[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
DISRUPTION IN THE SKIES: THE SURGE IN AIR RAGE AND ITS EFFECTS ON
WORKERS, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
=======================================================================
(117-25)
REMOTE HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
AVIATION
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 23, 2021
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
[GRAPHIC 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
49-704 PDF WASHINGTON : 2023
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 STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois JOHN GARAMENDI, California
JOHN KATKO, New York HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
BRIAN BABIN, Texas Georgia
GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina DINA TITUS, Nevada
MIKE BOST, Illinois SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas JARED HUFFMAN, California
DOUG LaMALFA, California JULIA BROWNLEY, California
BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania MARK DeSAULNIER, California
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
Puerto Rico SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
PETE STAUBER, Minnesota TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey
TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee GREG STANTON, Arizona
DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas, Vice Chair
MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
TROY E. NEHLS, Texas ANTONIO DELGADO, New York
NANCY MACE, South Carolina CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire
NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania
BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts
MICHELLE STEEL, California CAROLYN BOURDEAUX, Georgia
KAIALI`I KAHELE, Hawaii
MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
NIKEMA WILLIAMS, Georgia
MARIE NEWMAN, Illinois
TROY A. CARTER, Louisiana
Subcommittee on Aviation
RICK LARSEN, Washington, Chair
GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
DON YOUNG, Alaska ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania KAIALI`I KAHELE, Hawaii
JOHN KATKO, New York NIKEMA WILLIAMS, Georgia
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin Georgia
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania DINA TITUS, Nevada
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
PETE STAUBER, Minnesota JULIA BROWNLEY, California
TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey MARK DeSAULNIER, California
TROY E. NEHLS, Texas STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
NANCY MACE, South Carolina ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas GREG STANTON, Arizona
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
MICHELLE STEEL, California CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania, Vice
SAM GRAVES, Missouri (Ex Officio) Chair
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
District of Columbia
EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
JOHN GARAMENDI, 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 Chair, Subcommittee on Aviation, opening
statement...................................................... 1
Prepared statement........................................... 4
Hon. Garret Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Aviation,
opening statement.............................................. 5
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, opening statement.............................. 8
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, prepared statement............................. 67
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Texas, prepared statement............................. 67
WITNESSES
Sara Nelson, International President, Association of Flight
Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO, oral statement....................... 10
Prepared statement........................................... 12
Teddy Andrews, Flight Attendant, American Airlines, on behalf of
the Association of Professional Flight Attendants, oral
statement...................................................... 19
Prepared statement........................................... 21
Christopher R. Bidwell, Senior Vice President of Security,
Airports Council International-North America, oral statement... 23
Prepared statement........................................... 24
Lauren Beyer, Vice President of Security and Facilitation,
Airlines for America, oral statement........................... 26
Prepared statement........................................... 28
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Statement of Donielle Prophete, Ground Service Agent, Piedmont
Airlines, and President, Communications Workers of America
Local 3645, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio.. 68
Statement of Paul Hudson, President, FlyersRights.org, Submitted
for the Record by Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana.............. 69
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
September 21, 2021
SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER
TO: LMembers, Subcommittee on Aviation
FROM: LStaff, Subcommittee on Aviation
RE: LSubcommittee Hearing on ``Disruption in the
Skies: The Surge in Air Rage and its Effects on Workers,
Airlines, and Airports''
_______________________________________________________________________
PURPOSE
The Subcommittee on Aviation will meet on Thursday,
September 23, 2021, at 10 a.m. EDT in 2167 Rayburn House Office
Building and virtually via Zoom for a hearing titled,
``Disruption in the Skies: The Surge in Air Rage and its
Effects on Workers, Airlines, and Airports.'' The hearing will
examine the increase in disruptive and unruly airline passenger
behavior, the potential causes of the increase, the effect on
passenger and airline crew safety, airline crew training in
deescalating and addressing such passenger behavior, and the
enforcement of federal laws prohibiting such behavior. The
Subcommittee will hear testimony from the Association of Flight
Attendants--CWA (AFA); the Association of Professional Flight
Attendants (APFA); the Airports Council International (ACI)-
North America; and Airlines for America (A4A).
BACKGROUND
I. SURGE IN AIR RAGE CASES IN 2021
Passengers are increasingly returning to the skies as the
COVID-19 pandemic recedes in many parts of the nation. Although
hundreds of thousands of passengers travel through the aviation
system every day without incident the rate in unruly behavior
among passengers has risen by a large proportion.\1\ These
``air rage'' cases have ranged from passengers refusing to wear
airline- and federally-mandated face coverings, to attempts to
open airplane doors and flight deck doors during flight, to
physical and sexual assaults against airline crew members.\2\ A
recent survey by the AFA, querying more than 5,000 flight
attendants across mainline and regional airlines, found that 17
percent of flight attendants--nearly one in five--reported a
physical incident with a passenger.\3\ Fifty-eight percent
reported experiencing at least five incidents of unruly
passenger behavior this year, and 85 percent said they had
experienced at least one such incident this year.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Francesca Street, Dread at 30,000 feet: Inside the increasingly
violent world of U.S. flight attendants, CNN (Sept. 6, 2021), available
at https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/flight-attendants-unruly-
passengers-covid/index.html.
\2\ Associated Press, FAA seeks $100,000 in fines from travelers
who have tried to open a cockpit, hit a flight attendant, refused
masks, USA Today (Sept. 13, 2021), available at https://
www.usatoday.com/story/travel/airline-news/2021/05/20/southwest-delta-
flight-travelers-face-faa-fines-100000/5174212001/.
\3\ Ass'n of Flight Attendants, ``85 percent of Flight Attendants
dealt with unruly passengers, nearly 1 in 5 experienced physical
incidents in 2021'' (July 29, 2021), at https://www.afacwa.org/
unruly_passengers_survey.
\4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reports that as
of September 7, 2021, there have been 4,184 unruly passenger
reports since the beginning of the 2021 calendar year.\5\
During that same time, the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) reported that 367,547,059 passengers were
screened at airport security checkpoints, meaning that while
unruly passenger reports have increased significantly this
year, they cover only 0.001 percent of the travelling
public.\6\ Of those reports, the FAA has initiated 752
investigations and 153 enforcement cases.\7\ Compared to prior
calendar years--with the FAA initiating only 183 investigations
in 2020 and 146 in 2019--that's an increase of 411 and 515
percent respectively.\8\ According to the FAA, among those
events for which an underlying cause could be identified, 75
percent of reported unruly passenger incidents were attributed
to some element of mask non-compliance while only 6 percent
could be attributed to alcohol consumption.\9\ Compared to the
last 15 years, the number of investigations initiated so far
this year is still more than double the highest number of
yearly investigations initiated--304 investigations in
2004.\10\ Additionally, the FAA's database only includes
incidents that have been reported to the FAA and such reporting
is at the discretion of a crewmember.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ FAA, ``Unruly Passengers,'' available at https://www.faa.gov/
data_research/passengers_cargo/unruly_passengers/.
\6\ See TSA, ``TSA checkpoint travel numbers (current year versus
prior year(s)/same weekday),'' (last accessed Sept. 17, 2021),
available at https://www.tsa.gov/coronavirus/passenger-throughput
\7\ Id.
\8\ Id.
\9\ Email from FAA to Subcommittee Staff (Sept. 15, 2021).
\10\ Id.
\11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. EXAMPLES OF INCIDENTS
In the last 10 months, actions taken by unruly passengers
onboard aircraft have posed a significant safety risk to
passengers and crew members. Below are some of the most
egregious alleged cases in which civil penalties or criminal
enforcement are being pursued.
Delta Airlines flight from Honolulu to Seattle (December
23, 2020).\12\ A passenger tried to open the cockpit door and
refused to follow instructions from crew members. At one point,
after the passenger allegedly hit a flight attendant in the
face and pushed him to the floor, the passenger threatened and
charged the flight attendant as he tried to restrain the
passenger. Flight attendants, with the help of another
passenger, put plastic handcuffs on the passenger. The
passenger was able to free himself from one of the handcuffs
and allegedly struck the flight attendant in the face a second
time. The passenger was taken into custody and arrested after
the plane landed. The FAA has proposed a $52,500 civil
penalty.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Associated Press, FAA seeks $100,000 in fines from travelers
who have tried to open a cockpit, hit a flight attendant, refused
masks, USA Today (Sept. 13, 2021), available at https://
www.usatoday.com/story/travel/airline-news/2021/05/20/southwest-delta-
flight-travelers-face-faa-fines-100000/5174212001/.
\13\ FAA, Press Release, FAA Proposes Civil Penalties against Four
Passengers for Allegedly Interfering with Flight Attendants (May 17,
2021), available at https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-proposes-civil-
penalties-against-four-passengers-allegedly-interfering-flight-0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Southwest Airlines flight from Phoenix to Chicago (January
1, 2021).\14\ A passenger yelled and said he had a bomb and
would blow up the plane. The pilots made an unplanned landing
in Oklahoma City, where the passenger was arrested. The FAA has
proposed a $27,000 civil penalty.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Id.
\15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Southwest Airlines flight from Orlando to Kansas City
(January 2, 2021).\16\ A passenger became angry and began
assaulting passengers around him after another passenger in his
row would not change seats to accommodate his travel partner.
The passenger told his travel partner he would need to bail the
passenger out of jail for the physically violent crimes he
threatened to commit. The captain returned the plane to the
gate where law enforcement met the passenger. Southwest banned
the passenger from flying with the carrier in the future. The
FAA has proposed a $32,500 civil penalty against the
passenger.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Kylie Bielby, Unruly Passenger Incidents Skyrocket, Proposed
Civil Penalties Reach $1 Million in 2021, Homeland Security Today (Aug.
20, 2021), available at https://www.hstoday.us/featured/unruly-
passenger-incidents-skyrocket-proposed-civil-penalties-reaches-1-
million-in-2021/.
\17\ FAA, FAA Fines Against Unruly Passengers Reach $1M, Press
Release (Aug. 19, 2021), available at https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-
fines-against-unruly-passengers-reach-1m
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frontier Airlines flight from Atlanta to New York City
(January 3, 2021).\18\ A passenger physically assaulted two
flight attendants and threatened to kill one of them in an
attempt to gain entry to the flight deck. Law enforcement met
the passenger after deplaning and he now faces a $30,000 FAA
civil penalty.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Id.
\19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska Airlines flight from Seattle to Denver (March 9,
2021).\20\ A passenger refused to wear a mask and then stood up
and urinated in the cabin of the airplane. According to the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the passenger appeared
to be trying to sleep but swatted at an attendant when she
asked him repeatedly to put on his mask. The passenger told the
FBI that he had several beers and ``a couple of shots'' before
boarding the flight, fell asleep on the plane and awoke to
being yelled at by the flight attendants who told him he was
urinating. He stated he had no recollection of hitting the
flight attendant and didn't know he was urinating. The FBI
arrested the passenger, and he now faces a federal charge of
interfering with a flight crew and attendants, which carries a
maximum term of 20 years in prison and possible $250,000
fine.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Associated Press, Airline passenger faces federal charge with
a possible $250,000 fine for refusing to wear mask, urinating in cabin,
USA Today (Mar. 13, 2021), available at https://www.usatoday.com/story/
travel/airline-news/2021/03/13/mask-required-alaska-airlines-flight-
passenger-arrested/4683230001/.
\21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
JetBlue flight from New York City to Orlando (May 24,
2021).\22\ A passenger threw his carry-on luggage at other
passengers, before he then laid down in the aisle and refused
to get up. After the passenger grabbed a flight attendant by
the ankles and put his head up her skirt, he was placed in flex
cuffs and the flight made an emergency landing in Richmond,
Virginia. The FAA has proposed a $45,000 civil penalty.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Suzanne Rowan Kelleher, Here's How Much A JetBlue Passenger
Was Fined For Putting His Head Up A Flight Attendant's Skirt, Forbes
(Aug. 19, 2021), available at https://www.forbes.com/sites/
suzannerowankelleher/2021/08/19/passenger-head-up-flight-attendants-
skirt/?sh=1e5c21f3e017.
\23\ FAA, FAA Fines Against Unruly Passengers Reach $1M, Press
Release (Aug. 19, 2021), available at https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-
fines-against-unruly-passengers-reach-1m
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frontier Airlines flight from Philadelphia to Miami (July
31, 2021).\24\ A passenger made inappropriate physical contact
with a flight attendant and subsequently punched another flight
attendant in the face. As a result, the passenger was
restrained to his seat using duct tape until the flight landed
in Miami and law enforcement arrived. The passenger was charged
with three counts of battery and taken to Miami-Dade County
Jail-TGK Correctional Center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Man duct-taped to seat for allegedly touching flight
attendants on Frontier flight, ABC 7 NY (Aug. 3, 2021), available at
https://abc7ny.com/philadelphia-to-miami-flight-assault-maxwell-berry-
assaulting-attendant-inappropriately-touching/10926843/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Airlines flight from Los Angeles to Salt Lake City
(September 6, 2021).\25\ While the aircraft was still in
flight, an intoxicated passenger thought the aircraft had
landed, which caused him to become irate and argue with flight
attendants. After a member of the crew ordered the passenger to
sit down and stay in his seat, he staggered backward, invoked
the name of the President Biden, and continued to protest.
While a recording of the incident shows the passenger finally
sitting down, the video also shows him baring his teeth,
growling, and biting his mask while growling, and then biting
his mask and dragging it up and down over his face also while
growling. Later, he was recorded once again standing in the
aisle again telling the rest of the passengers that they were
``all being used as pawns.'' The passenger was cited for
disorderly conduct and public intoxication.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Hannah Simpson, Growling passenger is arrested after removing
mask, demanding to be let off plane, Wash Post (Sept. 8, 2021),
available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2021/09/08/american-
airlines-growling-passenger/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. RECENT ENFORCEMENT
With the FAA Administrator signing an order on January 13,
2021, establishing a ``zero-tolerance'' policy with respect to
unruly and dangerous behavior on aircraft, the FAA has pursued
some of the highest penalties in its history for these
violations.\26\ Below are some examples.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ FAA Order 2150.3C CHG 6, SUBJ: FAA Compliance and Enforcement
Program (Mar. 31, 2021), available at https://www.faa.gov/
regulations_policies/orders_notices/index.cfm/go/document.information/
documentID/1034329.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Southwest Airlines flight from Sacramento to San Diego (May
23, 2021).\27\ A passenger repeatedly ignored standard in-
flight instructions and became verbally and physically abusive
upon landing. Video shows the passenger sitting in an aisle
seat at the back of the plane, jumping up and hitting the
flight attendant multiple times. In the video, the passenger
continues swinging at the flight attendant until another
passenger intervenes, putting himself between her and the
flight attendant. The flight attendant lost two teeth. Upon
landing, San Diego Harbor Police arrested the passenger and
charged her with felony battery. The passenger has now been
charged with two federal felonies: assault resulting in serious
injury and interference with a crewmember. The first charge
carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, while the
second is punishable by as many as 20 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Julian Mark, A Southwest passenger was filmed punching a
flight attendant. She was charged with two felonies, Wash. Post (Sept.
3, 2021), available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/09/
03/vyvianna-quinonez-federal-charges/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delta Airlines flight from Los Angeles to Nashville (June
4, 2021).\28\ A passenger attempted to breach the flight deck
mid-flight. According to passenger testimony, the passenger,
seemingly unprovoked, got up, pushed aside flight attendants
and began pounding on the flight deck door, repeatedly yelling:
``We need to land this plane.'' The passenger was quickly taken
down by another passenger, who was then assisted by the flight
attendants. The passenger was held down for twenty minutes and
bound by his wrists and ankles. Nonetheless, he continued to
yell, ``Stop this plane.'' The plane made an emergency landing
in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The passenger was arrested by the
FBI, taken into custody, and charged with interfering with a
member of a flight crew. At his federal detention hearing on in
June, the passenger's attorney argued that he suffered an
``acute mental break'' during the flight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ DOJ, Airline passenger charged with interfering with flight
crew, Press Release (June 9, 2021), available at https://
www.justice.gov/usao-nm/pr/airline-passenger-charged-interfering-
flight-crew.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
United Airlines (SkyWest) flight from Los Angeles to Salt
Lake City (June 25, 2021).\29\ As the flight was readying to
take off from Los Angeles, a passenger leaned over to the
passenger sitting next to him and whispered that he was going
to jump out. He then sprinted to the front of the plane and
tried to enter the flight deck, banging on the door. When he
was unsuccessful, he opened an emergency exit door and leapt
out of the plane. According to the complaint, the passenger had
been smoking crystal meth on and off that day before boarding
this flight. The passenger was charged with interfering with
crewmembers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Julian Mark, Man who jumped from a moving plane at LAX tells
FBI he bought `a lot' of crystal meth before the flight, Wash Post
(June 29, 2021), available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/
2021/06/29/los-angeles-airport-cockpit-breach/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND ENFORCEMENT
A. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
The FAA possesses explicit statutory authority to pursue
civil enforcement action against any passenger who assaults a
crewmember or another passenger, or who otherwise commits any
act that endangers the safety of the aircraft.\30\ Through
regulation, the FAA also prohibits interference with
crewmembers in the performance of their duties.\31\ The 2018
FAA Reauthorization Act increased the fine for violations of
these prohibitions to not more than $37,000.\32\ Interference
with crewmembers' performance of his or her duties by assault
or intimidation is also a federal crime punishable by up to 20
years in prison.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ 49 U.S.C. Sec. 46318.
\31\ 14 C.F.R. Sec. 121.580.
\32\ P.L. 115-254 Sec. 339 (2018); see also 14 C.F.R. Sec. Sec.
91.11, 121.580, and 125.328.
\33\ 49 U.S.C. Sec. 46504.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
``Zero Tolerance'' Policy. On January 13, 2021, FAA
Administrator Steve Dickson issued an order directing FAA
inspectors and enforcement staff to pursue a ``zero tolerance''
policy regarding enforcement of the prohibitions on
interference with crewmembers and other unruly conduct on board
aircraft.\34\ In issuing the order, the Administrator cited
increased disruptive behavior by passengers stemming from both
refusal to wear masks and the attack on the U.S. Capitol the
week before.\35\ Under the policy, ``passengers who assault,
threaten, intimidate, or interfere with a crewmember in the
performance of a crewmember's duties in violation of [the
federal prohibitions on these acts]'' will be subject to civil
penalties.\36\ The order directs that the FAA's preexisting
presumption of ``compliance counseling'' and other
administrative actions short of formal civil-penalty actions
against violators may not be used to address these
violations.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ FAA Order 2150.3C CHG 6, SUBJ: FAA Compliance and Enforcement
Program (Mar. 31, 2021), available at https://www.faa.gov/
regulations_policies/orders_notices/index.cfm/go/document.information/
documentID/1034329.
\35\ David Shepardson, Exclusive: U.S. FAA chief orders `zero
tolerance' for disruptive airline passengers, possibly jail, Reuters
(January 13, 2021) available at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-
election-aviation-exclusive/exclusive-u-s-faa-chief-orders-zero-
tolerance-for-disruptive-airline-passengers-possibly-jail-
idUSKBN29I302; see also FAA, Press Release--Federal Aviation
Administration Adopts Stricter Unruly Passenger Policy, (January 13,
2021) available at https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/
news_story.cfm?newsId=25621.
\36\ FAA Order 2150.3C CHG 6, https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/
media/Order/FAA_Order_2150.3C_CHG_6.pdf.
\37\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Outreach. In an effort to address some of the issues
related to unruly passengers, Administrator Dickson sent a
letter to airports across the country requesting that airports
work with their concessionaires to amplify the FAA's
prohibition on consuming alcoholic beverages not served by
crewmembers on board flights.\38\ The letter also highlighted
the issue of state and local law enforcement failing to file
criminal charges after unruly passenger events.\39\ In
addition, the FAA has developed a ``Zero Tolerance for Unruly
and Dangerous Behavior Toolkit'' to amplify messages to
stakeholders regarding unruly passengers and to decrease air
rage incidents.\40\ This toolkit includes suggestions for
airport digital signage, public service announcements, and
social media memes.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ Letter from FAA Administrator Dickson to Airport Leaders (Aug.
3, 2021), available at https://www.faa.gov/data_research/
passengers_cargo/unruly_passengers/toolkit/media/
Letter_to_airports_FINAL_signed.pdf.
\39\ Id.
\40\ FAA, Zero Tolerance for Unruly and Dangerous Behavior Toolkit
(last accessed Sept. 14, 2021), available at https://www.faa.gov/
data_research/passengers_cargo/unruly_passengers/toolkit/.
\41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (TSA)
The TSA's primary role is to protect transportation
facilities and assets (including airports and airplanes) from
terrorist and criminal threats.\42\ The TSA is responsible for
setting the required security and training standards for
airlines and airline crews to manage unruly passengers via its
Aircraft Operator Standard Security Program (AOSSP).\43\ The
AOSSP provides general guidance on the security programs,
equipment, and employee training that airlines are required to
implement in order to operate. This training includes initial
and recurrent security training. The AOSSP's requirements are
not prescriptive; each airline is granted flexibility in the
development of its own specific curriculum to meet the program
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ CRS, R46678, Transportation Security: Background and Issues
for the 117th Congress (Feb. 2021).
\43\ TSA, Aviation Programs: Aircraft Operator Standard Security
Program (Full Program) and Public Charters (last accessed Sept. 16,
2021), available at https://www.tsa.gov/for-industry/aviation-programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The TSA is also responsible for enforcing the federal
requirement that individuals wear masks throughout commercial
and public transportation systems, including at airport
screening checkpoints, within the airports themselves, and on
commercial airplanes.\44\ The TSA reports that as of July 2021,
there had been over 85 assaults on transportation security
officers (TSO) in 2021.\45\ In July alone, large U.S. airlines
carried 73.4 million passengers.\46\ So, while a very rare
occurrence, such assaults are serious and must be addressed. In
June 2021, the TSA referred two incidents involving unruly
passengers to law enforcement officials.\47\ In one incident, a
passenger allegedly assaulted two TSOs while attempting to
breach the exit lane in Louisville, Kentucky. In the other
incident, a passenger allegedly bit two TSOs.\48\ In each case,
the passengers face civil penalties of up to $13,910 for
violation of TSA security requirements.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ TSA, ``Face Mask Requirements: Security Directives and
Emergency Amendment,`` (last accessed September 7, 2021), available at
https://www.tsa.gov/sd-and-ea.
\45\ David Shepardson, U.S. Inflight Disturbances jump 500%, 85 TSA
Officers Assaulted--agency, Reuters (July 20, 2021), available at
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-agencies-report-rising-number-
unruly-airline-passengers-2021-07-20/
\46\ U.S. Department of Transportation Bureau of Transportation
Statistics, U.S. Airlines July 2021 Passengers (Preliminary), available
at: https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDOT/bulletins/2f1c72e.
\47\ TSA, Press Release, TSA reminds passengers to remain calm and
respectful at security checkpoints (June 24, 2021), available at
https://www.tsa.gov/news/press/releases/2021/06/24/tsa-reminds-
passengers-remain-calm-and-respectful-security
\48\ Id.
\49\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The hearing will examine the recent rise in reports of air
rage incidents and the effect these incidents have on the
aviation workforce, airlines, and pilots. Witnesses will also
have the opportunity to share recommendations for federal
government prevention, response, and enforcement.
WITNESSES
LSara Nelson, International President, Association
of Flight Attendants--CWA
LTeddy Andrews, Flight Attendant at American
Airlines (appearing on behalf of the Association of
Professional Flight Attendants)
LChristopher R. Bidwell, Senior Vice President,
Safety, Airports Council International-North America
LLauren Beyer, Vice President, Security and
Facilitation, Airlines for America
DISRUPTION IN THE SKIES: THE SURGE IN AIR RAGE AND ITS EFFECTS ON
WORKERS, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
----------
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2021
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Aviation,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:03 a.m., in
room 2167 Rayburn House Office Building and via Zoom, Hon. Rick
Larsen (Chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Members present in person: Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Larsen, Mr.
Garamendi, Mr. Kahele, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Graves of Louisiana, Mr.
Perry, Mr. Burchett, Mr. Nehls, Mr. Mast, Mr. Katko, and Mr.
Stauber.
Members present remotely: Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Mr.
Brown, Ms. Williams of Georgia, Ms. Davids, Ms. Norton, Mr.
Stanton, Mr. Garcia of Illinois, Ms. Johnson of Texas, Mr.
Payne, Mr. Lynch, Mr. Allred, Mr. Lamb, Ms. Titus, Mr.
DeSaulnier, Mrs. Steel, Mr. Massie, Dr. Van Drew, Mr. Gimenez,
Mr. Fitzpatrick, and Ms. Van Duyne.
Mr. Larsen. The subcommittee will come to order.
First, I ask unanimous consent that the chair be authorized
to declare a recess at any time during today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
I also ask unanimous consent Members not on the
subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at
today's hearing and ask questions.
Without objection, so ordered.
As a reminder, please keep your microphones muted unless
speaking. And if we hear any inadvertent background noise, I
will request that Members please mute their microphone.
Also a reminder, to insert a document into the record,
please have your staff email it to [email protected],
and that is ``T'' with the ampersand and then ``I.''
So good morning, and welcome to today's witnesses joining
the Aviation Subcommittee's hearing titled, ``Disruption in the
Skies: The Surge in Air Rage and Its Effects on Workers,
Airlines, and Airports.''
As the Nation works to get to the other side of the COVID-
19 pandemic, the surge in public air rage incidents has
exacerbated the already tenuous workforce situation in our
aviation sector and eroded confidence in air travel. These
incidents have also put the safety of frontline workers,
passengers, and the Nation's aviation system at risk, and could
potentially lead to further safety issues.
Unruly passenger behavior is not necessarily new. From 2015
to 2020, the FAA initiated a total of 786 investigations into
unruly passenger behavior. However, through the first 9 months
of 2021, the FAA has initiated 789 investigations.
Airlines have filed 4,385 unruly passenger complaints since
the beginning of the calendar year, including 3,199 mask-
related complaints.
As Sara Nelson will testify from the AFA-CWA, frontline
aviation workers have to deal with everything from vulgar
language, including racial epithets, to punching, kicking,
biting, shoving, and spitting from passengers. This behavior is
from a small percentage of the traveling public, but it is
disgusting, it is unacceptable, and it is a danger to fellow
passengers, to crew, and the entire U.S. aviation system.
Congress, the Federal Government, and the aviation industry
must work together to protect airline crews, airport staff, and
the traveling public from passenger outbursts, while also
preparing for the next public health and national security
crises.
As subcommittee chair, I made aviation safety and enhancing
the air travel experience for passengers and crews a priority.
Three years ago, I worked with then-subcommittee chair, Frank
LoBiondo, and others to pass the FAA Reauthorization Act of
2018, which increased the maximum civil penalty per unruly
passenger violation by 48 percent, to $37,000.
When incidents began to rise after the January 6th attack
on the Capitol, Chair DeFazio and I encouraged FAA
Administrator Dickson to use the full weight of Federal law to
protect airline passengers and crews ahead of the inauguration.
Earlier this year, the FAA announced a series of measures
to combat passenger issues, including a zero-tolerance policy
and a public awareness campaign that showed noticeable results.
But Congress and Government agencies can only do so much. I
was encouraged to see this week that FAA urged airlines to take
additional steps to address this issue, though there is
confusion about what FAA is asking of airlines and others in
the aviation sector.
I look forward to hearing from today's witnesses about the
enforcement of U.S. laws prohibiting such behavior and what
more Congress and agencies can do to support frontline workers.
A public health response must lead economic recovery, and
as one thing that we can learn from today is that lessons
learned from the ongoing pandemic show the urgent need for a
national aviation preparedness plan to improve the safety of
aviation crews, employees, and passengers to minimize
disruptions to the national aviation system and restore
confidence in air travel.
And I would ask Members to consider supporting my bill, the
National Aviation Preparedness Plan Act, which I introduced
earlier this year with my colleague Don Beyer.
Before we begin, I want to thank the women and men on the
front lines of the aviation industry who continue to keep
people and the economy moving forward during these very
difficult times.
Today's witnesses represent stakeholders for air carriers,
airports, and frontline workers who can speak to the current
situation and what changes need to be made to reduce these
incidents.
I am pleased to welcome Sara Nelson, international
president of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA. Ms.
Nelson will provide the subcommittee with personal experiences,
both as a frontline flight attendant and as president of a
union representing 17 airlines across the aviation sector.
Mr. Teddy Andrews is a long-time flight attendant with
American Airlines and will be speaking today on behalf of the
Association of Professional Flight Attendants. Mr. Andrews can
provide us firsthand experience as a frontline flight attendant
during the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting the horrifying abuse
he has been subjected to while, as he will say, simply doing
his job.
Ms. Lauren Beyer is vice president for security and
facilitation for Airlines for America and has worked on a
variety of issues related to aircraft safety during the
pandemic. I look forward to hearing from her about the airline
industry's efforts to address passenger behavior and what other
support airlines need in order to do so.
The subcommittee will also hear from Mr. Christopher
Bidwell, senior vice president of security at Airports Council
International-North America. It is important to hear the steps
that airports are taking to prevent potential unruly passengers
from boarding aircraft as well as additional measures Congress
and agencies can undertake.
In my district, and of course across the country,
transportation means jobs and is key to economic recovery. And
without a safe, reliable, commercial air travel industry, I
would not be able to get to and from work. Many of us would not
be able to get to and from work here in Congress and back home
again. My constituents would not be able to travel to see
family and friends, and frontline aviation workers would be
without a job.
Congress, the Federal Government, and the aviation industry
must work together to reduce unruly passenger incidents and
assure passengers and crews that the airlines are safe to fly.
So I look forward to today's discussion on how to best support
their critical work moving forward.
Before I turn to the ranking member, Mr. Graves from
Louisiana, I will just remind Members that if you are speaking,
under the rules, you may take your mask off. If you are not
speaking, please wear a mask.
With that, I will turn to----
Mr. DeFazio. Mr. Chairman, I would like to see the rule
enforced. I hope it won't provoke violence, but Members on the
other side need to wear their masks.
Mr. Larsen. All Members are to wear their masks if not
speaking. If you are speaking, you may take your mask off. That
is, if you are recognized to speak--not if you are speaking out
of turn--you may take your mask off.
Mr. Graves.
[Mr. Larsen's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Washington, and Chair, Subcommittee on Aviation
Good morning and welcome to today's witnesses joining the Aviation
Subcommittee's hearing titled ``Disruption in the Skies: The Surge in
Air Rage and its Effects on Workers, Airlines, and Airports.''
As the nation works to get to the other side of the COVID-19
pandemic, the surge in public air rage incidents has exacerbated the
already tenuous workforce situation in our aviation sector and eroded
confidence in air travel.
These incidents have also put the safety of frontline workers,
passengers and the nation's aviation system at risk and could
potentially lead to further safety issues.
Unruly passenger behavior is not a new phenomenon.
From 2015 to 2020, FAA initiated a total of 786 investigations into
unruly passenger behavior.
However, through the first nine months of 2021, FAA has initiated
789 investigations.
Airlines have filed 4,385 unruly passenger complaints since the
beginning of the calendar year, including 3,199 mask-related
complaints.
As Sara Nelson will testify, frontline aviation workers have to
deal with everything from vulgar language, including racial epithets,
to punching, kicking, biting, shoving and spitting from passengers.
This behavior from a small percentage of the traveling public is
disgusting, unacceptable and a danger to fellow passengers, crew and
the entire U.S. aviation system.
Congress, the federal government and the aviation industry must
work together to protect airline crews, airport staff and the traveling
public from passenger outbursts while also preparing for the next
public health and national security crises.
As Subcommittee Chair, I have made aviation safety and enhancing
the air travel experience for passengers and crews a priority.
Three years ago, I worked with then-Subcommittee Chair Frank
LoBiondo to pass the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, which increased
the maximum civil penalty per unruly passenger violation by 48 percent
to $37,000.
When incidents began to rise after the January 6 attack on the
Capitol, Chair Peter DeFazio and I encouraged FAA Administrator Dickson
to use the full weight of federal law to protect airline passengers and
crews ahead of the Inauguration.
Earlier this year, FAA announced a series of measures to combat
passenger issues, including a zero-tolerance policy and a public
awareness campaign that showed noticeable results.
But Congress and government agencies can only do so much.
I was encouraged to see this week that FAA urged airlines to take
additional steps to address this issue, though there is confusion about
what FAA is asking of airlines and others in the aviation sector.
I look forward to hearing from today's witnesses about the
enforcement of U.S. laws prohibiting such behavior and what more
Congress and agencies can do to support frontline workers.
The public health response must lead the economic recovery.
Lessons learned from the ongoing pandemic show the urgent need for
a national aviation preparedness plan to improve the safety of aviation
crews, employees and passengers minimize disruptions to the national
aviation system and restore confidence in air travel.
I reintroduced my bill, the National Aviation Preparedness Plan
Act, earlier this year with my colleague Rep. Don Beyer (VA-08).
With a clear and consistent plan in place, I am confident the U.S.
aviation system will be better prepared for future crises.
Before we begin, I want to thank the women and men on the
frontlines of the aviation industry who continue to keep people and the
economy moving during these difficult times.
Today's witnesses represent stakeholders for air carriers, airports
and frontline workers who can speak to the current situation and what
changes need to be made to reduce these incidents.
I am pleased to welcome Sara Nelson, International President of the
Association of Flight Attendants-Communications Workers of America
(CWA).
Ms. Nelson will provide the subcommittee with personal experience
both as a frontline flight attendant and as president of a union
representing 17 airlines across the aviation sector.
Mr. Teddy Andrews is a long-time flight attendant with American
Airlines and will be speaking today on behalf of the Association of
Professional Flight Attendants.
Mr. Andrews can provide his first-hand experience as a frontline
flight attendant during the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting the
horrifying abuse he has been subjected to while, as he will say, simply
doing his job.
Ms. Lauren Beyer is Vice President for Security and Facilitation
for Airlines for America and has worked on a variety of issues related
to aircraft safety during the pandemic.
I look forward to hearing from her about the airline industry's
efforts to address passenger behavior and what other supports airlines
need to do so.
The Subcommittee will also hear from Mr. Christopher Bidwell,
Senior Vice President of Security at Airports Council International-
North America.
It is important to hear steps airports are taking to prevent
potential unruly passengers from boarding aircraft as well as
additional measures Congress and federal agencies can undertake.
In my district and across the country, transportation means jobs
and is key to economic recovery.
Without safe, reliable commercial air travel, I would not be able
to get to and from work, my constituents would not be able to travel to
see family and friends and frontline aviation workers would be without
a job.
Congress, the federal government and the aviation industry must
work together to reduce unruly passenger incidents and ensure
passengers and crews are safe to fly.
I look forward to today's discussion on how to best support your
critical work moving forward.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to
thank you for having this hearing today.
And I want to make very clear from the beginning that the
behavior we have seen in the media in regard to some of the
adverse interactions on airplanes is completely unacceptable.
It needs to be a civil experience for everyone on the plane,
and obviously there are additional safety considerations for
being tens of thousands of feet up in the air in a metal
airplane when thinking about this.
Flight attendants, gate agents, and other airline employees
have the right to go to work without the fear of being
harassed, intimidated, abused, or assaulted. Period.
FAA is correct for strenuously enforcing the rules and
regulations that are applicable to air travel and for holding
people accountable for failing to comply, and that unruly and
illegal behavior shall not be tolerated. Period.
Data shows that there are more cases of unruly behavior and
that we are seeing a spike or increase. And I think it is
important to look at the causes, to look at how we can mitigate
that, and how we can solve the problems.
There have been, I believe the chairman noted, 4,284
complaints of unruly passengers as of September 14, but let's
remember that, so far this year, more than 350 million
passengers have flown. So if you do the math there, that is
0.001 percent, and that is like comparing the population of New
Roads, Louisiana--a town that I represent, that you all haven't
heard of but you should go visit, False River, it is a lot of
fun--to the population of the entire country.
And so the vast majority of flights occur without these
types of air rage incidents. I am worried that this hearing may
convey to people on the outside that getting on an airplane is
a wild and unruly experience, and I think that it is really
important for us to convey to folks that that is absolutely not
the norm. That is the exception.
And I will say it again, 0.001 percent of passengers end up
having an unruly incident.
But I also think that we have got to look at this not just
from the perspective of the airlines and the airline employees
and others, we have got to look at this thing holistically.
Mr. Chairman, I want to read some statistics. According to
the Kaiser Family Foundation, in January 2021, 4 in 10 adults
reported symptoms of anxiety or depressive disorder, up from 1
in 10 adults. So 4 in 10 now, it was up from 1 in 10 in June of
2019.
Overall, 2020 values show a 50-percent increase in
overdose-related cardiac arrest--50-percent increase in cardiac
arrest related to overdose.
Mental distress, the number of March 2020 calls to the
Disaster Distress Helpline at the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration, SAMHSA, was 891 percent higher
than March the year before.
And perhaps a little bit closer to home for some of us
here, the Capitol Police have reported 4,135 threats against
lawmakers during the first 3 months of 2021 alone, putting the
number of threats on track to double those from last year.
Mr. Chairman, my point here is that we are seeing increased
anxiety in society, whether it is mental health and depression,
it is domestic violence, it is substance abuse, mental
distress, or other types of challenges across Government.
Now, let's look specifically at the air travel experience
from the passenger perspective; maybe it is a person or a
family that doesn't travel often, doesn't travel as often as
some people here perhaps. They have to think about packing
their bags, getting their kids all together, getting everything
in the car, getting to the airport on time, finding a parking
spot, getting on the shuttle, getting in line at the airport to
check bags in, getting in line at TSA, which who knows how that
experience is going to go.
I recently had a TSA agent make me walk through the metal
detector four times because I was told that I wasn't walking
through it right. I don't even know what that looks like. I
have walked through metal detectors thousands and thousands of
times. I do it every day here, and I was told I walked through
it wrong.
I had another TSA guy tell me that I didn't let the dog
sniff me properly. I don't even know what this stuff means.
Now let's keep going. So then you get into the airport, you
get to buy your $6 bottle of water, your $12 granola bar. You
get to sit on a plane, and, yes, it is packed. And just like my
flight experience coming here, I got up at 4 a.m. this week, I
left the house at 5 a.m., and, let's see, by the time I walked
into the airport and finally got to DC because of problems, I
think it was 8 or 9 hours later, wearing a mask the entire
time.
Mr. Chairman, I think it is important for us to contrast
that with the experiences people maybe had at the airport where
they sat down at a table with other people and were sitting
there eating without masks on.
We have seen all the data showing how clean the air on
flights are, and the low transmission rates are virtually
nonexistent transmission rates that are on airplanes.
So, Mr. Chairman, here is my point. I am glad we are having
this hearing, but I think it is really important that we look
at this from the passenger perspective as well. I met with
Tampa Airport yesterday. The guy used the term ``trying to
decompress the experience.'' How do we look at this
holistically and decompress that entire experience--from
parking, to TSA, to bags, and everything else, to make this a
lower stress experience.
So, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to hearing from the
witnesses today, and I am hopeful that we can move in a
direction that truly is productive. I am excited and optimistic
that some of the data FAA released today showed a significant
decline in air rage incidents, and I hope that we can build
upon that success.
I yield back.
[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
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for having this
hearing today. I want to make very clear from the beginning that the
behavior we've seen in the media in regard to some of the adverse
interactions on airplanes is completely unacceptable. It needs to be a
civil experience for everyone on the plane, and obviously there are
additional safety considerations for being tens of thousands of feet up
in the air in a metal airplane when thinking about this.
Flight attendants, gate agents, and other airline employees have
the right to go to work without the fear of being harassed,
intimidated, abused, or assaulted--period. The FAA is correct for
aggressively enforcing the rules and regulations that are applicable to
air travel and for holding people accountable for failing to comply,
and that unruly and illegal behavior shall not be tolerated--period.
Data shows that there are more cases of unruly behavior and that we
are seeing a spike or increase, and I think it is important to look at
the causes, look at how we can mitigate that, and how we can solve the
problems.
There have been 4,284 complaints of unruly passengers as of
September 14, but let's remember that so far this year, more than 350
million passengers have flown. So, if you do the math, that's 0.001
percent. That's like comparing the population of New Roads, Louisiana--
a town that I represent that you all should go visit--to the population
of the entire United States. So, the vast majority of flights occur
without these types of ``air rage'' incidents.
I'm worried that this hearing may convey to people on the outside
that getting on an airplane is a wild and unruly experience, and I
think that it is really important for us to convey to folks that that's
absolutely not the norm. That's the exception, and I will say it again,
0.001 percent of passengers have an unruly incident.
But I also think we have to look at this not just from the
perspective of the airlines and airline employees and others. We have
to look at this holistically.
I want to provide some statistics. According to the Kaiser Family
Foundation in January 2021, four in 10 adults reported symptoms of
anxiety or depressive disorder, up from one in 10 adults in June of
2019.
Overall, 2020 values show a 50 percent increase in overdose-related
cardiac arrest. The number of March 2020 calls to the Disaster Distress
Line at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
was 891 percent higher than March the year before. And perhaps a little
bit closer to home to some of us here, the U.S. Capitol Police have
reported 4,135 threats against lawmakers during the first three months
of 2021 alone, putting the number of threats on track to double those
of last year.
My point here is that we are seeing increased anxiety in society--
whether it's mental health and depression, domestic violence and
substance abuse, or mental distress or other types of challenges across
government.
Now let's look specifically at the air travel experience from the
passenger perspective, and maybe it's a person or a family that doesn't
travel often. They have to think about packing their bags, getting
their bags together, getting everything in the car, getting to the
airport on time, finding a parking spot, getting on the shuttle,
getting in line at the airport to check bags, getting in line at TSA--
and who knows how that experience is going to go. I recently had a TSA
agent make me walk through a metal detector four times because I was
told I wasn't walking through it right. I don't even know what that
means.
Now let's continue. You then get into the airport and you get to
buy your $6 bottle of water, $12 granola bar, and then sit on a plane.
And yes, it's packed. And just like my flight experience coming here, I
got up at 4:00 a.m. earlier this week, left the house at 5:00 a.m., and
by the time I walked into the airport and finally got to D.C. after
various problems, it was eight or nine hours later--and wearing a mask
the entire time.
Mr. Chair, I am glad we are having this hearing, and I think it is
really important that we look at this from the passenger perspective as
well. I met with Tampa Airport yesterday, and one of the people I met
with used the phrase ``trying to decompress the experience.''
How do we look at this holistically and try to decompress the
entire flying experience--from parking, to TSA, to bags, and everything
else--to make it a lower-stress experience.
I look forward to hearing from the witnesses today and I am hopeful
that we can move in a direction that truly is productive. I am excited
and optimistic that some of the data the FAA released today showed a
significant decline in air rage incidents, and I hope we can build upon
that success.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
And I now call on the chair of the full committee, Mr.
DeFazio, for an opening statement.
Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for holding
this.
Yeah, incidents are down 50 percent. They are still twice
the level of last year. And minimizing, oh, like a flight
attendant who gets her teeth knocked out or some jerk who tries
to open the exit door, or crash into the cockpit. Of course,
the FAA is dragging its feet on secondary barriers, which we
mandated a number of years ago, but that is an issue for
another day.
But it is still too high. I think the zero tolerance and
the publicized fines have an impact, but we need more
prosecutions when there are serious violent incidents on
airplanes.
And there needs to be more cooperation between the
airlines, the airports, the local police, and the Federal
authorities, and I hope that we can engender that.
I have flown about 8 million miles. Been doing this a long
time. Until recently, I never saw a big sign in the airport
advertising alcohol to go, in cups. That has got to stop. It is
illegal to bring your own alcohol onto a plane. But how are you
going to tell? You know? Is it a coffee? Is it a soda? What is
it?
But the airports need to crack down on these vendors, or we
need to find a way to induce the airports to crack down on
these vendors. That is literally encouraging people to break
the law. Get a great big to-go cup with four shots in it and
take it on the airplane. So that needs to end.
We are going to hear a lot of suggestions here today about
how we can better deal with this, and we will look at what
further actions this committee can take.
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 Chair, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you, Chair Larsen, for calling today's hearing on the spike
in air rage cases. Even as we continue to fight a pandemic, the amount
of disruption and violent behavior on planes has reached epidemic
proportions. Today, flight attendants, a representative of airports,
and the head of security from Airlines for America will allow us to
examine how air rage cases unfold on planes, how airports and law
enforcement respond, and what airlines are doing in the aggregate to
respond to these incidents.
In one incident in May, a flight attendant lost two teeth in an
altercation after a passenger repeatedly ignored instructions and then
became physically confrontational. In another, a belligerent passenger
tried to break down the cockpit door, was handcuffed, broke free, and
then struck the flight attendant trying to subdue him a second time.
Today we will hear from a flight attendant who has encountered
disruptive and unruly passengers on numerous occasions and can speak to
the anxiety and fear many flight attendants feel going to work each
day.
Recognizing the growing trend of belligerence, in January the FAA
issued an order directing staff to pursue a ``zero-tolerance'' policy
for cases relating to interference with crewmembers and other unruly
conduct on board aircraft. It's clear this policy, which I commended
the Administrator for adopting in a letter in August, has worked. The
FAA reported just this morning that the number of unruly passenger
incidents last week had dropped to 50 percent of the number in early
2021. But the rate of these incidents is still too high: it's twice the
rate of cases reported in late 2020. And the FAA inspectors who handle
these cases are also responsible for conducting oversight and
surveillance of the aviation system's safety. They can't continue
without some relief.
Beyond this morning's announcement, let's look at the total
numbers. The FAA reported that as of September 21, 2021, there have
been 4,385 unruly passenger reports since the beginning of the 2021
calendar year. Two weeks ago, that number was 4,184, so that's just
over 200 new reports in the last two weeks alone.
Moreover, there needs to be cooperation at the federal and state
levels, as well as continued coordination within the aviation industry
to stop the surge of air rage cases. First and foremost, the FAA must
continue to coordinate with other federal agencies.
While the FAA's civil penalties have gone a long way to dissuade
and deter dangerous and disastrous behavior--FAA fines issued for
unruly flyers just topped $1 million last month--other penalties must
be enforced for the most violent offenders. In many cases these
penalties must be brought in criminal court, under the jurisdiction of
the DOJ. Yet in an article published earlier this month, DOJ said it
had only filed charges in federal district courts for 16 defendants,
matching the total number of unruly passengers federally charged the
previous year. Given the discrepancy in cases between last year and
this year, that is not satisfactory or commensurate with the serious
number of cases.
Cooperation must also continue with airports and local law
enforcement. When a flight arrives with an unruly passenger in need of
intervention, the airport must work with airport and local law
enforcement to meet the plane at the gate. Airlines and the FAA must
also work together to create best practices so that crews know how to
interact with local law enforcement, and that local law enforcement in
turn communicates that information to the FBI, ensuring that all the
relevant information is gathered and needed reports filed.
Finally, airports and their restaurants and other concessionaires
must work to curb passenger intoxication and the occurrence of
passengers carrying on and consuming alcohol on flights. There is no
reason that a passenger should be able to leave a restaurant with a
``to-go'' cup of alcohol and board a plane with it.
I applaud Administrator Dickson's letter to airports across the
country requesting that airports work with their concessionaires to
amplify the FAA's prohibition on consuming alcoholic beverages not
served by crewmembers on board flights. While alcohol may not always be
the primary instigator in some of these confrontations, adding
gratuitous alcohol to a violent situation certainly exacerbates the
problem and subsequent danger to flight crew and the traveling public.
Some have argued about the cause of air rage cases and try to pin
it on the federal mask mandate, which has saved innumerable lives.
There's no question that alcohol and possibly other substances play a
significant role in driving otherwise-reasonable people to commit
outrageous acts upon their fellow passengers and crewmembers. One thing
that needs to happen, and to happen today, is that airports must compel
their concessionaires to sell alcohol responsibly. Posting a big sign
in the terminal advertising ``alcohol to-go'' is not selling alcohol
responsibly.
While I am relieved that people have begun to return to the skies,
we must remain vigilant in ensuring their safe travel. That includes
doing what we can to clamp down on this alarming increase in
belligerent behavior. The primary solution is simple--passengers need
to comply with federal and airline face mask requirements and practice
kindness and respect toward air crews and fellow passengers. In the
meantime, I look forward to working with my colleagues to see what we
can do to support those on the front line.
Thank you to all of our witnesses for being here today. I look
forward to your testimony.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
And now I welcome the witnesses on today's panel. In order,
we will have Ms. Sara Nelson, international president of the
Association of Flight Attendants; Mr. Teddy Andrews, flight
attendant--I am sorry--at American Airlines, I will make a
correction on my opening statement on that--on behalf of the
Association of Professional Flight Attendants; Mr. Christopher
Bidwell, senior vice president of security, Airports Council
International-North America; and Ms. Lauren Beyer, vice
president of security and facilitation, Airlines for America.
Thank you for joining us today. I look forward to your
testimony.
And, without objection, our witnesses' full statements will
be included in the record. And since your written testimony has
been made part of the record, the subcommittee requests that
you limit your oral testimony to 5 minutes.
Ms. Nelson, you may proceed.
TESTIMONY OF SARA NELSON, INTERNATIONAL PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATION
OF FLIGHT ATTENDANTS--CWA, AFL-CIO; TEDDY ANDREWS, FLIGHT
ATTENDANT, AMERICAN AIRLINES, ON BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATION OF
PROFESSIONAL FLIGHT ATTENDANTS; CHRISTOPHER R. BIDWELL, SENIOR
VICE PRESIDENT OF SECURITY, AIRPORTS COUNCIL INTERNATIONAL-
NORTH AMERICA; AND LAUREN BEYER, VICE PRESIDENT OF SECURITY AND
FACILITATION, AIRLINES FOR AMERICA
Ms. Nelson. Thank you, Chairman Larsen, Chairman DeFazio,
Ranking Member Graves, and Ranking Member Graves, for this
hearing on the surge in air rage incidents and the effect it
has on workers, airports, and airlines.
I am a 25-year union flight attendant and president of the
Association of Flight Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO. We also
coordinate closely with the leaders of APFA and TWU, together
representing nearly 100,000 flight attendants. As part of the
Communication Workers of America, we represent ground service
workers and can also speak to the impact on workers at the
gates. And, of course, we work closely with all of the aviation
unions who make up the Transportation Trades Department of the
AFL-CIO. This is a subject that is of great importance to all
aviation workers.
Since January, the FAA has logged 4,284 unruly passenger
reports. About three-quarters of those are mask-related. Of
these numbers, 755 investigations have been initiated and 154
cases have concluded with enforcement of over $1 million in
fines.
If we continue at this rate, there may be more incidents in
2021 than in the entire history of aviation, but for the first
time we are hearing from the FAA that some of our efforts
together has these numbers trending down.
There is so much more to do, though, because these
incidents are still too common, if even only from a small
percentage of passengers of those who are flying.
We cannot forget the devastating consequences of leaving
commercial aircraft vulnerable to terrorist attack. We know
there are two fundamentals in aviation safety and security.
Number one, remove all distractions from safety-sensitive work,
and, number two, leave all threats to safety and security on
the ground.
If we allow disruptions in the cabin or distractions due to
defiance of passengers to comply with crew instructions to
become a regular occurrence, we are in jeopardy of missing cues
of a coordinated attack.
Flight attendants are the eyes throughout the aircraft for
threats to safety of flight: depressurization, fires, medical
emergencies, including potential medical emergencies in the
flight deck. We cannot afford to lose any time when responding
to emergencies or preparing for an emergency landing.
Disturbances in the cabin are also a distraction in the
flight deck and could compromise the safety of flight. In
response to a survey of flight attendants across the industry,
85 percent of respondents had dealt with unruly passengers in
the first half of this year, and 58 percent of those had
experienced at least five occurrences.
This used to just be a one-off bad day at work in an entire
career, so this is very commonplace.
Disturbingly, one in five respondents experienced physical
altercations, 61 percent of respondents reported that
disruptive passengers use racist, sexist, or homophobic slurs
during the events. Only 60 percent of those who relayed
incidents of physical attack said that law enforcement was
requested to meet the flight.
Of all the incidents in the air, 50 percent showed that
signs of trouble were starting on the ground. This signals both
that workers at the gate are experiencing abuse, and half of
these incidents could be kept on the ground with better
response and coordination.
While 85 percent of the incidents are mask-related, flight
attendants report there are many contributing factors, the next
highest being alcohol.
FAA Administrator Steve Dickson sent a letter to all
airports calling for better communication on masks, the Federal
regulations on alcohol, the discontinuation of to-go alcohol--
and I think we have some pictures of this that can be shown--
and coordination with law enforcement to make sure consequences
are clear for bad actors.
Stopping to-go alcohol should be low-hanging fruit here,
but as I included in my written testimony and as you see on the
screen with examples from JFK, Phoenix, and St. Louis, they are
not the only airports to do this.
Not only has this practice not stopped, it is encouraged
and promoted, giving passengers the false idea that they can
bring their own alcohol onboard and encouraging as much
drinking as possible.
Flight attendants and gate agents then experience extensive
verbal abuse, yelling, and swearing in response to
instructions; shoving, taking seats, biting, punching, throwing
trash at workers, defiling restrooms after instructions are
given, following flightcrew and agents throughout the airport,
and continuing to yell and harass.
The danger in this hostile environment in response to
flight attendants simply conducting routine safety reminders
and compliance is hesitancy in performing these tasks.
Aviation safety is at risk when crew are deterred from or
delayed in performing our safety duties.
Now what do we need? We need DOJ criminal charges and
enforcement; make the FAA zero-tolerance policy permanent; and
staff up investigators and extend investigation time;
coordinated communication, including PSAs running throughout
the terminal on masks, alcohol, and generally following the
rules from point of ticket sale all through check-in, security,
gate, and the boarding process; require that all airport bars,
restaurants, and shops post signage and use verbal warnings to
patrons who fail to comply with masking requirements.
Every airline and airport should have a communication plan
that they submit to ensure we are all working together across
Government stakeholders and law enforcement. Enforcement of
masks in the terminals and stopping the ability for passengers
to become inebriated, more staffing at the gates and on the
planes.
We simply cannot accept this as the new normal. We look
forward to working with this subcommittee to effect positive
change.
I want to note that aviation is about bringing people
together, not tearing us apart. Every person matters, and we
can only have the freedom of flight when we recognize the
reality that we are all in this together.
Thank you very much. I look forward to your questions.
[Ms. Nelson's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sara Nelson, International President, Association
of Flight Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO
Introduction
Thank you Chairman DeFazio, Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves
and Ranking Member Graves for convening this hearing on the alarming
increase in disruptive and unruly airline travelers, and the effects
this has on workers, airports, and airlines.
My name is Sara Nelson. I am a twenty-five year union flight
attendant and president of the Association of Flight Attendants--CWA,
AFL-CIO (AFA), representing flight attendants at 17 airlines across the
industry. We also coordinate closely with leaders of the Association of
Professional Flight Attendants and the Transport Workers Union,
together representing nearly 100,000 Flight Attendants across the
industry. Flight attendants are the frontline of aviation along with
the passenger service agents and ground service workers represented by
the Communications Workers of America and all of the affiliates of the
Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO. The subject of this hearing
is of critical importance to all aviation workers.
I know there is not one person on this aviation subcommittee that
thinks the combative, abusive, defiant, and violent behavior on our
planes and in our airports is acceptable. Many of you have reached out
to ask how you can help. We believe it's critical to fully define the
problem, review effectiveness of actions taken to date, provide
recommendations for additional actions needed, and act with coordinated
urgency across aviation to subdue this threat to aviation safety and
security.
Air Rage and Disruptive Passengers Threaten Lives and Safety of Flight
Since January the Federal Aviation Administration has logged \1\:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.faa.gov/data_research/passengers_cargo/
unruly_passengers/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4,284 unruly passengers reports
3,123 mask related incidents
755 investigations initiated
154 enforcement cases
These numbers are staggering and if they continue at this rate may
result in more incidents in 2021 than the entire history of commercial
aviation. The enormity of the problem is reflected in these statistics,
and demonstrates why the FAA, under the leadership of Steve Dickson,
has engaged with urgency to tackle the problem. But the numbers don't
tell the full story about the impact on frontline workers or just how
dangerous this behavior is for aviation safety.
Flight attendants are aviation's first responders, charged with the
safety and health of passengers and crew. Twenty years since the events
of September 11, 2001, we cannot forget the devastating consequences of
leaving commercial aircraft vulnerable to terrorist attack. For the
past twenty years flight attendants have also served as the last line
of defense in aviation security. We know there are two fundamentals in
aviation safety and security: 1) remove all distractions from safety
sensitive work, and 2) leave all threats to safety and security on the
ground.
The disruptions in the cabin and failure to comply with crew
instruction are a threat to the safety of flight. The threat of
terrorist attack has not abated, but our vigilance and coordinated
actions across government and aviation stakeholders has to date
thwarted any planned attacks. If we allow disruptions in the cabin or
distractions due to defiance of passengers to comply with crew
instructions to become a regular occurrence, we are in jeopardy of
missing cues of a coordinated attack. We simply cannot allow this
behavior to become commonplace for this reason alone. Every level of
threat requires vigilance and scrutiny. We cannot be lulled into a
place of accepting these distractions as a new normal.
Flight attendants are the eyes throughout the aircraft for threats
to safety of flight: slow decompression, fires of all kinds, medical
emergencies affecting crew. We attend to the health and safety of
passengers facing an array of medical emergencies from pregnant mothers
suddenly in labor, to heart attack, stroke, choking, allergic reaction,
or drug overdose. When emergency landing or ditching prep is necessary
there is no time to lose to prepare the cabin and save lives. The
safety of every passenger and crewmember onboard is in jeopardy when
our duties are interrupted or needless distractions arise.
These events are also a distraction in the flight deck. We need to
work to reduce and eliminate all distractions and disruptions in order
to ensure the safety of flight.
Survey Results Say 85% of Flight Attendants Have Experienced an Unruly
Passenger Event in 2021
On July 29, 2021 our union released \2\ the results of a survey of
nearly 5,000 flight attendants across 30 airlines between June 25, 2021
and July 14, 2021. Key findings included:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.afacwa.org/unruly_passengers_survey
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
85 percent of all respondents had dealt with unruly
passengers in the first half of 2021.
58 percent had experienced at least five incidents during
that time.
17 percent, or nearly 1 in 5 respondents, reported
experiencing a physical incident.
71 percent of Flight Attendants who filed incident
reports with airline management received no follow-up
50 percent reported witnessing misconduct during
boarding, and 13 percent reported behavior beginning in the gate area.
58 percent of respondents reported alcohol contributed to
disruptive events and 85 percent of incidents were related to mask
compliance.
61 percent of respondents reported that disruptive
passengers used racist, sexist and/or homophobic slurs during
incidents. Many specific examples were provided, most of which were too
offensive to repeat.
Only 60 percent of respondents experiencing a physical
incident onboard said law enforcement was requested to meet their
flight.
The survey results demonstrate a greater impact on workers than the
FAA reported numbers provide. When asked what they believed to be the
cause or escalating reasons for the unruly behavior, Flight Attendants
cited that mask compliance, alcohol, routine safety reminders, flight
delays and cancellations were all common factors in unruly passenger
interactions. Many cited multiple factors contributed to incidents,
which also implies a compounding effect and an opportunity to reduce
incidents when better addressing any of the contributing factors.
Flight attendants reported facing extensive verbal abuse, including
from visibly drunk passengers, passengers yelling and swearing in
response to masking directions, and often aggressively challenging
flight crew working to ensure compliance with federal rules. Many
respondents recounted aggressive incidents, including shoving, kicking
seats, throwing trash at flight crew, defiling the restroom in response
to crewmember instructions, and following flight crew through the
airport to continue yelling and harassment.
One Flight Attendant wrote, ``We tell them [passengers] that it is
a federal offense to not comply with crew member instructions, use foul
and/or threatening language onboard, and then the plane is met by
airline supervisors or airport law enforcement and the passenger gets a
slap on the wrist and sent on their way. I've been yelled at, cursed at
and threatened countless times in the last year and the most that has
come out of it has been a temporary suspension of travel for the
passenger. We need real consequences if flight attendants are ever
going to feel safe at work again.''
Another Flight Attendant wrote, ``I was on the floor in the back of
the plane and the [rest of] crew members didn't know what happened
until after my attacker had already deplaned.''
Racist, sexist, and homophobic abuse of flight crews creates a
hostile environment for everyone onboard and violates federal law. It
has no place anywhere, and certainly not in a workplace environment.
Our union has fought discrimination and prejudice for decades, and we
are not about to allow this moment to set us back.
The danger in this hostile environment in response to flight
attendants simply conducting routine safety reminders and compliance is
hesitancy in performing these tasks. It is a federal aviation safety
requirement that aircraft are staffed with a minimum number of flight
attendants. Aviation safety is at risk when crew are deterred from or
delayed in performing safety duties.
Significant Opportunities for Reducing Events
According to the survey results, nearly half of the incidents could
be prevented by identifying problems on the ground or preflight--which
is an opportunity for dramatically reducing the threat in the air. The
survey also indicates room for significant improvement in the area of
response to incidents and enforcement.
Addressing Violence and Disrespect Toward Ground Service Workers Will
Reduce Inflight Events as Well
Ground service agents are experiencing an increased amount of
passenger rage and their experiences are going unrecognized. These
incidents vary from using crass and vulgar language when addressing
employees, using racial epithets that cause psychological harm to our
agents, to punching, biting, kicking, shoving and even spitting on
them. These incidents are caused by overlapping operational challenges
like staffing shortages, flight delays and cancellations and enforcing
federal mask mandates at the gates. CWA represents 20,000 agents
working for American Airlines and at wholly-owned regional subsidiaries
Piedmont Airlines and Envoy Air who have serious concerns about their
safety in the workplace and are looking to this administration for
action that shows the safety of ground service workers is a priority.2
Our ground service members have seen that incidents of assault
against passenger service agents are rarely investigated or prosecuted.
This is despite a 2017 ruling from the Department of Justice which
confirmed that any interference with airport or air carrier employees
with security duties is punishable by criminal penalties and jail
time--a provision that applies to passenger service workers performing
a range of vital security functions and are therefore covered under
this decision.
Over the past few months, CWA ground service members across the
country have experienced serious incidents of physical and verbal
assault and harassment, with few repercussions for the offending
passenger imposed by law enforcement.
On June 28, 2021 at the Charlotte Douglas Airport, a
passenger attempted to board a flight in a state of extreme
intoxication. CWA gate agents, fulfilling their duties to secure the
aircraft and protect the other passengers, denied the passenger access
to his flight. He became extremely violent--physically assaulting one
of our members and verbally attacking another two. There is no doubt
about what happened. Video of the assault, taken by a member of the
public, was obtained by local news and is publicly available.3 Despite
conclusive evidence, local law enforcement did not pursue assault
charges against the passenger in Charlotte and the FAA and federal law
enforcement have likewise refused to pursue this matter seriously
because of overlapping jurisdiction at the airport.
On July 30th at John F. Kennedy Airport, two CWA members
were assaulted after intervening in a dispute between two passengers.
The agent involved was repeatedly punched in the face and verbally
threatened for refusing to allow the passenger on the airplane. No
charges have been pursued at this time.
On June 30, 2021, a passenger attempting to board a
flight from JFK to MIA was stopped at the gate after an altercation
with another passenger. Despite warnings that any disruption onboard
the aircraft would not be tolerated, the passenger became aggressive
with agents--pushing, shoving and punching the agent in the face
several times. The agent was transported to a hospital after
experiencing headaches and pain in the jaw, left arm, knee and lower
back.
By failing to follow the law and seek justice for the victims of
assaults like these, a message is being clearly communicated that the
safety of airport workers is not a priority. Ground service members are
the last line of security before these agents have the opportunity to
board the aircraft and disrupt service. These incidents have outraged
CWA agents across the country and highlight the need for local and
federal law enforcement to prioritize airport workers safety and
security.
Action by Government and Airlines Has Made a Difference--But Much More
to Do
It is a violation of federal law to interfere or disrupt the duties
of a crewmember. Federal Aviation Regulations 91.11, 121.580 and
135.120 state that ``no person may assault, threaten, intimidate, or
interfere with a crewmember in the performance of the crewmember's
duties aboard an aircraft being operated.'' Violations of this law
carry up to $35,000 in fines for each incident, and up to twenty years
in prison if convicted. While the FAA has levied more than one million
dollars in fines, the Department of Justice has been slow to conduct
criminal investigations or seek indictments.
We have a shared responsibility to address threats to aviation
safety. Everyone involved in air travel, from federal officials to
airlines, to airport concessions must play a role in ending this
scourge of abusive passengers. Together we can improve communication to
passengers that misconduct is dangerous, illegal, and will result in
passengers losing the privilege to fly.
We commend FAA Administrator Dickson for initiating a `zero-
tolerance' policy for violation of this FAR and passenger misconduct,
first on January 13, 2021, at the first sight of this new threat and
further extending the policy in March. In addition, we appreciate the
FAA's public campaign to communicate consequences of violations, and
the efforts to bring the entire aviation ecosystem together to address
these problems. Dickson's letter to airports \3\ is a good example of
these efforts, and we appreciate the consistent dialog and problem-
solving with FAA, DOT, and TSA. Consistent communication from leaders
makes a huge difference and it has been extremely helpful to have
federal officials, including the President of the United States,
clearly communicating the rules and the consequences for breaking them.
Plain instructions from leaders such as President Biden's call to
``show some respect'' helps set a clear tone of order civil discourse
in our shared space.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.faa.gov/data_research/passengers_cargo/
unruly_passengers/toolkit/media/Letter_to_airports_FINAL_signed.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Still, there's more to be done to improve communications. We need
everyone from the door of the airport to the flight deck, control
towers, concessionaires, airport workers, security, law enforcement,
and travelers themselves to identify their part in helping promote
calm, kindness, and above all--safety. More airport signage, airport
PSAs, and notifications from the airline--starting when passengers
purchase the tickets all the way up until boarding--should all be
enhanced communication measures to reinforce the `zero-tolerance'
policy, the fines/jail time consequences, and the rules associated with
alcohol consumption.
Airlines have individually taken action to ban bad actors from
future flights. For example, United Airlines has banned over 1000
travelers due to issues related to mask mandates and unruly behavior.
The airline has instructed flight attendants to hand out cards to
maskless passengers that inform them, ``you're just going to be banned
from flying United Airlines if you don't put [a mask] on.'' We believe
this has been an effective way to avoid putting United flight
attendants in danger or into the role of a law enforcement official and
has helped deescalate a number of incidents involving unruly
passengers.
Problems Contributing to Unruly Passenger Behavior and Recommendations
to Stop It
With passenger incidents on the rise, many Flight Attendants have
expressed concerns about coming to work. When we think of the incidents
we've seen, we think of large network airlines with sufficient crews to
deal with a variety of issues but regional airlines are reporting a
couple of aggressive passenger incidents per week and often there is a
single flight attendant to face unhinged rages.
Overall, staffing minimums in the airports, at the gates, and on
our planes make it harder to identify problems early, seek help, and
deescalate conflict.
Failure to Communicate to Passengers about Rules and Penalties
After 9/11, TSA developed the ``See Something, Say Something''
campaign. This was clear, intentional messaging. Everyone understood.
Each of us, every one of us, had a role to play in security. Each of
us, every one of us, needed to be part of the solution.
We need similar clear, strong, and consistent messaging today about
COVID protocols, masking, the importance of following crewmember
instructions, and the penalties if you don't.
If the first time a passenger hears about the mask mandate when
they are boarding their flight, we are asking for trouble, and we are
putting our flight crew at risk.
We need all of aviation to help enforce and reinforce the rules.
This should include electronic messaging during and after booking,
signage on airport access roads and transit, communications and
acknowledgments embedded in the check-in process, clear and consistent
signage, video and audio throughout parking areas and terminals, and
with the active assistance of all personnel, including sky caps,
airport greeters, the ticket counter, TSA, airport vendors, and
restaurant workers, gate agents and flight crews.
Recommendations:
1. Develop and enforce stronger airport messaging that wearing a
mask and following crewmember instructions are both required, and that
failure to do so will result in penalties. Also, empower/promote the
message that all parties--TSA, law enforcement, airport security, PSAs,
pilots, and Flight Attendants--need to join the team to abbreviate the
pandemic and keep air travel safe.
2. FAA should require a COVID-protocols and zero-tolerance policy
communications plan from every carrier and airport to ensure that all
parties are brought into the process and that appropriate resources are
being deployed to support compliance.
3. Make the FAA `zero-tolerance' policy permanent.
4. The DOJ should utilize existing statutes to conduct criminal
prosecution.
5. Implement a series of actions proposed by our union to keep
problems on the ground and respond effectively in the event of
incidents.
Refusal to Comply with Mask Mandate
On September 14, 2021 the TSA extended the mask mandate (SD 1582/
84-21-01B), which was first issued on January 27, 2021 requiring masks
to be worn on all forms of public transportation. According to the FAA,
as of January 1, 2021, about 75% of disruptive passenger incidents are
directly related to the mask mandate \4\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/06/disputes-over-mask-mandates-
comprise-75percent-of-faas-unruly-passenger-complaints-on-planes-.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In his September 9, 2021, speech on new measures to address COVID-
19, President Biden called out the unprecedented verbal and physical
assault of flight attendants, and implored people to act in a civil
manner. During this speech the President also announced that fines for
passenger disruption and noncompliance would be doubled. Our union
thanks President Biden for his push to stop unruly passenger behavior
and his message of respect for those of us on the frontlines doing our
jobs to keep everyone safe.
On August 3, 2021, FAA Administrator Steve Dickson sent a letter to
Airport leaders reinforcing the FAA zero tolerance policy on disruptive
behavior. He stated ``Every week, we see situations in which law
enforcement was asked to meet an aircraft at the gate following an
unruly passenger incident. In some cases, flight attendants have
reported being physically assaulted. Nevertheless, many of these
passengers were interviewed by local police and released without
criminal charges of any kind. When this occurs, we miss a key
opportunity to hold unruly passengers accountable for their
unacceptable and dangerous behavior.''
Mask use continues to be an effective way to help stop the spread
of COVID-19, and consistent enforcement and accountability are vital--
especially as some travelers refuse to act responsibly. Since the
Transportation Security Administration announced in February that most
passengers must wear masks on airplanes and in airports, the agency has
received more than 3,000 reports of mask-related incidents \5\. As of
last week, Alaska Airlines alone had placed 857 passengers on a ban
list due to failure to comply with mask policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://www.faa.gov/data_research/passengers_cargo/
unruly_passengers/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommendations:
1. Maintain the TSA enforcement directive for the CDC
transportation mask mandate to keep passengers and aviation workers
safe.
2. Make permanent the FAA zero tolerance policy and increased
fines for disruptive, unruly, and violent passengers.
3. Minimize onboard food and beverage service until the CDC
declares that the pandemic is over in order to facilitate more
consistent mask wearing.
4. Require that all airport bars, restaurants, and shops post
signage and issue verbal warnings to patrons who fail to comply with
masking requirements.
Drunk Passengers and Alcohol Consumption Allowed outside of Concessions
To facilitate mask-wearing and enhance COVID safety protocols, a
few carriers have limited in-flight food and beverage service, and
either curtailed or ceased alcohol sales at this time. Flight
Attendants across the country have praised these measures for assisting
with compliance for the vast majority of passengers.
However, as our member survey made clear, alcohol continues to be a
major driver of passenger noncompliance with safety rules and is an
aggravating factor in many incidents with unruly, verbally and
physically abusive travelers.
Many of the most disruptive and threatening passengers have
attempted to bypass restrictions on in-flight service by drinking to
excess prior to flight or by bringing alcohol onboard for consumption,
in violation of FAA rules, which state that ``no person may drink any
alcoholic beverage aboard an aircraft unless the certificate holder
operating the aircraft has served that beverage to him.'' The purpose
of this long-established safety rule is to empower airline personnel to
guard against the safety risks from intoxicated passengers, including
the risk that drunk travelers will fail to follow instructions.
In this fraught moment, we have emphasized the need for clear,
strong, and consistent messaging. Today, we must convey to the
Committee our profound dismay that some airport vendors are actively
undermining efforts to enhance compliance by encouraging passengers to
violate alcohol consumption rules.
In airports across the country, from Phoenix to St. Louis to New
York, travelers are met with calls to order alcohol delivery to your
gate and ``cocktails to go.'' One ad at JFK, urges passengers to drive
one cocktail at the bar and order up another to bring to the gate.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
These messages, and the policies behind them, are totally
inconsistent with federal safety regulations and send a message that
getting drunk before flying is permissible. After months of verbal and
physical abuse from intoxicated passengers and unprecedented federal
enforcement, it is time to end gateside alcohol delivery and airport
cocktails to go. We need the FAA and Congress to send a clear message
to airports, and to their concessions and vendors--you have a key role
to play in supporting aviation safety and combating air rage, not
profit from it.
Recommendations:
1. Limit onboard alcohol sales.
2. Ban cocktails to-go and in-airport alcohol delivery.
3. Limit customers to purchasing one alcoholic beverage at a time.
4. The FAA must remind airports and vendors of their obligation
not to serve inebriated passengers.
5. Airports must remind all airport employees of their shared
responsibility to keep intoxicated passengers from boarding planes by
notifying gate agents and crew members in advance.
Inconsistent and Insufficient Response to Aggressive Passenger
Incidents
The response to aggressive passenger incidents upon landing is
inconsistent and generally insufficient at multiple levels. The
communication chain from the cabin, to flight deck, ground
coordinators, and law enforcement must be unbroken if we are to have
the chance to respond effectively and enforce compliance. If an
aircraft returns to the gate after pushback due to a disruptive
passenger incident, a report to the FAA is automatically generated. But
it is not clear how incidents that do not involve a deviation from the
flight plan get reported or investigated. Law enforcement response is
not consistent at some airports, law enforcement will board and escort
the offender off prior to everyone else deplaning. But often, either
the offender will deplane and walk away because the passenger service
agents (PSA) are not sure what occurred and there is no law enforcement
presence. Investigations can take weeks or months to investigate
because of a tremendous case backlog and staffing shortages, meanwhile
an unruly passenger will continue to fly and abuse crew members, gate
agents, and other aviation staff. I am concerned that it sends the
message to offenders and would-be offenders that enforcing the rules is
not a priority.
An issue that needs particular attention now is how an aggressive
passenger can be banned from one airline but then promptly fly on
another one, putting more crews, passengers, and gate agents at risk
and sending a message of lax (if any) oversight. This is not
acceptable. A central database that all the airlines can access to
share information about passengers who are banned from flying makes
practical sense.
Recommendations:
1. Clarify what triggers pilot reporting and law enforcement
response, define and require that pilot reporting and ground response
protocols are implemented, take action against passengers who break the
rules including consistent applications of fines (and some immediate
consequence, not just the remote threat of a distant and unlikely
consequence), criminally prosecute certain offenders under the DOJ, and
direct the fines into a legal/medical fund for affected crewmembers and
PSAs.
2. Create a centralized list of passengers who may not fly for
some period of time and provide airlines with access to the list. Add
to the contract of carriage that airlines have the right to share
passengers' information with the DOT.
Insufficient Flight Attendant and Gate Agent Staffing
The demands of managing the current spike in aggressive passenger
incidents is straining Flight Attendant and Passenger Service Agents
(PSA) staffing.
Recommendations:
1. Increase staffing to ensure a sufficient number of Flight
Attendants and PSAs to observe and respond to the issues.
Conclusion
This is not a `new normal' we can accept. We know the government,
airlines, airports, and all stakeholders can take actions together to
keep us safe and flying friendly. We look forward to working with this
subcommittee on our union's proposed actions and recommendations to
affect positive change. Aviation is about bringing people together, not
tearing us apart. Every person matters, and we can only have the
freedom of flight when we recognize the reality that we are all in this
together.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Ms. Nelson.
I now turn to Mr. Teddy Andrews. You are recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Andrews. Good morning, Chairman DeFazio, Chairman
Larsen, Ranking Member Sam Graves, Ranking Member Garret
Graves, and members of the committee. Thank you for the
opportunity to testify today.
My name is Teddy Andrews. I am an American Airlines flight
attendant of 10 years. My career in the airline aviation
industry began in 1981, where I served in many positions,
including gate agent, flight attendant trainer, and customer
service instructor.
I am honored to be representing APFA and my 25,000
colleagues to discuss the most significant challenge and daily
danger facing flight attendants right now.
Air rage has, unfortunately, become all too common. I have
lost count of the times I have been insulted or threatened on a
flight simply for doing my job.
The specific incident that I will share today is not easy
to talk about. On this flight, my crew had just completed our
service. My colleague, on the verge of tears, came to the
galley after a passenger who refused to wear a mask had been
giving her a hard time.
I left the galley to speak with the passenger. Politely I
asked, ``Sir, would you please put your mask on? It must be
covering both your mouth and nose.'' He looked at me, and I
will not repeat the epithet he used. He said, ``N-word, I don't
have to listen to a damn thing you say. This is a free
country.''
I was completely taken aback. I didn't know what to say,
but he continued. ``You heard me, n-word boy.''
While I am trained for this, I know I don't deserve to be
spoken to like this under any circumstance. But I replied,
``Sir, regardless of your thoughts, comments, or opinions,
there is a mask requirement onboard our aircraft, and failure
to comply could restrict your ability to fly with us in the
future. We wouldn't want that to happen to you, sir.''
He cited his freedoms and he called me the mask police. I
said, ``If you don't do it for yourself, please do it for your
family, who I am sure loves you very much and would be
devastated if something were to happen to you. Please do it for
your fellow passengers as well.''
He eventually calmed down and complied.
I, myself, have a personal experience with this virus. I
understand the importance of a mask mandate. In March of 2020,
I contracted COVID-19 and nearly died. The ER called my
daughter on her 24th birthday to say that it would be a miracle
if I made it to the morning.
After 10 days in the ICU, I stabilized, but I was not able
to work again until September of 2020. I could barely walk
across the room without oxygen.
The work environment I returned to had changed. And that
incident I shared is not unique to me or my colleagues. Air
rage comes in many forms--insults, threats, physical assaults,
general disrespect--simply for adhering to our
responsibilities.
I too wear my mask for hours on end. I know what is at
stake if we don't utilize all safety precautions to beat this
pandemic.
Last year, we came to work when everyone else was told to
stay home. When demand for air travel dropped off steeply, we
worried about our job security. And I would like to thank this
committee for passing the Payroll Support Program, which saved
our jobs, our healthcare, and the industry. I cringe to think
what would have happened to me in the ICU without health
insurance.
Now, flight attendants are in a third phase of crisis,
worried about our safety just by coming to work and fulfilling
our duties. Today we find ourselves in an environment where we
may need the voluntary self-defense skills offered by TSA.
The question, however, is how to prevent these situations
from escalating to that point. Medical emergencies, onboard
fires, security threats, and emergency evacuations are
situations that we are prepared for every day, every flight.
But now our most immediate danger is air rage. These days I
come to work anticipating disruptive behavior. It feels like
flight attendants have become the target for all kinds of
frustration.
But every day, flight attendants are disrespected for the
job we are trained to do. My colleagues are anxious and
fearful. What is going to happen on the next flight? How will
this passenger react if I remind them to wear their mask? Will
complying with airline policy set them off? Can I avoid
engaging, or would that be an evasion of my duties?
Many of you travel, on this committee, you travel every
week and understand the challenges of air travel today. We
cannot combat air rage without coordination at the Federal
level.
Our passengers need clear expectations and strong
consequences for their behavior. One more air rage event, one
more flight attendant who is threatened or assaulted is one too
many.
Thank you for your work to help keep my colleagues and I
safe. My testimony is complete, and I look forward to your
questions.
[Mr. Andrews' prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Teddy Andrews, Flight Attendant, American
Airlines, on behalf of the Association of Professional Flight
Attendants
Good morning, Chairman DeFazio, Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member
Graves, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the Committee. Thank you
for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Teddy Andrews. I am a
Charlotte-based Flight Attendant and have been flying with American
Airlines for ten years. My career within the airline industry began in
1981, and since then, I have held numerous positions, including gate
agent, Flight Attendant trainer, and customer service instructor.
I am honored to be representing my Union, the Association of
Professional Flight Attendants, and my 25,000 colleagues to discuss the
most significant challenge and daily danger facing Flight Attendants
right now. Air rage has reached unprecedented levels. Disrespect,
threats, verbal abuse, and even physical assault directed at flight
crew have sadly become all too common. I thank this Committee for their
commitment to the safety of Flight Attendants and for holding this
hearing to help prevent future incidents from occurring.
At this point, I have lost count of the times I have been insulted
or threatened on a flight simply for doing my job. The specific
incident that I will share with you today is not easy for me to talk
about. What should have been a routine domestic flight made me question
my career choice. On this flight, my crew had just completed our
service and was collecting trash and performing the required compliance
checks. My colleague, on the verge of tears, came to the back galley
and told me that she was having trouble with a passenger who was not
wearing a mask. The passenger was deliberately not complying with the
mask policy and was giving her a hard time. I offered to help, as any
fellow crewmember would.
I left the galley to speak with the passenger, who still had his
mask off but was not eating or drinking. As I approached him, I asked
politely, ``Sir, would you please put your mask back on? It needs to be
covering both your mouth and nose.''
He looked at me, and here I will not repeat the vile epithet he
used. He said,
``N-----, I don't have to listen to a damn thing you say, this is a
free country.'' I was completely taken aback. I didn't know what to
say. Then he continued, ``You heard me, N----- boy.''
I paused for a moment. While I am trained for this, I know I don't
deserve to be spoken to like this under any circumstance. Finally, I
replied, ``Sir, regardless of your thoughts, comments, or opinions,
there is a mask requirement onboard our aircraft, and failure to comply
could restrict your ability to fly with us in the future. We would not
want that to happen, so, sir, please do what we're asking of you. Put
your mask on and keep it on this flight.''
He went on and said, ``You nor the Government can control me, and
you are nothing but (damn) mask police. This entire virus thing is a
big fake.'' To this I answered, ``If you can't do it for yourself,
would you please do it for your family, who I am sure loves you very
much and would be devastated if something were to happen to you. Please
do it for your fellow passengers as well.''
The passenger eventually calmed down and put his mask on. I advised
the captain of the disturbance who asked whether law enforcement was
needed to meet our aircraft, but we landed safely with no further
issues.
This pandemic has been amongst the most trying and tumultuous times
to work in the airline industry. I also have a very personal experience
with this virus. Early in the pandemic, in March of 2020, I nearly
died.
Upon returning from an assignment in Chile, I started experiencing
aches, chills, night sweats, coughing, and vomiting. I was tested at
Urgent Care and the next day the Department of Health and Human
Services informed me I was positive for COVID-19. I was placed on a 14-
day in-home quarantine and sent a letter that said if I left my home
for any reason, I was subject to a $2,000 fine and up to two years in
jail.
That week, my condition deteriorated. I was admitted to the ER with
a fever of 104.5 and an oxygen level of 88%. My daughter, on her 24th
birthday, was called and told that it would be a miracle if I made it
through the night. Intubation forms and DNR forms needed to be signed.
But after ten days in the ICU, I stabilized. My recovery took
months. I was not able to work from March until September. I could
barely walk across the room without oxygen. Today, I'm still recovering
from chronic headaches. But against the odds, I am here, and I can work
at the job I love again.
However, the environment I have come back to has changed entirely,
and the incident I shared is not unique to my colleagues or me. We have
been insulted by passengers in different ways and on many separate
occasions, simply for adhering to our responsibilities.
When I fly, I, too, must wear a mask for hours on end because it is
part of my job. I fully understand that it is not always pleasant to
wear. But I also know, on both personal and professional levels, what
is at stake if we don't utilize all available safety precautions to
beat this pandemic.
This virus has taken a tremendous toll on the airline industry.
Flight Attendants were deemed essential frontline workers. We came to
work when everyone else was told to stay home. Then, when the demand
for air travel dropped off steeply, we worried about our job security.
We have Congress and the leadership of this Committee to thank for
passing the Payroll Support Program and saving our jobs, our
healthcare, and our industry during this pandemic. I cringe to think
what would have happened to me in the ICU had I lost my health
insurance.
But now, Flight Attendants are in a third phase of this crisis,
worried and anxious about our safety simply by coming to work and
fulfilling our job responsibilities. Flight Attendants have been
offered voluntary self-defense training which was first introduced
after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Today, we find ourselves in an
environment where we may need to employ these skills. The problem that
must be solved is how we can prevent these situations from escalating
to that point.
This type of environment makes it difficult for Flight Attendants
to perform our duties as safety professionals. Medical emergencies,
onboard fires, security threats, and emergency evacuations are all
situations in which we are prepared to encounter every time we come to
work. But now our most immediate danger, and our biggest distraction,
is the number of incidents we find ourselves having to deescalate. I
believe that passengers who so willfully cause disruptions, who show no
regard for our policies and personnel, put all others in danger.
These days I come to work expecting some form of disrespect or air
rage. It feels like Flight Attendants have become the target for all
kinds of frustrations that some people are feeling. Sometimes it
happens when passengers disagree with airline or federal policies. At
times passengers are emboldened by alcohol. But above all, everyday
Flight Attendants are not being respected for the job we are here and
trained to do.
My colleagues are anxious. What is going to happen on the next
flight? How will this passenger react if I remind them to wear their
mask? Will complying with airline policies set them off? Can I avoid
engaging, or would that be an evasion of my duties? This is now our
constant fear.
I know many of you on this Committee travel each week and
personally understand the challenges of air travel today. We cannot
combat this issue without solid coordination at thefederal level. We
must ensure that passengers have clear expectations and consequences
for their behavior in flight. One more air rage event--one more Flight
Attendant who is singled out, threatened, or assaulted--is one too
many.
Protecting ourselves from unruly passengers has become the top
issue for our Union this year. Successfully deterring this behavior
will require full coordination between all aviation, airport, and
government stakeholders. Everyone has a part to play. Here are some
initiatives that our Union supports.
1. Establishment of a federal ``no-fly'' list for disruptive
passengers
2. Full enforcement of civil penalties/fines, no settlements
3. Federal criminal prosecution where it applies
4. Public identification of passengers who have verbally/
physically assaulted crewmembers
5. Creation of a public campaign on behavior/consequences funded
through assessed fines
6. Confiscation of all alcohol through TSA
7. Discontinuation of to-go alcohol and shots in airports
8. Increased police and security presence in airports
9. Increased monitoring of passengers through the airport, TSA,
and prior to boarding
10. Consistent enforcement of the mask mandate throughout the
airport and security
11. Inclusion of updated de-escalation and TSA self-defense
training for Flight Attendants at annual requalification training
Thank you for the work you do to help keep my colleagues safe. My
testimony is now complete.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you for your testimony.
I now want to recognize Chris Bidwell--just a moment.
I will recognize Mr. Christopher Bidwell from the Airports
Council International-North America.
Mr. Bidwell, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Bidwell. Chairman Larsen, Chairman DeFazio, Ranking
Member Graves, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to participate in
today's hearing.
I am Christopher Bidwell, senior vice president of security
at Airports Council International-North America. I appreciate
the opportunity to discuss the work of the airport operators in
responding to and helping to reduce the number of unruly
passenger incidents.
As the security of their passengers, employees, tenants,
and facilities is their top priority, airports implement a
number of measures. Airports coordinate these security measures
with their partners at the TSA, FAA, FBI, other Federal, State,
and local law enforcement agencies, and the airlines.
COVID has created a lot of stress for our members, our
industry, and the traveling public. Due to that stress, many
people are acting differently in various aspects of their
lives, and air travel is no different.
While it is easy to blame the rise of unruly passenger
incidents on one cause or another, there are a variety of
factors that contribute to the incidents to which our airport
members are asked to respond.
We applaud the FAA for implementing a zero-tolerance
policy. We also appreciate TSA for having doubled the civil
penalty violations for the Federal mask mandate.
Much has been discussed in the press about the role of
alcohol and the behavior of unruly passengers, but we have yet
to see data on the number of incidents that involve alcohol.
Bartenders in restaurants and bars at airports must be
certified and trained by local alcohol licensing authorities.
Airport concessionaires are subject to the same licensing,
oversight, and inspection requirements in order to maintain a
license to serve alcohol as any other establishment in the
local community.
Airports work with their airline partners on initiatives to
raise awareness about the FAA regulation prohibiting passengers
from drinking their own alcohol onboard aircraft.
With certain States and communities having lifted mask
requirements, many residents were surprised, frustrated, or
even upset by TSA's extension of the mask mandate at airports,
and calls for airport law enforcement support increased
significantly. This remains an added burden on airport law
enforcement that is in addition to their existing
responsibilities.
Airport law enforcement faces a number of challenges when
called by airlines to respond to unruly passenger incidents.
Whereas interference with crewmembers is a Federal offense
under title 49 of the United States Code, section 46504,
airport law enforcement can only enforce State and local law.
Depending on the nature of the incident, airport law
enforcement officers may only be able to conduct a cursory
investigation and turn the case over to Federal authorities.
Let me be clear. Airport law enforcement attempts to hold
unruly passengers accountable for their dangerous behavior
while operating in accordance with State and local law.
In some instances, airline crewmembers are reluctant to
stay around to press charges, even when they have been
assaulted. Unless crewmembers press charges, airport law
enforcement officers may not be able to legally detain the
unruly passenger.
We are committed to being part of the solution and
encourage the implementation of the following recommendations.
First, airline gate agents, as the first line of defense,
should be extra vigilant for signs and deny boarding to those
individuals they suspect are intoxicated.
Second, when an incident occurs, airline crewmembers should
make statements to airport law enforcement and press charges to
enable criminal prosecution.
Third, airport law enforcement should be provided the
flexibility to prioritize the response to unruly passenger
incidents.
Fourth, FAA and TSA should share more detailed and timely
data on incidents with airport operators to ensure better
situational awareness.
Fifth, the U.S. Government should prioritize the
prosecution of individuals who interfere with crewmembers and
broadly publicize successful criminal prosecutions and civil
penalty actions.
ACI-NA and our member airports are committed to working
with Congress, FAA, TSA, FBI, and other law enforcement
agencies and aviation stakeholders to identify good practices
to reduce the number of unruly passenger incidents. We look
forward to coordinating with our industry and Government
partners to implement our recommendations to address this
important issue.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I look
forward to your questions.
[Mr. Bidwell's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Christopher R. Bidwell, Senior Vice President of
Security, Airports Council International-North America
Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to participate in today's
hearing. I am Christopher Bidwell, Senior Vice President of Security at
Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), the trade
association representing the local, regional, and state governing
bodies that own and operate airports in the United States and Canada. I
appreciate the opportunity to discuss the work of airport operators in
responding and helping to reduce the number of unruly passenger
incidents.
Mr. Chairman, each day, airports, operating in today's dynamic
threat environment, implement a variety of measures to provide for the
security of their passengers, employees, tenants and facilities. To
this end, airports coordinate closely with the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transportation Security Administration (TSA),
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), other federal, state and local law enforcement
agencies, and their airline partners to maintain a comprehensive,
multi-layered, risk-based aviation security system. In our testimony,
we have included several recommendations to address and mitigate unruly
passenger incidents.
COVID has created a lot of stress for our members, our industry and
the flying public. Due to that stress, many people are acting
differently in various aspects of their lives, and air travel is no
different. While it is easy to blame the rise of unruly passengers
incidents on one cause or another, there are a variety of factors that
contribute to the incidents to which our airport members are asked to
respond.
As with any issue in the aviation business, we arrive at the best
outcomes when industry and government work together as a community to
identify potential gaps and improve communication, processes and
procedures.
We applaud the FAA for implementing a zero tolerance policy to
raise awareness about the issue of unruly passengers and for taking
action against those individuals whose behavior is causing problems in
the aviation system. We also appreciate the TSA for doubling the amount
of civil penalties that may be imposed on individuals who violate the
federal mask mandate.
At ACI-NA, we have been proactively working on a number of fronts
to address the challenges:
At our request, the FAA briefed our Marketing,
Communications and Customer Experience Committee on the issue of unruly
passengers, so airports can amplify FAA's message and share information
about how they are assisting their airline partners.
Our Public Safety & Security Committee identified and
shared good practices, processes, and procedures airport management,
airport law enforcement, TSA and the airlines have implemented to
address unruly passenger behavior.
ACI-NA has held and continues to participate in joint
meetings with member airports, Airlines for America, the Airport Law
Enforcement Agencies Network (ALEAN) and concessionaires to share
information and identify strategies to mitigate the causes that give
rise or contribute to unruly passenger incidents.
Much has been discussed in the press about the role of alcohol in
the behavior of unruly passengers, but we have yet to see any data on
the number of incidents that involve alcohol. Bartenders who work in
airport restaurants and bars must be certified and trained by local
alcohol licensing authorities. Commensurate with the oversight of local
restaurants and bars with liquor licenses, airport concessionaires are
subject to the same licensing, oversight, and inspection requirements
in order to maintain a license to serve alcohol. In general, airports
have no authority over alcohol licensing, but continue to work with
their airline partners on initiatives to raise awareness with travelers
about the FAA regulation prohibiting passengers from drinking alcohol
on board the aircraft unless it is served by the air carrier. Some
airports have deployed signage to assist airlines that are reluctant to
make announcements during the boarding process. Other airports worked
with local airlines to design and institute the use of marked cups to
assist airline gate agents in identifying those that contain alcohol.
In accordance with TSA security regulations, airport operators
provide law enforcement officers, with arrest authority, in the number
and manner adequate to support their federally approved security
programs. Airport law enforcement officers are available, committed,
and respond to incidents when requested by air carriers serving the
airport.
With certain states and communities having lifted mask
requirements, many residents were either surprised, frustrated or upset
by TSA's extension of the mask-wearing requirement at airports, and
calls for airport law enforcement support increased significantly. This
remains an added burden on airport law enforcement, in addition to
their existing responsibilities for investigating and preventing
criminal activity, enforcing requirements in the airport security
program, and supporting TSA screening checkpoint operations.
TSA created the Law Enforcement Officer Reimbursement Program to
partially reimburse airports for providing law enforcement officer
staffing and support at screening checkpoints. Although TSA planned to
recruit, train and deploy a total of 2,000 Federal Law Enforcement
Officers at security checkpoints, the agency did not have the funding
to do so. Over time, many airports have entered into reimbursable
agreements with TSA to provide law enforcement officers to support TSA
screening operations. As security threats continue to evolve, TSA has
imposed additional requirements on airport law enforcement officers.
Through the TSA Modernization Act, Congress clearly recognized the
significant security value of the TSA Law Enforcement Officer
Reimbursement Program and required TSA to expand it. Congress should
continue to provide TSA adequate funding to fully support this
important program.
In responding to calls from airlines to address unruly passenger
incidents, airport law enforcement faces a number of challenges.
Whereas interference with crewmembers is a federal offense under Title
49 of the United States Code section 46504, airport law enforcement can
only enforce state/local laws. Depending on the nature of the incident,
airport law enforcement officers may only be able to conduct a cursory
investigation and turn the case over to federal authorities.
Let me be clear, airport law enforcement attempts to hold unruly
passengers accountable for their dangerous behavior, while operating in
accordance with state and local law.
In some instances, however, airline crewmembers are reluctant to
stay around to press charges, even when they have been assaulted.
Unless crewmembers press charges, airport law enforcement officers may
not be able to legally detain the passenger.
If there is a physical or sexual assault that occurs while the
aircraft is in flight, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has
jurisdiction. Typically, airport law enforcement will collect
information, and contact the FBI. Although the FBI can request airport
law enforcement to detain the passenger on a federal charge, it is rare
and usually occurs only when an aggravated assault or altercation has
occurred. Most of the time, FBI requests airport law enforcement to
gather information and forward the reports, so the agency can follow
up.
Further, as it pertains to incidents that occur at an airport, many
state criminal and procedural laws require law enforcement officers to
witness the crime in order to detain the perpetrator.
As I stated previously, it takes the community to solve the
problem. We are committed to being part of the solution, working with
the FAA, TSA, our members, other government agencies and the rest of
the aviation community to implement the following recommendations to
address unruly passenger incidents.
Airline gate agents, as the first line of defense, should
be extra vigilant for signs and deny boarding to those individuals they
suspect are intoxicated, and notify airport law enforcement.
When an incident occurs, airline crewmembers should make
statements to airport law enforcement and press charges to enable
criminal prosecution.
Airport law enforcement should be provided the
flexibility to prioritize the response to unruly passenger incidents.
FAA and TSA should share more detailed and timely data on
incidents with airport operators to ensure greater situational
awareness.
The U.S. Government should prioritize the prosecution of
individuals who interfere with crewmembers, and broadly publicize
successful criminal prosecutions and civil penalty actions.
Conclusion
ACI-NA and its member airports are committed to continue to work
with Congress, FAA, TSA, FBI, and other law enforcement agencies and
aviation stakeholders to identify good practices to reduce the number
of unruly passenger incidents. We look forward to coordinating with our
industry and government partners on the implementation of our
recommendations to address this important issue.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit this written testimony.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Bidwell.
I now recognize Ms. Lauren Beyer, vice president of
security and facilitation for Airlines for America.
Ms. Beyer, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Beyer. Good morning. My name is Lauren Beyer, and I am
the vice president of security and facilitation at Airlines for
America. A4A appreciates the opportunity to testify today, and
I am honored to be presenting alongside our labor and airport
partners on this important topic.
The top priority of A4A passenger carriers is the safety
and well-being of all employees and passengers, and we are
dedicated to working with our employees, Government partners,
and other private-sector stakeholders to address unruly
behavior and ensure that appropriate penalties for egregious
conduct onboard aircraft are fully pursued. There is simply no
place in our skies for passengers' unruly and disruptive
behavior.
I would like to thank the leadership of this committee,
specifically Chairs DeFazio and Larsen and Ranking Members
Graves and Graves, for your steadfast commitment and oversight
of this issue. Your support and advocacy for strict enforcement
of incidents has played a critical role in the Federal
Government's continued enforcement of the Federal Aviation
Administration's zero-tolerance policy for travelers who do not
follow crewmember instructions and who do not abide by Federal
law.
While most passengers, as has been noted, continue to
comply with crewmember instructions, we unfortunately have seen
a very concerning uptick in unruly passengers aboard aircraft
this year.
And though the frequency of these incidents remains
relatively low compared to passenger volume, even one unruly
passenger event is one too many. Each incident is thoroughly
investigated by the airline to determine the facts and details
of the case, and the incidents are also reported to the FAA.
In addition to the FAA's independent civil enforcement
process and any potential criminal prosecution, A4A member
airlines can choose to place a passenger on an internal no-fly
list, denying that passenger from flying on that airline.
Coordination and communication with our Federal partners
has been really critical. Airlines have been in regular
communication with the FAA and the Transportation Security
Administration to exchange information.
We appreciate the FAA's efforts just this week to provide a
forum for industry and Government to share best practices and
identify additional actions that can be taken across the entire
aviation ecosystem.
In June, A4A sent letters to the FAA and the Department of
Justice requesting our Federal partners do everything possible
to increase the public awareness of the ramifications of unruly
incidents. In the FAA letter, we requested the agency refer
egregious cases to the DOJ so that they may swiftly prosecute
criminal acts to the fullest extent of the law.
The FAA compliance and enforcement program already directs
this coordination when a case supports criminal enforcement
action.
A4A worked with a coalition of airline and labor partners
to ask the Department of Justice to direct Federal prosecutors
to dedicate the resources for these egregious cases and to send
a strong and consistent message through criminal enforcement
that compliance with Federal law and upholding aviation safety
are of paramount importance.
As the airline industry, we understand there are steps that
we needed to take to better address the problem as well. Each
of our member airlines has taken steps to evaluate what more
can be done and make enhancements, in consultation with their
employee groups, to policies, training, communications, and
more.
Earlier this year, A4A and our members began collecting and
sharing best practices across carriers to improve the airline
response to these incidents. Such best practices include the
performance of safety risk assessments, management and employee
training initiatives, and enhancements to customer-facing
initiatives.
These efforts have led to engagement across the broader
industry, to discuss collectively what more can be done. As a
result, we are now working on a cross-industry, self-initiated,
best practices effort that includes my fellow panelists.
We believe an industrywide approach is beneficial so that
all entities with responsibility in the aviation sector have
visibility into what the other entities are doing to address
the problem.
We will continue to work together with labor, Government
partners, and other industry stakeholders to do everything
possible to prevent and better respond to these incidents.
Thank you again to the committee for raising awareness of
this concerning trend, and I look forward to your questions.
[Ms. Beyer's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lauren Beyer, Vice President of Security and
Facilitation, Airlines for America
Good morning, my name is Lauren Beyer, and I am the Vice President
of Security and Facilitation at Airlines for America (A4A). A4A
appreciates the opportunity to testify, and I am honored to be
presenting alongside our labor and airport partners on this important
topic.
The aviation sector has worked collaboratively on many issues over
the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, including our collective
commitment to address unruly passenger behavior and ensure that
appropriate penalties for egregious conduct onboard aircraft are fully
pursued. The safety and wellbeing of all employees and passengers is
the top priority for U.S. airlines, and there is simply no place in our
skies for passengers' unruly and disruptive behavior. Regardless of
mode of transportation, whether it be an airline, train, bus or other,
these incidents can pose a safety and security threat, and they should
be dealt with both swiftly and strictly.
Thank You
At the onset, I would like to specifically thank the leadership of
this Committee for their steadfast commitment and oversight of this
issue. Your support and advocacy for strict enforcement of incidents
has played a critical role in the federal government's continued
enforcement of the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) ``zero
tolerance'' policy for travelers who do not follow crewmember
instructions and who do not abide by federal law.
We are grateful for the FAA's efforts to maintain and increase
awareness of the ``zero tolerance'' policy and violations for
disruptive behavior. We also appreciate the Administration's continued
enforcement of the federal mask mandate for transportation and are
grateful for efforts to raise awareness of potential penalties and
encourage compliance from all travelers. And we are thankful to all the
airline passengers who simply follow the rules every day and go about
their travels without incident. While media attention may focus on
dramatic, negative events, those incidents are the exception and not
the rule. The vast majority of passengers do comply with crewmember
instructions. We value and appreciate those customers.
Incident Data, Reporting and Response
While most passengers comply with crewmember instructions, we
unfortunately have seen a very concerning uptick in unruly passenger
incidents onboard aircraft in 2021. Year-to-date in 2021 we have seen
FAA investigations increase to 17.8 per every 10 million passengers
compared to 4.9 in 2020 and 1.6 in 2019. While that is a large
increase, the frequency of these incidents remains relatively low at
one investigation initiated for every 563,000 passengers enplaned.
However, even one unruly passenger event is one too many. These events
are taken very seriously, and each incident is reported to the FAA and
thoroughly investigated by the airline to determine the facts and
details of the incident. In addition to the FAA's independent civil
enforcement process and referrals to the Department of Justice (DOJ)
for criminal prosecution, A4A member airlines can choose to place a
passenger on an internal no-fly list, denying that passenger from
flying on that airline. Incidents are dealt with on a case-by-case
basis.
Federal Coordination and Communication
Coordination and communication with federal partners has been
critical. Since the federal mask mandate was implemented in January
2021, airlines have held regular calls with the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) and the FAA to exchange information, data and
trend analysis. This routine dialogue has proven helpful in providing
the industry visibility into trends at particular airports or other
timely updates. That coordination continues today.
Given the alarming escalation in incidents, in June 2021, A4A sent
letters to the FAA and the DOJ, requesting our federal partners
prosecute violators to the fullest extent of the law and do everything
possible to increase the public awareness of the ramifications of
unruly behavior including jail time and significant financial
penalties.
In the FAA letter, we requested the agency refer abhorrent cases to
the DOJ so that the federal government may fully, swiftly and publicly
prosecute criminal acts to the fullest extent of the law and deter this
dangerous and concerning behavior. We believe the DOJ is well-equipped
with the authority and processes to criminally prosecute qualifying
passenger behavior. Specifically, Section 46504 of Title 49 of the U.S.
Code (49 U.S.C. Sec. 46504) prohibits assault or intimidation of a
flight crewmember or flight attendant that interferes with the
performance of a crewmember's duties or lessens the ability of the
crewmember to perform those duties. The prescribed penalty ranges from
a fine to imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both. The FAA
Compliance and Enforcement Program instructs that FAA's enforcement
counsel promptly coordinate FAA enforcement action with the DOJ, when
an Enforcement Investigation Report contains allegations supporting
both criminal and legal enforcement action.
We made clear that our member airlines and our labor partners are
committed to working with the FAA, DOJ and the entire Federal
government to ensure onboard safety and security. This includes
participation in any investigation of onboard behavior and
collaboration in any prosecution of passengers. To the extent that the
FAA, DOJ, and TSA consider coordinating the collection of case
information, we support any consolidation efforts and standby to
assist.
We are grateful to the FAA for their strong, direct video messages,
social media posts and other public comments that speak directly to
unruly passengers and clearly articulate the FAA's ``zero tolerance''
policy. We also applaud the FAA for the transparency in publicizing the
outcomes of some of their most egregious civil enforcement cases as
well as the civil penalties assessed. We continue to encourage the FAA,
Congress and any other federal entities to amplify that messaging to
reach all travelers.
Concurrently, we joined a multitude of industry voices, including
airlines and unions, in writing to the Attorney General requesting that
the DOJ send a strong and consistent message through criminal
enforcement that compliance with federal law and upholding aviation
safety are of paramount importance. Making prosecutions public puts a
spotlight on the serious consequences of breaking the law and act as
effective deterrents against future onboard disruptions. In consort
with the FAA's special emphasis on its enforcement program, the DOJ
should direct federal prosecutors to dedicate resources for egregious
cases, again with full cooperation from airlines and labor. We continue
to support those efforts.
Additionally, we are encouraged by the White House's recent
announcement that TSA is increasing fines for violations of the TSA
Security Directive that implements the federal mask mandate.
Stakeholder Coordination and Best Practices
As an industry, we understand there are steps we can take to better
address the problem. Earlier this year, A4A and our member airlines
began collecting and sharing best practices across carriers in an
attempt to improve the airline response to these incidents. Such best
practices include the performance of safety risk assessments;
management and employee training initiatives; and enhancements to
customer initiatives.
These efforts have led to engagement across the broader industry to
discuss collectively what more can be done. As a result, we are now
working on a cross-industry best practices effort with the intent to
illustrate the types of approaches that can help prevent or respond to
incidents. We believe an industry-wide approach is beneficial so all
entities with responsibility in the aviation sector have visibility
into what the other entities are doing to address the problem,
especially as it pertains to keeping unruly passengers off the aircraft
and de-escalation of incidents if they happen onboard.
Conclusion
The safety and wellbeing of all employees and passengers is the top
priority for U.S. airlines. We appreciate the federal government's
continued support and enforcement of the ``zero tolerance'' policy for
travelers who do not follow crewmember instructions and who do not
abide by federal law, and we are grateful for the FAA's efforts to
increase awareness of violations of this policy. We appreciate
Congressional efforts and the Administration's continued support for
and enforcement of the federal mask mandate for transportation. U.S.
airlines are grateful for efforts to raise awareness of potential
penalties and encourage compliance from all travelers. As they have
done for months, U.S. airlines will continue to comply with the federal
mask mandate and strictly enforce this requirement in collaboration
with the TSA and the FAA. While an unruly incident video may go viral,
the repercussions for that behavior may not. We can all do better to
make certain the traveling public knows any abhorrent behavior will be
met with significant consequence. Airlines will continue to do all they
can to work with our employees, government partners and other private
sector stakeholders to address these issues.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Ms. Beyer.
And we will now turn to Member questions, and I will
recognize myself for 5 minutes.
Ms. Nelson, my first question is for you. Certainly, in a
continuum of trying to tamp down these incidents, there is a
prevention side, there is the management of the situation in
the cabin part, but then there is the enforcement as well of
any charges.
But in your survey, you said 60 percent of respondents
experiencing a physical incident onboard said law enforcement
was requested to meet their flight. In those instances, did law
enforcement meet the flight?
Ms. Nelson. Chairman Larsen, in not every instance was law
enforcement actually able to meet the flight in time before the
passenger left the scene.
But what is also concerning is that 40 percent of that
time--we are talking about physical altercations here--law
enforcement was not requested to meet the flight, which means
that there is a break in communication at some point here in
even getting that request to law enforcement.
But you are correct, not in every case did law enforcement
actually meet the flight when there was a request.
Mr. Larsen. Yeah. And, again, I just want to reiterate,
there is a prevention side, which I think we are going to
explore a little bit, there is the management of the situation
in the cabin, and there is enforcement. So I am not just saying
it is only a law enforcement issue, but when it does need to
occur, it should occur.
Mr. Bidwell, you talked a little bit about the
coordination, lack thereof; what improvements can occur with
regards to airport law enforcement. Can you expand on that a
little bit?
Mr. Bidwell. Chairman Larsen, absolutely, I appreciate the
question. And as I mentioned in my statement, airport law
enforcement does everything within their power and authority to
hold unruly passengers accountable for their bad behavior.
There may be situations--and I can't speak to the internal
communication and coordination issues within the airline--where
there may be a delay in requesting airport law enforcement
assistance. But suffice it to say, airport law enforcement
responds when called to carriers, supports them in responding
to unruly passenger incidents.
Mr. Larsen. It just seems already to me that, at least on
the enforcement side, there are gaps in the communication that
occurs to ensure there is law enforcement available when
requested.
But, Ms. Beyer, can you talk from the airlines' perspective
on how that process works to ensure that there--or to increase
the opportunity for law enforcement to be at the gate upon
landing?
Ms. Beyer. Sure. Thank you for the question. So, it is the
responsibility of the crewmembers onboard, when there is an
incident, to communicate with the airline and to make the
decision that the incident onboard merits calling law
enforcement to greet the aircraft.
From our side, from a higher level, we have coordinated for
many months with our airport partners, with our airport law
enforcement partners to understand how we can improve any
communication, and to ensure that when law enforcement is
called, they have the resources and the time to greet the
aircraft.
Mr. Larsen. OK. Mr. Andrews, I just want to start off by
underscoring, I recognize you work for American Airlines, not
United, as I said in my testimony. We will fix that, because I
know you are proud of your time there, and I apologize for
that.
And it is really disheartening and disturbing to hear about
this incident that happened to you, the one you described on
the flight. What was the follow-on from that? Did you feel a
need to report? Did you feel a need to let it slide? How did
you want to approach it, and what eventually happened?
Mr. Andrews. Thank you for that question, Mr. Chairman.
There was no need to, in my experience on that situation, to
escalate it any further. Following our threat and air
management procedures, if the situation is deescalated and
brought to resolve, there is no need to contact the cockpit or
to bring law enforcement involvement.
Mr. Larsen. There was not. At any point on the escalation
scale, then, what kind of incident would require you or compel
you to report that first to the cockpit and then to the gate
you are flying to?
Mr. Andrews. Thank you for that question, Mr. Chairman.
That would probably be at level 2 or anything higher, anything
that moves to a threatening level or physical interaction or
anything becomes physical we are there to----
Mr. Larsen. All right.
Mr. Andrews [continuing]. [Inaudible] move on.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you. Thank you. My time is up.
I will recognize Mr. Graves of Louisiana for 5 minutes.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr.
Chairman, I want to make note--let me say it again, I said it
at the beginning of my opening statement, and I am going to say
it again. Some of the instances we have seen with unruly
passengers are completely unacceptable. People need to be held
fully accountable under the law.
But I found it interesting in that--I want to say it
again--we have got to make sure that we are looking at this
entire flight experience. Why are these incidents increasing,
spiking, like they are? I heard alcohol, I heard masks, I heard
other things.
Seventy-five percent--75 percent--of the air rage incidents
that are occurring are tied back to masks--75 percent. Six
percent are tied back to alcohol.
One of the things that I think about, and I said this in my
opening, you have different experiences that people see--people
see things like this [indicating a poster]. They see things
like this happening. They see these things happening and they
are trying to decide, wait, what is the rule? Is there a rule?
Is there exception?
People sit down at restaurants right outside the gates of
the airplane, and they are all sitting there eating and maybe
close together, and they don't have masks on. Yet they come on
an airplane, where they have been told that it is the cleanest
air ever and all sorts of recycling air, and they have got to
put masks on.
And so I do think that we have got to really think through
this more holistically. I will say it again, not as myopically
as just looking at it, why are all these experiences tied back
to masks?
I think it is the frustration people have, the--I think the
conditions that appear to be demonstrating a good bit of
hypocrisy.
Mr. Chairman, I received a text message this morning from a
guy at home, which I have no idea how he knew this hearing was
happening. And he says, I want to share that I was traveling
three times a month but have almost given up air travel because
the experience is so uncomfortable with the mask mandate. As
long as there is a mask mandate on airplanes and airports, I
will avoid them at all costs. I know a lot of fellow travelers
who feel the exact same way.
Look, I wear masks, I wear it here, I wear it on airplanes,
but I do think we have got to make sure that we are not focused
on too small of a subset of this issue and make sure that we
are looking a bit more holistically.
Ms. Nelson, I appreciate your testimony, appreciate you
being back before the committee. It seems that people, as I
noted, are somewhat stressed out right now, and there is a lot
of anxiety, as I noted in some of the statistics earlier.
Why do we see so many instances of flight attendants and
airline employees escalating the situations in some of the
videos? What efforts are you all working on to attempt to
deescalate the situation?
And what I am thinking of specifically is, I know I have
seen a few videos recently with some of these kids, including
one that was having an asthma attack. Any thoughts there on
how--I will use that term again--we can ``decompress'' these
incidents?
Ms. Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Graves. First of all, I just
want to note that everyone is at a stress level 10, everyone
needs a little bit of help, and there are always exceptions,
but flight attendants have done an extraordinary job of
deescalating.
And part of the problem with deescalating is getting to the
problem early so that you can deescalate. You also, oftentimes,
if you are the initial flight attendant to provide instruction
and there is a conflict created, you oftentimes need to call on
another member of the flightcrew to try to do that
deescalation.
When we have staffing levels at minimum levels, we have
fewer people to be able to do that. We have fewer people to be
able to identify the issues as they are occurring so that we
can get to those and deescalate them more successfully.
And I should just note that flight attendants do this every
day. Most incidents and most flights don't make it on the
evening news. As you noted, these are a relatively small number
of incidents.
But, yes, we need more staffing. We also have to recognize
that during the course of this pandemic, there has been
conflicting information coming from leadership about what we
need to do to address this public health crisis. And that is
the biggest issue that we find onboard.
You are correct, there has not been enough enforcement in
the airport and consistency around that. Flight attendants give
instructions onboard that when you are eating or drinking, you
are supposed to dip your mask for a short period of time, put
it back up again. So there is very clear instructions onboard
the plane for that.
When you talk about the air circulation onboard, we talk
about levels of safety. All of the studies that show that great
filtration onboard is very important. But the aircraft is not
like an office environment. People are jammed in together much
closer than any other space. It is recirculated air. And so the
mask, together with the filtration onboard, together with the
cleaning onboard, all of these levels of safety are what keep
us safe.
Now, I will tell you, flight attendants every single day
have to remind people, and, in fact, actually I was on a flight
recently where I had to be reminded by a flight attendant to
put my mask back up.
So not every instance is an instance of conflict. Sometimes
we have to remind that because people are forgetting. So there
will be instances of that. But the more that we can keep those
masks on, the more that we are going to keep everybody safe,
and we have to get through this pandemic.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Ms. Nelson.
Mr. Larsen. I recognize Chair DeFazio for 5 minutes.
Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Nelson, Mr. Bidwell said that many times the affected
flight attendant or flightcrew will not wait around to report
to airport police. Can you address that?
Ms. Nelson. Yes, I can. So flight attendants are scheduled
quite tight. Not all airlines have communicated to flight
attendants that they will support them, both emotionally and
legally, when these incidents occur.
There is a program at United Airlines that does provide
this and does provide communication to flight attendants that
helps them know that they will have that backing from the
airline if they report these incidents to law enforcement.
It is a disruption in the day. There is a lot of pressure
on the flight attendants to get to the next flight. They know
that, because of minimum staffing, if they don't make the next
flight, the next flight may not go out on time.
And so all of these pressures are on the employee on the
front lines, not to mention the fact that we should recognize
that these are the victims. These are the people who have just
been punched in the face or have just been hurt in some way.
And if they don't have support around them right away to
let them know that they should report that, that they are going
to be supported in reporting that, oftentimes, in that state of
shock, they are not in a place where they are able to make a
good decision on their own without that information to make
those reports.
So we often find that law enforcement will blame the crew.
The crew is not necessarily backed up by the airline, or just
given good information around that. And this is an area where
we can improve.
I don't believe anyone is trying to do anything wrong here,
but the crews don't have enough support around them, and they
do have plenty of pressure on them to keep moving.
Mr. DeFazio. Thank you.
So, Ms. Beyer, I would hope that your member airlines would
take that into account since FAA has asked them to look at what
additional measures can be taken.
Ms. Nelson specifically mentioned United having a good
policy around this. I assume that not all airlines have
communicated that. If you were going to be a little late for
your next flight, delay the next flight, because you have to
report that someone punched you, we are going to support you.
So I would hope that that would be part of the recommendations
that would go.
Back to Mr. Bidwell, what about this to-go alcohol stuff?
Again, I have been flying, doing this job for 35 years. And
until this year, I never saw big to-go signs. Can't the
airports themselves--you are saying, oh, well, it is local
laws, like in Louisiana, you can walk down the street, and some
States--I think New Mexico stopped allowing you to get drive-
in, to-go drinks, but that is only recent.
So, couldn't the airports themselves say to the
concessionaires, this could lead to a violation of Federal law,
we want you to stop this practice?
Mr. Bidwell. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the question.
Although we have yet to see it, we understand the FAA has data
indicating that alcohol was involved in 6 percent of unruly
passenger incidents. And of that, we have no way of knowing
whether the unruly passenger was intoxicated when they arrived
at the airport, brought----
Mr. DeFazio. No, OK, I got that, but let's say, this is
new. Here it is. I was getting a beer and some guy asked for
like three shots of vodka in a to-go cup. By the time he cranks
that down with whatever he drank beforehand, he is going to be
drunk. And, yeah, maybe it is only reported at 6 percent. Who
knows.
I am asking you a simple question. This did not occur
before COVID, and why is it occurring now, and why won't you
stop it? It is an inducement for people to break the law, just
by carrying it onboard, let alone whether or not they are going
to get crocked. Yes or no?
Mr. Bidwell. So, to-go alcohol was available before the
pandemic in certain instances, and it is only available in a
relatively few locations. And I will tell you that in order to
assist airlines that are reluctant to make announcements during
the boarding process, many airports have deployed signage.
Other airports work with local airlines to design and institute
the use of marked cups to assist airline gate agents in
identifying those that contain alcohol. It is a coordinated
effort, but only airline employees, and specifically gate
agents, can deny boarding to passengers.
Mr. DeFazio. Right. So, they are going to have to do
breathalyzers. All right, thanks. The answer is ``No.''
Again to Ms. Beyer, just on the preflight announcements,
some airlines have tougher announcements than others. I would
hope, again, that would be part of the consideration that the
FAA is asking for, to talk a little more specifically about the
potential penalties in more harsh terms. OK, but here is a
question.
Does law prohibit the airlines from sharing their no-fly
lists? I think it does, maybe, because it is collusion or
something.
Ms. Beyer. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the question. As I
mentioned, the internal airline no-fly list has been a really
critical tool for us in response to this issue over the past
year. I think it is important to note first, because there is
sometimes some confusion, that what we are talking about is an
internal airline no-fly list----
Mr. DeFazio. Right. I am asking, though, can one airline
share it with another? Could there be a common database?
Because someone gets banned from one airline because of unruly,
unacceptable behavior, they just switch to another one.
Ms. Beyer. So, there are legal and operational challenges
with airlines sharing those lists amongst one another----
Mr. DeFazio. OK. Then how about--OK, good, all right. That
is a good answer. Thank you. There is a problem. Maybe we can
have the FAA create a database, and they can ask people to post
to that, and then the airlines can access it in the future.
My time is expired. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Massie of Kentucky for 5 minutes.
Mr. Massie. Thank you, Chairman Larsen. Thanks for having
this hearing.
No passenger should ever be violent or disrespectful to a
flight attendant or a member of the crew of an aircraft.
Everybody has a bad day now and then, and I always try to
give somebody the benefit of the doubt when I see stern words
being exchanged between a passenger and a flight attendant. I
am thinking one of them is having a bad day. This is a
stressful situation, and just try to give people the benefit of
the doubt.
I would suggest--and I am not really going to direct my
statements to the witnesses so much as my colleagues on this
panel and also the broader membership of the House. I would
suggest that we put these flight attendants and flightcrews in
a very difficult situation, and there are some things that we
might be able to do to alleviate that.
For instance, we live in a Republic where we elect
Representatives and they pass the laws. The reason we have it
that way is, if there were just one person or one nameless
agency or bureaucracy that were promulgating these rules for us
to live by, we have no way to address our grievances.
And if the People's House would actually vote on these
regulations--now, I don't agree with the mask regulations, and
I will get into that later--but if we would vote on these
things, they would have the imprimatur of the support of the
people, if the People's House would weigh in.
But when people sit down in their aircraft to take their
flight and they hear a public service announcement that says
Federal law states, even myself, I am wondering, well, when was
that Federal law passed?
The reality is, there has never been a Federal law passed.
Yes, there are laws that you need to comply with the flight
attendant, and, yes, there has been an Executive order, but the
problem with that is what our Founders realized long ago:
Unless you have the buy-in of the people, it is going to be
hard to get people to comply with rules.
And so, I think a breakdown of our institutions, our
governmental institutions, is leading to this breakdown of
society and civil politeness to each other.
So, I would suggest that instead of wringing our hands and
just having a hearing and listening to this, that we actually
weigh in, instead of deferring everything to the executive
branch and to people who aren't elected to make the rules.
And in the long run, I think it would be more helpful to
our flight attendants and the flightcrews, and we could all
have a better experience.
Now, let me get to another thing that I think is leading to
these problems, and the ranking member touched on it. The
science is very lightly presented here. I mean, what if in the
pocket in front of you, instead of just instructions for
exiting the aircraft, were directions for wearing a mask and
also the science that shows to what degree a cloth mask is less
effective than an N95.
I mean, people, they are sort of--they are catching on.
They are not all scientists and engineers. But the cloth mask
is the only medical device or personal safety equipment in the
United States that is required, for which there is no
specification, for which there is no regulation.
People start to wonder, well, if these worked, wouldn't
there be a specification on them, and which ones work better
than others? The science is not being presented here.
If we could persuade people of what is effective instead of
trying to force them--and then as the ranking member pointed
out, we see instances of our officials, the Speaker of the
House going to close, tightly packed fundraisers and not
wearing the mask, or other people within the Government who are
on the planes and leave their mask off for an extended period
of time. That doesn't help either.
So, let me just close by saying this. I do not support
vaccine mandates. I do not support mask mandates. I am not
saying they are not effective, but if we want to help out here,
there needs to be a persuasion campaign, not a coercion
campaign, and it is not fair to put the flight attendants in
the middle of this. Some of it has become political, but we put
them in the middle of a situation that is a no-win situation.
And I will just close with that and say, let's get back to
the science, let's get back to being reasonable and civil with
each other, and let's get back to the job of legislating,
instead of wringing our hands because some administrative
agency, which by the way, we have the authority over, because
they have done something or aren't doing something we don't
agree with, but we haven't given them the instructions on what
to do.
With that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Larsen. The gentleman yields back.
I now turn to Representative Cohen of Tennessee. You are
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank all of our
witnesses.
For Mr. Andrews, I want to say that the behavior that you
experienced was unacceptable, and there is no excuse for it. I
don't care if people are upset because they have to wear masks.
I don't care if they have higher stress. That behavior was
totally unacceptable and inexcusable, and it was wrong.
This question goes out to anybody that can give me an
answer. Has there been any--I guess I will start with Ms.
Nelson. Has there been any analysis of the demographics of the
people who have been involved in this outrageous behavior?
Ms. Nelson. Not that I am aware of, Mr. Cohen.
Mr. Cohen. Anybody else have any knowledge of any
demographics on race, age, residence, anything at all?
Ms. Nelson. What I will tell you is that from our survey
results, many of these incidents were more likely happening out
of places where there has been a real inconsistent
communication and very clear opposition to masks and to dealing
with this public health emergency in a mobilized way.
Mr. Cohen. Can you be more specific? Are you saying that
the airports have been less, or are they the region?
Ms. Nelson. I am being specific to the region, and,
obviously, the airports are located in those regions. We have
had----
Mr. Cohen. So are you saying basically the Southeastern
Conference region?
Ms. Nelson. We have had a lot of incidents out of
Charlotte. We have had a lot of incidents out of the Florida
airports and out of Texas. And I am not saying that there
aren't incidents in other places at all, but there seems to be
a higher concentration.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Ms. Nelson. That is kind of what I
suspected, and I would comment that Charlotte, which I have
been through on occasion, there is--I think it is gate A. It is
the furthest one out when you have to go to the terminal and go
through it, and you are over on the side where they sell the
pizza and the nice kind of area. The Chick-fil-A side that you
go out the other way all the way to the end.
They will stop serving food out there, give or take, 6 or 7
o'clock. I think it is somewhere around there the food places
are closed down. But the alcohol places stay open, and I know
they stay open at least until the last flight is out. So the
gentleman that--Mr. Bidwell, you represent the airports, do you
not?
Mr. Bidwell. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. Cohen. Why in the hell would they not give you food,
but they will give you alcohol?
Mr. Bidwell. Congressman, I don't know what exactly is the
policy for the concessionaires at gate A at Charlotte
International Airport.
Mr. Cohen. Yeah. Well, it might be profit margin. It might
be they don't give a hoot. But the areas where they sell the
alcohol are packed, and the people are fairly rowdy. They do
have some type of, like, little pork rinds or something like
that, a real gourmet area. And I like pork rinds, which is
neither here nor there. But they close the food. They close the
food down, but the alcohol is in abundance.
This behavior is just wrong. I had to raise the issue early
on in March of 2020 with the airlines to start enforcing masks
because I was on planes where the flight attendants didn't wear
masks, and there was no requirement for anybody to wear them.
The flight attendants were not wearing masks either, and that
is just wrong, and it is--we need to get beyond that.
Mr. Andrews, I agree with all of your suggestions, and that
was very helpful, your 11 suggestions. Would any of them really
cost any money for the airlines and the airports to do that?
Mr. Andrews. Thank you for that question, Mr. Cohen. While
I am not an expert, I certainly would suggest that possibly if
there are fines that some of these passengers are subjected to,
that possibly some of those fees or things can be paid for.
Mr. Cohen. They could use it, right. Thank you.
Let me just relate my anecdote. When I left DC the week of
the insurrection, there were lots of people in the airport that
did not have their masks on, and that is the airport's fault.
And when they got on the plane, and they tried to hand them a
little ointment to wipe their hands, they objected and tossed
it back to them.
Mr. Larsen. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Cohen. That was the Southeastern Conference crowd.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you very much.
I recognize Mr. Perry of Pennsylvania for 5 minutes.
Mr. Perry. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Nelson, I just noted in your testimony that you stated,
and I quote, ``I know there is not one person on this Aviation
Subcommittee that thinks that combative, abusive, defiant, and
violent behavior on our planes and in our airports is
acceptable,'' unquote. I couldn't agree more, and I don't think
there is a person on this committee that could agree more with
you.
So, I am just going to give you a statement and see if you
agree with this, then. No American should be subject to
combative, abusive, defiant, and violent behavior in the
workplace, and such behavior should be universally condemned
and subjected to the full extent of the law, regardless of the
perpetrator.
Is that something you can stand with, something you would
agree with?
Ms. Nelson. One hundred percent, and I appreciate you
raising these issues because I believe that this hearing is an
opportunity for us to identify issues where we can all work
together to make----
Mr. Perry. That is great.
Ms. Nelson [continuing]. This better. Thank you.
Mr. Perry. Thank you. I appreciate your response. I would
like to talk to you and address the issue of union violence,
and some statements that you made, and to provide some context
to the committee here and everyone else.
In 1969, the seminal study on union violence in America by
Phil Taft and Philip Ross noted the United States has had the
bloodiest and most violent labor history of any industrial
nation in the world. Now, unfortunately, the bloodshed and
violence at the hands of unions has continued at a disturbing
rate. Since 1975, there have been nearly 12,000 incidents of
union violence reported by the media, including the murder of
203 Americans, according to the National Institute for Labor
Relations Research, and those are just incidents reported by
the media. I mean, the rate of union violence in America is
staggering and should be received with universal condemnation
by every single American, regardless of your affiliation.
Now, unfortunately and strangely, the Supreme Court
prohibits Federal prosecution of such violence if it is in
pursuit of a legitimate union objective, which, if you take
Chairman DeFazio's statements, I would say is an inducement to
break the law and commit union violence.
Ma'am, in an interview with Splinter News, you stated,
``It's important to put out that clear, militant line, and have
it be centered around the workers and what they are willing to
do. I've said, `sometimes you have to beat it out of them,
sometimes they just have to remember the beating they'll take'
'' unquote. That is what you said. You also said ``The law
doesn't reflect moral clarity or conscience. It doesn't
recognize the power of working people, but the truth is, there
are no illegal strikes, only unsuccessful ones,'' unquote.
And then further, in July of this year, and I am just going
to abbreviate the terminology for respect here. ``F--- Taft-
Hartley. F--- Taft-Hartley. A general strike likely doesn't
work without unions, and just because it's a law doesn't mean
it's just,'' unquote.
To me, these seem like explicit calls for violence and
militancy, claims that strikes are only illegal if they fail,
and repeated calls for illegal general strikes demonstrates a
flagrant disregard for property, life, and the rule of law.
And, so, I am just wondering if you are interested in maybe
recanting any of these statements and if you would agree that a
zero tolerance regarding union violence would be appropriate,
because I agree with you that zero tolerance regarding violence
on an airplane is the standard we ought to strive. So where do
you stand on zero tolerance regarding union violence?
Ms. Nelson. I don't know what you are talking about with
union violence. I know that the labor movement pushes peaceful
civil disobedience. I know that the mine workers who are in the
sign right behind me, right here, 1,100 mine workers on strike
right now in Alabama, have been peacefully demonstrating. They
have been hit five times with vehicles and----
Mr. Perry. Ma'am, I just read your statements. Those are
your statements.
Ms. Nelson. I want to be very clear. I want to be very
clear. My friend, Paul Hartshorn, is behind here right now. He
died on the job. There were many people who died on the job.
There are poultry workers who were slammed into their----
Mr. Perry. Ma'am, that is great. I am talking about union
violence.
Ms. Nelson. I am talking about the violence----
Mr. Perry. I grew up in a time in Pennsylvania where--
ma'am, it is my time. I grew up at a time in Pennsylvania where
Jock Yablonski was killed by a union rival. He and his wife and
his daughter were killed. I grew up in a time--just last year
and the year before in south central Pennsylvania, the IBEW got
a presentment for being the thugs, the helpful union guys for
forced violence and threats of violence. Will you renounce
that, or won't you?
Ms. Nelson. Let me be very clear.
Mr. Perry. I guess you won't.
Ms. Nelson. The labor--let me be very clear. The labor
movement is for peaceful protests, not violence.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you. The gentleman's time----
Ms. Nelson. We are against violence against the workers.
Thank you.
Mr. Larsen. The gentleman's time has expired.
I recognize Representative Davids for 5 minutes.
Ms. Davids. Thank you, Chairman.
Very briefly, I will just say that I appreciate the
recognition by the folks on here who have shown up to speak on
behalf of their union members, that the work that you all do is
appreciated. And as the daughter of a union steward, I would
just like to recognize that when folks go on strike and they do
it peacefully, which is exactly what we were just hearing
about, it can lead to some very positive change. And so, I just
want to express my appreciation for that.
And then I will yield my time to Chairman DeFazio.
Mr. DeFazio. I thank the gentlelady.
Mr. Larsen. The gentlelady yields.
Mr. DeFazio. Ms. Nelson, I think it would be helpful to
respond to Mr. Perry's statements. I guess he missed things
like the Pullman strike and other slaughters of union
organizers attempting just to have a decent living and a decent
life. So, I would yield you time to respond if you would like.
Ms. Nelson. The Walter Reuther brothers were beaten on an
overpass near Detroit. They were assaulted for trying to fight
for healthcare, a decent living, the ability for workers to go
into a workspace without losing limbs because they are pushed
so hard against machinery that they can't compete with with
their human bodies. The Ludlow strikers were gunned down and
burned to death when they were striking in tents, pushed out of
company housing. There were workers who were disrespected, and
the mules that were carrying the coal out of the mines were
more important than the workers.
This past year, for the past 18 months, we saw that workers
were treated as disposable. The strikes and the actions in
return have been about safety. They have been about improving
the safety for consumers, and certainly, as flight attendants,
as pilots, as anyone working in aviation, we take very, very
personally when any blood is shed.
And we said during the Government shutdown that our
workspace was becoming increasingly unsafe as we had 35 days of
people not going with a paycheck; people, like air traffic
controllers who have to go into their workspace, and if they
make a mistake, it is an aircraft accident, so they have to put
all distractions aside. What could be more distracting than not
getting a paycheck and not knowing how you are going to be able
to provide for your families?
So, I want to be very clear that the violence perpetrated
against workers has been nonstop and has been persistent. And
the unions have organized against that, and they have organized
against that, both for workers' rights and sometimes just to
enforce the laws that already exist but also, to make sure that
consumers and other people who are in our space, who we are
serving, who are dedicated and went to work on the front lines
throughout this pandemic with risk to ourselves and our
families, and we lost our lives.
Some people, as Teddy said, went through horrible
conditions because of it, and some people are suffering long-
term effects of COVID. And, so, these are the things that we
fight against. This is why we are here. We are dedicated to
safety, we are dedicated to the people who are in our care, and
the actions that we take are to keep everyone safe.
Mr. DeFazio. I thank you for that statement. The
reconstructive history of Mr. Perry was actually quite
extraordinary, having studied the labor history, so I won't
comment any further because it was so bizarre and absurd.
I yield back my time.
Mr. Larsen. The gentleman yields back to Ms. Davids. Does
Ms. Davids yield back the rest of her time?
Ms. Davids. I yield back.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Burchett from Tennessee for 5
minutes.
Mr. Burchett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is always tough
to follow my colleague from Tennessee, Representative and
former Senator Cohen, my dear friend who my mama would always
say, I just love that Steve Cohen, but dadgum, hon, sometimes I
just want to smack his little fat jaws, so--he is my dear
friend. He called my mama when my daddy died. So, I am kind of
partial to my buddy, Steve Cohen. I know that hurts him in his
district and hurts me in my district, but that is just the way
it is.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate you letting me speak. I recently
heard a story about a mama and her 2-year-old son being removed
from a plane because her son was suffering from an asthma
attack and couldn't keep his mask on. A spokesman for the
airlines said after the fact that exemptions to the face
covering requirements may be granted to individuals with
disabilities who make a request to our special assistant team
at least 72 hours prior to the departure.
I understand your all's point for better communication with
passengers on mask mandates before boarding, but what kind of
efforts are airlines actually making to ensure that the parents
of children with disabilities similarly receive advance notice
of available medical exemptions? I have been flying a whole
lot, like everybody up here has, and I have never heard of any
of this. If one of y'all could answer that, please.
Ms. Beyer. Congressman, I would be happy to answer your
question. The airlines have done many things since the mandate
was first implemented and gave very specific instructions and
directions to the airlines for what is permissible in terms of
exemptions to the mask mandate. And those things include very
clear communications, what the requirements are at the time of
booking, at check-in and throughout that individual's air
travel journey.
I am not familiar with the specifics of the case you are
referring to, but what I would say is that each of the
individual airlines, per the U.S. Government requirements, have
individual processes for individuals to apply for those
exemptions, and I do know that the majority of those exemptions
that are granted are given to younger children with cognitive
or other disabilities.
Mr. Burchett. OK. Well, this is a 2-year-old. You might
want to look it up. It is Chaya, C-H-A-Y-A, Bruck was the mama,
and it was her 2-year-old child, Dina, that this involved.
I would like to note, too. I am often on the plane, and
they announce that it is Federal law that we have to wear a
mask. Could somebody please direct me to the code where that
is, in fact, the Federal law that you have to wear a mask, or
is this a rule that we have designated to the FAA to, in fact,
enforce, but yet, we have not put it on paper? I am curious.
Ms. Beyer. So, Congressman, I am happy to take that as
well. The transportation Federal mask mandate is a regulation
imposed on airlines and airports and transportation nonaviation
partners through an order of the CDC, as well as a security
directive issued by the Transportation Security Administration.
Mr. Burchett. But is that, in fact, a law? They state very
clearly over the microphone, and I suspect it would be time you
could be informing folks that have disabled children of what
they need to do. You tell us that it is, in fact, a Federal law
that you have to wear a mask.
Ms. Beyer. I would defer to my Federal agency counterparts
about the underlying statutory authority, but it is, indeed, a
Federal requirement that is imposed on the operators of
transportation.
Mr. Burchett. OK. Mr. Bidwell, you mentioned that airport
law enforcement should be provided the flexibility to
prioritize the response to unruly passenger incidents. Can you
be a little more specific on what these flexibilities are and
what you have in mind?
Mr. Bidwell. Thank you, Congressman Burchett. Yes. Airport
law enforcement has a number of competing requirements when
they are called upon to respond when called by an airline. It
can be for an unruly passenger incident; it could be for a
mask-related incident; or it could be for some other related
activity. And by regulation, they are compelled to respond to
the gate when called by the airlines.
But our recommendation is that airport law enforcement be
given the discretion to prioritize the response to unruly
passenger incidents over mask-related incidents or other
incidents.
Mr. Burchett. OK. Thank you, and I yield----
Mr. Bidwell. Those take precedence, of course.
Mr. Burchett. I yield the remaining--my last 3 seconds to
Representative Cohen.
Mr. Cohen. God bless your mother and father.
Mr. Larsen. The gentleman's time has expired.
The Chair recognizes Representative Williams of Georgia for
5 minutes.
Ms. Williams of Georgia. Good morning, everybody, and thank
you, Chair Larsen, for holding this important hearing today.
And thank you to all of the witnesses for testifying and being
here in what I did not anticipate being a hostile witness
situation.
Y'all, my district is home to Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta
International Airport, our Nation's busiest and most efficient
airport. Many of the people that you will see working there are
my constituents, and these folks help so many of us like me get
to work every week here in DC and help us travel across our
country and our world, and they prioritize passenger safety in
their work every single day. It is personal to me that here in
Congress, that we prioritize their safety as well. I am
dedicated to protecting my constituents from verbal and
physical abuse, and disruption as they continue to do their
jobs and serve our travelers. Today's hearing will help us best
prevent and respond to rising cases of air rage.
Ms. Nelson, Chair DeFazio touched on this earlier, but I
want to go deeper into this conversation. In your testimony,
you mention an abusive passenger can be banned from one airline
but then can jump on another carrier. You also recommend
creating a database for airlines to share information that will
prevent this.
So, could you go into detail on what obstacles currently
exist for this kind of information-sharing across airlines and
tell us any specific recommendations for Congress or regulators
to help remove the barriers to information-sharing that would
benefit airports, airlines, workers, and passengers alike?
Ms. Nelson. Thank you very much for that question. Yes. We
had an incident where one regional carrier was providing
service for a mainline carrier, so this was not--this, in the
passenger's eyes, was the same airline, actually, and an
incident occurred onboard a flight, attacked a crew. The
passenger was banned from that airline after the fact, but the
passenger got off the flight, went on to their next flight, and
continued to be a problem on the next flight performing for a
different carrier.
So, if we simply have a coordination that can be
coordinated from the FAA, Chairman DeFazio was referring to
this earlier, there are potentially some issues to work through
in terms of how this information is shared. It is my
understanding that through the contract of carriage, the
airlines already have the ability to share this for safety
reasons. And there could be a coordination through the FAA
where airlines are, in real time, sharing that information
about problem passengers so that other airlines can be flagged,
and that can be flagged in their system so that they can
identify that and assess the conditions and take appropriate
actions at their airline as well.
Ms. Williams of Georgia. Thank you, Ms. Nelson. You also
mentioned in your testimony that 71 percent of flight
attendants who file incident reports did not get followup.
Could you provide some best practices for a process of
following up on incident reports and how important it is that
this kind of process not only addresses the incident itself,
but also ensures that workers know that steps are being taken
for their safety?
Ms. Nelson. Yes. Thank you very much for that question. I
do not believe that it means that 71 percent of the time that
the airlines are not taking action. The importance of following
back up with crew to let them know that action was taken is
very important for backup of that crew, because the next time
they go to their flight and they are abused or attacked or
experience another one of these incidents, they are less
likely, if they believe that nothing is going to happen, to
report it, so we have a break in the safety chain there. And
then, also, it is possible that they are hesitant to even take
action to enforce safety compliance, which leads to an unsafe
condition because they don't believe that they have that
backup.
So, simply having the staff, and I will say, this is a
challenge in this era of coronavirus. Everyone has cut back.
But having a process at each airline where there is a simple
followup to those reports, that they have been received, they
are being acted on. In not every case can the flight attendants
be given all the actions that are being taken, but letting them
know their report was received and being acted on is going to
help facilitate better safety onboard, because that crewmember
then goes back to do their job as they are required to do, and
doesn't have any hesitancy in doing it.
Ms. Williams of Georgia. Thank you.
And thank you, Mr. Andrews, for sharing your testimony
today. Thank you especially for sharing an incident that I know
couldn't be easy to talk about. The racism and rage that you
endured are unacceptable, and I want to be sure that we can do
all we can to stop air rage incidents before they occur, so
that dedicated airline industry workers like yourself can do
the job that you love to do.
Of the recommendations in your testimony to protect workers
from unruly passengers, which would make the biggest and most
immediate impact in preventing incidents of air rage? And I am
out of time.
Mr. Larsen. The gentlewoman's--yeah.
Ms. Williams of Georgia. If you could give that answer to
me because I would love to find some immediate impacts that we
could do in this committee to help keep everyone safe in our
air.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you. I will take that question for the
record, please.
And the Chair now recognizes Representative Nehls of Texas
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Nehls. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
The American people want to feel safe and secure when
flying, and it is important to provide those same protections
to airline employees. I thank all the witnesses for being here
and appreciate what you do each and every day. However, I am
discouraged by the fact this committee hearing does not have
witnesses from agencies that are charged with protecting
airline passengers and their employees. The FAA, TSA, DOJ, FBI,
they are all absent, and this makes no sense to me.
It is unfortunate our airline employees are facing
difficult times. It is unfortunate flight attendants are tasked
with enforcing mandatory mask mandates on children 2 years old.
It is unfortunate flight attendants are required to patrol up
and down the aisles, ensuring small children are complying with
these mask mandates.
And it is unfortunate these same flight attendants are
tasked with reporting these children and their families to
authorities.
It is also unfortunate these families, after explaining to
the flight attendant that their child suffers from anxiety or
are autistic or suffers from asthma, which places that child in
an unnecessary health risk, will be forcibly removed, if
necessary, from that flight.
[Reading from a poster] ``I was not refusing a mask. Nor
did I even say I wouldn't try to keep a mask on my son. We were
escorted off the plane as I was holding a mask over his little
face. I genuinely don't have words.''
And, quite honestly, I wouldn't know what to say to that
mother.
It is important to note this administration is flying
illegal immigrants around our country on commercial airlines
using taxpayer dollars with many of them not tested for COVID-
19. The hypocrisy of this administration may be a contributing
factor to increased tension on our airline employees. Testimony
of one witness today stated 75 percent of reports related to
unruly passengers are related to mask noncompliance. I would
like to see that data as to how many of those reports were
related to families with small children. But, of course,
without having representatives from the FAA here, I don't
believe I will receive an answer.
But I do have a question for you, Ms. Beyer. In your
testimony, you stated that Federal cooperation will be critical
to fighting air rage. What actions taken by the Federal
Government have been most effective so far at helping the
airlines maintain safety and security in regard to air rage?
Ms. Beyer. Thank you, Congressman, for the question. I
think it has been stated many times that we all have a role to
play in addressing these issues, both the United States
Government and the industry. In terms of specifically what the
Government has done that has been helpful to our efforts, we do
applaud the Federal Aviation Administration for their efforts
with the zero-tolerance policy for maintaining that policy, but
also, in particular, for the transparency in publicizing the
outcomes of the cases that they have adjudicated, and also
publicizing the penalties involved. We think that that is a
strong deterrent to future misbehavior incidents.
And back to what Ms. Nelson had offered earlier on that
feedback loop to industry about what happens with those cases.
It is extremely helpful to the airlines so that we can continue
to adjust our policies and approaches to deal with these issues
but also to ensure that we have the information to provide to
our employees about what is being done after an incident
occurs.
Mr. Nehls. Thank you, Ms. Beyer, for your answer. And I
think that it would be very helpful to the airline industry and
all of its employees if this administration would actually
comply with some of the rules and regulations they want
everyone else to follow. You can see behind me [indicating a
poster] with good old Mr. Kerry here, and a bunch of crazies
from Texas flying to DC, leaving Texas doing their job, leaving
Texas, flying up to Washington, DC. Do you see any of them with
masks on? Where is the outrage from the airlines there? Where
is the outrage from the administration?
I hope we give these individuals fines. Are we fining them?
I don't think so. It is an outrage, quite honestly. Thank you
for being here.
Mr. Larsen. The gentleman's time has expired.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Johnson of Georgia for 5 minutes.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for
holding this hearing, and thank you to the witnesses for your
time and testimony.
Rage has become the defining emotion of our times, and we
witnessed rage from Trump and Members of Congress when Trump
lost the election. The flying public was pummeled with false
claims that the election was stolen. And we all witnessed the
rage against Congress spurred on by those same leaders who
instigated the infamous insurrection on January 6. These are
the same leaders who spread the other big lie, that the COVID-
19 pandemic is a fraud, you can't believe Dr. Fauci, and that
Democrats are taking away your personal freedom with mask
mandates.
As a result, people are angry and confused. They get on
flights, and they let out their rage after having seen their
leaders refuse to follow the rules. They have seen belligerence
from the Nation's highest leaders become acceptable behavior.
So, if the leaders can do it and get away with it, they think
it is OK for them to do the same thing. So, when they get to
the airport, folks feel like they can say and do anything they
want because they have been misled into believing that their
personal freedom trumps, pun intended, their responsibility to
their fellow man or for the common good.
Then, politicians blame air flight rage on hypocrisy of
those who take off their masks to eat at airport restaurants.
Unbelievable. Rage is emboldened by the careless and ill-
thought-out actions of leaders who insist the pandemic is
unreal and who eschew public health safety measures. Rage in
the skies is one of the unfortunate but predictable results.
Mr. Andrews, misinformation touted by some public officials
is feeding societal distrust and anger towards CDC regulations.
What is worse, too many Americans buy into this misinformation,
resulting in a lack of consensus in scientific fact and an
erosion of civility in our national discourse. Can you please
speak to how important it is that State, local, and national
leaders role model best practices for public health and safety,
and how essential that signaling is to prevent folks from
behaving in a reckless and aggressive manner?
Mr. Andrews. Thank you for that question, sir. I would
agree totally that there are mixed messages out there, and that
is confusing to the public, and at times, makes it very
difficult for flight attendants to do our jobs effectively, or
challenged to do our job. They leave from one State to another
State, from one city to another city, where they hear messages
from leadership in their particular city or State. They come
aboard an aircraft when we carry passengers from State to
State, city to city, and it is very confusing and can be very
frustrating at times and make our jobs much more difficult. So,
having clear messaging, scientific messaging that is accurate
would help all of us.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you. I admire your
professionalism as you maintained your cool while under attack.
The blatantly racist, sexist, and homophobic character of
airplane rage is alarming. Is there a need, sir, to elevate the
safety concerns of Black Americans and flight attendants of
color? And, Ms. Nelson, anger and violence are
disproportionately targeted towards female flight attendants,
and we have heard that crewmembers are oftentimes reticent to
file charges against an assault. How can Congress support
crewmembers, especially women, so that they feel empowered to
file charges against assaults on flights.
And starting with you, please, Mr. Andrews.
Mr. Andrews. Thank you for that----
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. In 30 seconds or less. Mr. Andrews.
Mr. Andrews. Thank you for that question. It is no mistake
or no unknown fact that flight attendants of color have been
disparaged on numerous occasions. And I think that there would
be helpful and necessary steps to better those so that it is
not happening as frequently as it is.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. OK. Thank you.
Ms. Andrews [sic].
Ms. Nelson. Congressman Johnson, I believe you are
referring to me, Sara Nelson.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. I am sorry, Ms. Nelson.
Ms. Nelson. That is all right.
I think clarity about what we expect, absolute respect
among each other. I do want to note that all of the witnesses
here today, and all of the representatives across the industry
have worked very closely together. Unions, companies, airports,
airlines, we have worked closely together during this pandemic,
and frankly, we have fared better because of that. But when we
had the backing from the Federal Government about the actions
that we were taking to keep everyone safe, that made all of us
safer, and it made it----
Mr. Larsen. The gentleman's time has expired. If you could
wrap it up.
Ms. Nelson. And it made it possible, actually, for flight
attendants to feel more empowered to report these events
regardless of the way that they have been dismissed or disposed
of before based on gender or love or their race.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Ms. Nelson.
The Chair recognizes Representative Katko of New York for 5
minutes.
Mr. Katko. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for
being here. Prior to coming to Congress, I was a Federal
organized crime prosecutor for 20 years, and I have an immense
amount of respect for the rule of law. And what I am hearing
today from both sides is not so much a focus on that as it is
trying to blame someone.
The bottom line is, the problem on airplanes is very
troubling, the problem on airplanes is very real. And it is not
a Democratic issue, it is not a Republican issue, it is not a
political issue. I do believe it is just a general disrespect
for the rule of law that permeates many aspects of our society
today. And unless we enforce the rule of law, we are going to
continue to have these types of problems. So, I strongly urge
my colleagues on the committee and my colleagues in Congress to
help the airline industry enforce the rules of law on this. And
it is not about masks. It is not about individual freedoms. It
is not about arrogance. It is not about catching someone with
their mask off. It is about enforcing the rule of law and
enforcing it uniformly across the way.
When I first came into Congress, I spent a lot of time with
TSA as chairman of the subcommittee overseeing TSA. And now as
ranking member, the rule of law is an issue I take very
seriously. And one of the things I am concerned about with
respect to airline safety is something we have worked very hard
on in Homeland Security, is what is going to be the impact of
airline safety with the new developments in Afghanistan and the
potential for al-Qaida and other nefarious groups there that
want to do harm to the United States? What impact does that
have on the airline industry again? And what concerns does that
generate for you all, especially when you look at it through
the prism of this complete misbehavior on airplanes and
airlines today.
I have heard concerns directly from stakeholders in the
aviation community that facing these threats at the same time
could amount to a perfect storm, jeopardizing the safety of our
aviation workers and travelers as well as our national
security.
So, with this in mind, I would like to hear from the panel
about how their organizations perceive these threats. And I am
particularly interested in how unruly passengers may have
disrupted basic security operations or required the diversion
of resources, more importantly, that are typically intended to
address major systemic threats, such as terrorist activities.
For example, I know that the air marshals have to spend an
extraordinary amount of time dealing with this misbehavior and
maybe, maybe, will miss at some point some signs they should
have seen of people that are really intending to do an awful
lot of harm to the American people in general. So, with that as
an overview, I would like to ask Ms. Beyer, first, if you could
give me your thoughts on this?
Ms. Beyer. Sure. Thank you, Congressman. It is nice to see
you.
Mr. Katko. Nice to see you as well.
Ms. Beyer. So, I mean, the short answer is from a 10,000-
foot perspective, unfortunately, as an industry, we are used to
facing a number of different threats all at the same time. It
doesn't make it any easier. We certainly have been extremely
concerned, as I voiced already, throughout this past year that
these unruly passenger incidents not only threaten the safety
of everyone onboard but, as has been noted, can be a
distraction onboard the aircraft.
In terms of the threats, whether it is the evolving
situation in Afghanistan or anywhere else in the world, we are
constantly evaluating how those threats are evolving in concert
with the Government partners so that we understand those direct
or indirect threats, and so that we can quickly respond with
any additional measures that may be necessary.
In addition to our coordination with the Government so that
we understand those threats, we also rely on our own
independent resources in all the places in which we operate
around the world, so that we have a good picture of all of the
threats that we may be faced with.
Mr. Katko. Thank you very much.
Anyone else want to weigh in on this issue? We have about 1
minute left.
Ms. Nelson. Congressman Katko, I want to thank you very
much for your partnership and your very clear focus on aviation
security. You have been absolutely wonderful to work with. And
you are right to recognize that after 9/11, we put in place
emergency orders to keep all of us safe. And you are very right
to recognize also that these disturbances on the airplanes, and
the number of them are distracting us from the issue that we
have been going to work with for the past 20 years, recognizing
that there is and will continue to be a threat against
commercial aviation, the worst of which would be using our
commercial jets, again, as weapons. We need the secondary
barriers installed, as you have supported, and we need to focus
on this.
But these distractions onboard do nothing to help us
address what Ms. Beyer was just referring to in the constant
evolving nature of the threats and addressing the fact that we
have several threats going on at the same time, having the best
communication to the crews to be able to address that and
staying focused on it and everyone able to do their job.
Mr. Katko. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Thank you, folks, for your testimony.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
The Chair recognizes Ms. Holmes Norton of Washington, DC,
for 5 minutes.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this important
hearing.
My first question is to Ms. Nelson. It is not as if there
has been no recognition of the presence of unruly passengers,
and yet, we are having to hold this hearing this morning. I
took note of the fact that the FAA Administrator, Steve
Dickson, had issued an order enforcing, whatever that means, a
zero-tolerance policy against violent or threatening
passengers. So, I have to ask you: How consistently is this
zero-tolerance policy enforced? How is it enforced?
Ms. Nelson. Thank you, Congresswoman Holmes Norton. I
appreciate your support. And you, of course, were a part of
working with our union almost two decades ago to put in place
penalties for interfering with flightcrews, penalties, both in
terms of jail time and fines.
The FAA has in the past addressed these issues as they
come, sometimes issuing warnings to people. When FAA
Administrator Steve Dickson announced that there would be a
zero-tolerance policy on January 13, he was recognizing that
there was a new threat here that we were just discussing with
Mr. Katko, and that needed to be clearly communicated that the
FAA would not be offering any warnings but would be taking
action directly on any of these occurrences.
Now, we need to staff up. We need to have more time to deal
with that for the investigators who are dealing with it. So, on
the enforcement side, there is more that we could do to support
the FAA's work in that, and we also need DOJ to take their role
more aggressively on enforcing the criminal prosecutions around
that.
But the zero-tolerance policy is one that says there will
not be a second chance. Every single report that is received,
and they are addressing this now in a priority order, it used
to be first in, first out, but they are taking it priority
order so the severity of the case first, that those are being
addressed immediately, and there is no consideration of a
warning to those passengers. There will be action taken once
enough evidence is received to be able to take that action.
Ms. Norton. Is DOJ prosecuting?
Ms. Nelson. DOJ, to my knowledge, has only prosecuted one
case at this point. There are many cases that DOJ could take
up, and we need DOJ to take more aggressive action. And, as you
know, and as you have heard, alcohol has been a major
contributor. We believe that when people start to actually face
jail time, there is going to be a lot of sobering up around the
country, and we will not have these bad actors, who are a few
among the millions who travel every day, disrupting the safety
and security of everyone else.
Ms. Norton. I would ask the chairman to indicate to the
Department of Justice that a deterrent policy is very much
needed. If we could ramp up prosecutions, I think it would have
an effect.
Ms. Nelson. Very much.
Ms. Norton. Ms. Beyer, I would be interested in knowing
what factors influence an airline's decision to place an unruly
passenger on an internal no-fly list. Is that passenger
notified? I would be very interested in how one gets on that
list. Ms. Beyer.
Ms. Beyer. Certainly, Congresswoman. So, the internal
airline no-fly lists were created as a mechanism for airlines
to handle individual cases of passengers pre-pandemic, and it
has really just come into the spotlight post-pandemic.
Primarily, they have been used as a mechanism to prevent
further travel of that individual for egregious mask
violations, and certainly for unruly passengers.
Each airline has their own internal process once a report
is received from crewmembers for conducting their own
investigations to determine the details and specifics of that
case, before making a final determination that the criteria has
been met to add them to that list. And I know that a number of
my member airlines have publicly shared on numerous occasions
how many individuals, unfortunately, have already been added to
those lists just this year.
Ms. Norton. Could I ask Mr. Bidwell? In your testimony, you
indicated----
Mr. Larsen. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Larsen. The Chair recognizes Representative Balderson
of Ohio for 5 minutes.
Mr. Balderson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank
everyone here this morning, and all that you do in the airline
industry and making sure that we are all taken care of and all
the people across America. I really apologize for what has been
going on and what you are having to deal with.
I am going to kind of go in a little bit of a different
direction, though, and talk about some of the staffing and how
that might have been impacted. We know that staffing levels
across the country, and the aviation industry itself has--have
you all seen any changes in that, staffing levels? And that can
be directed to Ms. Beyer, but Ms. Nelson, and Mr. Andrews, you
are more than welcome to comment on that also.
Ms. Beyer. Thank you, Congressman. I am happy to start.
Certainly, I don't need to tell this committee that the
pandemic had a huge impact on the airline industry and our
staffing levels. Again, we are extremely grateful for the
multiple rounds of support through the Payroll Support Program
to ensure that we could keep all of the employees who wanted to
remain with our companies on payroll and ready to serve the
traveling public.
We have focused specifically on the unruly passenger issues
throughout this year to ensure that we have appropriate
staffing. This is one of the best practices that we have been
talking about, ensuring things like having additional
supervisors, or airline security personnel, who are available
to respond to the gates when there is an incident, and it is
something that we continue to evaluate.
Ms. Nelson. Mr. Balderson, I will just add to that to say
that we have two different issues of staffing. Of course, what
you recognize has happened during the pandemic which Ms. Beyer
referred to. We kept people in their jobs and connected to
their certifications and security credentials, but there was a
lapse in funding from October 1 to the end of December.
And so, this summer, we saw some of the hangover of that
because as you have people out of their jobs--and I should say
it wasn't just the involuntary furloughs. It was also the
voluntary requests for furloughs that airlines across the
industry requested. Getting those people back into training and
getting those certifications back in place takes time. And, in
fact, we are almost just now getting through getting everyone
back on staff.
Separately, prior to the pandemic, staffing at the gates
and on the planes was cut down to minimum staffing, and so, we
are still at those minimum staffing levels, and it does make it
very difficult. I want to applaud this Congress for putting TSA
on the general schedule because as we know, some of those
staffing problems are about being able to attract people to the
jobs. And so, increasing that pay and addressing those benefits
and those collective bargaining agreements will make the jobs
more attractive for people to come to.
Finally, I would just note that the concessionaires had a
very difficult time at the airports, and they are not all back
up and running. We don't have all the staff there. And one of
the issues that we have is very long lines at places where
people are trying to get food in the airport. Crews have a
difficult time getting food. And so, staffing up across the
airport is an issue, and also reduces the number of people with
eyes and ears to be able to remind people on those masks and do
this in a deescalating, nonconfrontational way so that we can
have consistent messaging across the board.
Mr. Balderson. Thank you, Ms. Nelson. That was great.
Mr. Andrews, would you like to add anything?
Mr. Andrews. Thank you for that question, and thank you for
this opportunity. I, too, saw a very significant impact to us,
and I am thankful for the Payroll Support Program that did
allow a lot of our flight attendants to still keep our jobs.
And the summer was very challenging. We have seen an uptick
with a lot of flight attendants being able to come back here at
American Airlines. I think we brought--the last set of flight
attendants who were on furlough are coming back in November and
December, so that will help to improve the shortage onboard the
aircrafts as well.
Mr. Balderson. Thank you all very much, and Mr. Chairman, I
yield back my remaining time. Thank you.
Mr. Kahele [presiding]. All right. Thank you.
The Chair would like to now recognize Mr. Stanton for 5
minutes.
Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and I want to
thank Chairman Larsen for holding this very important hearing.
I want to thank each of the witnesses for your outstanding
testimony today. Mr. Andrews, I just want to acknowledge you
and say I am so sorry about the incident of violence that you
described earlier that you were the victim of.
As someone who is fortunate to travel twice a week to my
job in Washington, DC, I am deeply concerned about the sharp
increase in the number of incidents of disruptive passengers
reported by airline crews. Flight attendants, they are on the
front lines in dealing with the escalation and disruptive
behavior from passengers, and they need the tools and support
at all levels, the Federal Government, from airports, airlines,
and others to deal with these challenges. Their primary job is
the safety of passengers and crew; yet, they are all too
frequently finding themselves in difficult situations every day
working to deescalate situations, whether verbal or physical,
that have the potential to impact safety.
Many of the incidents we have seen reported have been on
planes while in flight, but we are also witnessing disruptions
within our airports. In the past year, staff at Phoenix Sky
Harbor Airport in my State and local police have responded to
nearly 3,000 calls of customers being disruptive or assaulting
employees or fellow passengers. This is a significant increase
from the previous year, and it is not uncommon for our local
police to be called to meet a flight with a passenger who has
disrupted or interfered with flightcrew.
My first question is for Mr. Andrews. In your written
testimony, you describe your experience as a flight attendant,
and you describe many initiatives that you are advocating for,
and I just want to talk about a few of these potential
initiatives. Quote, ``No. 8--increased police and security
presence in airports, No. 9--increased monitoring of passengers
through the airport, TSA, and prior to boarding, No. 10--
consistent enforcement of the mask mandate throughout the
airport and security.'' Can you describe what you are
witnessing in airports and what leads you to make these
specific recommendations?
Mr. Andrews. Thank you for that question, sir. I am
noticing on a regular basis when I am traveling to and for to
work that there is minimal police presence. There is a shortage
in TSA staffing that is impacting how many people can get
through or how people are monitored. A shortage at gates, of
gate agents that is impacting whether or not we have the
staffage to cover and monitor passengers as they are boarding
the aircraft. Those are some of the things that are leading to
some of those suggestions.
Mr. Stanton. Thank you so much.
Not only have we witnessed unruly passenger incidents and
passengers ignoring the Federal mask mandate onboard aircraft,
but we have seen this kind of activity in the airports
themselves. Passengers can be seen without their masks within
airports, even though individuals in airports are required by
law to wear them.
This is my question for Mr. Bidwell. What role are airports
currently playing in enforcing Federal and sometimes local mask
mandates within airport terminals?
Mr. Bidwell. Congressman Stanton, thanks very much for that
the question. Airports do their due diligence to enforce
Federal security requirements, including the mask mandate. A
key part of enforcing the mask mandate is providing support to
their airline partners. In order to address incidents on the
ground, some airports have encouraged airline representatives
to call airport law enforcement at the first sign of a
disturbance.
And I would also note that just to address something that
was mentioned previously, a majority of mask-related incidents
do not occur at the airports, and again, just reiterate our
support for TSA having increased the civil penalties for
violations of the mask mandate.
Mr. Stanton. Thank you. Obviously, this Congress has been
very supportive of the industry through the PSP. Thank you to
the leadership of President Nelson. We have all been very
supportive of the Nation's airports, knowing how important it
is for our economy, especially during and to get us out of the
pandemic crisis.
But, Mr. Bidwell, what additional resources do you think
airports need now to ensure better enforcement of mask
mandates?
Mr. Bidwell. I think that there have been a number of
things that have been done that really assist in this regard.
As I mentioned, TSA has increased the civil personalities. I
think another key component of that is for TSA to publicize the
number of civil penalty actions instituted against violators of
the mask requirements, much like FAA does in publicizing the
civil penalties imposed on unruly passengers.
Mr. Stanton. Looks likes I am out of time, so I have to
yield back. Thank you very much for those answers.
Mr. Kahele. All right. Thank you.
The Chair would like to now recognize Mr. Fitzpatrick for 5
minutes.
Mr. Fitzpatrick. Thank you. Thank you to all our panelists
for being with us today.
Ms. Nelson, thank you for being here. Thanks for the
incredible job you do representing the amazing people of the
aviation industry. And I wanted to just run--or ask two
questions, Ms. Nelson.
Number one, focusing on the mental health and morale of
flight attendants, which obviously is very, very important--
they have been put under tremendous stress. They always have a
stressful job. It has been incredibly stressful for the past
1\1/2\ to 2 years. What can this committee, what can this
Congress do to help in that regard? Because oftentimes we are
not asking the question, ``What can we be doing to help these
amazing public servants?''
Ms. Nelson. Congressman Fitzpatrick, thank you so much for
that and for recognizing what flight attendants have been
through. And I can confirm that the mental health has been
under strain, for sure. Our calls to our EAP have been through
the roof.
And so, what I would say to you is exactly what you have
talked about so clearly, and I just want to reflect, because we
just went through the 20th remembrance of September 11. And I
just want to remind people that we were trained completely
wrong for that day. We had the wrong information to be able to
address that. But we got information to the ground. Flight
attendants did that. And that got to the crew and passengers on
flight 93. And the crew and passengers on flight 93 could not
be more of a rainbow of America than you would see anywhere
else--all gender, races, cultures and creeds, Democrats,
Republicans, and Independents.
But in a moment's time, with urgency, they had new
information, and they took action together to try to save their
own lives, definitely to save our own, very likely to save our
United States Capitol.
And so, what I would say is that what I have heard during
this hearing is exactly what the problem is going on the
airplane, that people have been led to believe that we are in
conflict with each other. But the truth is, this is a small
number of people who are acting out. The vast majority of
people just want to follow the rules. They want a safe,
uneventful flight. They want to take care of each other.
Americans love solidarity. We need messaging from
leadership that is consistent about what we are doing together
to face this crisis and how we can come together and support
each other in this moment.
And that is the single most important thing that we need,
is leadership from that level, from every level, from every
corner of our leadership, giving consistent messaging about how
frontline workers are supported, about how we all have to come
together, face this crisis, and do what needs to be done to put
it behind us.
Mr. Fitzpatrick. Thanks, Ms. Nelson. And you mentioned the
20th anniversary of 9/11. I think it had us all reflect and,
quite frankly, go back and read the stories that many of us
haven't reread since that awful day. And hearing the heroism of
so many of the flight attendants who were on the phone, who had
access to the phone, who were rallying passengers on a plane.
And it was a flight attendant that called the vote on flight
93. Isn't that amazing that, at that dire moment, the first
thing that Americans thought to do was to take a vote. And we
all know how they voted and what the outcome was.
Speaking of 9/11, Ms. Nelson, if you could just touch upon
H.R. 911, a bill that you obviously know I am very, very
invested in, secondary barriers. It has been inconsistently
applied with regard to new aircraft. It is not even being put
in all new aircraft. And certainly, we haven't even dealt with
the retrofitting issue yet.
Could you just touch upon that on behalf of the people you
represent?
Ms. Nelson. Sure. Absolutely. First of all, this committee
and Congress took nearly unanimous action in 2018 before this
latest crisis to say that all new aircraft need to have that
secondary barrier installed. This is a recommendation from
right after September 11th from the Commission, and it has not
been done yet, not even with the new aircraft coming on the
line, not to mention retrofitting.
But this is an issue that was identified 20 years ago, to
make sure that our aircraft cannot be used as weapons against
us. You have already done the work, at least for the new
aircraft. It just needs to be implemented. It needs to be
implemented yesterday, and we need to take additional steps to
pass legislation to make sure that this is put onto all of our
aircraft, because this is an area of vulnerability.
I would only add with that, that the secondary barriers and
crewmember self-defense training were both recommendations that
were supposed to be implemented and really should be, because
this is an area where we have a hole in our security right now.
And thank you so much for your leadership on this.
Mr. Fitzpatrick. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Kahele. Thank you.
The Chair would like to now recognize Ms. Johnson from
Texas.
Ms. Johnson of Texas. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
must admit that I have had to dip in and out of this meeting
for another one, but I want to express my appreciation for this
very important hearing and for the witnesses to be present.
I would like to ask unanimous consent to put my opening
remarks in the record so I won't have to read them.
[Pause.]
Oh, well, just yesterday, in fact, my hometown newspaper,
the Dallas Morning News, an article entitled, ``Go inside a
flight attendant self-defense class as threats of violence fill
the air,'' described how Federal air marshals are teaching
flight attendants to defend themselves against belligerent
passengers, generally in response to the resistance to wear a
mask.
Now, I represent an area where the Dallas-Ft. Worth TSA
office is, which encompasses the nearby headquarters of
American Airlines and Southwest Airlines, both are very large
carriers from my district.
And I hope this question has not been asked, but I would
like to point it to Ms. Nelson, but I would like to hear any
other comments from other witnesses.
Your testimony makes multiple references to the lack of
assault investigations and that serious punishment for the
offenders, even though stipulated by Federal law, is rarely
carried out by the Department of Justice. What do you think can
be done to rectify this, and is there anything that this
committee can do?
Ms. Nelson. Thank you so much, Congresswoman Johnson.
Mr. Kahele. Hold on 1 second, Ms. Nelson.
Ms. Johnson, can you please turn your video on, if you can,
please, your video monitor?
Ms. Johnson of Texas. Yes.
Mr. Kahele. All right. Go ahead, Ms. Nelson.
Ms. Johnson of Texas. Here I am in person.
Mr. Kahele. Thank you.
Ms. Nelson. Lovely to see you, and it was great to see you
at Dallas Airport last month. So, thank you for the question.
We already have statute. DOJ already has authority under
the law to prosecute, and we do need encouragement from this
Congress to encourage DOJ to take those actions.
To my knowledge, so far, they have only taken up one case
of these incidents that have occurred since the beginning of
2021. So, we need a greater attention on that, and there is--
representatives from across the industry have signed a letter
long ago asking for DOJ to take that action.
So, all of us have made it very clear that we believe that
we need to make it clear to the public about the seriousness of
this, of these disruptions in the air, and how it can have such
a dramatic impact on safety and security of our air travel.
And we all know that when safety and security is in
question, people don't buy tickets, because they want to take
that for granted. So, it is our economic security at stake as
well.
Ms. Johnson of Texas. Thank you very much.
Any other witness like to comment on that?
Ms. Beyer. Yes, Congresswoman. I would just simply add, you
know, echo Ms. Nelson's sentiments there. We have all worked
together on this specific issue.
And in response to your question about what more the
committee could do, we would very much encourage you to speak
with the Department of Justice and urge them to direct Federal
prosecutors to dedicate their resources to handle these cases.
Ms. Johnson of Texas. Thank you.
Any other comments?
Mr. Bidwell. Congresswoman, I would just like to add, I
support the comments of my colleagues. But in addition, just to
reiterate, it is important for crewmembers to stay around and
provide statements to airport law enforcement and press charges
so unruly passengers can be criminally prosecuted.
Ms. Johnson of Texas. Thank you very much.
Mr. Andrews, did you want to chime in?
Mr. Andrews. Yes, Ms. Johnson. Thank you so much for that
question. I echo the sentiments of my colleagues, and one other
thing would just be so vitally important for that information,
if there is prosecution, if there is something done, for that
information to be conveyed back to the flight attendant. That
would encourage them to report in the future.
Ms. Johnson of Texas. Well, thank you very much.
And I will yield back the last 30 seconds of my time, Mr.
Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Kahele. All right, thank you.
The Chair would like to now recognize Mr. Stauber for 5
minutes.
Mr. Stauber. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First off, I would like to thank you all for stepping up
over the last 1\1/2\ years, especially in the early days of
COVID, the early days of the COVID shutdowns.
I flew several times during the early months of the
pandemic, and the front-facing workforce each of you represent
were always positive and professional, despite mass layoffs and
suspensions due to an industry that had effectively been put on
pause.
As many of you likely know, I have a son. My wife and I are
blessed with a son who has Down syndrome. My family understands
the difficulties that those with disabilities and their
families encounter when traveling.
We have seen these episodes play out time and time again on
airplanes where families with autistic kids as young as 2 are
booted off airplanes because their son or daughter has
difficulty keeping their mask on.
These are heartbreaking scenes that are objectively unfair
to the families who are, in good faith, just trying to get to
from point A to point B, and it is unfair to the flight
attendants and the staff who have been forced to enforce these
rigid mandates.
As you all are also likely aware, the Department of
Transportation has put forth a rule for mask exemptions for
those with disabilities, and it states, in quotes, ``The
following narrow subset of persons with disabilities are exempt
from CDC's requirement to wear a mask:
``A person with a disability who, for reasons related to
the disability, would be physically unable to remove a mask
without assistance if breathing becomes obstructed. Examples
might include a person with impaired motor skills, a
quadriplegic, or limb restrictions.
``A person with intellectual, developmental, cognitive, or
psychiatric disability that affects the person's ability to
understand the need to remove a mask if breathing becomes
obstructed.''
The question is for Teddy or Sara. I don't think that
Americans with disabilities are really aware of these
exemptions, and I know that many of them feel discriminated
against right now. What is the protocol that a flight attendant
currently goes through when dealing with a passenger who has an
exemption?
Ms. Nelson. Mr. Chairman, let me start, and I think Teddy
will have a lot to add as well.
First of all, let me just say that it is very difficult for
flight attendants, at minimum staffing with our aircraft full,
to be able to identify problems or issues as people are coming
on the plane.
It is very important that the airlines are making it very
clear at the point of ticket sale for anyone who needs to
provide information to the airline ahead of time about these
challenges. This does already exist. It is already in the
ticketing process. It could probably be more clear.
When we have that information, that information is
communicated to the crews ahead of the flight. We are given
seat numbers, we are given information about that situation.
And when we have that, we are much better prepared to face
that. I will tell you that----
Mr. Stauber. So let me just ask you, let me just--I just
want to follow up on that. So, if they didn't in advance notify
the airline, if they are boarding and you clearly see that, and
the guardian or parent notifies you at that moment, then can
you make the decision and follow the same protocols as if they
had let the airlines know? Can you at that moment, if a mom and
dad or guardian says, ``Sara, this is our child, he is
autistic, and he has trouble wearing a mask.'' At that point,
then you can make the decision and let the other flight
attendants know?
Ms. Nelson. That depends. OK? And so, in most cases, yes,
flight attendants are going to be able to take that
information, share it with the rest of the crew, and be able to
address that.
We have had some situations where people have purposely
tried to avoid this. So normally what we would do is we would
notify the ground supervisor and try to get help to that
family, prior to the flight taking off, so that they can
provide the proper documentation to the airline, and that can
be properly done so that we are advised that we should follow
those protocols.
But I will tell you that flight attendants have an
incredible ability to have very intuitive nature of how to
address these issues and can assess these things, and we will
take action sometimes on our own under that authority.
That is not the procedure, though. So, it is better that we
have that confirmation from the airline so that we know that we
are fully backed up by the airline when we are taking that
action.
Mr. Stauber. Well, I appreciate the answer. And I will just
say that there are times maybe you don't know if there is
somebody autistic or what have you, but it is difficult. And I
want to again thank you and all the flight attendants for the
professionalism during this difficult time and to enforce
mandates that were forced upon your industry and your
profession.
So, with that, Mr. Chair, I see my time is out, so I will
yield back. Thank you.
Mr. Kahele. All right, thank you.
The Chair would like to now recognize Mr. Payne for 5
minutes.
Mr. Payne. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It is a pleasure to be here today on a committee hearing
that is so vitally important to the American people and people
that work in the aviation industry.
There is no question that the FAA should institute more
policies to better protect flightcrews during this
unprecedented rise in air rage incidents.
Beyond additional signs and verbal warnings about
consequences, how best can the FAA help protect all flightcrews
if incidents like these are continuing, Ms. Nelson?
Ms. Nelson. Thank you very much for that question. First of
all, I do want to applaud the FAA for the seriousness that they
have given this and their efforts to try to communicate to the
public what the rules are, why they are in place, and what will
happen if people break them. The FAA has been extraordinary on
this, and I applaud FAA Administrator Steve Dickson for his
leadership on it.
What could happen, though, is that we hear from the FAA
safety inspectors that they do not have enough inspectors or
enough time to conduct these investigations in some cases. So,
because of the zero-tolerance policy, it used to be that the
FAA inspectors would be inspecting events on a first-in/first-
out basis.
They now have the ability to prioritize these issues based
on the severity of the case. But if they get down to a 6-month
timeout, there is a statute of limitation on the case of 6
months, so if they don't get to the case by that time because
they simply don't have enough resources to address it, the case
falls away completely.
So, they suggest that there should be an extension of that
time, and, of course, if we could get more resources to the FAA
to be able to conduct these investigations, that would better
support us as well.
Mr. Payne. Thank you.
And, Mr. Andrews, let me commend you for your
professionalism, preserving your job through the vile, racist
incident you recall in your testimony and your personal fight
against COVID-19.
I would like to discuss the secondary barriers under the
FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018. The FAA is required to issue a
rule requiring installation of barriers that would protect the
cockpit even when it is open. Unfortunately, the FAA has not
fulfilled this legal requirement.
How would these barriers further protect the safety of the
flightcrew and passengers from unruly passengers?
Mr. Andrews. Thank you for that question. I think any steps
that we can take, especially that second barrier, would help
with protecting flightcrew, passengers onboard. Having
personally, my family experienced the death of my cousin in 9/
11, definitely would make it more secure, make sure that we
have additional steps in place to ensure the safety of all
passengers and flightcrew. So, I think it is vitally important
to have.
Mr. Payne. Thank you.
And let me just say to Ms. Nelson and Mr. Andrews that the
gentleman from Pennsylvania made good points on the second
barrier, Mr. Fitzpatrick. And I am going to reach out to him to
see how we can work together to finally get this implemented.
And I make that promise to you. I will start working on that
today.
Ms. Nelson. Thank you.
Mr. Payne. Ms. Beyer, can you assure this committee that
your member airlines will be cooperative should the FAA take
additional actions to protect flightcrew and passengers?
Ms. Beyer. Yes, sir. We certainly always comply with any
law or Federal requirement that we have been asked to
implement.
Mr. Payne. OK. Well, thank you for that concise answer.
And, with that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.
Mr. Kahele. All right. Thank you.
The Chair would now like to recognize Mr. Lynch for 5
minutes.
[Pause.]
If not, we will move on to Mr. Allred for 5 minutes.
[Pause.]
OK. Moving on to Mr. Garcia for 5 minutes.
Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for
accommodating me at today's committee hearing and for allowing
me to ask these questions.
As a frequent air traveler and a former union member, I
want to thank the flight attendants, pilots, ground crews, and
the aviation units for the work that they do every day, keeping
our aviation system running and safely getting millions of
Americans to their destinations.
I am deeply concerned with the large increases in air rage
and assaults on flight attendants and other aviation workers
since the pandemic started. Every person deserves a safe,
harassment-free workplace.
I want to thank the witnesses for appearing today and their
enlightening testimony. I look forward to working with them and
the committee to address this important issue.
I have questions that I would like to ask of Ms. Nelson and
Mr. Andrews. I would like to follow up on a question posed by
Congressman Hank Johnson.
What more needs to be done to specifically make sure that
flight attendants of color, who may be disproportionately
facing more air rage and other discrimination, are safe in
working environments?
Ms. Nelson. Teddy, would you like to start?
OK. So let me just start here.
What happens in our communities comes to our aircraft, and
the more that we can do to lift up people of color, to make
sure that there is a place at the table, to make sure that
there is a recognition of the struggles that people are facing
simply because of the color of their skin.
I will tell you that as we were going to work in the wake
of the George Floyd murder, that there were many flight
attendants who were concerned about even traveling to work, and
they were concerned about that before they even got there.
And then when they get to work, they are facing incredible
discrimination that none of us can imagine if you haven't faced
it before. Some of the airlines are doing a very good job of
having townhalls lifting us up.
I would say, actually, I have been recently made aware of
the actions of American Airlines to hold these townhalls to
make it very specific that the airline is focused
wholeheartedly on addressing the issues of diversity and
inclusion, of giving the opportunity for people of color to
tell their stories at the airline about what they face and have
other people hear that and hear the difficulties, the
microaggressions that they face at work.
And when they have the backing of everyone at the airline
and know that those issues are going to be taken seriously,
they are more likely to report, there is more likely to be
followup action, and other people are more likely to understand
that when you are disrespecting someone because of their gender
or their race or because of the way that they identify, that
that is unacceptable, and there is a zero-tolerance approach
from the airline to addressing that.
That needs to be taken as seriously as any other violation
at the airline. And so, I would lift up what American has been
doing. I would say I have seen it at other airlines too. They
all have diversity and inclusion programs, but more could be
done to have these public conversations about what people of
color are facing at work.
Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you.
Mr. Andrews. I too thank you for that question,
Representative Garcia. I think I would echo wholeheartedly what
my colleague, Ms. Nelson, just said.
The airline has taken specifically--excuse me--American
Airlines has taken steps towards making sure that there is
diversity, equity, and inclusion conversations happening. And
the APFA has just instituted a diversity, equity, and inclusion
team, which I am now chairing.
So, we are having conversations, and those conversations
are happening. Should there be more conversations? Yes. Clear
expectations on behaviors and some possible consequences for
those.
So, we are talking about air rage, air rage that knows no
color, right? It doesn't discriminate. But, unfortunately,
there are cases where race and other disparaging remarks or
comments are being made towards flight attendants of color
and--just conversations, more conversations, and more dialogue
between the airline and all of our counterparts would help.
Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank so much. My time has just
about run out, so I am going to yield back to the chair. Thank
you.
Mr. Kahele. Mahalo, Mr. Garcia.
The Chair would like to now recognize Mr. Allred of Texas
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Allred. Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I first wanted to ask about jurisdictional issues. I have
heard from some flight attendants that I have spoken to that
there is concern and issues on the ground regarding whose
jurisdiction it is when something happens and seeing how
jurisdictional issues can play out in other contexts.
I am wondering, who is ultimately responsible when an event
occurs in the air and you get to your location, which
jurisdiction is responsible? And does there need to be an
adjustment to policy to make sure that there is no gap in terms
of who is going to respond to it?
Ms. Nelson, I see you nodding. If you want to jump, go
first, and if anyone else wants to add, I would be happy to
discuss that.
Ms. Nelson. Thank you very much. So, Congressman Allred,
the jurisdiction on the plane is the FBI. It is Federal
jurisdiction, but, oftentimes, there is not an FBI agent at an
airport to be able to respond. Some of the larger hubs, there
is, and when we get that communication to the agency, they can
respond directly to the flight and get the statements from
everyone right there. And that is the best-case scenario for
dealing with these issues.
Most of the time, when the aircraft arrives--think about
the chain of communication. So the flight attendants
communicate to the flight deck; the flight deck communicates to
the ground controller; the ground controller oftentimes will
communicate to a ground security coordinator, who will then
have to communicate to law enforcement.
If there is a break in that chain and you either slow down
the communication or it doesn't go through, sometimes you don't
have anyone respond at all.
When local law enforcement responds, what they are doing is
they are taking statements and sometimes taking people into
custody. But there is inconsistency there because, at some
airports, it is a security company that is providing the
security, and in other cases, there is local law enforcement.
So, there are inconsistencies at each airport because of this.
It would be much better if there were a clear set of
standards that the airlines and the airports would be following
that then gets those reports. When those reports go to the FAA,
that can then be coordinated with FBI for followup action, even
if FBI is not there to meet the flight.
Mr. Allred. That is really good. So, do you think that the
FAA is within their purview to make that [inaudible] do you
think we, in Congress, need to give them additional authority?
Ms. Nelson. So, the FAA would need additional authority to
actually oversee that. What I will say is that I know the FAA
Administrator has started a dialogue with local law enforcement
across the country about how we can create better protocols.
And that dialogue, even in and of itself, is very, very helpful
for us to set up protocols that are better to respond.
I will tell you that when I saw the images after January 6,
and there were sort of mobs of people acting out in the
airport, and you saw that law enforcement, all they could do
was protect the people who were being attacked, that was a very
different scene than we have seen in the past. It used to be
that there would be one bad actor that law enforcement could go
there and address that directly. That person would be hauled
away.
So, we have a new set of conditions here where we need to
make sure that we have better communications and that we are
properly resourced at the airports to be able to respond.
Mr. Allred. Well, thank you for that, Ms. Nelson. You
mentioned the 6th. I know there has been some discussion of the
creation of a no-fly list for domestic terrorism. And I just
wonder what your view of proper use of a no-fly list might be,
obviously taking into account the need to protect civil
liberties and some kind of need for that to be a fair system in
which it wouldn't be a permanent mark on people's records and
things like that.
Ms. Nelson. So, the no-fly list is very specific to the FBI
no-fly list, and this is about terrorism. So, first and
foremost, we need to call it something else very likely. We
need to have a process that is very clear, that is an incident
review process with the airlines, possibly the airports, and
law enforcement, where we are reviewing whether or not someone
should be put on a flyer ``banned list,'' and call it something
like that, and then a process for how someone might be able to
get off of that list as well.
And so, thinking through those procedures needs to be done.
There has already been some work underway at many of the
offices. We appreciate that. But we need to speed this up and
figure out how we can make this work so that we are addressing,
yes, as you said, the issues of civil liberties, that there is
actually a due process for this, for getting on this list, and
then a means at some point to have a process to appeal to get
off the list.
Mr. Allred. Well, thank you. I appreciate you all's
testimony. You have helped us identify, I think, some gaps in
what we can do. And I just want to say thank you for your
service to the country during a time when many of you were
still flying at the very beginning of the pandemic when you
weren't even allowed to wear masks at times, and you had to
protect yourselves in any way you could. I know it has been an
extremely difficult time.
I and the members of this committee are committed to
protecting you, supporting you. We appreciate the role you play
in our economy. And as someone who represents one of the bigger
airports in the country and a couple of the largest airlines in
the country, we appreciate everything you do.
So, with that, I will yield back.
Ms. Nelson. Thank you, Congressman Allred.
Mr. Kahele. Mahalo, Congressman Allred.
The chair, I guess, will now yield to himself, since I look
like to be the last person here. And one of those opportunities
of being last is that you've had the chance to hear all the
questions, and there has been a lot of great questions that
have been asked.
As someone who was born into the airline industry--my mom
was a 35-year flight attendant with United Airlines--and who
married into the airline industry: my wife is a flight
attendant with Hawaiian Airlines--and who also is a pilot for
Hawaiian--I want to thank our flightcrews, our gate agents, our
ground crews, who have really been on the front lines dealing
with unruly passenger behavior, in many cases, dangerous and
violent acts of aggression.
And I also want to emphasize that passengers and
individuals that assault, threaten, intimidate, interfere with
airline crewmembers, that the FAA and the Department of Justice
need to conduct swift but thorough enforcement investigations.
They need to impose at least civil penalties against those
passengers. And if those civil penalties are not deterring,
really, criminal activity by these airline passengers, that the
Department of Justice needs to look at how these individuals
can be criminally prosecuted. And so that is something that I
hope the FAA and the DOJ will do.
In regard to masks, we all want to stop having to wear
masks on airlines when we fly, but we do know that masks, in
combination with vaccinations, are the most effective tool to
stopping the spread of COVID-19.
Air travel is one of the most controlled indoor spaces and
modes of transportation, and so the current guidance where we
need to wear masks through early January 2022, I think is a
good thing. With the Delta variant, with the upcoming flu
season, keeping ourselves protected is really important.
My first question was going to be directed to Ms. Beyer and
Airlines for America, and that is in regard to, in the early
part of the pandemic, airlines took the step to change seating
arrangements in the airlines, to space people apart farther.
Can you speak to or answer, in terms of the airlines that
you represent, have all the airlines gone back to booking at
full capacity and are no longer blocking seats to maintain that
social distance between passengers?
Ms. Beyer. Thank you for the question, Congressman. And
thank you for recognizing the work that we have all done as an
industry throughout this pandemic, a really unprecedented, it
goes without saying, time to evaluate what we knew about this
public health emergency.
And really, I think the airlines have leaned into science
since the beginning to determine what measures need to be put
in place to keep all of our employees and the traveling public
safe throughout the pandemic.
In terms of seating, as we have all done throughout this
pandemic, we have learned more and more about this specific
virus and about the variants that have emerged. And so, our
policies, as the airline industry, have been adjusted along the
way as we learned more about the virus itself.
Specifically on the seating, one of the things that we have
done is worked with Harvard School of Public Health to evaluate
the risk of transmission in air travel. And one of the things
that they determined is that, in the air filtration, 2 to 3
minutes the air is cycled out with HEPA filters onboard, the
mask-wearing, all of the other measures, that you are safer
onboard an aircraft than you are in many other routine daily
activities.
And as a result of that science and studies from many other
reputable sources, that is when the decisions were made for
those who had adjusted seat policies that it was safe to resume
a full aircraft.
Mr. Kahele. OK. Thank you.
Next question is for Ms. Nelson. In your testimony, you
wrote, ``Over the past few months, CWA ground service members
across the country have experienced serious incidents of
physical and verbal assault and harassment, with few
repercussions for the offending passenger imposed by law
enforcement.
``By failing to follow the law and seek justice for the
victims of assaults like these, a message is being clearly
communicated that the safety of airport workers is not a
priority. Ground service members are the last line of security
before these agents have the opportunity to board the aircraft
and disrupt service.''
So, my question would be, what do you believe are the next
steps we can take to protect our ground service members?
Ms. Nelson. Thank you, Congressman Kahele. Let's be very
clear. This is extremely important that we protect the ground
service members because, as you said, they are the last chance
to keep problems on the ground. And when there is no followup,
when they are physically assaulted, what do you think there is
going to be their response?
In many cases, there is a single agent at the gate who is
dealing with all of the passengers. And when you are under
threat, what you want to do is to get away from the threat.
What that does is it potentially puts a situation where there
is a desire to actually put that passenger on the plane, to get
them away.
So, these are some of the consequences that can happen if
we don't take these acts seriously.
There have been gate agents who have been punched in the
face repeatedly and no action has been taken. Law enforcement
doesn't come fast enough, and the prosecution has not happened.
There are at least three cases that are noted in my testimony
that I would direct the Department of Justice to immediately,
that are very clear, well-documented cases of assault against
these gate agents.
There needs to be criminal action right away because,
otherwise, we are sending the message to these workers that
they are on their own, and the decisions that they make then,
that they will be forced to make for their own safety, may not
be good for the safety of all of aviation. That is the
consequence that we face if we don't back them up.
Mr. Kahele. OK. Thank you for that answer.
Last question I have, I guess it can be directed to both
Ms. Beyer and Mr. Bidwell. But you had mentioned--or we had
mentioned through this conversation that sometimes airline
crewmembers--and it could also be gate agents--are reluctant to
stay around to press charges even when they have been
assaulted.
And I kind of would like to know what are the reasons for
this, and is there a way that we can either incentivize or do
something to support those airline crewmembers so those cases
can be captured and the investigation can proceed forward?
And I guess we can start with Ms. Beyer.
Ms. Beyer. Yes, sir. So, first off, I will say right
upfront that our airlines are doing everything possible to
better prevent and respond to these incidents, and that
includes having regular dialogue with their employee groups,
including the gate agents, including the flight attendants,
including the pilots.
We take this extremely seriously, and we want to make sure
that our employees feel supported to be able to report these
incidents, and that we as their airline are going to take them
seriously, are supporting them, and are doing everything in our
power to address the issue.
Mr. Kahele. Mr. Bidwell?
Mr. Bidwell. Thank you. Thank you very much for the
question.
So, in accordance with TSA regulations, airport operators
provide law enforcement officers with arrest authority in the
number and manner adequate to support their federally approved
security programs.
And I would note, the challenge is not the number of law
enforcement officers available; it is one of jurisdiction or,
rather, the lack thereof. Indeed, airport law enforcement
responds when called, but can only enforce State and local law.
In order to pursue cases, they need crewmembers to stick
around, they need them to provide statements, whether those are
processed locally or then referred on to Federal Government,
including the FBI.
Mr. Kahele. I thank you for that.
Ms. Nelson. Congressman Kahele?
Mr. Kahele. Yes, go ahead.
Ms. Nelson. We really need from the airlines a clear
communication to the pilots, to the flight attendants, to the
gate agents, that when these incidents occur, their first
priority is to stay, write the report, report the incident, and
make sure that the local law enforcement has all that they
need.
So, I agree that the airlines have tried very hard to be
supportive of crews in these events, but that clear
communication to the crews that this is their first order of
business after these incidents has not been made, and can be
made more clear, and those procedures can be communicated more
clearly to all of the crews and the agents at the gate.
Mr. Kahele. Ms. Beyer, in response to Ms. Nelson's
comments, what do the airlines do in terms of when a
crewmember, if it is in flight and they send a message to the
station manager that they are flying into, what do the airlines
do to make sure that there are representatives of the airlines,
station managers, others that meet the crew at the aircraft and
are able to capture those statements from the flight attendant
or pilot, to work together with local law enforcement agencies
and take a proactive role to support those crewmembers?
When they do land at their locations, they have been
working for a long time, they are tired, and they, at that
point, just want to go home. And in many cases, these assaults
go unreported.
Ms. Beyer. So, certainly, if the crew reports that there is
an in-flight incident and they are requesting that law
enforcement respond to the aircraft upon landing, then the
airline employees on the ground will forward that request to
the local law enforcement and request that support.
I did want to come back to something I noted in my
testimony, which is this larger sort of cross-industry, best
practices effort that we are undertaking at this moment. I
think that the many comments that have been made by my fellow
panelists today are evidence that one of the ways that we can
continue to improve is by enhancing the collaboration, not just
within airlines, not just within airports, et cetera, but
across all of the aviation sectors.
And our hope is that this effort, bringing in all parties
who have a responsibility, that we can identify what some best
practices may be by certain entities, that perhaps can be
enhanced by others. And we are committed to doing that.
Mr. Kahele. OK. Thank you.
All right. Seeing no further testifiers, I want to conclude
our hearing today, and thank each of the witnesses for your
testimony today. Your comments have been very informative and
helpful.
And I would like to ask for 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.
I also ask unanimous consent that the record remain open
for 15 days for any additional comments and information
submitted by Members or witnesses' responses to be included in
the record of today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
And, with that, our subcommittee stands adjourned. Mahalo.
[Whereupon, at 12:46 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, Chair Larsen and Ranking Member Graves, and thank you to
our witnesses for being here today.
Given that most Members fly on a near weekly basis, we should all
be concerned with the increase in unruly passenger incidents.
According to the FAA, it has received almost 4,200 reports of
unruly passenger behavior since the beginning of the year, with 75
percent of the incidents related to mask noncompliance.
This type of behavior is unacceptable.
However, I think it is very important for people to understand that
millions of people have flown on U.S. airlines so far this year and the
vast majority of those flights have occurred without incident.
When these rare occurrences do take place, the two Federal agencies
charged with addressing unruly passenger behavior are the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA).
Unfortunately, neither agency is in attendance today.
While I am disappointed that Members will not be given the
opportunity to hear from the two Federal agencies charged with setting
airline security procedures and training requirements related to unruly
passengers, as well as enforcing those policies and procedures, I am
very interested in the testimony of the other witnesses here today.
It goes without saying, aviation safety is the top priority for
this subcommittee.
That includes both the safety of air travelers, and the safety of
the airline personnel.
I again want to thank Chair Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and the
witnesses, and I yield back.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson, a Representative in
Congress from the State of Texas
Thank you, Chairman DeFazio, Aviation Subcommittee Chairman Larsen,
and Ranking Member Graves for holding today's hearing. I also want to
thank our witnesses for your testimony and participation.
The disturbing instances of air and airport passenger rage are well
documented. Our nation has witnessed a sharp increase in
confrontational behavior in recent years, particularly since the onset
of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Just yesterday in fact in my hometown newspaper, the Dallas Morning
News, an article entitled ``Inside a flight attendant self-defense
class as threats of violence fill the air'' described how federal air
marshals are teaching flight attendants to defend themselves against
belligerent passengers, generally in response to resistance to wearing
a face mask.
The Dallas-Ft. Worth TSA office, which encompasses the nearby
headquarters for American Airlines and Southwest Air, is one of the
largest training centers in the country.
Sadly, there is a critical need for this type of training, given
that this year so far, the FAA has received over 4,000 reports of
unruly passengers. Moreover, according to the articulate testimony
provided by AFA President, Ms. Sara Nelson, 85 percent of flight
attendants have dealt with unruly passengers and nearly 1 in 5 report
that the incidents involved a physical assault.
I am also concerned about the more generalized, adverse effects
this tension has caused the airline industry and the traveling public.
Although there are many reasons for the difficulties major airlines are
facing in recruiting employees, being outright fearful of going to work
is a strong disincentive for anyone working in or considering
employment in the airline industry at this time.
Statement of Donielle Prophete, Ground Service Agent, Piedmont
Airlines, and President, Communications Workers of America Local 3645,
Submitted for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
Chairman DeFazio, Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves and
Ranking Member Graves and members of the committee, I am grateful for
the opportunity to submit this testimony for the record.
My name is Donielle Prophete. I have worked as a ground service
agent for Piedmont Airlines for 17 years and have been the President of
the Communications Workers of America Local 3645 since 2020. I
represent passenger service agents across the Southeast states working
for a regional subsidiary of American Airlines, Piedmont Airlines. My
hope is that this testimony can help members of the Committee and the
broader public to better understand the challenges that frontline
airline employees are facing during one of the most challenging periods
in the history of the airline industry.
The COVID-19 pandemic has made clear that the frontline gate and
ramp agents that I represent are key to keeping the industry operating
safely and efficiently. Our responsibilities include boarding
passengers onto airplanes in a safe and orderly manner, loading and
unloading luggage from the aircraft and assisting passengers with
reservations. We perform these duties on a daily basis even while our
stations are severely understaffed, while we suffer from fatigue and
stress from excessive mandatory overtime and while working through a
global pandemic that has taken the lives of 650,000 Americans,
including two agents at the Charlotte Douglas International Airport in
just the past month.
Our agents are the face of the airline's operations at the airport.
We work to keep passengers safe during the ongoing pandemic by
enforcing federal mask mandates. We work to mitigate the impacts of
snags in the operation due to flight delays, cancellations or other
irregularities from COVID-19. This means that, even as we keep the
entire industry moving, we have become targets of passengers'
frustrations and anger.
Since January 1, 2021, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
has recorded 4,284 incidents of verbal and physical assaults against
flight crew members and gate agents. Mask related incidents accounted
for 3,123 of recorded cases. This is a substantial increase from the
146 incidents reported to the FAA in 2019 and 183 reported in 2020.\1\
These are staggering numbers, but they don't tell the full story on the
physical and emotional impact incidents like these have had on my
members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.faa.gov/data_research/passengers_cargo/
unruly_passengers/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In particular, one of the most egregious incidents of passenger
rage this summer at the Charlotte Airport highlights the challenge
faced by my members and the need for a more coordinated and committed
response from local and federal law enforcement.
On June 28, 2021, a passenger tried to board a flight in a state of
extreme intoxication. My member and their supervisor, fulfilling their
duties to secure the aircraft and protect the other passengers, denied
the passenger access to his flight. The passenger became extremely
violent--physically assaulting and verbally attacking the gate agent, a
ramp agent, and their supervisor. Our agent sustained an injury to his
back when the passenger pushed our agent into the sharp edge of a coat
hanger on the wall.
There is no doubt about what happened. Video of the assault, taken
with a cellphone by a member of the public, was obtained by local news
and is publicly available.\2\ Despite the clear evidence of the
assault, the Charlotte Police Department arrested and charged the
passenger only for resisting arrest and trespassing in the gate area.
These charges were dropped the next day. The burden was on my member to
file separate assault charges for which there has been no resolution so
far.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ WSOC-TV ``Video shows man's confrontation with gate agent at
Charlotte airport'', July 12, 2021 https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/
video-man-gets-into-confrontation-with-gate-agent-charlotte-douglas/
QDCX6OIZQ5FGZIZHMKSEXK4URA
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe this demonstrates the patchwork and ineffective nature of
the response that often characterizes these incidents. Local law
enforcement did not pursue charges against the passenger for assaulting
my member and the FAA and federal law enforcement have likewise refused
to pursue this matter seriously. Under the 2018 FAA Reauthorization
Act, any interference with airport or air carrier employees with
security duties is punishable by criminal penalties and jail time. A
2017 ruling from the Department of Justice confirms this provision
applies to passenger service workers who perform a range of vital
security functions and are therefore covered under this decision.
In this case, American Airlines banned the passenger from flying
with the carrier for the rest of the year--but the airline is limited
in the actions it can take on its own. The passenger had the ability to
return to the airport and board a flight with a different carrier the
very next day. What frontline employees need is improved communication
from federal agencies to local law enforcement on their responsibility
to thoroughly document incidents like these and refer for federal
prosecution when appropriate. Federal law enforcement must also follow
through in pursuing repercussions outlined under the law as it stands
now.
My member is just one of many gate agents across the country who
have had experiences of physical or verbal abuse from enraged
passengers. These incidents don't just affect the workers directly
involved, impacts of an unsafe work environment reverberates throughout
my membership and the broader airport workforce.
Working in an environment where violence can erupt at any moment
results in high levels of stress, and I've heard members express the
impact of stress. I've heard from members who cry every day before
going into the airport or feel like they're having a ``nervous
breakdown'' before their shift starts. Many of my members feel that
they're reaching a breaking point.
Low morale doesn't just have a human cost, but a cost to the
industry as well. I am seeing members separate from the job, go out on
unpaid leave, and reduce their hours to part time as a result of the
stress and unsafe conditions. Airlines are struggling to retain their
workforce or recruit new employees.
I believe that for passengers to understand that these actions will
not be tolerated, local and federal law enforcement must pursue
repercussions for offenders. The 2017 ruling from the Department of
Justice makes clear that interference with agents with security duties
is a matter for federal law enforcement. Pursuing these cases will also
send a powerful message to airport and airline workers that their work
is valued and their safety is a priority. My members deserve a
commitment to protect them while they serve all of us.
Thank you.
Statement of Paul Hudson, President, FlyersRights.org, Submitted for
the Record by Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana
Comment of FlyersRights.org to the House Aviation Subcommittee on the
Increased Number of Airline Incidents
The recent increase in violent incidents in air travel is a serious
issue in need of solutions. The subcommittee hearing would benefit from
hearing the passenger perspective. FlyersRights.org submitted a
rulemaking petition to the Department of Transportation in August 2020
to mandate mask wearing in air travel and has been the leading
organization advocating for Covid mitigation measures to make air
travel safer. FlyersRights.org also published a financial stimulus and
covid mitigation policy proposal that, for less than the three combined
bailout payments, would have made air travel safer and would have
allowed the airlines to more effectively increase service, avoiding the
widespread cancellations seen this summer.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://flyersrights.org/news/f/air-travel-social-distancing-
and-stimulus-plan
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the latest FAA data, mask-related reported incidents
account for 73% of all incidents reported by crewmembers in 2021.\2\ At
the same time, non-mask related incidents are down, and the FAA has
more than doubled the number of its investigations. FlyersRights.org
proposes the following solutions to reduce the number of mask-related
disturbances on airplanes:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.faa.gov/data_research/passengers_cargo/
unruly_passengers/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Implement the yellow card system where a passenger is given a
written warning and the ability to send a written complaint to the
pilot or airline as means of de-escalation.
2. Ensure flight attendants themselves comply with and more
consistently enforce the mask rules.
3. Allow greater ease of obtaining legitimate health and
disability exceptions to the mask rule.
4. Implement greater covid mitigation measures, including social
distancing and temperature checks. Social distancing must be enforced
not only on the airplane, but at the gate, during the boarding process,
and at security checkpoints.
5. Reevaluate the TSA mask mandate extensions with a public notice
and comment process.
The airlines have crammed passengers on a smaller number of flights
with no social distancing, no middle seat blocking, no capacity limits,
no temperature checking, and no covid testing. While some passengers
oppose masks for political reasons, others see the lack of other common
sense safety precautions taken by the airlines (social distancing,
middle seat blocking, temperature checks) and the lack of consistent
enforcement on passengers and flight attendants as signs that maybe
safety precautions are not needed.
Prosecution for battery is needed when these incidents become
violent. However, it would be a severe escalation and a gross
infringement on civil liberties to invoke the Patriot Act's felony
``interference with flight crew members and flight attendants,''
intended for hijackers, to threaten a passenger with up to 20 years in
prison.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 49 USC Sec. 46504.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FlyersRights.org has advocated for a mask rule as well as other
health measures to protect passengers and crew members. While most
flight attendants enforce the mask rule as best as they can under the
circumstances, often flight attendants do not attempt enforcement and
themselves violate the mask rule.
Not only will these proposals help curb the increased number of
abhorrent passenger incidents, it is vital for the continued health of
all passengers and flight crew throughout the pandemic.
About FlyersRights.org
FlyersRights.org is the largest nonprofit airline passenger
organization with over 50,000 members and supporters nationwide. It
publishes a weekly online newsletter, operates a toll free hotline for
airline passengers, and advocates for their rights and interests.
FlyersRights was founded in 2007 after thousands of passengers,
including the founder Kate Hanni, were stranded on the tarmac for over
nine hours in Austin, Texas.
[all]