[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 201 (Monday, December 11, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7941-S7942]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Airline Fees
Mr. NELSON. Madam President, we are just about to enter the holiday
season. The traffic is already picking up. We could call it the great
holiday migration that is going to be underway. Millions of people will
be traveling to see their loved ones--their families, their friends--
and they will be visiting by airplane. They are going to get a big
surprise when they head to the airline ticket counter or try to check
in online and face a blizzard of what the airlines call ancillary fees.
For years, many of us on the Commerce Committee have been pushing the
Department of Transportation to adopt rules that would require a
standardized disclosure statement for common airline fees, such as bag
fees, change and cancellation fees, and priority boarding and seating
fees. Comparing this to when one applies for a credit card, there is a
box on the back of the application that shows the annual fee of the
credit card, the interest rate, and any other fees. Consumers have this
so they can compare adequate data to adequate data. We like to call it
comparing apples to apples. Therefore, the consumer can know what it is
they are looking for and choose the credit card they want. So it is a
commonsense solution in the airline business that you would want to do
for consumers, to make sense of all
[[Page S7942]]
those different fees on an airline ticket.
Well, there was some progress on this earlier in the year when the
Department of Transportation proposed a rule to require airlines to
disclose bag fees to consumers when they purchased a ticket. Last week,
however, the White House directed the Department of Transportation--the
administration did this for all of those airline holiday travelers.
They put a big lump of coal in their Christmas stockings when they
abruptly canceled the proposed rule of the Department of Transportation
that you were going to know what those fees were upfront when you
purchased the ticket, along with another rule that would have required
airlines to tell the public how much money the airline is charging for
all the other ancillary fees. Those proposed rules were withdrawn.
Well, that is just not in the interest of the traveling public. That is
not in the interest of consumers, and it should not be any skin off the
airlines' back to just show what the fees are upfront so the consumer
understands that.
Indeed, a new revenue source for the airlines is to have these
additional charges. That is not what this Senator is arguing with, as
long as those fees are properly and clearly disclosed.
Let me give you another example. Last year, on the FAA bill we passed
into law, it required the Department of Transportation to implement two
basic rules to protect airline customers--two very simple rules. The
first was, if you have checked a bag and you have paid the airline a
certain amount of money to check that bag, what happens if your bag
doesn't arrive or if it is delayed beyond a certain number of hours?
Shouldn't the airline, at least, refund that fee you paid for that bag
to be delivered in a timely fashion? Well, it is a pretty simple
concept. If you pay $50 for a checked bag, you expect it to arrive with
you, and if it doesn't, you should get an automatic refund. That is
common sense, but the Department of Transportation hasn't done anything
on that, and it is in the law. It is in the law we passed last year.
I will give you another example. The second requirement we put in
last year's FAA bill is that airlines, when they seat children 13 or
under, put them adjacent to a parent or an older sibling traveling with
them. So the Department of Transportation, earlier in the year,
designed a rule to ensure that parents would not have to fork over
money for a preferred seat just to be able to sit next to their child.
The Department of Transportation was supposed to have finalized both
of these rules by July of this year, but to date they have done
nothing. Consumers traveling during the holidays are going to have the
experience, if your bag doesn't show, since the rule hasn't been put in
place by the Department of Transportation, even though it is the law
that was passed last year--what is going to happen? Passengers with
delayed bags will be losing out on the money they paid to check their
bag, even if it doesn't get to them in a timely fashion.
What is going to happen to the parent with the underaged child? They
are going to be boarding planes wondering if they will be able to beg
someone to give up their seat just to sit next to their child, even
though that may be a preferred seat; in other words, a seat that costs
more money.
Just about everyone else will be left playing airline fee roulette,
not knowing what the new fee is that they are going to have to pay just
to get the basic service. It is so common sense, why do we have to
fight about this? We are not arguing that the airline doesn't have the
right to charge the fee; we just want it disclosed to the person who is
purchasing that ticket. It doesn't have to be the way it is now because
consumers should have a right to know ahead of time what they are
paying, and then they can compare options. When an airline charges a
fee for a service, if they failed to deliver that service, passengers
ought to get their money back. This is called basic fairness, but that
is not what we are seeing out there.
I urge the leadership of the Department of Transportation--Secretary
Chao and her staff--to go ahead and implement those two regulations
that emanate from the law we passed and to do it quickly. I urge the
Department of Transportation to treat airline passengers like they
ought to be treated, which is as valued customers during this holiday
season, as in every season.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Moran). The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.