[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]