
provisions alone will not address the fundamental access 
problems to safe air travel for people with disabilities. Thus, 
we strongly support the bipartisan Air Carrier Access 
Amendments Act, H.R. 1549, which was introduced in March 2019 
by Representative Jim Langevin.
    This legislation would greatly improve aircraft 
accessibility, and strengthen enforcement of Air Carrier Access 
Act. As the population ages, the need for greater accessibility 
in aircraft will only continue to grow. Better training of 
airline personnel and their contractors, increased aircraft 
accessibility, and improved enforcement options, will lead to 
safer travel experiences for PVA members and all passengers 
with disabilities.
    PVA thanks you for the opportunity to express our views 
today. I will be happy to answer any questions at this time.
    [Mr. Page's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
  Prepared Statement of Lee Page, Senior Associate Advocacy Director, 
                     Paralyzed Veterans of America
    Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the 
Subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) thanks you for the 
opportunity to testify about the experience of air travel passengers 
with disabilities and opportunities for reform. PVA is a 
congressionally-chartered veterans services organization serving the 
needs of veterans with spinal cord injuries and disorders. Nearly all 
of our members require the use of some type of assistive device, 
including manual and power wheelchairs, scooters, and canes, to 
increase their mobility and function; thus, ensuring greater 
independence in the mainstream of society.
    Over 30 years ago, President Ronald Reagan signed the Air Carrier 
Access Act (ACAA) into law. The ACAA, which prohibits disability-based 
discrimination in air travel, was the result of a U.S. Supreme Court 
decision in Department of Transportation v. 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. Subsequently, PVA led the charge on Capitol Hill to pass 
protections that would finally end discrimination against people with 
disabilities in air travel.
    Prior to passage of the ACAA, people with disabilities were 
routinely forced to travel with an attendant at their own expense, even 
if they did not need assistance to fly safely; required to sit on a 
blanket for fears that they might soil the passenger seat; or simply 
refused passage. The ACAA has provided passengers with disabilities 
improved consistency in air travel. Through this law, air carriers must 
provide passengers with disabilities the opportunity to preboard, if 
additional time or assistance is needed in boarding the aircraft; 
timely assistance in boarding and deplaning; proper stowage of 
assistive devices; and appropriate seating accommodations.
    Although the ACAA led to improvements in the air travel experience 
for passengers with disabilities, the process is far from seamless and 
is, at times, dangerous. PVA members routinely report incurring 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. As a result, some 
people with disabilities would rather drive long distances than risk 
personal injury or damage to their mobility devices.
    Passengers with disabilities who encounter discrimination in air 
travel may file a complaint with the specific air carrier and U.S. 
Department of Transportation (DOT). In 2017, passengers filed 34,701 
disability-related complaints as reported by 190 domestic and foreign 
air carriers, which represents a 6.5 percent increase over 2016. Top 
complaints with U.S. carriers for passengers with paraplegia or 
quadriplegia include failure to provide passenger assistance and 
appropriate seating accommodations. In 2019, passengers filed 905 
disability-related complaints directly with DOT.
    We believe most problems for our members in air travel result from 
lack of training, inaccessible aircraft, and inadequate enforcement of 
the law. Commercial air travel is the only mode of public 
transportation in which a wheelchair or scooter user must surrender 
their assistive device in order to travel. These passengers must rely 
on air carrier personnel and contractors to properly stow their devices 
and help them board and deplane the aircraft. For many PVA members, 
this is where the problems in safely accessing air travel truly begin.
    During the preboarding process, I travel to the bottom of the 
jetway in my customized wheelchair. It is on this sloped area that I 
transfer from my personal wheelchair into an aisle chair, which is a 
small, narrow wheelchair. This device has no means of self-propulsion. 
Some individuals are able to perform the transfer independently, others 
need the assistance of air carrier personnel. Air carriers use several 
different types of aisle chairs to assist passengers with mobility 
impairments during the boarding process. Often these aisle chairs are 
poorly designed and in disrepair. In some cases, the aisle chair can 
cause harm because it does not have proper padding, which can lead to 
skin abrasions, bruises, or sores.
    The assistance from personnel in trying to coordinate the transfer 
and the slope of the jetway can make this a precarious procedure. In 
our experience, air carrier personnel and contractors are not properly 
trained on how to physically lift / transfer a person from a wheelchair 
to an aisle chair. They are also too often unfamiliar with the 
securement straps. Once securing the passenger, assistants must 
traverse the aisle chair backwards into the plane, down the narrow 
aisle, and then transfer the passenger from the aisle chair into the 
passenger seat.
    Upon entering the plane, accessibility diminishes rapidly. The 
aisle width of the plane is typically smaller than that of the 
individual being transported on the aisle chair. This means that 
passengers are bumped and scraped from row to row to get to their seat, 
wherever that might be on the aircraft. Despite requirements for 
disbursed removable armrests to facilitate transfers, aircraft 
consistently have fixed arm rests in first and business classes of 
service, making the process more difficult.
    On my most recent flight, in December 2019, I encountered a 
recurring problem with the aisle chair and the personnel who came to 
assist me. Specifically, when I was boarding and upon my return 
deplaning at the same airport, the aisle chair that was used did not 
accommodate my needs. The foot rest was too small and my feet kept 
falling off the aisle chair as I was being brought into and out of the 
airplane. Also, the seat straps were not sufficient to keep me in a 
secure seated position. As a result, my hip and lower backside hit 
every armrest all the way back to my assigned seat. At my seat, the 
personnel tried to lift me up over the fixed armrest and into my seat 
but they were not strong enough. This resulted in my being dropped onto 
the armrest as I slid into the seat.
    People with disabilities are sometimes deplaned without the benefit 
of even an aisle chair or other mechanical device. In October 2019, a 
PVA member was hand-carried off of an airplane. Although there was no 
emergency requiring it, she was informed that allowing individuals to 
carry her off was the only way for her to deplane. She reluctantly 
agreed even though she expressed her discomfort with the process. While 
she was being carried from the aircraft, she was afraid that they would 
drop her and could feel the struggle of those attempting to assist her. 
Current regulations should have prevented her from enduring this 
treatment, but they did not.
    Once I am preboarded, the rest of the passengers enter the plane. 
Those that are seated in my row, have to climb over me if I am seated 
in the middle or aisle seat. This causes further discomfort and 
aggravation to myself and others. Upon getting to my destination, the 
deplaning process is similar to the boarding process. I am the last 
person off the plane no matter if it is my connector city or final 
destination. Sometimes, the aisle chair is delayed.
    In addition to the difficulties that passengers with limited 
mobility face in boarding the plane, they must also worry about the 
stowage of their assistive devices. Damage to a wheelchair can be a 
trip altering event as well as pose significant health concerns for the 
passenger who depends on it for mobility. Customized wheelchairs are 
not easily replaced if damaged.
    Upon exiting the aircraft, air carrier personnel deliver my manual 
wheelchair to the bottom of the jetway where I transfer to it from the 
aisle chair. I am fortunate that my wheelchair is typically returned to 
me in the condition it was surrendered. Unfortunately, this is not the 
case for some of our members, particularly those who use power 
wheelchairs. Damage to assistive devices is typically a result of 
improper loading and securement within the cargo area of the aircraft. 
Damage ranges from minor tears in fabric upholstery to a complete 
electrical power break down rendering the chair useless to the 
operator. The air carriers are responsible for the repair of broken 
wheelchairs, but repairs are not done immediately, leaving the 
passenger stranded until it can be fixed. Even if the individual is 
provided with a loaner wheelchair, it is not the same as the 
individual's customized wheelchair.
    As part of the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act (Public Law 115-254), 
large domestic air carriers are required to submit monthly reports on 
the number of wheelchairs and scooters they enplane and the number that 
are mishandled. In December 2019, reporting air carriers reported 
enplaning 65,345 wheelchairs and scooters and mishandling 1,001, a rate 
of 1.53 percent mishandled. For the entire calendar year of 2019, air 
carriers reported checking 685,792 wheelchairs and scooters and 
mishandling 10,548, a rate of 1.54 percent mishandled. Although the 
percentage of mishandled wheelchairs is low, those affected are 
completely disenfranchised from their daily lives until it has been 
repaired. They might be forced to miss work, school, social activities, 
medical appointments, or other activities of daily living.
    Due to the many problems that can occur as part of boarding and 
deplaning an aircraft, PVA supported a requirement in Section 432 of 
the FAA Reauthorization Act for the U.S. Access Board to conduct a 
study to determine the feasibility of in-cabin wheelchair restraint 
systems. The Access Board is carrying out the study through the 
National Academy of Sciences' Transportation Research Board. PVA 
members Peter W. Axelson and Dr. Rory A. Cooper were appointed to the 
study committee. If the study determines that flying in a wheelchair is 
feasible, we call on Congress to mandate that DOT develop regulations 
implementing such a requirement in commercial air travel, which would 
bring air travel up to the standards found in other modes of public 
transportation.
    In addition to problems with boarding and deplaning, aircraft have 
limited accessibility. At the end of a long flight, my first stop once 
I leave the jetway is the airport restroom. Once I board the aircraft, 
I lose the ability to use a restroom because the vast majority of 
single-aisle aircraft do not have one that is accessible. A January 
2020 Government Accountability Office report on the accessibility of 
U.S. aircraft lavatories for people who have limited mobility found 
that although accessible lavatories are available, ``carriers do not 
often choose to acquire them.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-20-258, Aviation Consumer 
Protection, Few U.S. Aircraft Have Lavatories Designed to Accommodate 
Passengers with Reduced Mobility 14 (2020), https://www.gao.gov/
products/gao-20-258.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2016, DOT's Accessible Air Transportation (ACCESS) Advisory 
Committee conducted a negotiated rulemaking that addressed whether to 
require accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft of a certain 
size.\2\ In order to assist the committee, PVA conducted a survey of 
disability stakeholders to determine what their expectations would be 
for an accessible lavatory on new single-aisle aircraft. The survey 
included seven questions and netted nearly 950 responses. One of the 
questions asked respondents whether or not the inability to use a 
lavatory was sufficient reason not to fly. With a 99 percent response 
rate, 67 percent of those responding said that the inability to access 
a lavatory would be reason enough for them to avoid air travel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Air Travel; 
Establishment of a Negotiated Rulemaking Committee, 81 Fed. Reg. 
20,265, (Apr. 7, 2016) https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/
04/07/2016-08062/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-disability-in-air-
travel-establishment-of-a-negotiated-rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    After six months of negotiations, the ACCESS Committee voted on 
October 14, 2016, to approve a set of terms that when fully implemented 
would require accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft with 125 
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) maximum certified passenger 
seats.\3\ Despite agreement of the committee members and DOT on a 
proposal that would ultimately require fully accessible lavatories on 
single-aisle aircraft, the Department has yet to move forward with 
publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking on such a requirement. This 
is extremely disappointing and a failure of the regulatory process if 
the agreement of the regulated entity and the beneficiary is not 
sufficient to propel forward a process that has already been decades in 
the making.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ U.S. Department of Transportation, Resolution of the U.S. 
Department of Transportation Access Committee, Nov. 22, 2016, https://
www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/
ACCESS%20Committee%20Final%20Resolution.11.21.16.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    When passengers with disabilities encounter disability 
discrimination, they are left with few remedies. The administrative 
remedies available through DOT are quite limited. The Department can 
issue cease and desist orders. DOT can also levy civil penalties for 
ACAA violations; however, the largest financial penalty in recent years 
was in 2016 for $2 million.\4\ That fine, much of which was credited to 
the carrier, was an anomaly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ U.S. Department of Transportation, United Airlines, Inc. Order 
2016-1-3, https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/eo-2016-1-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Any remedy for the passenger must come from the carrier and is 
typically limited to bonus miles or gift cards. I filed a complaint 
with regard to the improper transfer that I encountered last December. 
The carrier determined that the ACAA was violated and provided me with 
10,000 bonus miles. Systemic change is what is needed, not more miles.
    The experience of our members and other passengers with 
disabilities in boarding and deplaning aircraft and the general 
inaccessibility of commercial passenger aircraft have compelled PVA to 
lead the charge to improve the air travel experience of veterans and 
all people with disabilities. We appreciated the opportunity to work 
with the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on the FAA 
Reauthorization Act of 2018. We also appreciated the opportunity to 
appear before the Subcommittee during last September's FAA oversight 
hearing to highlight the provisions related to the experience of 
passengers with disabilities in air travel.
    The FAA Reauthorization of 2018 included 11 provisions focused 
solely on improving the air travel experience of passengers with 
disabilities. In addition to those already discussed, were provisions 
that will inform air travel passengers about their rights under the 
ACAA, improve the assistance they receive from air carriers, and 
establish formal lines of communication between the air travel 
industry, the disability community, and DOT to address barriers to air 
travel. As a result of these provisions, we are particularly pleased to 
note that PVA will be represented on the recently announced Air Carrier 
Access Act Advisory Committee required under Section 439.
    One of the provisions in the FAA Reauthorization that we believe 
could address the systemic training problems is the requirement in 
Section 440 for the Secretary to perform a review, and as necessary, to 
revise the regulations governing timely, dignified, and effective 
assistance for passengers with disabilities. The Secretary was also 
required to determine whether the regulations governing training 
programs for assisting passengers, like paralyzed veterans, are 
sufficient and whether hands on training should be part of the required 
regular training regimen. We understand that the advisory committee 
will be reviewing this requirement and ask that the Subcommittee 
conduct appropriate oversight of this requirement to ensure that DOT 
takes the current training deficiencies seriously as they are a health 
and safety issue for PVA members and other passengers with 
disabilities.
    The disability-related provisions in the FAA Reauthorization Act 
and the study on lavatory access also included in the law represent an 
important step forward in efforts to improve the air travel experience 
of passengers with disabilities. However, these provisions alone will 
not address the fundamental access problems to safe air travel for 
people with disabilities. Thus, we strongly support the bipartisan Air 
Carrier Access Amendments Act, H.R. 1549, which was introduced in March 
2019 by Rep. Jim Langevin (D-RI). This legislation would greatly 
improve accessibility within aircraft and strengthen enforcement of the 
ACAA.
    The Air Carrier Access Amendments Act would ensure new airplanes 
are designed to accommodate the needs of people with disabilities by 
requiring airlines to meet defined accessibility standards. These 
standards would address safe and effective boarding and deplaning, 
visually accessible announcements, seating accommodations, lavatories, 
and better stowage options for assistive devices. The legislation would 
also require removal of access barriers on existing airplanes to the 
extent that it is readily achievable--easily accomplishable and may be 
done without much difficulty or expense. We see no reason why these 
concepts, which are mainly drawn from the Americans with Disabilities 
Act (ADA), would not successfully translate to air travel.
    Unlike the ADA, the ACAA does not impose specific physical access 
requirements for aircraft. Because of the ADA and other disability 
civil rights laws, other forms of mass transportation in the United 
States are accessible to people with disabilities, including those who 
use wheelchairs. Meanwhile, the interior of most commercial passenger 
aircraft are quite hostile to passengers who use wheelchairs. There is 
not an accessible path of travel to safely board and reach an airline 
seat; lavatories are inaccessible; and limited personal space typically 
means passengers crawling over their fellow passengers who are unable 
to stand up and move.
    We believe that it is time for aircraft to accommodate the needs of 
passengers with disabilities, including those who use wheelchairs. It 
is one of the few areas of sanctioned discrimination against a minority 
group in transportation. As the population ages, the need for greater 
accessibility in aircraft will only continue to grow. All fare paying 
customers should be able to independently access aircraft without 
depending on unsafe, inefficient assistance. Only then will air travel 
truly be a viable option for all members of the flying public.
    H.R. 1549 would also strengthen ACAA enforcement by requiring 
referral of certain passenger-filed complaints to the Department of 
Justice and establishment of a private right of action. The requirement 
for DOT to refer certain ACAA complaints to the Attorney General would 
appropriately recognize that the ACAA is not a customer service 
standard but a civil right. The Attorney General would then be able to 
pursue a civil action on behalf of a passenger.
    Equally important, the law would establish the right of passengers 
with disabilities to seek relief in the courts for ACAA violations. 
Unlike laws governing access for people with disabilities in other 
forms of transportation, the ACAA does not explicitly allow people with 
disabilities to enforce their civil rights, if needed, in a court of 
law. Prior to 2001, some courts \5\ 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),\6\ however, the 
Second,\7\ Fifth,\8\ Ninth,\9\ Tenth,\10\ and Eleventh \11\ U.S. Courts 
of Appeals have ruled that there is no private right of action under 
the ACAA. At its recent midyear meeting, the American Bar Association 
adopted a resolution supporting a private right of action under the 
ACAA.\12\ We also believe that Congress must act to restore this right 
to paralyzed veterans and all passengers with disabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ The U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Fifth and Eighth Circuits 
had previously ruled that there is a private right of action under the 
ACAA. Shinault v. American Airlines, Inc., 936 F.2d 796 (5th Cir. 1991) 
and Tallarico v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 881 F.2d 566 (8th Cir. 
1989).
    \6\ In Sandoval, the Court held that a private right of action 
should not be implied absent obvious congressional intent.
    \7\ Lopez v. Jet Blue Airways, 662 F.3d 593 (2d Cir. 2011).
    \8\ Stokes v. Southwest Airlines, 887 F.3d 199 (5th Cir. 2018).
    \9\ Segalman v. Southwest Airlines Company, 895 F.3d 1219 (9th Cir. 
2018).
    \10\ Boswell v. Skywest Airlines, Inc., 361 F.3d 1263 (10th Cir. 
2004).
    \11\ Love v. Delta Airlines, 310 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 2002).
    \12\ Amanda Robert, Air Travelers Should Have a Private Right of 
Action if Discriminations Against, ABA House Says, ABA Journal, Feb. 
17, 2020, http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/resolution-106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The administrative remedies currently available provide little 
relief and have netted few in improvements in air travel for passengers 
with disabilities. Establishing a private right of action would 
institute additional remedies, without removing DOT's role in the 
administrative process. It would also provide relief directly to 
passengers with disabilities. Furthermore, the private right of action 
would allow for injunctive relief to foster policy changes that would 
allow passengers and airlines to partner together to make changes that 
would benefit all passengers with disabilities.
    We believe that better training of airline personnel and their 
contractors, increased aircraft accessibility, and improved enforcement 
options will lead to safer travel experiences for passengers with 
disabilities. PVA members and other people with disabilities have 
waited long enough for true access to air travel. The future has 
arrived, and we know what the process can be like for passengers with 
disabilities. We simply need to have the will to do it.
    PVA thanks you for this opportunity to express our views. We would 
be happy to answer any questions you may have.

    Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Page.
    I want to now turn to Mr. Joe Leader, chief executive 
officer of the Airline Passenger Experience Association. You 
are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Leader. Thank you. Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member 
Graves, Chairman DeFazio, and members of the subcommittee, my 
name is Dr. Joe Leader, and I proudly have served since 2015 as 
the chief executive officer of the Airline Passenger Experience 
Association, APEX.
    It is one of the largest international airline associations 
in the world. During my tenure as CEO, we came together with 
IFSA, the International Flight Services Association, giving us 
a combined history of 96 years of proudly advancing every major 
airline and valued supplier worldwide.
    I am before you today because I believe deeply in the 
advancement of airline passenger experience. Like each of you, 
I began my journey as an airline passenger. Twenty years ago, 
while working as a high-tech executive, I was featured in a 
magazine as an airline's most frequent flyer. As a part of that 
honor, I met with the airline CEO and shared with him a page-
long list of ideas on how the airline could better serve its 
customers. They implemented nearly every single idea.
    With that introduction, please allow me to address the 
subject of the airline passenger experience, what it is, and 
what it can be. APEX neutrally tracks, verifies, validates and 
certifies ratings for over 1 million flights per year across 
approximately 600 airlines globally, for the Official Airline 
Ratings (TM) via TripIt, the leading travel 
management app worldwide. Only 1 in 17 airlines makes it to 
APEX Five Star status, while another 1 in 17 makes it to APEX 
Four Star status.
    I am proud to share with you that the United States reached 
an incredible milestone last year as Alaska, American, Delta, 
Hawaiian, JetBlue, JXS, Southwest, Spirit, and United all 
reached either four or five stars, as independently rated by 
their airline passengers.
    Spirit Airlines has proudly joined me here today at this 
hearing to share how their Invest in the Guest philosophy has 
improved their independently verified passenger ratings, 
thereby advancing themselves to an APEX 2020 Four Star airline.
    In good news for all Americans, the inflation-adjusted cost 
of air travel has dropped by approximately 50 percent over the 
past two decades, keeping air travel costs lower than historic 
totals, even after including all ancillary revenue fees. From a 
dynamic market perspective, competition has driven U.S. 
airlines to offer more variety in types of airline passenger 
experience than ever before.
    Innovation has enabled U.S. airlines to offer better 
options to their customers, including the disabled. To that 
end, APEX served a leading role on the U.S. Department of 
Transportation ACCESS Advisory Committee, advancing closed 
captioning and audible description options. Voluntarily, U.S. 
airlines have been placing these enhancements across new in-
flight entertainment systems, both in seatback screens and in 
bring-your-own device options.
    For better accessibility, manufacturers are creating better 
options for improved ease of access for wheelchair-bound 
passengers. This resonates personally for me with the Paralyzed 
Veterans of America testifying here today, as my wife 
personally served a quadriplegic before she became a medical 
doctor and surgeon, and my father proudly served in the U.S. 
Army, and flies frequently with my family using his wheelchair.
    What does the future bring for U.S. airline passengers? Our 
customers will enjoy flights more than ever, with expanded 
entertainment and connectivity options. The number of aircraft 
with in-flight entertainment screens worldwide will continue to 
increase, while bring-your-own device options will surge to 
cover nearly all remaining commercial U.S. aircraft this 
decade.
    As an example of innovation, each new screen installed by 
Delta weighs approximately 2 pounds less than its predecessor, 
saving millions of gallons of fuel despite more screen size for 
passengers. New technologies for our key airline suppliers will 
make future seatback screens nearly as thin and light as 
seatback hard plastic. Seating advancements have enabled 
passengers 2 to 3 inches more legroom than historic seats in 
existing space, as I have indicated in my written testimony.
    U.S. airline ticket prices should continue to track lower 
than the rate of inflation, as airlines now burn 53.7 percent 
less fuel per passenger than the 1990s. This helps benefit our 
passengers, our airlines, and our world, with a carbon emission 
reduction averaging 2.3 percent less each and every year for 
the past decade alone.
    Our U.S. airlines are voluntarily spending tens of billions 
of dollars enhancing airports to better serve their customers, 
including implementation of face-matching from the U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security that securely interlinks with 
their airlines without any transfer of photos. Other new 
technologies being deployed by our airlines are advancing to 
complete journey management, including ground transportation, 
automated bag tracking all along your journey and remembering 
your personal preferences.
    This is only the beginning of----
    Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Leader. Thank you.
    Mr. Leader. I will be wrapping up, yes, Chairman.
    Mr. Larsen. You are wrapped up. Sorry. I got to move on.
    Mr. Leader. Of course.
    [Mr. Leader's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
  Prepared Statement of Joe Leader, Chief Executive Officer, Airline 
                    Passenger Experience Association
    Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and Members of the 
Subcommittee.
    My name is Dr. Joe Leader and I proudly have served since 2015 as 
the Chief Executive Officer of APEX, the Airline Passenger Experience 
Association, one of the largest international airline associations in 
the world. During my tenure as CEO, APEX came together with IFSA, the 
International Flight Services Association, giving us a combined history 
of 96 years of proudly advancing nearly every major airline and valued 
supplier worldwide.
    I am before you today because I believe deeply in the advancement 
of airline passenger experience. Like each of you, I began my journey 
as an airline passenger. Twenty years ago, while working as a high-tech 
executive, I was featured in a magazine as an airline's most frequent 
flyer. As a part of that honor, I met with the airline CEO and shared 
with him a page-long list of ideas on how the airline could better 
serve its customers. They implemented nearly every single idea.
    With that introduction, please allow me to address the subject of 
``The Airline Passenger Experience: What It Is and What It Can Be?'' 
APEX neutrally tracks, verifies, validates, and certifies ratings for 
over 1 million flights across approximately 600 airlines globally for 
the Official Airline Ratings (TM) via TripIt, the leading 
travel management app worldwide. Only 1 in 17 airlines makes it to APEX 
Five Star status while another 1 in 17 reaches APEX Four Star Status. I 
am proud to share that the United States reached an incredible 
milestone last year as Alaska, American, Delta, Hawaiian, JetBlue, JSX, 
Southwest, Spirit, and United all reached either Four or Five Stars 
status as independently rated by their passengers. Spirit Airlines has 
proudly joined me today at this hearing to share how their ``invest in 
the guest'' philosophy has improved their independently verified 
passenger ratings thereby advancing themselves to an APEX 2020 Four 
Star airline.
    In good news for all Americans, the inflation-adjusted cost of air 
travel has dropped by approximately 50% over the past two decades \1\ 
\2\--keeping air travel costs lower than historic totals even after 
including all ancillary revenue fees.\3\ From a dynamic market 
perspective, competition has driven US airlines to offer more variety 
in types of passenger experience than ever before \4\. Innovation has 
enabled US airlines to offer better options to their customers 
including the disabled \5\. To that end, APEX served a leading role in 
the US Department of Transportation's ACCESS Advisory Committee 
advancing closed captioning and audible description options. 
Voluntarily, US airlines have been placing these enhancements across 
new in-flight entertainment systems in both seatback screens and bring-
your-own device options. For better accessibility, manufacturers are 
creating better options for improved ease-of-access for wheelchair 
bound passengers.\6\ \7\ This resonates personally for me with the 
Paralyzed Veterans of America testifying here today as my wife 
personally served a quadriplegic before becoming a medical doctor and 
my father proudly served in the U.S. Army and flies frequently with my 
family using his wheelchair.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Belobaba, P., Hernandez, K., Jenkins, J., Powell, R., & 
Swelbar, W. (2015). Productivity trends in the US passenger Airline 
Industry 1978-2010. Transportation@MIT, 1-24. Retrieved from https://
transportation.mit.edu/sites/default/files/documents/MIT_Air_Passenger_
Report.pdf
    \2\ IATA. (2019). Economic Performance of the Airline Industry. 
Retrieved from https://www.iata.org/contentassets/
36695cd211574052b3820044111b56de/airline-industry-economic-performance-
dec19-report.pdf.
    \3\ Hill, Catey (March 26, 2019). Marketwatch. ``The uncomfortable 
reason you're seeing dirt cheap airfares right now.'' Retrieved from 
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-uncomfortable-reason-youre-
seeing-dirt-cheap-airfares-right-now-2019-03-26.
    \4\ Kim, S., Kim, I., & Hyun, S. S. (2016). First-class in-flight 
services and advertising effectiveness: antecedents of customer-centric 
innovativeness and brand loyalty in the United States (US) airline 
industry. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 33(1), 118-140. DOI: 
https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2015.1038420.
    \5\ Most studies report complaints by disabled. This study shows a 
reduction in complaints by one airline, and other positive remarks 
alongside complaints. Major, W. L., & Hubbard, S. M. (2019). An 
examination of disability-related complaints in the United States 
commercial aviation sector. Journal of Air Transport Management, 78, 
43-53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2019.04.006.
    \6\ The level of implementation is still low. See United States 
Government Accountability Office, GAO. (2020). Few U.S. Aircraft Have 
Lavatories Designed to Accommodate Passengers with Reduced Mobility. 
Aviation Consumer Protection. Retrieved from https://www.gao.gov/
assets/710/703687.pdf.
    \7\ Taylor, Stephanie (February 12, 2020). APEX: ``New Aircraft 
Lavatory Concept Is Accessible to Passengers in Wheelchairs.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    What does the future bring for US airline passengers? Our customers 
will enjoy flights more than ever with expanded entertainment and 
connectivity options. The number of aircraft with in-flight 
entertainment screens worldwide will continue to increase while ``bring 
your own device'' options will surge to cover nearly all remaining 
commercial US aircraft this decade \8\ \9\. As an example of 
innovation, each new screen installed by Delta weighs approximately 2 
pounds less than its predecessor saving millions of gallons of fuel 
despite even more screen size for passengers \10\. New technologies 
from our key airline suppliers will make future seatback screens nearly 
as thin and light as seatback hard plastic. New technologies from our 
key airline suppliers will make future seatback screens nearly as thin 
and light as seatback hard plastic. Seating advancements have enabled 
passengers 2 inches to 3 inches more legroom than historic seats in 
existing space.\11\ US airline ticket prices should continue to track 
lower than the rate of inflation as airlines now burn 53.7% less fuel 
per passenger \12\ than the 1990s. This helps benefit our passengers, 
our airlines, and our world with a carbon emissions reduction averaging 
2.3% less each and every year for the past decade alone \13\. Our US 
airlines are voluntarily spending tens of billions of dollars enhancing 
airports to better serve their customers including implementation of 
face-matching from the US Department of Homeland Security that securely 
interlinks with our airlines without any transfer of photos \14\. Other 
new technologies being deployed by our airlines are advancing to 
complete journey management including ground transportation, automated 
bag tracking all along your journey \15\ \16\, and remembering personal 
preferences for food and beverage ordering in-flight. This is only the 
beginning of a decade of advancing one-to-one airline customer service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ Delta continues to invest in seatback screens rather than BYOD. 
Modolo, K. (n.d.). 3 ways Delta Flight Products is revolutionizing 
aircraft interiors. Delta News Hub. Retrieved from https://
news.delta.com/3-ways-delta-flight-products-revolutionizing-aircraft-
interiors.
    \9\ APEX Experience Magazine (April-May 2018).
    \10\ Delta Professional. (April 25, 2019). How Delta's new wireless 
IFE tech helps cut emissions. Retrieved from https://pro.delta.com/
content/agency/in/en/news/news-archive/2019/april-2019/how-delta-s-new-
wireless-ife-tech-helps-cut-emissions.html.
    \11\ Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors (September 
2019).
    \12\ IATA/ATAG Geneva Meeting (January 2020).
    \13\ IATA. (December 12, 2019). Carbon Emissions Per Passenger 
Decrease More Than 50% Since 1990. Retrieved from https://www.iata.org/
en/pressroom/pr/2019-12-12-01/.
    \14\ Abandoned. See Metz, R. & CNN Business. (December 5, 2019). 
Homeland Security drops plan to use facial recognition on traveling US 
citizens. CNN Business. Retrieved from https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/
02/tech/homeland-security-facial-recognition-citizens-at-airports/
index.html.
    \15\ Delta News Hub. (n.d.). Delta introduces innovative baggage 
tracking process. Retrieved from https://news.delta.com/delta-
introduces-innovative-baggage-tracking-process-0.
    \16\ IATA. (June 2, 2019). Resolution: RFID Baggage Tracking Set 
for Global Deployment. Retrieved from https://www.iata.org/en/
pressroom/pr/2019-06-02-05/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While I recognize that this merely scratches the surface of 
advancements, I look forward to your questions so that I may share 
innovations that our airlines and key suppliers are advancing to best 
service customers across the United States and around the world.




                 2020 Official Airline Ratings Winners
FOUR AND FIVE STAR RECIPIENTS OF THE 2020 OFFICIAL AIRLINE RATINGS 
        (TM) (All Listed in Alphabetical Order)
FIVE STAR GLOBAL AIRLINES
      Aeroflot
      Aeromexico
      Air New Zealand
      American Airlines
      All Nippon Airways
      Asiana Airlines
      Cathay Pacific
      China Airlines
      Delta Air Lines
      Emirates
      EVA Air
      Japan Airlines
      KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
      Korean Air
      Lufthansa
      Qantas
      Qatar Airways
      Singapore Airlines
      SWISS International Air Lines
      Turkish Airlines
      Virgin Atlantic
FIVE STAR MAJOR AIRLINES
      Air Astana
      Air Tahiti Nui
      Alaska Airlines
      Avianca
      Bangkok Airways
      Copa Airlines
      Hawaiian Airlines
      JetBlue Airways
      Kuwait Airways
      Middle East Airlines
      Royal Brunei Airlines
      Virgin Australia
      Vistara
FIVE STAR REGIONAL AIRLINES
      Aeromexico Connect
      JSX
FOUR STAR GLOBAL AIRLINES
      Aerolineas Argentinas
      Air France
      Air Italy
      British Airways
      China Southern Airlines
      El Al
      Etihad Airways
      Finnair
      LATAM Airlines Group
      LOT Polish Airlines
      Scandinavian Airlines (SAS)
      Thai Airways International
      United Airlines
      Vietnam Airlines
FOUR STAR MAJOR AIRLINES
      Aer Lingus
      Air Europa
      Austrian Airlines
      Caribbean Airlines
      Fiji Airways
      Gulf Air
      HiFly
      Icelandair
      Kenya Airways
      Malindo Air
      Oman Air
      Philippine Airlines
      SriLankan Airlines
FOUR STAR LOW-COST CARRIERS
      Atlantic Airways
      Citilink
      GoAir
      Interjet
      Norwegian
      Southwest Airlines
      Spirit Airlines
      WestJet
           And the 2018 Crystal Cabin Award Winners Are . . .
11 April, 2018 in Industry Written by Caroline Ku
    APEX CEO Joe Leader was on the judging panel and also presented the 
IFEC award.


  IFEC award winner: Bluebox aIFE: Accessible IFE for passengers with 
visual impairment_Bluebox Aviation Systems (cooperation partners Virgin 
      Atlantic Airways & The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association

    Entertainment for All! United Airlines' New Accessible Inflight 
      Entertainment System Wins Crystal Cabin Award April 04, 2019
    CHICAGO, April 4, 2019 /PRNewswire/--At this year's annual Aircraft 
Interiors Expo in Hamburg, Germany, United Airlines was awarded the 
Crystal Cabin Award for Inflight Entertainment and Connectivity for its 
new onboard entertainment interface, which recently debuted on the 
airline's 787-10 Dreamliner fleet. The highly coveted award, which is 
the standard by which airlines, manufacturers, suppliers and design and 
engineering firms are judged, recognized the efforts of United and its 
partners at Panasonic Avionics to provide customers with what is the 
most accessible airline entertainment system in the world.
    ``Accessible and relevant inflight entertainment plays a major role 
in customers enjoying their flying experience and we wanted to create a 
system that all United customers could enjoy, including customers who 
have varying vision, hearing or mobility requirements,'' said Toby 
Enqvist, senior vice president of customers at United. ``Together with 
Panasonic, we spent three years building a system that is truly 
inclusive, and we look forward to adding it to more aircraft soon.''
    This new system offers the world's most extensive suite of 
accessibility features on seatback entertainment, which accommodates 
any level of vision, as well as provides support for customers with 
hearing and mobility issues. These features include:
      Text-to-speech with reading granularity options
      Customizable voice volume, speed and pitch
      Explore by touch features including screen magnification, 
customizable text size, high contrast text options, color correction 
options and color inversion options
      Custom messaging tailored for customers with hearing 
disabilities
      Additional navigation options for mobility impaired 
passengers who are unable to swipe or use handset features

    The system also provides the following enhancements that improve 
the overall experience for all customers:
      Split screen capabilities that allow customers to watch a 
movie and view the flight map simultaneously
      A relax mode that lets customers customize a selection of 
soothing videos and relaxing audio playlists
      Movie and television recommendations based on remaining 
flight time, previously watched content and movies and shows that have 
been added to a customer's favorites list
     New Aircraft Lavatory Concept Is Accessible to Passengers in 
                              Wheelchairs
12 February, 2020 in Comfort Written by Stephanie Taylor


                  Image via Acumen Design Associates.

    Acumen Design Associates and ST Engineering have jointly developed 
ACCESS, which they describe as ``the world's first expanding aircraft 
lavatory,'' to improve the flying experience on single-aisle aircraft 
for passengers with reduced mobility (PRMs). As narrow-body flight 
times grow in length, the need to make lavatories more easily 
accessible is imperative.
    In certain countries, there's currently no legislation regarding 
the availability of an accessible lavatory on narrow-body jets, but 
arguably, there's more need for the facility than ever. With new 
aircraft types such as the Airbus A321XLR featuring a range of up to 
4,700 nautical miles, narrow-body jets are now capable of flying 
longer, even transatlantic routes.
    Daniel Clucas, senior designer at Acumen Design Associates 
(Acumen), said: ``Many PRMs avoid flying because of the compromises 
they have to make--especially when using the on-board lavatory. During 
our research, we heard first-hand how those who do fly will even avoid 
using the lavatory altogether if possible.''


     Standard ACCESS footprint. Image via Acumen Design Associates


 Expanded ACCESS lavatory footprint. Image via Acumen Design Associates

    ACCESS has been designed for line-fit or retrofit on Boeing 737 and 
Airbus A321 aircraft with input from accessible aviation consultant and 
founder of Rocket Girl Coaching, Mary Doyle; campaigner, lobbyist and 
founder of Flying Disabled, Chris Wood; and entrepreneur and founder of 
easyTravelseat, Josh Wintersgill, among others.
    During the research process, Doyle stated, ``I believe there are 
four main things that can improve the onboard experience: more space, 
highly sanitized work surfaces, greatly improved physical supports for 
unassisted transfer and anti-slip flooring. And whilst lavatories serve 
a functional need, I believe they should look beautiful too, in keeping 
with excellent customer experience.''
    The resulting solution created by Acumen and ST Engineering uses a 
moving wall to offer PRMs 40% more space than a standard lavatory 
module.
    Clucas explained, ``The standard lavatory is 33 inches wide with a 
20-inch wide doorway. ACCESS fits into that footprint, so it doesn't 
take up any additional cabin space, but in its expanded state is 51-
inches wide, with an extra-wide entranceway of 24 inches.'' This allows 
for passengers in a wheelchair to enter the lavatory independently, 
rather than having to be transferred behind a curtain. It also provides 
enough room for a carer or family member to enter the space, if 
necessary.
    According to Clucas, the process of expanding or shrinking the 
lavatory, which is carried out by a crewmember, takes a matter of 
seconds using a latch on the outside wall of the lavatory and leaves 
enough room for people to move around in the galley.
    The expanded lavatory opens into the entranceway in the aisle at 
the rear of the aircraft, and covers what Clucas refers to as ``the 
assist space''--where a crewmember would stand in the event of an 
emergency. ``In the same way business-class cabin doors have a back-up 
mechanism; we will need to prove there is an adequate fail-safe that 
can stow the lavatory away in the event of an emergency while it is in 
its expanded state,'' he noted.
    ACCESS builds on a previous product created by Acumen and ST 
Engineering, the ARC lavatory upgrade kit, which was shortlisted for a 
Crystal Cabin Award in 2019. Similar to ACCESS, the Zen-inspired Boeing 
777 lavatory design featured ``cutting-edge hygiene technologies--such 
as antimicrobial surface finishes, touchless faucet and flush 
mechanisms and under-floor membranes to remove odor--combined with 
floor-to-ceiling lighting and minimalist, curved architecture to create 
a striking interior,'' Clucas said. ACCESS also includes features such 
as vertical, horizontal and fold-down grab bars and a lowered sink 
height.






    Mr. Larsen. Thank you very much.
    I now want to recognize Mr. Klein for 5 minutes, Spirit 
Airlines.
    Mr. Klein. Good morning, Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member 
Graves, Chairman DeFazio, and members of the Subcommittee on 
Aviation. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My 
name is Matt Klein. I am the chief commercial officer of Spirit 
Airlines.
    Spirit Airlines is the largest ultra low-cost carrier, or 
ULCC, in the U.S. We serve over 50 U.S. domestic airports and 
25 international destinations. Our total prices, including all 
ancillary products and services, are, on average, more than 30 
percent below those of other airlines on our routes.
    Corporate travelers and more affluent consumers have many 
choices in today's market. Spirit's product is designed for 
highly price-sensitive travelers, mainly ordinary individual 
consumers, families, and small and medium businesses who pay 
for their own tickets and who face narrower options. This 
continues to be an underserved segment in today's market, and 
we are proud to fill the need.
    We are the fastest growing airline in the U.S. for the past 
1, 3, 5 and 10 years, consistently running high load factors. 
So it seems American consumers are responding very favorably to 
the choice we provide in the market for air travel.
    What may be less widely known are the tremendous strides 
Spirit has made in the past few years to become one of the most 
reliable airlines in the country. We ranked fourth nationally 
in on-time performance out of 10 reporting carriers in 2018, 
and based on unofficial statistics, in 2019 as well, beating 
out three out of the four big airlines and all the other low-
cost carriers.
    We also rank strongly on completion factor and on baggage 
handling. None of that is easy to do for a smaller airline, as 
we have less built-in redundancy and inherently greater 
challenges in recovering from unforeseen events.
    We believe Spirit's combination of low prices and reliable 
service adds up to terrific value for our guests and we are 
seeing a positive reaction from consumers, both in our 
satisfaction surveys as well as in our increasing customer 
repeat rate.
    And it is not just about operational reliability. Over the 
past 3 years, Spirit rolled out a broad-based and ongoing 
initiative we call Invest in the Guest. That program comprises 
enhanced service training for our crews and other guest-facing 
personnel, as well as investments in technology, like enhanced 
airport kiosks, and our new self-bag drop machines that will 
help speed our guests through the check-in process at the 
airport.
    We also recently announced a complete refresh of our 
interior cabins, featuring all new seating that provides 
significantly greater comfort, personal space, and usable 
legroom. Later this year, we will begin installing next-
generation, full-streaming Wi-Fi across our fleet, the first 
ULCC to do so. I believe we are the only major U.S. carrier to 
have wheelchair accessible lavatories installed on most of our 
aircraft.
    Spirit operates one of the newest and most fuel-efficient 
fleets in the Americas, ranking consistently as a leader in 
fuel consumption per passenger. All new aircraft coming into 
our growing fleet feature next-generation engines that burn 
about 16 percent less fuel than even the most recent 
generation, not just fuel efficiency, but also noise 
efficiency.
    In addition to several other awards in the past 2 years, we 
are proud to have won Seattle's prestigious Fly Quiet Award for 
2 years in a row.
    In the U.S., the large distances, the dispersal of families 
across the country and the needs of our interconnected business 
environment all make air travel more essential than in other 
countries.
    At Spirit, we recognize our products may not be for 
everyone; yet, we are very proud to offer low-price, reliable 
service to those who may have no other option. And with the 
strong discipline we exert on the prices charged by other 
airlines, we are also pleased to help drive savings for all 
travelers, whether they fly us or not.
    Thank you, again, for the opportunity to speak with you 
today.
    [Mr. Klein's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
 Prepared Statement of Matt Klein, Executive Vice President and Chief 
               Commercial Officer, Spirit Airlines, Inc.
    Good morning Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and members of 
the Subcommittee on Aviation. Thank you for the opportunity to testify 
today. My name is Matt Klein. I am Chief Commercial Officer of Spirit 
Airlines.
    Spirit Airlines is the largest so-called ``Ultra Low-Cost 
Carrier,'' or ULCC, in the US. We serve over 50 US domestic airports 
and 25 international destinations. Our total prices including all 
ancillary products and services are, on average, more than 30% below 
those of other airlines on our routes. Corporate travelers and more 
affluent consumers have many choices in today's market. Spirit's 
product is designed for highly price-sensitive travelers, mainly 
ordinary individual consumers, families and small and medium businesses 
who pay for their own tickets and who face narrower options. This 
continues to be an underserved segment in today's market, and we are 
proud to fill the need. We are the fastest growing airline in the US 
for the past one, three, five and 10 years, consistently running high 
load factors, so it seems American consumers are responding very 
favorably to the choice we provide in the market for air travel.
    What may be less widely known are the tremendous strides Spirit has 
made in the past few years to become one of the most reliable airlines 
in the country. We ranked fourth nationally in on-time performance (out 
of 10 reporting carriers) in 2018 and, based on unofficial statistics, 
in 2019 as well, beating out three out of the four big airlines and all 
the other low-cost carriers. We also rank strongly on completion factor 
(i.e., low cancellation rate) and on bag handling.
    None of that is easy to do for a smaller airline, as we have less 
built-in redundancy and inherently greater challenges in recovering 
from unforeseen events. We believe Spirit's combination of low prices 
and reliable service adds up to terrific value for our Guests, and we 
are seeing a positive reaction from consumers, both in our satisfaction 
surveys as well as in our increasing customer repeat rate.
    And it's not just about operational reliability. Over the past 
three years, Spirit rolled out a broad-based and ongoing initiative we 
call ``Invest in the Guest.'' That program comprises enhanced service 
training for our crews and other Guest-facing personnel, as well as 
investments in technology like enhanced airport kiosks and our new 
self-bag drop machines that will help speed our Guests through the 
check-in process at the airport. We also recently announced a complete 
refresh of our interior cabins, featuring all-new seating that provides 
significantly greater comfort, personal space and usable legroom. Later 
this year, we will begin installing next-generation, full-streaming 
WiFi across our fleet, the first ULCC to do so. I believe we are the 
only major US carrier to have wheelchair-accessible lavatories 
installed on most of our aircraft.
    Spirit operates one of the newest and most fuel-efficient fleets in 
the Americas, ranking consistently as a leader in fuel consumption per 
passenger. All new aircraft coming in to our growing fleet feature 
next-generation engines that burn about 16% less fuel than even the 
most recent generation. Not just fuel efficiency, but also noise 
efficiency: in addition to several other awards in the past two years, 
we are proud to have won Seattle's prestigious ``Fly Quiet'' award for 
two years in a row.
    In the US, the large distances, the dispersal of families across 
the country and the needs of our interconnected business environment 
all make air travel more essential than in other countries. At Spirit, 
we recognize our product may not be for everyone. Yet, we are very 
proud to offer low-priced, reliable service to those who may have no 
other option and, with the strong discipline we exert on the prices 
charged by other airlines, we are also pleased to help drive savings 
for all travelers, whether they fly us or not.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to speak today.

    Mr. Larsen. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Klein.
    As noted earlier, Ranking Member Graves is here, and I will 
recognize him for 5 minutes for his opening statement.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Airline 
travel has truly revolutionized this planet, giving us access 
to areas that never were previously accessible, giving us 
integration and exposure to cultures, to people, to resources 
that we previously would not have had access to.
    We have been able to deliver doctors and life-saving 
medicines to folks in need. We have been able to lift folks out 
of poverty. We have been able to introduce technology and 
innovation, improving lives around the world, as a result of 
aviation technology and commercial air travel. It really is 
amazing to sit and go through the exercise of thinking about 
potentially not having that amazing technology.
    But also, right here in the United States, as I recall, in 
2017, we had 841 million airline passengers. By 2038, that is 
projected to reach 1.28 billion passengers. The whole 
experience doesn't start when you get on the plane.
    The experience actually starts well before that. We have 
three kids. I know going through the exercise of schlepping all 
the luggage, loading them up in the car, going perhaps to a 
remote parking spot, taking the shuttle, getting to the 
airport, trying to find the right gate, checking in your bags, 
trying to get through security, trying to get actually checked 
in on the plane, seated. And that whole experience, it is 
pretty intimidating. And I will say it again, when you have 
three kids that you are--I know I am supposed to say in tow, 
but usually following, it is pretty intimidating and it is 
pretty overwhelming.
    And so, I do think--it is 2020, and, Mr. Leader, or Dr. 
Leader, you talked about some of the technology that is out 
there today, and it really is amazing. It is fantastic the way 
tech has been integrated into airplanes in terms of the AV-type 
opportunities.
    One of the home airports that I represent and share with 
Congressman Richmond, New Orleans Airport, they actually allow 
us to check bags at the parking lot, at the parking garage, 
which is fantastic, and not having to take them on the shuttle 
and everything else that we have to do.
    But there are other areas where we can improve, where we 
can use technology to help improve that experience, because the 
cumulative experiences I hear from constituents all the time 
does need improvement. And looking at the statistics, the 
upward trend in passenger travel, it is going to become more 
challenging. It is going to get worse, not better, in terms of 
the volume, and we need to ensure that we are using technology 
that has a system that can actually accommodate or facilitate 
it and allow it to be a pleasurable experience.
    In the United States, as you know, we have gone from eight 
major carriers down to four. It is interesting in that if I 
remember the numbers correctly, when you look at the 
complaints, when you look at the complaints about airline 
travel, as I recall, over half of them, over half of them are 
complaints concerning international carriers, not our domestic 
carriers.
    Now, I haven't done the math or looked at the statistics, 
but I am going to guess that we have multiple times more folks 
flying on domestic carriers than we do international. And as we 
have seen in this committee across issues, there is a culture 
difference among international carriers versus domestic, and 
certainly something that we need to continue to focus on.
    I also want to make note that in the FAA bill that we did 
in 2018, we had included over 40 different provisions related 
to consumer issues and passenger experience. As the chairman 
noted, perhaps there are a few that we need to continue 
focusing on and working together with everyone in this room to 
continue to improve the experience as best we can. But I do 
want to make note, everything from seat sizes to strollers, 
evacuation standards, involuntary bumping, oxygen masks, 
protecting pets on planes, and I believe a dozen different 
provisions, Mr. Page, related to passengers with disabilities.
    So, certainly, progress has been made as the FAA works to 
implement those. But I will say it again, and I think the 
chairman noted, we certainly need to ensure that we continue to 
revisit this, this is an iterative process, and continue to 
improve the experience as much as we can.
    Lastly, right now, obviously, one of the things on people's 
minds is coronavirus, and we need to make sure that we all 
continue to focus on this. Outbreaks in South Korea, Italy, 
Iran and other areas are infecting more new patients on a daily 
basis than are occurring in China. And if outbreaks can happen 
there, they can happen here. We need to work in a bipartisan 
manner, and ensure that we focus on this particular issue, 
aviation travel, air travel, and ensure that we are making this 
experience as safe as possible.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back and appreciate the 
opportunity to give an opening statement.
    [Mr. Graves of Louisiana's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
Prepared Statement of Hon. Garret Graves, a Representative in Congress 
   from the State of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on 
                                Aviation
    Air transportation has truly revolutionized the world, giving us 
access and exposure to many areas, people, cultures, and resources that 
were in many cases practically inaccessible before. Air transportation 
has allowed for the delivery of life saving medical care, the reduction 
of poverty, the introduction of technology and innovation, and other 
developments in areas that otherwise may not have experienced those 
benefits.
    For passengers, the cumulative experience, as I often hear from my 
constituents, is that air travel does need to be improved. And as 
passenger levels continue to increase, this will become even more 
challenging. Here in the United States, we expect passenger volume to 
grow from 840 million people in 2017 to 1.28 billion in 2038.
    The passenger experience doesn't begin when you board the plane--it 
begins well before that. It involves purchasing the tickets, getting to 
and parking at the airport, checking your luggage, going through 
security, finding your gate, getting seated on the plane, and then 
reversing the entire process once the flight lands. Especially when 
traveling with children, as I frequently do, it can be a challenging 
experience--and it's a challenge for those involved in working to 
improve the passenger experience.
    Technology can help do that. At New Orleans Airport, for example, 
passengers may check their bags in the parking lot, which is incredibly 
helpful. There are more ways that policies and technologies can improve 
the passenger experience, and we need to identify them.
    As we continue to consider the passenger experience in the U.S., we 
need to keep in mind that the number of major commercial carriers has 
been reduced from eight down to four, and approximately half of 
passenger complaints relate to international carriers and travel.
    I also want to note that in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, we 
included over 40 provisions addressing consumer issues and the 
passenger experience, everything from seat size to strollers, 
evacuation standards to involuntary bumping, and oxygen masks to 
protecting pets on planes--as well as a dozen provisions addressing the 
concerns of passengers with disabilities. DOT and FAA are in the 
process of implementing these provisions, and this subcommittee should 
ensure the law is being implemented properly while we examine what more 
may need to be done.
    Finally, coronavirus is on the minds of many. Our subcommittee 
needs to focus in a bipartisan manner on the impacts that outbreaks 
have on air travel and how we can ensure that people stay as safe as 
possible.

    Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
    I now want to move on to Member questions. Each Member will 
be recognized for 5 minutes, and I will start by recognizing 
myself.
    I will start with Mr. Page. Last fall, during the 
subcommittee's recent roundtable on accessibility, you 
discussed PVA's collaboration with the administration on a 
recent rule to improve lavatory access in single-aisle 
aircraft. Can you give us your thoughts on the proposed rule 
and where we are on its development?
    Mr. Page. Well, as you know, the Department put out the 
NPRM, and comments are going back in reference to that. Spirit 
testified they are an airline that most of their planes have 
Space-Flex 1, which is a lavatory at the end of the airplane, 
that a person in an aisle chair can actually traverse back and 
get into the lavatory, with assistance from the flight 
attendant.
    You know, as GAO just mentioned, most of the airlines are 
not purchasing accessible lavatories, and Boeing and Airbus 
have a product on the market. So the real deal is, you know, 
when are they going to start buying those lavatories?
    Mr. Larsen. Mr. Leader, can you elaborate a little bit more 
on technological investments to improve accessibility?
    Mr. Leader. Certainly. Chairman Larsen, when it comes to 
restrooms, the Space-Flex option that Spirit has implemented 
was done on a voluntary basis. It is designed so that you can 
have two lavatories that actually become one, so it is more 
accessible for people that need the additional space and room. 
We have other new technologies that, as I have put in my 
written testimony, will enable airlines to actually use space 
that could not otherwise be used in the aircraft for a more 
accessible lavatory, by actually expanding the lavatory out.
    As I have worked with our airlines across the U.S., this is 
a central area of concern, one in which I am very proud of what 
Spirit Airlines has done, as a market leader in this space, and 
one in which I think you will see all of our airlines more 
assertively doing as they do cabin redesigns and new orders 
from our friends at Airbus and Boeing.
    There are more options than before. Our airlines care. And 
the big requirement--and this is what Space-Flex allows--is you 
have two lavatories for use for most of the passengers, because 
we do want to serve all passengers, but when it comes to 
serving our disabled passengers those two lavatories become one 
for greater ease of access. It is the perfect type of 
compromise that advances our industry.
    Mr. Larsen. Mr. Klein, you did note where Spirit is on 
lavatory accessibility. What kind of different--what level of 
investment was necessary to make that happen?
    Mr. Klein. Well, we did go through a retrofit of--I would 
say at the time it was roughly half of our fleet went through a 
retrofit in order to put those accessible lavs into the 
aircraft. Now, every new delivery we take moving forward, which 
I think that project finished up about 2 years ago, and since 
then, every new delivery we have it is right there as it comes 
in.
    If I may add one other piece to that, to what Dr. Leader 
mentioned, is we also have on our aircraft the widest aisles 
that you can possibly have on a single-aisle aircraft. It is 
important to us. We put certain types of seats in that create 
more width for the aisle as well, just to help address the 
issues that Mr. Page mentioned earlier.
    Mr. Larsen. And all of your planes are single-aisle?
    Mr. Klein. Yes, that is correct.
    Mr. Larsen. Spirit is all single-aisle?
    Mr. Klein. All single-aisle, that is correct.
    Mr. Larsen. Mr. Page, back to you on wheelchairs in the 
aisle and the design of the wheelchairs they use. I have never 
seen a wheelchair used that isn't sort of basically metal pipes 
with cushions and so on.
    Is there some research going into looking into redesigning 
and using different materials so you have a lighter, stronger 
aisle wheelchair to help out with the folks in the disability 
community?
    Mr. Page. You have got two products. You have got the aisle 
chair, which is what airlines and the airports use to get on 
the plane.
    Mr. Larsen. Yeah.
    Mr. Page. And then you have the on-board wheelchair, which 
would take you back to the restroom, if needed. Access Board 
just put out an NPRM with the standards for the on-board 
wheelchair. There are no recent standards for the aisle chair. 
The aisle chair is what gets you on the plane, and that is the 
one that gives you trouble, as I described in my testimony, 
because, basically, my seat is 18 inches by 19 inches, and I am 
sitting on a 14-inch aisle seat. And the width of the aisle is 
narrow also.
    So your question of standards, there are three or four 
different products that the airlines use. The Columbia is the 
most widely used across the industry, and there are a couple 
others that are used, but, you know, they are not specifically 
designed for someone with a permanent disability such as 
myself.
    Mr. Larsen. Thank you. I am going to turn now to Mr. 
Graves. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Von Ah, I will ask you a question. In your testimony, 
you indicated that the number of denied boardings have 
decreased or gone down, including in 2018. However, Mr. McGee's 
testimony indicated a trend otherwise. Do you have any idea of 
the differences?
    Mr. Von Ah. Sure. No, absolutely. Thank you for the 
question. In 2019, it is correct that those numbers have gone 
up. For involuntary denied boardings, they have gone from about 
11,000 or so in 2018 to, I think it was 21,000 or so in 2019. 
We looked into that data a little bit more carefully, and found 
that that is really all a result of two specific airlines. 
American and Southwest were responsible for all of those 
additional denied boardings involuntarily.
    I might add that part of that might be in our work on 
denied boardings, some of the airlines warned us that because 
of some of the Boeing MAX issues, there may be an uptick in 
that number for this year. So that might be part of the 
explanation for that.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. And just very quickly in regard to 
that, as I recall, those two airlines that you noted are the 
two airlines that had the largest investment in the MAX fleet, 
I believe.
    Mr. Von Ah. That is correct.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. OK. So it is likely there is a 
direct correlation there?
    Mr. Von Ah. There is definitely--there is possibly a 
correlation, sure.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you.
    Mr. Klein, do you have any idea, I am not sure if you all 
have kept statistics indicating the number of first-time air 
passengers that Spirit has accommodated? You lower the bar in 
terms of access to airline travel, right?
    Mr. Klein. Absolutely. So it is a great question. We 
actually don't have specific statistics on knowing--we don't 
survey guests to say, is this the first time you have ever 
flown? What we do know is when we go into certain new cities, 
for example, when we entered Haiti, we knew there were a lot of 
people from south Florida that were flying for the first time 
to places like Haiti, creating access for people in south 
Florida.
    We know, for example--we just announced service yesterday 
from New Orleans to Honduras, San Pedro Sula. We know there are 
going to be people in New Orleans that are going to be taking 
their first flight when we start that service in June, for 
example.
    So we don't know exactly what those statistics are. What we 
do know is when we go into new routes, we definitely attract 
new guests that are infrequent travelers as well. They may not 
have the opportunity to fly often.
    And what we do is we go into new routes, we grow markets. 
We stimulate with low fares. On average, what we will do is 
grow markets in the whole industry. As we get competed with, we 
will grow markets by 30 percent and fares come down by 22 
percent, on average, in the 12 months following our entry into 
service.
    So we do know that we are driving new growth, and those are 
industry numbers. We act as a discipliner of sorts on fares for 
our competitors. They choose to compete with us. And when they 
choose to compete with us on price, the whole market grows.
    And that can even happen in large routes as well, routes 
where people fly all the time, say New York metro area, Newark 
to Fort Lauderdale, very large market. We entered that in 
October of 2016. The market grew. From a large route, it almost 
doubled. It grew by 88 percent even though there was a lot of 
service in the market already. We seek out those kinds of 
underserved opportunities and create the travel opportunities 
for those that don't get to fly often.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you. Look, I can tell you, 
from one of our home airports in New Orleans, every time I walk 
in the Spirit area of the airport, it is absolutely the people 
that are there for tourism, that are there having a good time, 
in many cases, still out from the night before, but that is 
fine.
    But it clearly--it appears, anyway, that it is opening up 
aviation access to folks that previously wouldn't have made 
that decision. You know, it is actually comparable in some 
cases, to, hey, should we drive here or should we fly to New 
Orleans? And it is fantastic to see that whole group, what I 
believe, just anecdotally, opening access to a whole group of 
travelers that previously wouldn't have chosen that option, or 
would have seen it being out of reach. So I certainly do 
appreciate that.
    Dr. Leader, Mr. McGee, I mentioned that we had 40 changes 
to kind of addressing passenger issues in the FAA bill. Would 
you all like to comment on where you see sort of best 
opportunity for the experience as a result of some of the 
revisions in that bill, either of you, or both?
    Mr. McGee. Certainly. One of the key provisions was the 
minimum seat standards, which we view not just as a comfort 
issue and as a value issue, but more important as a health 
issue due to deep vein thrombosis and as a safety issue due to 
evacuations.
    I touched on in my opening remarks the evacuation issue. 
The testing that is being done by the FAA down in Oklahoma City 
right now is not sufficient. There is ample evidence that they 
are not reflecting real-world scenarios, and seats is a big 
part of that.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you.
    Mr. Leader. I will speak to that briefly. I agree that in 
Oklahoma City, the FAA tests are not what they could be, but in 
the opposite direction, they tend to use--my understanding is 
they are using older, full-size seats, not the slimline seats 
that are being utilized by airlines.
    It really, from my perspective, is about serving total 
available space to passenger comfort. What I really like about 
some of the new seats that our airlines are doing instead of 
the thick Styrofoam that was a flotation device, it is now made 
of space-age materials that are designed to provide greater 
comfort in flight, and where knee space is becoming one of the 
areas of focus.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you very much. I appreciate 
your answer.
    I yield back.
    Ms. Davids [presiding]. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair will now recognize the chairman of the full 
committee, Mr. DeFazio.
    Mr. DeFazio. I thank the chair.
    Mr. Von Ah, I just want to confirm this. It is 4.5 percent 
of the eight largest U.S. airlines fleet, single-aisle, have 
lavs that are accessible to people in wheelchairs. Is that the 
current figure?
    Mr. Von Ah. That is correct. That is what our data showed, 
yes.
    Mr. DeFazio. All right. We have all these planes rolling 
off the assembly line, are sitting on the ground somewhere, all 
the MAX planes. Are you aware of whether or not they are 
ordering accessible lavs in those planes?
    Mr. Von Ah. I am not aware that they are doing that, sir. 
And, in fact, none of the Boeing planes--none of the fleet of 
Boeing planes have the accessible lavs that Boeing offers when 
we looked at it.
    Mr. DeFazio. So, Mr. Klein, how much more expensive is it 
to have--I don't know, you might not want to give me an exact 
figure--but to have an accessible lav like you are getting from 
Airbus on your new planes?
    Mr. Klein. Yeah. Chairman DeFazio, I don't know the exact 
answer to that question. There is some expense involved with 
that, but I don't--we can get that number for you.
    Mr. DeFazio. And you don't lose seating capacity with these 
new lavs?
    Mr. Klein. We do not. That is correct.
    Mr. DeFazio. So I wonder what the resistance is?
    Mr. Klein. I don't think it is smart for me to speculate on 
what other airlines may be choosing for their product.
    Mr. DeFazio. Right. Yeah. This might be something that 
warrants more of a mandate. Because, I mean, we are losing 
opportunity when you are making a new plane and there are 
things that could go in it. For instance, secondary barriers, 
which we mandated in the bill, which are not going into the new 
planes because of DOT dragging its feet, and now what we are 
hearing about accessible lavs.
    Mr. Page, have you ever flown Spirit? Have you experienced 
their accessible lav?
    Mr. Page. Truthfully, I have not flown Spirit before, but I 
have seen the accessible lav in 2016 during the ACCESS Advisory 
Committee.
    Mr. DeFazio. Do you think it is suitable?
    Mr. Page. It works very well. For a person who is on an 
aisle chair with the assistance of a flight attendant, you can 
get in.
    As Dr. Leader described, it is two bathrooms side by side. 
They split the foldable wall that opens up, and so you actually 
have two sinks and two lavatories. And it is big enough to 
close the door and be in there on the aisle chair, so it works.
    Mr. DeFazio. All right.
    Mr. McGee, you referenced the emergency evacuation. Again, 
the tests that are being conducted, why do you think they are 
inadequate? I mean, what are the inadequacies in those tests?
    Mr. McGee. Well, from the experts at the FAA that we have 
spoken to, real-world testing hasn't really been done in an 
effective way by the FAA in about 20 years, because they have 
relied on computer modeling.
    And so the testing, as you noted, Mr. Chairman, in your 
remarks, involves a truncated section of a fuselage. It is not 
even an entire aircraft. It doesn't reflect these seismic 
changes that have taken place over the last 20 years.
    Load factors are a good 20 points up on average since the 
late 1990s. Americans are larger. There are more disabled on 
board. There are more carry-ons due to the checked baggage 
fees. There are more distractions from electronics. There is 
this issue with the animals, the support animals that in some 
cases are oversized or not trained.
    You combine all this together, and then you add the issue 
that we raised earlier about families traveling together where 
children are separated from their parents, you put that all 
together, and then you have an emergency evacuation. And we 
can't stress it enough, an American Airlines survey of its own 
passengers last year found that 87 percent of people flying on 
American flew less than once a year. So they are just not 
familiar with this.
    It is just a bad recipe all around, all of these factors 
combined.
    Mr. DeFazio. What do you think we could do about the issue 
of--I mean, flight attendants, say, inform you, don't get your 
carry-on bags. But we had the Chicago incident, and the flight 
attendant gave up trying to stop someone because they figured 
it was taking longer to get the bag away from him. What can we 
do about that?
    Mr. McGee. We think that the FAA needs to enhance the in-
flight briefings. It is an issue that just hasn't been stressed 
enough. It is life and death. And there is ample photographic 
evidence of real-world accidents in which people are going down 
slides with carry-ons and laptops.
    Mr. DeFazio. Do you think maybe we should impose--it should 
be emphasized, and also a penalty should be mentioned?
    Mr. McGee. It is something that certainly needs to be 
considered by the FAA, yeah.
    Mr. DeFazio. Right. How about some way to lock on approach 
and takeoff the overhead bins? It seems like it wouldn't be too 
difficult for the manufacturers to come up with an electronic 
locking system.
    Mr. McGee. I have spoken to some experts about that. A few 
of them expressed concerns about emergency equipment that might 
be in overhead bins. Like, it can obviously be----
    Mr. DeFazio. Well, you can leave that one off.
    Mr. McGee. Right. Exactly. It can obviously be moved. It is 
an excuse that can easily be addressed.
    Mr. DeFazio. All right. OK. Thank you. I see my time has 
expired.
    Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. 
Balderson.
    Mr. Balderson. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    And thank you all, panel, for being here today.
    I want to kind of switch gears a little bit. My first 
question is for Mr. Klein.
    Last month, this committee held a hearing on the future of 
America's aviation maintenance and manufacturing workforce. It 
is no secret that our aviation airlines industries are facing a 
major labor shortage that is expected to grow in the coming 
years. Industry forecasts show that North America will need 
over 200,000 civilian pilots, and almost as many maintenance 
technicians over the next 20 years.
    On February 5, 2020, United Airlines announced an expansion 
of their Aviate pilot program and signed a purchase agreement 
to become the only major U.S. carrier to own a flight training 
academy.
    Can you discuss any recent actions from Spirit Airlines 
that would invest in education and workforce development?
    Mr. Klein. Yes. We have done some investment in this. We 
have what is called flow through agreements with some regional 
carriers where pilots go through, they get their flight hours, 
they become pilots at regional carriers, and then come to 
Spirit Airlines after a period of time.
    Additionally, we have just used--and this is on behalf of 
the Spirit Foundation, which is a nonprofit arm of Spirit 
Airlines--we are investing in what I would call education 
centers and facilities that do pilot training and also do 
mechanics training, technician training. And we are doing that 
for two reasons. One is to make sure the pipeline continues to 
grow. The second is we think it is extremely important that we 
have a more diverse workforce in both the pilot ranks as well 
as the technician ranks.
    So we are also investing in places that promote both female 
and minority training for those individuals that want to join 
the aviation industry. We think it is an important part that 
can help diversify the workforce at the same time.
    Mr. Balderson. OK. My second question, also to Mr. Klein, 
but if anyone on the panel would like to jump in and give their 
thoughts, please do so.
    If the workforce shortage in the aviation space is not 
addressed, whether it is with air traffic controllers, 
maintenance technicians and engineers, or pilots, what 
consequences will we see for consumers?
    Mr. Klein. Well, certainly it is very important to have 
highly skilled professionals as part of the workforce. It is 
hard for me to speculate about the future because right now we 
are not having issues with recruitment or training and 
retention of the professionals that you are speaking of. It is 
hard to speculate about the future.
    I would just assume that, if we start to have those kinds 
of issues, you will see the free market work, where salaries or 
things of that nature would become more important for those 
individuals, and you will see that kind of demand drive more 
people entering that part of the workforce.
    Mr. Balderson. OK. Thank you very much.
    Would anybody else like to add?
    Mr. McGee.
    Mr. McGee. Yes. Thank you.
    For about 15 years now at Consumer Reports we have been 
investigating and advocating about aircraft maintenance 
outsourcing by U.S. airlines, much of it outside the country to 
foreign repair stations. We have advocated it as a safety issue 
from a consumer perspective, not from a labor perspective, but 
the two issues are intertwined because we have decimated an 
entire generation of mechanics here in the United States, 
because the work has been shipped overseas for much lower 
salaries.
    And that is something you just can't get back overnight. 
Younger people coming out of the military, coming out of 
school, looking for careers who once found a very good career 
in airline maintenance are not finding it now.
    Mr. Balderson. OK.
    Would anybody else like to?
    Mr. Leader.
    Mr. Leader. Yes. I would like to speak on that briefly, 
Congressman Balderson.
    From my perspective, we are seeing the right balancing 
occur. When the FAA mandated higher number of hours for pilots, 
we saw it suddenly drive more pilots to get more experience at 
smaller airlines or part 135 operators, and then they are 
actively seeking to move up through the airlines.
    When it comes to maintenance, I have been at maintenance 
facilities across our airlines, it is a very sought-after job 
and one that I believe will continue to grow. The economics of 
continuously outsourcing labor to aircraft that are primarily 
based in the United States does not make economic sense given 
the cost to ferry aircraft elsewhere.
    I think you will see a strong, growing base here in the 
U.S. and one that our airlines are investing in independently. 
And from APEX--so we have the IFSA Foundation, which last year 
surpassed over $1 million given out in educational scholarships 
to help advance their industry forward.
    Mr. Balderson. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Klein, you leaned forward.
    Mr. Klein. I was just going to add to what Dr. Leader just 
mentioned, is we do some outsourcing of some of that work, but 
we do it in Puerto Rico. It is the decision we made to help 
support the Territory there. And we are using a highly skilled, 
highly trained professional organization there, and we are 
doing it--so we do have a small ferry cost to get the aircraft 
to Puerto Rico. We felt that was a good investment for the 
Territory to continue to do that work there.
    Mr. Balderson. OK. Thank you all very much.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. 
Cohen.
    Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Discontent among airline travelers has been increasing, and 
it is for a good reason. While airlines are experiencing record 
profitability and executive salaries are getting larger and 
larger, the flying public is being squeezed like sardines in 
shrinking seats, charged unreasonable amounts of money due to 
an increase in new ancillary fees, and faced with fewer choices 
as competition decreases.
    When it comes to unreasonable airline fees, the airlines 
have gone beyond imaginable levels. In 2018, fees for checked 
baggage and reservation changes amounted to a record $7.6 
billion. That was $4.9 billion for checked baggage and $2.7 
billion for reservation changes. Even worse, some airlines have 
recently increased these fees.
    The flying public is exasperated, and so are many members 
of this committee, and I am.
    As passenger levels continue to grow in the years ahead, it 
is imperative that we work as a committee to ensure that 
airline policies and practices are transparent and reasonable, 
not erode public consumer protection.
    Mr. McGee, you discussed the proliferation of these fees in 
your testimony. In your opinion, wouldn't you say the fees that 
we have gotten used to, like checked baggage and ticket 
changes, are growing, and how is that factoring into the 
consumer experience?
    Mr. McGee. It has had a very negative impact for many 
consumers, and we don't think that the DOT complaint system is 
capturing that discontent.
    At Consumer Reports, we have the advantage of surveys with 
tens of thousands of readers, and when we ask them about 
airline service, which we do every year or two, the top of the 
list of complaints is fees, particularly baggage fees. It is 
not just that there are existing fees, but that the existing 
fees keep increasing, as was noted earlier. Just this month, 
United and JetBlue raised their fees.
    Mr. Cohen. And that is the reason why Senator Markey asked 
me to introduce a bill in the House, which I was proud to do, 
H.R. 5195, with Chuy Garcia from Illinois, and other 
transportation colleagues. That would be the FAIR Fees Act.
    This bill would prohibit the charging of fees, including 
cancellation, change, and bag fees, that are--it would require 
those fees to be reasonable and proportional to the cost of the 
services. They can still charge them, but they would have to be 
reasonable and proportional.
    Mr. Klein, Spirit Airlines is quite upfront about the fact 
that it relies on ancillary fees as part of its business model. 
That being said, the pricing of some of these fees is 
confounding. A recent search for bag fees found costs more than 
doubled depending on time and place of purchase.
    What is the rationale for charging variable baggage fees 
depending on when a traveler buys their ticket?
    Mr. Klein. Congressman Cohen, as you mentioned, our 
business model highly relies on ancillary revenue. We are not 
shy about talking about that.
    What we do in our business model is make sure that we 
reduce the base fares. So the fares are reduced. Other airlines 
don't necessarily do that, that you are mentioning. What we do 
is bring the fares down so that customers that don't need to 
check bags or don't need to have a specific seat assignment 
have the ability to fly that may not otherwise be able to fly.
    Mr. Cohen. And I understand that, and I appreciate it, but 
my question is, why do you charge more depending on when a 
traveler buys a ticket? You have got the same luggage space. 
You have got the same luggage. Why do you charge more if they 
buy their ticket at a different time?
    Mr. Klein. Certainly. So what we want to make sure we do is 
encourage people to think about when they are making their 
purchase decision. We want them to get that discount by 
assigning the bag fee to their record when they buy their 
ticket upfront.
    The standard price is if you just add your bag to your 
record whenever you want to. We want to give people a discount 
for adding that bag to their record at time of purchase.
    Mr. Cohen. How does that affect your airline? You have got 
a certain space for baggage. It is not going to increase or 
decrease depending on when that person brings their bag and 
puts it on the plane. Shouldn't it be the same fee because it 
is the same amount of service you have to give them for that 
baggage space?
    Mr. Klein. Well, the answer to your question is no. We 
disagree with that. We think it is better to give people a 
discount for adding their bag fee upfront, because if they do 
that and can think about how they are thinking of their 
overall--to Mr. McGee's point, we want people to get the best 
upfront price they can and----
    Mr. Cohen. I have limited time, and I appreciate it.
    Mr. McGee, he called on you. Do you agree with his 
analysis?
    Mr. McGee. No, we don't. We believe that with the fee 
situation with the airlines, there are two problems. That is 
why we supported your legislation.
    One is the transparency. Consumers are confused by the 
fees. These are pages from the Spirit and United websites. You 
can't always determine the cost of a bag until you enter 
specific flight information.
    The other issue beyond transparency is that many of the 
fees are quite arbitrary. As was pointed out here, in 2017, 
when Chairman DeFazio asked United and American what is the 
costs internally of changing a ticket, and the executives were 
deer in the headlights. They couldn't answer it.
    Mr. Cohen. Thank you very much.
    And with Spirit Airlines, get a flight from Memphis to New 
Orleans. Thank you.
    Mr. Klein. Thank you, sir.
    Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
    The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Spano, is now recognized.
    Mr. Spano. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate it.
    I wanted to talk about an issue that is on a lot of 
Members' minds. The ranking member referenced it just a moment 
ago during his opening comments with respect to the COVID-19 
virus.
    On Sunday, the first two cases of COVID-19 were diagnosed 
in Florida, one of which was in Hillsborough County, 
Hillsborough County being part of the congressional district 
that I happen to represent, which is Florida 15. It spans much 
of the area between Tampa and Orlando. And so most, if not all, 
of my constituents, when they fly somewhere, they will fly out 
of Tampa or Orlando International Airports.
    The airport I primarily use, Tampa International, announced 
that they have taken several steps to prevent the spread of the 
virus at the airport. And so those steps include increased 
cleaning and sanitation of high-touch areas, providing extra 
hand sanitizer in key areas, reminding travelers and employees 
to practice good hygiene, and so forth and so on.
    A few questions related to the specific issue. Number one, 
if I may, I want to ask the panel, have you seen any similar 
actions at airports across the country, and, if so, what are 
those actions?
    Anybody can respond.
    Mr. Leader. I can speak to this. APEX provided guidance to 
all of our airlines, not just in the U.S., but worldwide on 
nine key steps that they need to be taking now.
    I want to stress to Members of Congress and to members of 
the public, it is completely safe to fly right now. We have 
gone through this now and had different instances of people 
flying on aircraft. There has not been traceable transmission 
on aircraft to this date.
    We believe that will continue to be the case, because there 
is vertical air circulation through HEPA filters that are 99.97 
to 99.99 percent effective onboard aircraft.
    With that said, the steps that we have outlined to airlines 
are clearly communicating to passengers and to staff the safety 
steps the airline is taking; broader waivers for changes and 
cancellations, which we are proud that several airlines in the 
U.S. have taken; enhancing customer contact details and 
traceability should we need to be able to have that on board; 
flight crew awareness on how to act in this instance.
    We have dealt with tougher situations--for example, with 
Ebola--which created much more significant aircraft incidents. 
We haven't had those yet, but they are prepared. Aircraft 
decontamination procedures, having a flight aircraft 
decontamination and procedures in place, for example, on door 
handles of restrooms and other high-touch surfaces.
    And then most importantly, to your point, Congressman, 
working with airports and Government authorities to make sure 
that we are prepared, as Tampa has done, to have a cleaner 
environment on the airport side, because the TSA security area 
is a very high-touch area that needs to be very closely 
maintained during this thing.
    And then enhancing the ability for airline employees and 
supplier staff to call in sick as needed so that we never have 
someone come on board the aircraft or to work that might be 
spreading COVID-19.
    Mr. Spano. All right. Thank you, Mr. Leader.
    Anybody else?
    Mr. Von Ah.
    Mr. Von Ah. Congressman, I would just mention, in our work 
we found that all of the airports that we looked at--this was 
back a few years ago--had individual plans in place for dealing 
with situations like this.
    Some of the challenges we noted in executing those plans 
related to coordination and communication--communication from 
Federal agencies in terms of what they should be doing, what 
the real threat was, what the real issue was, and communication 
amongst contractors and others in the airport area to make sure 
that everybody knows what they should be doing.
    I would also mention that we don't really have a national 
plan for the aviation system. This is a recommendation we still 
have open for DOT.
    Mr. Spano. My next question was going to be, what, if any, 
recommendations do you have as far as what we can do to support 
the airports? So that goes to that question.
    Any other suggestions on what we might be able to do in our 
purview to help assist the industry as a whole at airports 
specifically?
    Mr. McGee.
    Mr. McGee. Yes, Congressman. We have been looking at the 
websites of most of the major U.S. carriers, and to their 
credit many of them have very large notices on the home pages 
about the coronavirus, particularly on international routes 
where they have canceled flights.
    But we have seen this before with other force majeure 
events, natural disasters, et cetera, that we think that 
communication could increase. For those that are not directly 
affected yet--in other words, if you are planning a trip and 
you are uncertain--the communication from the airlines could be 
much better. It is not sufficient.
    Mr. Spano. Anyone else want to speak to that?
    Mr. Leader. I think that what we should do from a U.S. 
Government perspective to further enhance traveler safety is 
working with the TSA to make sure that we have--following 
Tampa's example, I would love to see the TSA have hand 
sanitizer available for passengers at stations, to have Lysol, 
you know, the fact that my phone is placed where people's shoes 
go in a TSA bin. It would be wonderful to have, during this 
time in particular, additional steps taken by the U.S. 
Government.
    Mr. Spano. Thank you, Mr. Leader.
    I yield back.
    Ms. Davids. The gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Stanton, is 
recognized.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Chairwoman.
    As has been discussed by several of our witnesses today, 
air travel for those with disabilities poses a number of unique 
challenges. More often than not, it could be a very stressful 
experience. And in some instances those with disabilities 
choose not to fly rather than deal with the obstacles that 
exist from the curb to the aircraft and beyond. However, for 
some, avoiding air travel altogether simply isn't a viable 
option, and we must do more to improve accessibility for those 
with disabilities.
    Mr. Page, in your testimony, you discussed many of these 
challenges, from inaccessible restrooms, to injuries during the 
boarding process, to lost or damaged mobility aids. You also 
discussed the need for proper training for those assisting 
passengers with disabilities, particularly when boarding and 
deplaning an aircraft.
    One area, though, that hasn't been discussed much that I 
would like to explore is what happens to passengers with 
disabilities in the event of an emergency? For those with 
disabilities, exiting an aircraft in the best of circumstances 
is a challenge, but in an emergency it may be virtually 
impossible, especially considering current aircraft design and 
airplane training procedures.
    Currently regulations require that all passengers be able 
to evacuate the aircraft within 90 seconds with half of the 
exits blocked. Yet when the FAA ran evacuation tests between 
November 2019 and January of this year to evaluate the 
relationship between seat spacing and evacuation times, those 
tests did not include people with disabilities.
    This not only concerns me, but also raises questions about 
the accuracy of these tests and how reflective they are of the 
flying public.
    I understand that passengers with disabilities should 
receive a safety briefing from the flight crew, the goal of 
which is to provide greater awareness of their accessibility 
needs, yet I am concerned that this briefing rarely happens. In 
the case of my outstanding legislative director, Tracee Sutton, 
she indicates to me that briefing has never happened when she 
flies.
    Additionally, it is not clear to me what procedures are in 
place to assist those who are not able to evacuate on their own 
in an emergency.
    So, Mr. Page, can you share your thoughts on the FAA's 
choice to not include people with disabilities in its 
evacuation tests?
    Mr. Page. OK. Thank you.
    Yeah, that is disappointing, that they are not included in 
the tests. To kind of echo your thoughts, for me, being a 
person with permanent disability, when it comes to boarding and 
deplaning, I am first on and last off.
    I have had the evacuation briefing from flight attendants 
on occasion but not on a full-time, regular basis. But in that 
briefing the emergency evacuation process was explained to me 
as basically I would be dragged out of the plane by sitting on 
the floor and taken out the best they can. The definition of 
``timed escape'' is not really defined to me by the flight 
attendant at that time.
    Mr. Stanton. I am equally disappointed. It is clear that 
the required training procedures for professional staff in the 
airline industry need to be improved.
    I want to turn to our friends at Spirit Airlines. You 
talked about some of the improvements you made, and I really 
appreciate those improvements. However, according to the DOT, 
your airline ranked 13th out of 17 U.S. carriers for mishandled 
wheelchairs and scooters last year. So I wanted to hear 
directly from you what steps you are taking to improve your 
ranking in this important regard.
    Mr. Klein. Yes. It is something, Congressman, that we know 
we had to improve upon. We have improved upon that. I am happy 
to say, although there is a lot of work we can still do, for 
the first 2 months of this year our complaints are down 45 
percent year over year as it relates to disability-related 
complaints overall.
    As it relates to the securing and the delay of bringing the 
assistive devices back to the guests, we are down 29 percent on 
that number as well.
    So we do agree there is work to do. This is a topic that is 
extremely important to us and one that we feel passionate 
about. We know there is more we can do, and we are basically 
doing that just with better training, quite frankly. It is 
better training and making sure that we are saying the right 
things and making sure that the training is being followed 
through upon.
    Mr. Stanton. You have an opportunity for your airline in 
particular to be a market leader in this area and maybe work 
with your staff to make sure that the necessary security 
protocols are followed for all passengers, including especially 
passengers that happen to have disabilities. Obviously it is 
lacking, based on my analysis, and that is an area that needs 
great improvement.
    Mr. Klein. Yeah, it is disappointing to hear this 
information. And I can't speak specifically. I wasn't prepared 
to speak to that today. But we will definitely take that away 
and make sure it is not something that we are lacking on. This 
is extremely important.
    Mr. Stanton. Thanks so much. Thank you.
    Mr. Klein. Yes.
    Mr. Stanton. I yield back.
    Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
    The gentleman from New York, Mr. Katko, is now recognized.
    Mr. Katko. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    And thank you all for being here today. As I was sitting 
here listening to some of the testimony and reflecting about my 
many, many years of traveling, I can't help but think that, 
from the time I started traveling and flying until today, it is 
a vastly different experience, and it is nowhere near as 
pleasant and nowhere near as comfortable. And I am not the 
tallest guy in the world, but I am 6, 3", and it is hard for me 
to fit in the seats in a lot of airlines. You can't even move 
in them. And there is no headrest. You can't even put your head 
back, because there is nothing there.
    So it is not as pleasant an experience for me, so I am kind 
of curious. If I have time, I am going to drill down on some of 
those experiences.
    But, Mr. Von Ah, I want to ask you quickly. Consumer 
complaints between 2008 and 2017 increased. Is that because 
airline service deteriorated, or is it because consumers are 
more aware of their ability to file complaints with the DOT?
    Mr. Von Ah. It is hard to pinpoint the exact reason why, 
Congressman. I think there are a number of factors that play 
into why and how a consumer will complain.
    What we have noticed is that they did increase about 10 
percent over that period relative to the number of boardings, 
but passenger complaints, they stay relatively static to DOT. 
They sort of get the same kinds of complaints in the same kinds 
of categories from year to year.
    What we noted in our testimony and what we found in some of 
our work is that we have seen notable increases in complaints 
related to disabilities, as well as some spikes in 
discrimination complaints.
    Mr. Katko. Thank you.
    Mr. McGee, Consumer Reports, first of all, I love the 
organization. I think they serve a great job for the public. 
And I don't think I have ever bought a car without looking at 
Consumer Reports. So thank you for that. I appreciate that.
    Mr. McGee. Thank you, Congressman.
    Mr. Katko. And especially having teenage boys now who are 
driving, I am always trying to make sure I get a car that keeps 
them safe. So thank you for that.
    There is a disparity between your complaint numbers and 
those of DOT. Can you explain why that may be? Or what is your 
take on that?
    Mr. McGee. Certainly. I think the best microcosm for that 
is the issue I raised earlier of families traveling together. 
When we submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the 
DOT to find out complaints about families who had been 
separated from young children on flights, they forwarded us 136 
complaints over about 2 to 3 years.
    We then put a portal on consumerreports.org asking people 
to let us know, and we would forward those complaints to the 
DOT, and we received more than 400. We are up to 600 now, just 
within weeks.
    So to us, that clearly underscores that the DOT complaint 
system is insufficient. Most consumers don't get off a flight 
after a bad experience and say, ``Honey, we need to contact the 
DOT.'' They are not aware of it.
    In the European Union, for example, there is signage all 
throughout European airports letting you know how and when you 
can complain, both to the EU and to the airlines, and we 
strongly suggest that the DOT needs to do more to let people 
know that the complaint system is there.
    Mr. Katko. Let's talk about that for a minute.
    And, Mr. Von Ah, I want to give you an opportunity to talk 
about that.
    I don't know if it is DOT's role or not, but it can only 
help the industry do better. And I know a lot of times I get--I 
fly American all the time, and they do a wonderful job about 
asking questions all the time. And I have those little 
certificates. When someone does a good job on the airplane, I 
give it--I turn one in for them, and that is great.
    But how can we do something along the European model? And 
what would you suggest it look like? I am not sure it should 
come from DOT, but if it does, what would it look like, and 
what would you suggest?
    Mr. Von Ah. Well, before I get to that question, 
Congressman, I just wanted to mention, I think DOT, they will 
tell consumers to go to the airlines first with complaints, 
because that is the way that a consumer is going to get more 
immediate resolution of that complaint.
    When DOT is looking at complaints, they are looking for 
something that is pervasive, it is repeating, it is happening 
over and over again, that is more broad, that has a broader 
consumer impact.
    So that is just one notice to why they would not see as 
many complaints as Consumer Reports might get, for example, or 
the airlines themselves, as we have pointed out, or DOT has 
actually reported that airlines get maybe 50 complaints for 
every 1 complaint that DOT gets.
    In terms of the DOT publicizing or making it known how to 
complain, they have made some improvements to their website, so 
consumers do have a little bit better idea of what rights they 
have available to them and how to complain. But that is on 
their website. You have to go to their website to see it. That 
is not something that is available in airports.
    Mr. Katko. Yeah, but I don't think people would know it, if 
you are flying, necessarily know, I am going to go to the DOT 
website and voice my complaint.
    Mr. Von Ah. That is correct.
    Mr. Katko. Mr. McGee, what do you think that would look 
like if we tried to set something up? What would you suggest on 
how we do it?
    And I don't think it is such a bad thing, because I think 
airlines want to be good and want to provide good service, and 
they generally do. I understand the competitiveness and why you 
have to have smaller seat space and all the other things. I got 
it. But what can we do to help them be more conscious of the 
complaints out there?
    Mr. McGee. Well, Mr. Von Ah's point is a good one in that 
the DOT does suggest that consumers go to the airlines to fix 
things. They are not in the European model where they will step 
in and try and redress grievances.
    But the more serious problem from our perspective is that 
the DOT has stated to us repeatedly that they work on issues 
based on complaints. So when we said we had 136 complaints from 
families with autistic children and children with allergies and 
all kinds of serious problems, who in their right mind would 
say that those 136 complaints are less than 10,000 complaints 
about scuffed baggage?
    So they need to have perspective on complaints. Some of the 
most serious complaints are low in numbers, and yet they said 
specifically they would not act on the families traveling 
together issue because, quote, ``the numbers were too low.''
    Mr. Katko. Yeah. We have got to figure out a way. Maybe in 
a separate submission, if you have ideas what that would look 
like, maybe we can figure out something. I think having a more 
healthy discussion on the concerns, and maybe people knowing 
where to go if there is a concern, now airlines can see what 
the concerns are, and all airlines can access, and all 
Americans. I think it might be better to have that 
transparency.
    Mr. McGee. We would be happy to assist.
    Mr. Katko. I thank you.
    I yield back.
    Ms. Davids. Thank you. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 
Carbajal.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Mr. Von Ah, in your written testimony, you discuss the 
growing number of complaints from passengers alleging racial 
discrimination. Can you elaborate on this topic? And to your 
knowledge what are some of the steps airlines are taking to 
address this important issue?
    Mr. Von Ah. Thank you for the question, Congressman.
    Those complaints, when we have looked at them, the 
discrimination-based complaints are typically about racial 
discrimination. Some of the things that we have noted in our 
reports are things where it may be a misunderstanding or there 
is always a push and pull between the pilot's ability to remove 
a passenger for safety reasons, but they are not allowed to 
discriminate, and so there may be just misunderstandings about 
what is going on with that.
    But we didn't really get into pinpointing exactly the cause 
of some of those complaints. So it is hard to comment exactly 
on what the airlines are doing.
    Mr. Carbajal. That is a little disconcerting. If we don't 
know, is there a way to step up our ability to dive into that a 
little bit further?
    Mr. Von Ah. So DOT does follow up on every one of these 
complaints. In particular, discrimination complaints are one of 
those categories that they do pay close attention to and 
forward to the airlines. So that is one way that they are 
addressing the issue.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you.
    You also touched on increased barriers that passengers with 
disabilities face. I found it notable that you mentioned that 
the number of complaints filed by people in wheelchairs may not 
fully reflect the inconvenience experienced by these 
passengers.
    Why do you believe there is an underreporting from this 
particular group?
    Mr. Von Ah. Yeah. Thank you for that question.
    There are a number of reasons why. First and foremost, 
there is no requirement that these rest--we looked at 
lavatories specifically. There is no requirement from DOT that 
lavatories be accessible to persons with disabilities. And so 
they may not have an expectation that they can complain, 
because it is not a requirement. So that is one reason why.
    I think that some of the things that we also heard are 
people take extreme measures to not have to use the lavatory in 
the first place. So if they are not using it, they are not 
going to necessarily complain about the lack of accessibility 
in that lavatory.
    And then, as was noted I think in some previous discussion, 
people just choose not to fly.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you.
    Mr. Page, I coming to you. From the perspective of 
Paralyzed Veterans of America, would you have anything else to 
add?
    Mr. Page. I am sorry. Say it again.
    Mr. Carbajal. Do you have anything else to add?
    Mr. Page. Yeah, I was just getting ready to echo what he 
said.
    Yeah, in reference to a lot of our members, they dehydrate 
themselves the day before when it comes to flying, because we 
know that there is no access to the lavatory on the plane 
currently, because it is just not accessible.
    And in reference to complaints, back to DOT, I echo what 
Mr. McGee said. PVA has started to file a lot of complaints, 
and so we have gotten some action from DOT on a lot of 
different issues. But it was a row to hoe that we built over 
there trying to get some response from the Department on a lot 
of different issues.
    So, yeah, definitely there is a lot of work left to be 
done, for sure.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
    The gentlewoman from the District of Columbia, Ms. Norton, 
is now recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Norton. Thank you very much.
    Mr. McGee, I noted in your testimony that you raised an 
issue that has been of special interest to me and to this 
committee itself. You reference on page 6 of your testimony a 
2018 FBI report that stated--and here I am quoting you--``that 
in-flight sexual assaults are on the rise, with children 
particularly vulnerable.''
    You go on to say that you were shocked--I must tell you we 
were as well--by DOT's refusal to act. So you did it yourself. 
And within weeks you said you had in excess of 600--I am 
quoting you again--600 complaints, more than four times the 
DOT's original total.
    I have a bill called the AWARE Act, it has a Republican 
cosponsor, that would require the Justice Department to report 
this data. And I will note that a similar bill has passed this 
committee. It is the chairman's bill, I am an original 
cosponsor, that would require that sexual assaults be measured 
on airlines and then made public. That bill passed this 
committee in November.
    So my question to you, particularly given your testimony, 
Mr. McGee, is, how many of the 600 complaints that you quoted 
in your testimony that you handle dealt with sexual assault in 
particular?
    Mr. McGee. Many of them, ma'am, raised the issue. We did 
not have an actual case cited to us, but repeatedly we heard 
from parents and caregivers that they were concerned about it. 
In some cases, they got off the plane. They said: If my child 
is not going to be sitting near me, we are not going to take 
this flight.
    And, conversely, we hadn't thought about this, but we heard 
from the business travel community, and we heard that many 
corporate travelers don't want the responsibility of sitting 
next to a young child--we are talking 5, 6, 7, 8--who is not 
their own. They don't want to take on the responsibility.
    Ms. Norton. They don't want that responsibility?
    Mr. McGee. They don't want the responsibility to have to 
ensure the child's welfare, with oxygen masks, with 
evacuations.
    And so the FBI report is chilling reading. And when we had 
that in mind, when we read through these complaints, we saw 
parent after parent say: What are the airlines thinking? How 
could you possibly--you might as well be an unaccompanied 
minor. The airlines have very strict policies on unaccompanied 
minors. They don't allow children under a certain age to travel 
as unaccompanied minors. They give them special attention.
    For all intents and purposes, if I am the parent and I am 
in row 12 and my 6-year-old is in row 18, that child is an 
unaccompanied minor.
    And so that is why we were shocked that the DOT doesn't 
take this more seriously enough to act. Again, not all 
complaints are created equal. You can't compare the threat of a 
child being assaulted to damaged luggage.
    Ms. Norton. Here, on the one hand, we are talking about 
children who are completely defenseless, don't know what to do, 
and we don't know how many are adults as well. And this is, as 
I say, it has shocked this committee, so that there is a bill 
that should be going to the floor soon.
    Could I ask you as well, Mr. McGee, have you found any 
difference in the quality of customer service between the 
regional airlines and the legacy airlines?
    Mr. McGee. Well, we have found that, when we talk about the 
legacy airlines, many of their flights, up to 50 percent of 
departures on a given day, are in fact operated, they are 
subserviced, they are outsourced to regional carriers that the 
passenger doesn't book with. And so we have written about this 
and advocated about this at length over the years.
    There are two sets of rules. There are safety issues that 
in some measure have been addressed after the crash in Buffalo 
of Colgan Air, but there are also customer service issues. 
There are different standards.
    The bottom line is you are buying a ticket on United, 
American, Delta, but you are flying on an aircraft that is not 
operated by United, American, or Delta.
    And so, from an FAA perspective, there could be different 
standards in terms of safety, in terms of maintenance, in terms 
of pilot training. And, from a customer service standard, there 
can be differences----
    Ms. Norton. Do you think legislation is needed on that?
    Mr. McGee. Absolutely. We have advocated for years that 
there needs to be tighter control of regional carriers 
operating on behalf of major carriers. And we find repeatedly 
that many passengers have no idea they bought a ticket on 
airline A and they are flying on airline B.
    Ms. Norton. So simply knowing would help----
    Mr. McGee. Absolutely.
    Ms. Norton [continuing]. Who is actually flying you.
    Thank you very much. I will look into that.
    Mr. McGee. We would be happy to assist you, ma'am.
    Ms. Norton. Thank you.
    Ms. Davids. The gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Johnson, is now 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you.
    Mr. McGee, when the Trump administration came to power 
there was a Department of Transportation Aviation Consumer 
Protection Advisory Committee that was in place that was by law 
to meet quarterly.
    Did that quarterly meeting schedule change once the Trump 
administration came to power?
    Mr. McGee. Yes, Congressman, it did. For the first 2 years 
there were no meetings. They were finally reinstated in 2019. I 
participated in one on behalf of Consumer Reports last year. It 
has continued, but it has been infrequent since then.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. So it has not been holding the 
quarterly meetings that are required by law?
    Mr. McGee. That is correct. It has not been quarterly, no.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. And now the Department of 
Transportation appointed someone as its consumer 
representative, I think you testified to earlier, someone from 
the American Enterprise Institute?
    Mr. McGee. Yes. And that individual has no career record of 
ever having advocated on behalf of consumers. So we were rather 
shocked by that.
    This is a committee with several members, and traditionally 
under other administrations that role was filled by someone 
with a robust history of advocating for consumers. This person 
does not.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Well, now, how has this appointment 
impacted consumer access to a satisfactory passenger experience 
on airlines?
    Mr. McGee. Well, it has many effects, and we, as consumer 
advocates, we work with colleagues outside of Consumer Reports, 
with many other consumer organizations that advocate on behalf 
of airline passengers, and we treat those meetings very 
seriously. We look forward to them, and we have very robust 
agendas.
    And now we go in, and we feel that we are not being heard 
in the same way. We don't have someone on the inside of that 
committee advocating for passengers the way that we believe 
there should be.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you.
    Mr. Von Ah, GAO's testimony to date describes the growing 
number of complaints each year from passengers alleging racial 
discrimination. Can you describe what airlines are doing to 
address racial discrimination in air travel?
    Mr. Von Ah. So thank you for that question, Congressman.
    Our work looked at the training that airlines have provided 
for nondiscrimination. I would just mention that we didn't get 
specific information about those airline trainings. I would 
note that that training, it was hard to understand exactly who 
got the training, how often they have got it.
    And we did note that in some of the leading practices that 
we developed in terms of nondiscrimination training, some of 
those trainings did not include a number of the things that we 
would consider to be best practices, things like implicit bias 
training, ensuring there is a robust discussion amongst the 
people in an interactive training environment.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Have you seen the Department of 
Transportation make any significant efforts to address racial 
discrimination in air travel?
    Mr. Von Ah. They do take that issue very seriously, and 
they do follow up on those complaints. However, that kind of 
training that I just mentioned is not required by DOT, although 
airlines do have that kind of training. But they don't require 
it.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you.
    Mr. Klein, your company uses arbitration clauses in your 
contracts with airline consumers, correct?
    Mr. Klein. Yes. That is correct, sir.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. And that is because it is more 
efficient and cost effective for the company to force people 
into arbitration than it would be to allow them to file 
lawsuits in court against the company. Is that correct?
    Mr. Klein. So we do get lawsuits in court all the time, 
sir.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. But it is more cost efficient for 
the airline when you can divert cases away from court into the 
arbitration process, correct?
    Mr. Klein. So, sir, in our case we have many more court 
cases that take place than actual arbitrations.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. No, no, no. That is not my 
question. My question is, it is more cost efficient for the 
airline to divert cases to arbitration than it is to allow 
cases to proceed to litigation in court. Isn't that correct?
    Mr. Klein. Sir, that may be accurate. I can't speak to the 
full accuracy of that at this time.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Well, otherwise, you would not do 
it. You are low-cost, ultra low-cost airline, you are looking 
to cut corners as much as you can, and people taking you to 
court is just more expensive than arbitration. I mean, that is 
a simple equation, isn't it?
    Mr. Canfield. Congressman, I am general counsel of Spirit, 
so maybe I am better suited to answer this, the question.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. I know you know the answer to the 
question, then.
    Mr. Canfield. We do provide some context for arbitration. 
Many consumer businesses do. It is an attempt to achieve better 
consistency of results.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. And it is cheaper for the airline, 
isn't it?
    Mr. Canfield. I am sorry, sir?
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. It is cheaper for the airline to 
divert customers into arbitration than it is to allow them to 
proceed with litigation. That is the question. And is that 
true, or is that false?
    Mr. Canfield. I really can't say, because I don't----
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. All right.
    Ms. Davids. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Mr. Canfield [continuing]. Know if we have enough 
arbitrations to make a statement one way or the other.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you.
    Ms. Davids. The gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Brown, is now 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Brown. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    I have a statement and not a question, but I will preface 
by thanking each of you for being here today in this hearing on 
airline passenger experience.
    In 2018, the GAO found that airlines' operation performance 
generally is improved from 2008 through 2017 as measured by the 
Department of Transportation data on denied boardings, 
mishandled baggage, and late and canceled or diverted flights. 
This is due in part to the airlines making investments in 
technology, airport infrastructure improvements, and expanding 
flight operations.
    However, there is always room for improvement, especially 
regarding safety. I think that a passenger's experience 
includes even the unexpected, unscheduled, and unfortunate 
series of events that occur during emergencies.
    In November of 2019, this committee held a roundtable on 
the air traveler experience for persons with disabilities. The 
roundtable highlighted safety concerns regarding seat size and 
passenger evacuation. Federal aviation regulations require that 
the design of an airliner must permit all passengers to 
evacuate the aircraft within 90 seconds with half of the exits 
blocked.
    Recent accidents have raised concerns about whether all 
passengers can, in fact, evacuate an airliner in 90 seconds, 
and I believe the chairman of the full committee alluded to 
that. The example of this is an uncontained engine failure and 
fire that occurred in Chicago in 2016.
    I am concerned that current standards do not take into 
account passengers with disabilities. Aircraft manufacturers 
like Boeing and Airbus are responsible for successfully 
demonstrating to the FAA that each aircraft design meets this 
bar. But FAA standards, like seat size and aisle width, that 
have not been updated in 20 years, make it extremely difficult 
for passengers with disabilities to evacuate.
    In November of 2019, the FAA started tests aimed at setting 
a minimum standard for seats and the space between rows to 
ensure safety. However, there was no indication that the 
volunteers being used for the tests encompassed all 
demographics and legal requirements.
    We must ensure that the FAA considers all groups of people 
when testing cabin evacuations to ensure the safety and 
consumer experience of the passenger.
    So I want to thank you, Madam Chair, for the opportunity to 
put this statement in the record, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.
    Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
    The gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Lynch, is now 
recognized.
    Mr. Lynch. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, for holding 
this hearing.
    And I want to thank our witnesses for helping the committee 
with its work.
    So Members of Congress are frequent flyers. I had a flight 
on Monday down here. I got the 6 a.m. shuttle down from Boston. 
And maybe it is because it was the 6 o'clock shuttle, but half 
the plane was empty. Yet because of the seating assignment 
protocol--and I am thinking about the coronavirus here--because 
of the seating assignment protocol, the first dozen rows are 
all jam packed with people cheek by jowl, shoulder to shoulder 
on that flight, and then the back of the plane was completely 
empty.
    So even though the assurances that you have given, Mr. 
Leader, about the HEPA filter and all of that, certainly having 
everybody jammed in with each other while the rest of the plane 
is empty is probably not a good practice.
    So, Mr. Klein, you run an airline. Will this take an act of 
Congress to change the seating protocol so that people aren't 
piled up when there are half-empty planes? Is that something 
that you can take on yourself without being directed to do so?
    Mr. Klein. In a way, Congressman Lynch, we don't frequently 
deal with half-empty planes, so our planes are full.
    Mr. Lynch. You are lucky, yeah. But, if this thing goes a 
year, and HHS is saying we could be dealing with this for a 
year, you are going to see--a lot of airlines are going to see 
half-empty planes.
    Mr. Klein. So you bring up an excellent question and an 
excellent point and one that, frankly, we are not dealing with 
today yet. Planes continue to run full, and it is hard for me 
to comment on that, but it is a good point----
    Mr. Lynch. OK. I don't want to waste all my time on this. 
It is probably indicative of the problem we have here. This is 
a very heavily regulated industry. All I am saying is it should 
be simple, it shouldn't be hard.
    Mr. Klein. There are some places where----
    Mr. Lynch. I know there is a loading issue.
    Mr. Klein. Correct. There is a weight and balance issue as 
well, so that is the----
    Mr. Lynch. I don't want to waste all my time on this.
    Mr. Klein. OK. Fair enough.
    Mr. Lynch. I think it should be easily fixed, and I will 
deal with the other airlines individually.
    The other issue that we are dealing with is--so the CDC is 
actually asking for information from the airlines. OK, so you 
get a passenger who is on a flight, they fly to their 
destination, they get off. You know, 3, 4 days later, they test 
positive for coronavirus.
    So now the CDC is trying to get the information from the 
airline, from the flight manifest, the PNR, the passenger name 
record, usually has a phone number and an email, so they can 
tell the passenger that was sitting next to the person that 
tested positive: Hey, you have been in contact with--direct 
contact with someone who has tested positive recently for 
coronavirus.
    So we are having a tug of war. The airlines don't want to 
give up the information. They don't want to cooperate. And so 
we have a dilemma here. And I am asking you again, Mr. Klein, 
not to put you under the gun, but what is the airline position 
on this?
    Mr. Klein. I can speak specifically to Spirit. And we may 
be in a position--I may want Dr. Leader to finish up after I 
give you the Spirit perspective.
    Mr. Lynch. Sure.
    Mr. Klein. Is the information that has been requested by 
the CDC is extremely important, and it hasn't historically been 
collected by airlines.
    Mr. Lynch. The name, contact phone number, and the email?
    Mr. Klein. I can comment. Yeah, so passengers that booked 
directly with the airline, all that information is stored in 
the passenger name record, as you mentioned. If you book 
through a third party--so, for Spirit Airlines, think of 
someone booking through, say, Expedia.
    Mr. Lynch. Yeah, but will you give what you got?
    Mr. Klein. Well, we don't get the information from the 
customers through that transmission of data.
    Mr. Lynch. Some customers you do.
    Mr. Klein. We do if--and we have the information. What I 
was going to say is we have the ability through our system. It 
is very inefficient, but we are collecting, per the CDC 
requirements to collect information. As a directive has come 
in, we have been able to address that.
    Not every airline can, because it is not automated. And it 
is information--like email address and cell phone number of 
each individual passenger is not something that is stored on 
the record. So you have to go get that information upon check-
in. It is inefficient and hard to get. I am not saying it is 
not important to get. We have the ability to do that in our 
reservation system.
    I will hand it over to Dr. Leader maybe to talk about other 
airlines, because that might be important.
    Mr. Lynch. Mr. Leader, you are recognized.
    Mr. Leader. Yes, of course.
    So the from the global distribution systems that are used, 
when airlines are collecting information directly, if they have 
an email and phone number, they are happy to provide it to the 
CDC for the safety of our public.
    In instances where historically Expedia and other online 
travel agencies have held back this information, I think you 
are going to see a wall break down, because if the CDC requests 
it, I believe that the OTA behind the reservation will offer it 
to the airline, which historically they have not.
    Mr. Lynch. It is important information to have, especially 
for that passenger and their family. They want to know that 
they have been in contact with someone so they can take those 
precautions.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. 
Carson.
    Mr. Carson. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    I know many of my colleagues mentioned discrimination, but 
much of the aviation industry has comprehensive reporting 
requirements regarding incidents which occur on airplanes, and 
for good reasons.
    However, there is very little required from airlines to 
report when they remove someone from an airplane. At present, 
the DOT only reports on discriminatory removals when passengers 
complain. This disproportionately impacts American Muslims, 
Sikhs, and Arab Americans, a problem which predates the Gore 
Commission on Aviation Safety from 1997.
    Most recently, the DOT has entered a consent decree with 
Delta arising from two cases of discriminatory removals.
    What can be done to require full reporting and rationale 
for removal to prevent customers, flight attendants, or pilots 
from causing American Muslims, Sikhs, Arab Americans, and 
others--African Americans--to be stereotyped and removed from 
flights for simple acts such as speaking Arabic or wearing a 
hijab?
    Mr. Leader. So from the airline passenger experience 
perspective, I can tell you that our U.S. airlines have an 
incident--two different things.
    Number one is the level of sensitivity and training that 
has been done by each of our airlines keeps getting better and 
better each year. We see examples, for example, at Starbucks, 
where there was insensitivity. Airlines learned from that quite 
readily, because no airline wants to be in that instance.
    In terms of reporting, airlines do collect incident reports 
any time there is a confrontation with a passenger or an 
incident with a passenger that leads to removal from an 
aircraft. They each have procedures that are much, much better 
and very well orchestrated in terms of serving their customers, 
not allowing an incident to occur that is to the detriment of 
their customer as happened to Dr. Dao. So that is an area of 
great improvement.
    My one concern is, to your point, Congressman, is that we 
need to do better about underlying, unseen bias, and our 
airlines continue to focus on training and awareness to not 
allow that to ever impact decisions. And I can turn it over to 
Mr. Klein to speak about Spirit's activities on that front.
    Mr. Klein. Yeah, certainly.
    So we have greatly improved our antidiscrimination 
training. It is something, again, we take seriously, and it is 
an area that we saw that we had improvement we could make, and 
we have invested in that. It is for all of our guest-facing 
team members, so it is not just on the aircraft. It is also at 
the airport as well. So it is extremely important to us and 
something that we do take seriously.
    And to Dr. Leader's point, the removal rate on aircraft, it 
is largely not related to some of the examples that you have 
raised. Most of the time we are dealing with guests that are 
being incredibly disruptive, maybe from having too much fun in 
the destination they were just at before they got on the 
aircraft, and then that causes calls to law enforcement 
officials to help assist us if we can't diffuse the situation 
ourselves, which is always what we try to do first before we 
call in law enforcement to help us, if necessary.
    Mr. Carson. Sure.
    Yes, sir?
    Mr. McGee. Congressman, one of the key issues here is the 
term ``airline employee'' itself. You will notice that at some 
past hearings before this committee some airline executives 
have referred to their team members.
    That is a euphemism that disguises the fact that many 
frontline employees of airlines are, in fact, not employees, 
they are outsourced.
    And so the levels of training, compensation, et cetera, no 
reflection on the people themselves, but on the airlines that 
outsource this work.
    Today we talked about outsourcing maintenance and we talked 
about outsourcing flights to regional carriers. What many 
customers have no idea is that they interface, these are people 
on the front lines interfacing with customers at airports, they 
may even be wearing airline uniforms, but they are not airline 
employees.
    So these training issues, unless you address the 
outsourcing issue, it is very hard to address the training 
issues.
    Mr. Carson. It is a great point.
    Yes, sir?
    Mr. Klein. Yes. So Mr. McGee does raise a good point there. 
And what we do at Spirit Airlines is every single team member 
or family member, even if they are part of an outsourced 
organization in some of our airports, come to our headquarters 
in Florida and go through the exact same training as our team 
members that are on the specific Spirit payroll.
    So they come in, they have the same exact training. In 
fact, I spend time and my colleagues spend time meeting each 
and every single person during our new-hire orientation. We 
take time out of our day to make sure we spend that hour and a 
half with them during their 3-plus weeks, and sometimes, in 
cases, it could be 6 or 8 weeks of training.
    So I understand what Mr. McGee is raising. We agree and 
think it is extremely important to make sure that outsourced 
employees are trained and taught the same way as an actual 
employee.
    Mr. McGee. We appreciate that, but that is not the case at 
all airlines in the U.S.
    Mr. Carson. OK. Thank you, gentlemen.
    I yield back, Madam Chair.
    Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
    Are there any further questions from members of the 
subcommittee?
    Seeing none, I would like to thank each of the witnesses 
for your testimony today. Your contribution to today's 
discussion has been very informative and helpful.
    I ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing 
remain open until such time as our witnesses have provided 
answers to any questions that may be submitted to them in 
writing and unanimous consent that the record remain open for 
15 days for any additional comments and information submitted 
by Members or witnesses to be included in the record of today's 
hearing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    If no other Members have anything to add, the subcommittee 
stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:03 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]



                       Submissions for the Record

                              ----------                              

  Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress 
     from the State of Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Last Congress, we came together to pass a long term, bipartisan, 
comprehensive FAA Reauthorization that made significant strides in 
improving the passenger experience, including for passengers with 
disabilities.
    I am pleased that this subcommittee is holding hearings to ensure 
the intent of Congress is fulfilled.
    I have no doubt that we will hear complaints and concerns about the 
customer experience today.
    Most Members of Congress are frequent fliers, and we've all 
probably had at least one less-than-pleasant experience.
    But we shouldn't forget the numerous instances where flight 
attendants, gate agents, pilots, and ground crew have provided great 
service.
    Bottom line: air travel is now safer, more affordable, and 
available to more people than ever before.
    In the last FAA Reauthorization, Congress acknowledged that all 
passengers must be treated with dignity and fairness.
    But, in order to ensure a robust aviation sector, airlines must be 
able to compete with one another and offer different products at 
different price points.
    Another important issue that will come up today is the impact the 
coronavirus is having on airlines and the passenger experience.
    We need to ensure that the Government's efforts, led by HHS and 
CDC, are well coordinated with the airlines and consider operational 
factors and passenger rights.
    While I look forward to this hearing, it is unfortunate that the 
Department of Transportation and additional airlines were unable to 
participate.
    I understand that the inability of DOT to participate today was 
solely a question of timing, and I think we all agree their presence 
would have added to today's discussion, particularly on the impacts of 
coronavirus.
    Nevertheless, I want to thank the Chairman and the witnesses, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.

                                 
  Letter of March 13, 2020, from Kenneth Mendez, President and Chief 
Executive Officer, Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, Submitted 
                for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
          Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America,
                                   1235 South Clark Street,
                                                 Suite 305,
                               Arlington, VA 22202, March 13, 2020.
The Honorable Rick Larsen,
Chair,
Subcommittee on Aviation, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, 
        DC.
The Honorable Garret Graves,
Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Aviation, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, 
        DC.

    Dear Chair Larsen and Ranking Member Graves,
    On behalf of the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America (AAFA), 
thank you for holding the hearing on the Airline Passenger Experience 
on March 3rd. AAFA is the leading patient organization advocating for 
people with asthma and allergies, and the oldest asthma and allergy 
patient group in the world.
    We were pleased to see that the hearing included a focus on 
passengers with disabilities. I am writing to encourage you to ensure 
that the committee's continued work in this area takes into account the 
experiences of passengers with asthma or allergies, both disabilities 
requiring accommodation.
    According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 
over 25 million Americans have asthma, and over 50 million have 
allergies. Like anyone else, this sizable portion of the population 
often travels by air for business, family visits, or pleasure. Travel 
by plane can be particularly risky for these passengers, particularly 
if they experience an asthma attack or allergic reaction mid-flight. 
AAFA has supported many common-sense policy goals to help protect the 
safety and lives of children and adults with allergies and asthma as 
air travelers:
      AAFA supports the recent Department of Transportation 
(DOT) Traveling by Air with Service Animals Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking allowing airlines to limit the boarding of emotional support 
animals.\1\ Animal dander is one of the most common allergens, and can 
also trigger asthma attacks in those living with asthma. We support the 
use of trained service animals for documented medical needs, but the 
proliferation of non-service animals in the cabin on flights has 
created increased risk for people living with allergies and asthma.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Traveling by Air with Service Animals Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOT-OST-2018-0068-
4724
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      AAFA also urged the DOT to ensure that the health needs 
of people with asthma and allergies are also accommodated. 
Specifically, people with medical documentation of severe allergies to 
animals, or of asthma triggered by animal dander, should be able to 
access seating a specific distance from any animal on a flight. This 
common-sense measure is not always provided. For example, we heard from 
a member of our community, who had a letter from her physician 
requiring a 30-foot distance from animals on the plane. In this case, a 
flight crew informed her that her needs would only be met if a seat was 
available. This is not an acceptable approach: someone with severe 
allergies on a plane is entitled to protection of her rights and 
health, and airlines should be required to provide this reasonable 
accommodation.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      AAFA supports the availability of epinephrine auto-
injectors in the main cabin of commercial flights. Currently, 
epinephrine is only required to be present in the locked cockpit, and 
is typically available on in a vial that must be drawn out with a 
syringe--a task that can be impossible for laypeople, and difficult 
even for medical professionals if turbulence is present. Auto-injectors 
such as ``epi-pens'' are easier to use, but not all people with 
allergies have their own on hand. Both children and adults can have new 
or undiagnosed allergies that first manifest on a flight. We have 
therefore urged the FAA to issue regulations requiring airplanes to 
include epinephrine auto-injectors in adult and pediatric dosages in 
all onboard emergency medical kits, so that they can be easily accessed 
and administered in an anaphylactic emergency.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ AAFA Letter to Administrator Dickson, March 9, 2020. https://
www.aafa.org/media/2626/aafa-letter-faa-urging-airplane-regulations-
require-epinephrine-autoinjectors-onboard.pdf

    As these examples illustrate, for passengers with asthma or 
allergies, the passenger experience is still fraught with too many 
risks. We urge the Committee to affirmatively include people with these 
potentially fatal conditions in your work on the passenger experience, 
so that we can reduce the risk of preventable serious injury and death. 
AAFA would be happy to work with the Committee on these important 
issues.
    Thank you very much for your time and attention.
        Sincerely,
                                            Kenneth Mendez,
                             President and Chief Executive Officer,
                          Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America.

                                 
 Statement of Airlines for America (A4A), Submitted for the Record by 
                    Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana
    A4A welcomes and appreciates the Committee examination of the U.S. 
airline passenger experience. While we unfortunately are unable to 
participate at this particular hearing, we did want to share some 
information for the record that brings context and data to what is 
happening in the airline marketplace.
                   Record High Customer Satisfaction
    In May 2019, J.D. Power noted customer satisfaction had climbed to 
record high levels, further stating that:

        ``Airlines continue to deliver on the operational side of air 
        travel. New technology investments have dramatically improved 
        the reservation and check-in process. Fleets are newer and 
        travelers generally feel that they are getting great value for 
        their money. These improvements have been most profound in the 
        traditional carrier segment, where customer satisfaction has 
        climbed considerably.''--Michael Taylor, J.D. Power (May 29, 
        2019).

    A4A also commissioned Ipsos to conduct a poll of the American 
people in January 2020, asking those who had flown in 2019 about their 
overall satisfaction with their air travel experience. For the third 
consecutive year, only one percent indicated they were very 
dissatisfied. In fact, 39 percent said they were very satisfied, and 45 
percent said they were somewhat satisfied, for a combined score of 84 
percent, up from 80 percent in 2015.
           Record Capital Investment by Airlines and Airports
    As J.D. Power noted in May 2019, ``This is probably the best time 
in modern history in which to fly.'' \1\ We agree and believe this 
recognition is due in no small part to the industry-wide investments 
made by U.S. airlines and airports. Over the past 10 years, U.S. 
passenger airlines alone spent $139 billion on new aircraft, 
refurbishment of aircraft interiors (e.g., larger overhead bins, lie-
flat seating in premium cabins), upgraded airport lounges, renovated 
gate areas, new ground equipment, improved information technology, 
increased USB power access and faster and more reliable Wi-Fi, in 
addition to improved food, beverage and inflight entertainment options. 
Airlines continue to streamline the check-in process with advanced 
mobile app capabilities and modern kiosks and enabling passengers to 
track their bags throughout the journey. Similarly, since 2008 there 
has been over $200 billion invested in across the country--including 
$38 billion over the past three years--to revitalize airport terminals, 
security checkpoints, bag systems, parking structures, roadways and 
innovative baggage tracking technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/2019/05/
29/j-d-powers-best-airlines-customer-satisfaction-2019-southwest-
jetblue-alaska/1256499001/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Investment in the Workforce
    From 2010 to 2019, U.S. passenger airlines increased their payrolls 
by 70,000 full-time equivalent workers, an 18.5 percent increase, with 
annual payroll expenditures rising from $32 billion to more than $55 
billion. In addition to the fact that airline job growth outpaced 
overall U.S. employment growth during this period, the average airline 
employee wage increased over 50 percent, not including benefits.
                 Historic Affordability and Convenience
    Consumers have enjoyed benefits from a thriving and competitive 
aviation marketplace. According to the Bureau of Transportation 
Statistics (BTS), 2018 inflation-adjusted fares were the lowest ever 
recorded. Further, our own analysis of BTS data shows that the 
inflation-adjusted price of domestic air travel, with both fares and 
ancillary charges included, fell 6.9 from 2010 to 2018. This included 
four consecutive declines from 2014 to 2018. Along with rising consumer 
incomes and household wealth, the affordability and increasing schedule 
convenience and plentiful service have resulted in access to the skies 
for an increasing share of the population. Prior to deregulation of the 
industry in late 1978, aviation was a luxury good limited largely to 
businessmen and the affluent households. At that time, only 63 percent 
of Americans had ever taken a trip on an airline. By 2019, that figure 
had grown to 86 percent, including 70 percent within the past three 
years. As affordability and choice of business model and inflight 
product continues to grow, the mobility and opportunities afforded by 
aviation will continue to change the lives of millions of Americans.
                    Extremely Low Rate of Complaints
    From 2010 to 2019, the number of passengers enplaned on U.S. 
carriers rose 28 percent from 720.5 million to an estimated 925.5 
million. Despite this incredible increase in travelers in only nine 
years, complaints to the DOT about U.S. airlines fell below one per 
100,000 passengers enplaned in both 2018 and 2019 as financial 
stability and investments in physical and human capital paid off.\2\ 
Airlines will continue to make investments to reduce this number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Source: DOT Air Travel Consumer Report
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Robust Competition
    While safety of operation is always the paramount priority, it is 
closely followed by the passenger experience. U.S. air carriers 
continuously review a broad array of policies to improve customer 
service because they know full well that passengers have many choices 
of airlines in a highly competitive marketplace. In fact, competitive 
choices for domestic flyers have continued to increase, and contrary to 
some assertions, traffic analysis shows the average number of 
competitors on all domestic itineraries has increased from 3.33 in 2000 
to 3.39 in 2010 to 3.48 in 2018.\3\ Competition is alive and well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Source: Compass Lexecon analysis of DOT Origin-Destination 
Survey (Data Bank 1B) and http://darinlee.net/pdfs/
airline_competition.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There should be no misconception, airlines vigorously compete on 
customer service. The relative financial stability of most of the last 
decade has enabled the industry to make record investments of up to $20 
billion per year in the customer experience and has driven the 
improvements we see today. The industry strives for perfection with the 
ultimate goal of providing a safe, efficient and enjoyable travel 
experience for the 2.5 million passengers who fly each day.
                          Disabilities Issues
    Airlines are committed to providing safe air travel for all 
passengers and accessible travel for passengers with disabilities. A4A 
and our members have a strong history of proactively working with 
disability groups and addressing air travel accessibility to strengthen 
that commitment. A few examples include:
      A4A is a member and active participant in the DOT Air 
Carrier Access Act Advisory Committee. That Committee is addressing 
issues such as:
        Bill of Rights for Passengers with Disabilities;
        Assistance at airports and on aircraft and related 
training programs;
        Use of technology to improve access;
        Accessibility of ticketing practices;
        Seating accommodations, including pre-flight seat 
assignments and access to bulkhead seating; and
        Stowage of assistive devices.
      The industry is actively participating in the 
Transportation Research Board study on the Feasibility of Wheelchair 
Restraint Systems in Passenger Aircraft. We are working to ensure this 
study takes a data-driven approach to address all Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA) safety requirements.
      The industry is currently partnering with Paralyzed 
Veterans of America (PVA) to create the Assistive Technology for Air 
Travel Committee (ATAT) under the Rehabilitation Engineering and 
Assistive Technology Society of North America--known as RESNA--to 
improve the handling of wheelchairs in air travel. The leadership for 
the ATAT includes PVA, Invacare--a wheelchair manufacturer--and A4A. 
The Committee is developing three documents:
        Standards for wheelchairs that will be used in air 
travel;
        Wheelchair handling guidelines for airlines; and
        Guidelines for passenger information and instructions 
for preparing wheelchairs to be stored and transported in commercial 
aircraft.

    We anticipate and are hopeful that the wheelchair standards and 
wheelchair handling documents will be finalized this year.
      The industry regularly participates in disability groups 
conferences and meetings to directly hear how we can improve service.
      In 2016 the airline industry participated in the DOT's 
Negotiated Rulemaking on accessible inflight entertainment, accessible 
lavatories on single aisle aircraft, and service animals. We are 
pleased to share that the Negotiated Rulemaking resulted in agreements 
on inflight entertainment and accessible lavatories, an agreement we 
continue to support. As a result:
        DOT issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for 
Phase 1 of the accessible lavatory agreement, A4A filed comments 
supporting the proposal; and
        DOT issued a NPRM on service animals, comments are due 
April 6, 2020. The industry will be filing comments in support of the 
proposal.

    In advance of the Negotiated Rulemaking, airline representatives 
participated in a collaborated effort with DOT and advocacy groups to 
create guidance for carriers and passengers on the accessibility areas 
on which the DOT receives the most complaints. These guidance materials 
are used by industry and are publicly available on DOT's website today.
      The airline industry supported creating accessible 
websites and accessible airport kiosks, DOT adopted a kiosk and website 
regulation in 2013.
                          Customer Commitment
    While we are proud of the customer service trends outlined, we also 
are acutely aware and highly sensitive to the fact that not every 
passenger has shared in the investments made and not every passenger 
experience is always positive. Airlines recognize that the onus is on 
each carrier operating in the marketplace to foster a customer-centric 
environment. Our industry is dedicated to diligently and continually 
improving the customer experience for all passengers. In this area, our 
work is obviously never done, but please know the industry remains 
committed to the effort. We believe our industry does good things for 
people by connecting them to their families and friends and being an 
enabler of commerce. We hope that certain, and often times very rare, 
instances do not eclipse the dignity and respect shown by airline 
employees to millions of travelers every day.
    Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony.



                                Appendix

                              ----------                              


Question from Hon. Steve Cohen to Matt Klein, Executive Vice President 
          and Chief Commercial Officer, Spirit Airlines, Inc.

COVID-19

    Question 1. It has been reported that some of the most germ 
infected areas on airplanes include overhead air vents, seat covers, 
tray tables, armrests, seat-back pockets, headrests and window shades. 
What steps is your airline taking to ensure that all these areas are 
disinfected in between each flight?
    Answer. A response was not received at the time of publication.

Question from Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana to Matt Klein, Executive 
   Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, Spirit Airlines, Inc.

    Question 1. Aviation is an international industry which involves 
customers of many different cultures, races, and religious backgrounds. 
How do Spirit employees bridge these cultural differences?
    Answer. A response was not received at the time of publication.