[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE AIRLINE PASSENGER EXPERIENCE: WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT CAN BE
=======================================================================
(116-56)
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
AVIATION
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 3, 2020
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-
transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/
transportation
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
43-346 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon, Chair
SAM GRAVES, Missouri ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
DON YOUNG, Alaska District of Columbia
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
BOB GIBBS, Ohio RICK LARSEN, Washington
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois JOHN GARAMENDI, California
ROB WOODALL, Georgia HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
JOHN KATKO, New York Georgia
BRIAN BABIN, Texas ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana DINA TITUS, Nevada
DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
MIKE BOST, Illinois JARED HUFFMAN, California
RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas JULIA BROWNLEY, California
DOUG LaMALFA, California FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan MARK DeSAULNIER, California
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
GARY J. PALMER, Alabama SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California,
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania Vice Chair
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
Puerto Rico ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey
ROSS SPANO, Florida GREG STANTON, Arizona
PETE STAUBER, Minnesota DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida
CAROL D. MILLER, West Virginia LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
GREG PENCE, Indiana COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas
ABBY FINKENAUER, Iowa
JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
ANTONIO DELGADO, New York
CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota
HARLEY ROUDA, California
CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania
Subcommittee on Aviation
RICK LARSEN, Washington, Chair
GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
DON YOUNG, Alaska STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania District of Columbia
ROB WOODALL, Georgia DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
JOHN KATKO, New York STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania Georgia
PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan DINA TITUS, Nevada
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida JULIA BROWNLEY, California
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania GREG STANTON, Arizona
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
ROSS SPANO, Florida JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
PETE STAUBER, Minnesota EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
SAM GRAVES, Missouri (Ex Officio) SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas, Vice Chair
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota
GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon (Ex
Officio)
CONTENTS
Page
Summary of Subject Matter........................................ vii
STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Washington, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation:
Opening statement............................................ 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Oregon, and Chairman, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure:
Opening statement............................................ 4
Prepared statement........................................... 6
Hon. Garret Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Aviation:
Opening statement............................................ 43
Prepared statement........................................... 45
Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, prepared statement............................. 71
WITNESSES
Andrew Von Ah, Director, Physical Infrastructure, U.S. Government
Accountability Office:
Oral statement............................................... 9
Prepared statement........................................... 10
William J. McGee, Aviation Adviser, Consumer Reports:
Oral statement............................................... 19
Prepared statement........................................... 21
Lee Page, Senior Associate Advocacy Director, Paralyzed Veterans
of America:
Oral statement............................................... 25
Prepared statement........................................... 27
Joe Leader, Chief Executive Officer, Airline Passenger Experience
Association:
Oral statement............................................... 31
Prepared statement........................................... 33
Matt Klein, Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial
Officer, Spirit Airlines, Inc., accompanied by Thomas Canfield,
Senior Vice President, General Counsel, and Secretary, Spirit
Airlines, Inc.:
Oral statement of Mr. Klein.................................. 41
Prepared statement of Mr. Klein.............................. 42
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Letter of March 13, 2020, from Kenneth Mendez, President and
Chief Executive Officer, Asthma and Allergy Foundation of
America, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio..... 71
Statement of Airlines for America (A4A), Submitted for the Record
by Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana............................. 72
APPENDIX
Questions to Matt Klein, Executive Vice President and Chief
Commercial Officer, Spirit Airlines, Inc., from:
Hon. Steve Cohen............................................. 77
Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana.............................. 77
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
February 27, 2020
SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER
TO: LMembers, Subcommittee on Aviation
FROM: LStaff, Subcommittee on Aviation
RE: LSubcommittee hearing on ``The Airline Passenger
Experience: What It Is and What It Can Be''
_______________________________________________________________________
PURPOSE
The Subcommittee on Aviation will meet on Tuesday, March 3,
2020, at 10:00 a.m. in 2167 Rayburn House Office Building to
hold a hearing titled, ``The Airline Passenger Experience: What
It Is and What It Can Be.'' The hearing will examine the U.S.
airline passenger experience today, how airlines are working to
improve the air travel experience, and opportunities to invest
in technologies or innovations that could enhance the air
travel experience. The Subcommittee will hear testimony from
the Government Accountability Office (GAO); Consumer Reports;
Paralyzed Veterans of America; Airline Passenger Experience
Association (APEX); and Spirit Airlines.
BACKGROUND
I. OPPORTUNITIES FOR INNOVATION
A decade of sustained profitability provides U.S. carriers
an opportunity to invest in the passenger experience and
implement innovative technologies and features. For example, to
address the challenges faced by passengers with reduced
mobility, discussed in section V, infra, companies have
developed ``the world's first expanding aircraft lavatory'' for
single-aisle aircraft to accommodate passengers with reduced
mobility.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Stephanie Taylor, New Aircraft Lavatory Concept Is Accessible
to Passengers in Wheelchairs, APEX (Feb. 12, 2020), https://apex.aero/
2020/02/12/access-aircraft-lavatory-design.
Other companies have developed glass touch-controlled
reading lights.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Stephanie Taylor, Schott Reveals Touch-Controlled Reading
Light, APEX (Feb. 19, 2020), https://apex.aero/2020/02/19/schott-jade-
reading-light-priestmangoode.
While these innovative technologies have not yet been
adopted by airlines, they are examples of the types of
innovations--along with temperature-controlled seats \3\ and
seats that collect data on parameters such as cushion pressure
and passenger movement to help inform future seat designs \4\--
available to airlines that could improve passengers' in-flight
experience.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Marisa Garcia, Lantal Delivers Temperature-Control System for
Aircraft Seats, APEX (Feb. 5, 2020), https://apex.aero/2020/02/05/
lantal-temperature-controlled-seats.
\4\ Katie Sehl, Sitting on Air: Lantal's Pneumatic Comfort System,
APEX (May 16, 2016), https://apex.aero/2016/05/16/sitting-air-lantal-
pneumatic-comfort-system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. AVIATION REGULATION
While the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) provides
air traffic control and regulates aviation safety in the United
States,\5\ the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) conducts
limited economic regulation of the airline industry by
monitoring compliance with and investigating violations of its
aviation economic, consumer protection, and civil rights
requirements.\6\ Much of the DOT's economic regulation of the
industry is remnants of the former Civil Aeronautics Board's
regulatory authority, which included the complete regulation of
airline rates, routes, and services.\7\ Congress mostly ended
this economic regulation of air carriers with the enactment of
the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-504).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See 49 U.S.C. 44701, et seq.
\6\ See DOT, Aviation Consumer Protection, https://
www.transportation.gov/airconsumer. The DOT prohibits, for example,
unfair or deceptive practices, such as excessive tarmac delays and
misleading advertisements. See 49 U.S.C. 41101-02 (economic fitness
certification), 41712 (prohibition on unfair and deceptive trade
practices).
\7\ See Federal Aviation Act of 1958, Pub. L. 85-726.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the realm of consumer protection and civil rights, the
DOT has broad authority to investigate and prohibit ``an unfair
or deceptive practice or unfair method of competition'' among
air carriers and ticket agents.\8\ In addition to monitoring
industry compliance with DOT requirements, the DOT receives and
reviews consumer complaints filed with the Department.\9\ If
the DOT reviews and investigates a complaint and finds that an
air carrier or ticket agent has violated a DOT regulation or
order, or otherwise engaged in an unfair or deceptive practice,
the DOT will take appropriate enforcement action, including
issuing warning letters or consent orders, seeking injunctive
relief, or imposing civil penalties.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 49 U.S.C. 41712.
\9\ DOT, Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, https://
www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/about-us.
\10\ 49 U.S.C. 46301. See generally the DOT's message to major
air carriers (Sept. 25, 2001), available at https://
www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/docs/20010925_0.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 20, 2020, the DOT issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) intended to clarify the meaning of ``unfair''
or ``deceptive'' practices in air travel to align DOT
definitions with Federal Trade Commission principles, according
to the Secretary of Transportation.\11\ Among other things, the
proposed rulemaking would:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ POLITICO Pro Transp., DOT to Propose New Rule on 'Deceptive'
Practices by Airlines, Ticket Agents (Feb. 20, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LCodify the DOT's longstanding interpretation of
the terms ``unfair'' and ``deceptive''; \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ DOT NPRM, Defining Unfair or Deceptive Practices, DOT-OST-
2019-0182 at 1 (Feb. 20, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LRequire the DOT ``to articulate in future
enforcement orders [against airlines or ticket agents] the
basis for concluding that a practice is unfair or deceptive
where no existing [DOT] regulation governs the practice in
question''; \13\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LRequire the DOT ``to state the basis for its
conclusion that a practice is unfair or deceptive when it
issues discretionary aviation consumer protection
regulations.'' \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Id.
While Airlines for America--the trade association
representing U.S. carriers--applauded the proposed rule,
stating it would ``provide greater transparency for both the
U.S. airline industry and the flying public,'' a National
Consumers League executive argued the rule will set ``all kinds
of new bars that [the DOT] would have to get over in order to
conduct any enforcement actions.'' \15\ The NPRM will be
available for public review and comment for 60 days.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Sam Mintz, Morning Transportation, POLITICO (Feb. 21, 2020).
\16\ DOT NPRM, supra note 12 at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. AIRLINE CONSUMER COMPLAINTS
As noted above, the DOT is responsible for monitoring
compliance with and investigating violations of aviation civil
rights and consumer protection requirements. In 2019, the DOT
received a total of 15,332 consumer complaints--9,547 against
U.S. airlines; 5,147 against foreign airlines; and the
remainder against travel agents, tour operators, and
others.\17\ Of those complaints, approximately:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ DOT Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, Air Travel
Consumer Report (ATCR) (Feb. 2020) 60-64, https://
www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2020-02/February%202020
%20ATCR.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
L31 percent related to cancellations, delays, or
misconnections;
L17 percent related to baggage;
L12 percent related to reservations, ticketing, or
boarding;
L11 percent related to customer service;
L6 percent related to disability; and
Lthe remainder related to fares, refunds,
oversales, advertising, discrimination, and loss, injury, or
death of animals.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Id. at 60.
In 2019, 10 U.S. air carriers reported receiving 2,966,496
mishandled baggage reports from passengers\19\ and reported
denying boarding to, or bumping, more than 20,000 passengers
holding confirmed reservations involuntarily, although the
latter number is inflated from prior years due to the worldwide
grounding of the Boeing 737 MAX aircraft.\20\ Reporting U.S.
air carriers informed the DOT they collectively mishandled
10,548 wheelchairs and scooters in 2019--for a monthly average
of 879 mishandled mobility aids.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Id. at 36.
\20\ This figure represents 0.24 involuntary denied boardings per
10,000 passengers. Id. at 46. ``On March 13, 2019, the Federal Aviation
Administration ordered the immediate grounding of Boeing 737 MAX
aircraft operated by U.S. airlines or in U.S. territory based on data
arising out of the relevant accident investigations. American Airlines
and Southwest Airlines separately informed the Department that the
grounding of the 737 MAX aircraft has negatively impacted their
involuntary denied boarding statistics immediately following the
grounding.'' Id.
\21\ Pub. L. 115-254, 441 (requiring airline compliance with the
DOT's 2016 final rule requiring reporting of mishandled baggage and
wheelchairs in aircraft cargo compartments). See ATCR (Feb. 2020),
supra note 17 at 41. The figure for mishandled wheelchairs and scooters
represents 1.54 percent of the 685,792 aids enplaned in 2019. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. U.S. AIRLINES' PERFORMANCE AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
According to most recent Federal data, approximately 888.6
million passengers boarded U.S. airlines in 2018--an increase
of more than 25 percent in passenger levels since the 2008-09
economic crises.\22\ As described in detail below, U.S.
airlines have benefited from the annual increases in passenger
traffic, surging to record profitability. In fact, since the
economic crises, the U.S. airline industry has become the
world's most profitable. In 2018, the airlines reported an
after-tax net profit of $11.8 billion and a pre-tax operating
profit of $17.6 billion.\23\ As a whole, the U.S. airline
industry has been solidly profitable for 10 consecutive
years.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ U.S. Bureau of Transp. Statistics (BTS), Passengers, All
Carriers--All Airports, https://www.transtats.bts.gov/
Data_Elements.aspx?Data=1.
\23\ BTS, 2018 Annual and 4th Quarter U.S. Airline Financial Data
(May 6, 2019), https://www.bts.gov/newsroom/2018-annual-and-4th-
quarter-us-airline-financial-data.
\24\ Id. 2018 marked the tenth consecutive annual pre-tax operating
profit; the sixth consecutive annual after-tax net profit. Id.
According to Airlines for America calculations, over the course of the
last 50 years, even in the best years, the profitability of U.S.
airlines has lagged the U.S. corporate average. See A4A, Presentation:
Industry Review and Outlook, at 6-7, https://www.airlines.org/dataset/
a4a-presentation-industry-review-and-outlook/. For company-specific
margins, please see the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings
of each respective company. For the overall U.S. average, please see
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Department of Commerce, NIPA (Table
1.14, lines 1 and 11), available at http://www.bea.gov/iTable/
index_nipa.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to increased and new ancillary fees
contributing to U.S. airlines' recent financial performance, a
series of airline mergers over the last decade has reduced the
number of large competitors from eight to four, helping keep
airfares higher and airline costs lower than they would have
been otherwise.\25\ Still, flying today is lower than the cost
of air travel 25 years ago. According to U.S. Bureau of
Transportation Statistics (BTS) data, the average domestic
airfare, when adjusted for inflation, fell nearly 37 percent
from 1993 to 2018, from $563 to $345.\26\ This reduction may be
at least partially associated with the competitive effects
associated with the entry of low-cost and ultra-low-cost
carriers into different aviation markets.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Delta and Northwest merged in 2008, United and Continental
merged in 2010, Southwest and AirTran merged in 2010, and American and
US Airways merged in 2013. See GAO, Airline Competition: The Average
Number of Competitors in Markets Serving the Majority of Passengers Has
Changed Little in Recent Years, but Stakeholders Voice Concerns About
Competition 1, 6, 13-15, GAO-14-515 (June 2014).
\26\ BTS, Average Domestic Airline Itinerary Fares, https://
www.transtats.bts.gov/AverageFare/.
\27\ Alexander Bachwich and Michael Wittman, The Emergence and
Effects of the Ultra-Low Cost Carrier (ULCC) Business Model in the U.S.
Airline Industry, 62 J. of Air Transp. Mgmt. 155-64 (July 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. CONTRACTS OF CARRIAGE
Most of an air passenger's rights--beyond those mandated by
Congress or the DOT--are defined in an airline's contract of
carriage--``the legal agreement between an airline and its
ticket holders.'' \28\ These contracts contain provisions on
everything from how the airline will conduct check-in and
ticket refund procedures to its responsibilities to a passenger
when a flight is delayed.\29\ Each airline has its own
contract, so provisions differ from carrier to carrier. For
domestic travel, an airline may provide its contract terms on
or with a ticket at the time of purchase, or elect to
``incorporate the terms by reference,'' meaning they are
contained in a separate document that a passenger can request
or that is available on the airline's website.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Cong. Res. Service, Airline Passenger Rights: The Federal Role
in Aviation Consumer Protection 4 (Aug. 17, 2016).
\29\ See id. See also Bill McGee, Contracts of Carriage:
Deciphering Murky Airline Rules, USA TODAY (July 12, 2017), https://
www.usatoday.com/story/travel/columnist/mcgee/2017/07/12/airline-
contract-carriage/469916001/.
\30\ DOT, A Consumer Guide to Air Travel, https://
www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/fly-rights.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
But contracts of carriage can be lengthy and complicated.
In 2017, the GAO reviewed the contracts of carriage of 11 U.S.
airlines.\31\ The GAO found that the approximate average length
of the documents was 40 pages.\32\ Using an automated grade-
level readability test, the GAO found these documents ``require
a reading level of someone with a college graduate degree.''
\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ GAO, Information on Airline Fees for Optional Services, GAO-
17-756, 35 (Sept. 2017), available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-
17-756.pdf.
\32\ Id. at 35.
\33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. UNBUNDLING OF FEES FOR OPTIONAL SERVICES
U.S. airlines' assessment of fees for checked baggage and
reservation changes alone totaled $7.6 billion in 2018--$4.9
billion for checked baggage and $2.7 billion for reservation
changes.\34\ And some U.S. airlines have recently increased
these fees. For example, on February 21, 2020, United Airlines
increased its checked baggage fee by $5, resulting in a
passenger's first checked bag costing $35 and the second bag
$45, unless the passenger pre-pays for the bag before online
check-in.\35\ If past behavior is indicative of what is to
come, competitors could follow suit and raise their bag fees as
well. For example, when JetBlue Airways increased its bag fees
by $5 in August 2018, United, Delta Air Lines, and American
Airlines all raised theirs by $5 within 30 days.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See BTS, Baggage Fees by Airline 2018, https://www.bts.gov/
node/221236 and BTS, Reservation Cancellation/Change Fees by Airline
2018, https://www.bts.gov/node/221251.
\35\ Dawn Gilbertson, United Airlines Raising Checked-Bag Fees,
Joining JetBlue, USA TODAY (Feb. 21, 2020), https://www.usatoday.com/
story/travel/airline-news/2020/02/21/united-airlines-bag-fees-35-first-
checked-bag-45-second/4831976002/.
\36\ See id. See also Dawn Gilbertson, No Surprise: American
Airlines Raises Bag Fees to $30, Matching Delta and United, USA TODAY
(Sept. 20, 2018), https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/
todayinthesky/2018/09/20/american-increases-bag-fees-matching-united-
delta-jetblue/1189021002/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the past decade, in addition to increasing existing
fee amounts (e.g., checked and oversized bags, ticket
cancellation), U.S. airlines have introduced a variety of new
fees for optional services \37\ that were once included in the
total/base cost of a passenger's ticket, such as seat selection
and priority boarding.\38\ Consumer advocates have ``raised
concerns about the lack of transparency regarding optional
service fees and the full price of airline tickets,'' which
affect the ability of consumers to compare the total cost of
planned air travel across several airlines before purchase.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ GAO-17-756, supra note 31 at 10.
\38\ Id. at 1.
\39\ Id. at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite increased and new ancillary fees, passenger travel
has continued to grow since 2010.\40\ In its 2017 report, the
GAO noted that ``unlike the revenues from domestic airfares,
revenues from most optional service fees are not subject to the
excise tax that helps fund the Airport and Airway Trust Fund,
which partially supports the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) . . . .'' \41\ For example, the nearly $5 billion in
checked baggage fees in 2018 was not subject to the aviation
excise tax like the base cost of the ticket for air travel.\42\
If this ancillary fee were subject to the 7.5 percent excise
tax, approximately $367 million in excise tax revenue would
have been deposited into the Trust Fund, the dedicated source
of funding that helps finance the FAA's investments in the
airport and airway system and FAA operations, including air
traffic control services and aviation safety inspections, among
other things.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ Id. at 18.
\41\ Id.
\42\ See id. at n. 18 (describing how Department of Treasury
regulations specifically exempt baggage fee payments from the 7.5-
percent aviation excise tax).
\43\ See FAA, Airport & Airway Trust Fund (AATF), https://
www.faa.gov/about/budget/aatf/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. FARE CLASSES
U.S. airlines divide their economy-class inventory into
fare classes at different costs.\44\ Beginning in 2015, several
U.S. airlines introduced ``basic economy'' tickets,\45\ which
have been called ``the cheapest, least flexible, unfriendliest
option'' available to a consumer due to all of the restrictions
entailed.\46\ Passengers purchasing these restricted tickets
may be ``assigned seats after checking in, meaning that they
might not be seated with the rest of their travel group; board
the aircraft last; cannot upgrade seats or class of service;
and cannot change their flights.'' \47\ Further, some ``basic
economy'' passengers may be denied access to overhead
compartments or limited to a single carry-on bag that fits
under the seat.\48\ Some travelers may, however, take advantage
of these tickets if they can pack light, bring their own
snacks, and travel with few expectations, for example.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ Hannah Sampson, Airline Classes Are Complicated. Here's How to
Know Which One You Need., Wash. Post (Nov. 15, 2019), https://
www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2019/11/15/airline-fares-are-complicated-
heres-how-know-which-one-you-need/.
\45\ GAO-17-756, supra note 31 at 13. See Hugo Martin, Senator Says
Basic Economy Seats on Planes Add to Travel Confusion and Airline
Profits, L.A. Times (Jan. 27, 2018), https://www.latimes.com/business/
la-fi-travel-briefcase-basic-economy-20180127-story.html.
\46\ Sampson, supra note 44. Others have said, ``[T]he growing
number of ultra-low-cost carriers along with price conscience travelers
searching on comparison websites have forced the major legacy carriers
to introduce these bare-bones tickets in order to compete.'' Peter
Thornton, A New Look at Basic Economy for Domestic and Short-Haul
International Travel, AirfareWatchdog (Dec. 20, 2019), https://
www.airfarewatchdog.com/blog/44259587/a-new-look-at-basic-economy-for-
domestic-and-short-haul-international-travel/. Basic economy tickets
are also sold on Canadian and Mexican airlines.
\47\ GAO-17-756, supra note 31 at 13.
\48\ Id.
\49\ See Thornton, supra note 36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
But these fares sometimes push passengers to ultimately
purchase more expensive tickets that include the flexibility to
change flights or roomier seats.\50\ According to one American
Airlines executive, ``The product is working entirely as we
expected and so we're seeing the buy-up rates that we expected
to see and we're seeing the sell-up amounts that we expected to
see . . . . So basic economy is really, at this point, working
as designed.'' \51\ United Airlines president Scott Kirby
similarly said that segmentation of the economy cabin could add
up to $1 billion in revenue for the carrier within a few
years.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ Martin, supra note 45.
\51\ Id.
\52\ Edward Russell, United Completes Domestic Basic Economy Roll
Out, FlightGlobal (June 7, 2017), https://www.flightglobal.com/united-
completes-domestic-basic-economy-roll-out/124319.article.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There have been cases when ``basic economy'' policies have
caused confusion at the airport, both for employees who must
enforce the policies and for passengers who may have
unknowingly or mistakenly purchased such a restricted ticket.
For example, in 2017, American Airlines employees erroneously
attempted to charge a nursing mother $150 to check a cooler of
frozen breast milk at the gate because she had purchased a
``basic economy'' ticket, which limited her carry-on baggage
allowance.\53\ The airline clarified that the employees were
not acting consistently with the carrier's policy, which would
have permitted the passenger to carry the cooler on board.\54\
The ``budget-conscious'' passenger felt pressured to leave
behind 40 ounces of frozen breast milk at the gate.\55\ There
have been other cases of consumers becoming frustrated with
these ``budget tickets,'' and several airlines have responded
by ensuring that communications with customers purchasing a
``basic economy'' ticket are clear as to how the fares work and
any associated restrictions.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ Dawn Gilbertson, American Airlines Tries to Charge Mom $150 to
Check Frozen Breast Milk, USA TODAY (Dec. 14, 2017), https://
www.usatoday.com/story/travel/nation-now/2017/12/14/breast-milk-
baggage-fee/953074001/).
\54\ Id.
\55\ Id.
\56\ See Cadie Thompson, United Airlines Unveiled New Budget
Tickets--and Some Customers are Furious, Bus. Insider (June 14, 2017),
https://www.businessinsider.com/united-airlines-basic-economy-tickets-
frustrating-customers-2017-6 (describing instances of public response
to United's basic economy tickets and several airlines' efforts to
ensure ticket restrictions are made clear to passengers before and
after purchase).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The detailed segmentation has also prompted difficulty for
families traveling together. Parents often do not want to pay
extra for assigned seats next to their children. But when asked
about this issue, United Airlines president Scott Kirby said,
``Look, when you go to a concert, do you think you should pay
the same price to sit in the nosebleed seats or to sit up
front?'' \57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ See Brian Sumers, United Airlines President on Turning
Skeptics Into Believers, Skift (Aug. 27, 2018), https://skift.com/2018/
08/27/united-airlines-president-on-turning-skeptics-into-believers/
?utm_content=76281326&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. DENIED BOARDING
For decades, airlines routinely overbooked flights to
compensate for an inevitable number of ``no-shows'' among
passengers holding confirmed reservations.\58\ However, non-
refundable or non-flexible ticket options and reservation
change fees have reduced the number of no-shows, and
overbooking practices result in ``oversale'' situations in
which airlines are forced to involuntarily deny boarding to, or
``bump,'' some passengers.\59\ The need to accommodate airline
flight crews or aircraft maintenance issues can also result in
denied boardings.\60\ While most denied boardings are
voluntary--meaning the passenger voluntarily gives up their
seat and accepts the airline's offer for compensation (e.g.,
cash or an airline voucher)--others are involuntary.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ Tom Chitty, Why Do Airlines Overbook Flights, CNBC (June 21,
2019), https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/21/why-do-airlines-overbook-
flights-paris-air-show.html.
\59\ See id. See also GAO, Information on Airlines' Denied Boarding
Practices, GAO-20-191 (Dec. 2019), https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-20-
191.pdf.
\60\ See GAO-20-191 supra note 59 at 1.
\61\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In these situations, airlines must first solicit passengers
to voluntarily give up their seats before denying boarding
involuntarily,\62\ and the rules for how an airline will select
passengers for bumping if there is an insufficient number of
volunteers vary by carrier.\63\ DOT rules set minimum
compensation amounts for passengers who are involuntarily
denied boarding; amounts vary based on fare and the amount of
time by which the passenger's arrival at their final
destination is delayed.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ Id. at 6.
\63\ Id. at 7. Factors for determining how an airline will select
passengers to deny boarding involuntarily include fare types, check-in
times, and frequent flyer status. Id.
\64\ Id. at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A high-profile incident in 2017 raised public questions
about airlines' denied-boarding policies. In order to
accommodate off-duty crewmembers traveling on a United Express
flight from Chicago to Louisville, United Airlines gate agents
attempted to bump a passenger who had already boarded the
aircraft.\65\ When the passenger refused to give up his seat,
airline staff called police officers from the Chicago
Department of Aviation to physically remove the passenger.\66\
As evidenced by several passengers' video recordings, the
passenger was bloodied and seriously injured as he was
forcefully removed from the aircraft.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ See Erin McCann, United's Apologies: A Timeline, N.Y. Times
(Apr. 14, 2017), https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/14/business/united-
airlines-passenger-doctor.html?_r=0 and David Koenig, United CEO Says
No One Will Be Fired for Dragging Incident, AP Online (Apr. 18, 2017),
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/04/18/business/ap-us-united-
passenger-removed.html.
\66\ McCann, supra note 65.
\67\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In an attempt to prevent such incidents in the future, the
FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 prohibited, with few
limitations, an airline from denying boarding to or
involuntarily removing a passenger from an aircraft after the
passenger has checked in for the flight and had their boarding
pass accepted by the gate agent.\68\ The law also directed the
GAO to review airline policies and practices related to
oversales of flights.\69\ In its review, the GAO found that to
reduce the possibility of denied boarding, airlines have
``reduced their rate of overbooking or eliminated [overbooking]
altogether,'' \70\ and now solicit volunteers to give up their
seats earlier in the process (e.g., soliciting voluntary
passengers before airport arrival), or offer alternative forms
of compensation (e.g., gift cards or iPads).\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ Pub. L. 115-254, 425(b).
\69\ Id. 425(f).
\70\ GAO-20-191, supra note 59 at 15.
\71\ Id. at 16-17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. WIDESPREAD INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) DISRUPTIONS
A series of high-profile IT system failures resulting in
the delay or cancellation of tens of thousands of U.S. flights
has affected airlines' overall on-time performance in recent
years. In total, the GAO identified 34 IT outages between 2015
and 2017, with 85 percent of those outages resulting in flight
delays or cancellations.\72\ For example, in July 2016, more
than 2,300 Southwest Airlines flights were canceled, 7,000 more
were delayed, and nearly all flights were grounded at the
airline's Chicago-Midway hub due to a the failure of a small
Cisco router--one of about 2,000--in a Southwest data
center.\73\ Similarly, Delta canceled 2,300 flights over three
days in August 2016, after a critical computer system crashed
due to a power outage and small fire in a Delta data
center.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ GAO, Information on Airline IT Outages, GAO-19-514 (June
2019), https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-19-514.pdf.
\73\ Robert Wall, U.S. Airlines Report Delays Caused by System
Fault, Wall St. J. (Apr. 1, 2019), https://www.wsj.com/articles/
southwest-airlines-says-systemwide-technology-problem-affecting-
flights-11554117011.
\74\ See id. See also GAO-19-514, supra note 72 at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While airlines' policies may vary in what they will provide
their passengers during an IT outage (e.g., food, hotel),
according to DOT policy, passengers affected by cancellations
or significant disruptions are entitled to a refund of any
unused portion of their tickets if they so request.\75\ Under
DOT policy, an airline's failure to provide such a refund is an
unfair and deceptive practice.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\75\ GAO-19-514, supra note 72 at 1, 10.
\76\ Id. See 49 U.S.C. 41712 (prohibiting broadly unfair and
deceptive practices among air carriers and ticket agents). Airlines or
ticket agents that violate that proscription may be required to pay a
civil penalty to the DOT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. PASSENGERS WITH DISABILITIES
According to the most recent Census, 57 million Americans
(roughly 1 in 5 individuals) have a disability, and more than
half of these individuals experience issues with physical
mobility.\77\ While these Americans may face various hurdles in
their daily life, air travel can often present an additional
unique set of challenges. For instance, airline passengers with
disabilities may encounter inaccessible lavatories on aircraft
or incur bodily harm when boarding or deplaning an aircraft,
and frequently report lost, damaged, or otherwise mishandled
mobility aids, such as wheelchairs and scooters.\78\ In
addition, individuals with certain disabilities, such as
wheelchair users, require additional assistance or have
difficulty performing certain actions at airports, such as
handling their baggage, navigating through crowded terminals,
and undergoing security screening.\79\ Such challenges can
prevent passengers with disabilities from enjoying their air
travel experience, and may lead them to seek out alternative
means of travel or avoid traveling altogether.\80\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ GAO, Passengers with Disabilities: Air Carriers' Disability-
Training Programs and the Department of Transportation's Oversight,
GAO-17-541R (May 31, 2017), https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-17-541r.pdf.
\78\ A Work in Progress: Implementation of the FAA Reauthorization
Act of 2018: Before the Subcomm. on Aviation of the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, 115th Cong. 2 (2019)
(statement of David Zurfluh, National President, Paralyzed Veterans of
America).
\79\ Barbara Twardowski, Flying Tips for Wheelchair Users, from
Wheelchair Users, N.Y. Times (Mar. 8, 2019), https://www.nytimes.com/
2019/03/08/travel/flying-tips-for-wheelchair-users-disabilities.html.
\80\ See Zurfluh, supra note 78, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1986, Congress passed the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA),
landmark legislation specifically focused on preventing
discrimination against people with disabilities in air
travel.\81\ Before the ACAA, people with disabilities often had
no way of predicting the extent of a given airline's or flight
crew's accommodations.\82\ It was common practice for people
with disabilities to routinely be forced to travel with an
attendant at their own expense, even if they did not need
assistance to fly safely; be required to sit on a blanket for
fears that they might soil the passenger seat; or simply be
refused service.\83\ Passage of the ACAA provided people with
disabilities improved air travel by setting clear standards
regarding aircraft accessibility, seating accommodations,
boarding and deplaning assistance, service animals, and
screening, among other things.\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\81\ Pub. L. No. 99-435.
\82\ Id.
\83\ Id.
\84\ See generally Cong. Res. Service, Overview of the Air Carrier
Access Act (May 19, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1990, the DOT promulgated rules under the ACAA defining
the rights of passengers with disabilities and the obligations
of air carriers under this law. Among other things, the ACAA:
LProhibits air carriers from requiring a person
with disability to travel with an attendant; \85\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\85\ 14 C.F.R. 382.29(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LRequires widebody (twin-aisle) aircraft to
include accessible lavatories; \86\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\86\ 14 C.F.R. 382.63.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LRequires aircraft of a certain size to have
priority space for wheelchair storage in cabin; \87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\87\ 14 C.F.R. 382.121(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LRequires airline assistance with boarding and
deplaning; \88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ 14 C.F.R. 382.95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LProhibits airlines from charging passengers with
disabilities for providing accommodations; \89\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\89\ 14 C.F.R. 382.31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LRequires airlines to train airline and contractor
personnel who assist people with disabilities; \90\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\90\ 14 C.F.R. 382.15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LRequires that air carriers designate ``complaints
resolution officials'' to respond to disability-related
complaints.\91\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\91\ 14 C.F.R. 382.151.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. EMOTIONAL SUPPORT ANIMALS
Many people with disabilities use a service animal in order
to fully participate in everyday life. Under the ACAA, a
service animal is defined as any animal that is individually
trained or able to provide assistance to a person with a
disability; or any animal that assists persons with
disabilities by providing emotional support.\92\ By law,
airlines must allow individuals with disabilities to travel
with service animals, including emotional support animals.\93\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\92\ DOT, Service Animals (Including Emotional Support Animals)
(Mar. 20, 2018), available at https://www.transportation.gov/
individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/service-animals-including-
emotional-support-animals.
\93\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ACAA requirement to allow emotional support or
``comfort'' animals diverges from the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.\94\ This has led to an
increasing variety of purported emotional support animals being
used in recent years, including pigs, peacocks, miniature
horses, snakes, iguanas, and parrots, with air carriers having
limited ability to restrict some of these animals.\95\ Airlines
and flight attendants have reported numerous instances of
purported emotional support animals growling at and biting
flight crew or passengers and displaying aggression toward
other purported emotional support animals.\96\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\94\ Cong. Res. Service, The Americans with Disabilities Act and
Service Animals 3 (Oct. 28, 2010).
\95\ Id.
\96\ See, e.g., Ted Reed, `Emotional Support' Dog Bites Flight
Attendant Who Requires Five Stitches, Forbes (July 23, 2019), https://
www.forbes.com/sites/tedreed/2019/07/23/emotional-support-dog-bites-
flight-attendant-who-requires-five-stitches/#10c1284e2286.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 directs the DOT to
define ``service animal'' and develop minimum requirement
standards for both service and emotional support animals.\97\
In January, the DOT proposed a rule that would, among other
things, end the requirement that airlines recognize emotional
support animals as service animals and thereby allow airlines
to deny their carriage.\98\ The president of the Association of
Flight Attendants lauded the proposal and said, ``The days of
Noah's Ark in the air are hopefully coming to an end.'' \99\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\97\ Pub. L. No. 115-254, 437.
\98\ DOT, U.S. Department of Transportation Seeks Comment on
Proposed Amendments to Regulation of Service Animals on Flights (Jan.
22, 2020), https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/us-department-
transportation-seeks-comment-proposed-amendments-regulation-service.
\99\ Ass'n of Flight Attendants, Flight Attendants Applaud DOT's
Clear Rule on Animals in the Cabin (Jan. 22, 2020), at https://
www.afacwa.org/flight_attendants_applaud_dot_rule_
animals_cabin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION
Federal law prohibits discrimination by both U.S. and
foreign air carriers against individuals on the basis of race,
color, national origin, religion, sex, or ancestry \100\ as
well as disability.\101\ As described above, the DOT is
responsible for enforcing statutes prohibiting unlawful
discrimination by airlines against air travelers, monitors
compliance with DOT regulations, and processes and investigates
complaints filed with the DOT alleging discrimination.\102\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\100\ 49 U.S.C. 40127(a). See also 49 U.S.C. 41310(a), 41712,
and 41702 (other provisions that the DOT has interpreted as prohibiting
discrimination in air travel).
\101\ See 49 U.S.C. 41705. See also 14 C.F.R. part 382 (the DOT's
regulation implementing the Air Carrier Access Act of 1968). Part 382
includes a series of sections describing air carriers' requirements,
including making airport facilities and aircraft accessible. See, e.g.,
14 C.F.R. part 382 subpart E (``Accessibility of Aircraft''), subpart F
(``Seating Accommodations''), and subpart G (``Boarding, Deplaning, and
Connecting Assistance'').
\102\ See DOT, Passengers' Right to Fly Free From Discrimination,
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/
Passengers%20Right%20to%20Fly
%20Free%20from%20Discrimination.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In January 2020, the DOT found Delta violated Federal anti-
discriminatory/bias statutes in two 2016 incidents where the
carrier's flight crews ordered three Muslim passengers off the
aircraft.\103\ In the first case, the DOT found that, but for
the couple's ``perceived religion,'' the carrier ``would not
have removed or denied them re-boarding.'' \104\ In the second
case, flight crew flagged the behavior of a Muslim passenger,
and despite the carrier's security office reporting the
passenger's record had ``no red flags,'' the captain requested
the passenger be removed after flight attendants expressed that
``they remained uncomfortable.'' \105\ The DOT found that the
captain's removal of the passenger after being cleared by
security was discriminatory.\106\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ David Koenig, U.S. Fines Delta $50,000 for Booting Off 3
Muslim Passengers, AP News (Jan. 24, 2020), https://apnews.com/
3edb75b25d5863e79a4ea37fd71102b5.
\104\ DOT Consent Order Issued to Delta Air Lines (Order No. 2020-
1-9) 2 (Jan. 24, 2020), https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/
files/2020-01/delta-air-lines-order-2020-1-9.pdf.
\105\ Id. at 3.
\106\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Without admitting or denying these violations, the airline
consented to the DOT's issuance of an order to cease and desist
from violating applicable anti-discrimination statutes, and the
DOT fined the carrier $50,000, mandated civil rights training
for certain employees, and required the carrier to enhance its
e-training civil rights program.\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\107\ Id. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 directed the GAO to
examine airlines' training programs on racial, ethnic, and
religious non-discrimination for their employees and
contractors, including how frequently airlines train new
employees and contractors.\108\ The GAO found that the six U.S.
airlines selected for the audit did indeed provide such
training to their newly hired employees, including pilots,
flight attendants, and customer service representatives.\109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\108\ Pub. L. 115-254, 407. See GAO, Information on Selected
Airlines' Non-Discrimination Training Programs 1, GAO-19-654R, https://
www.gao.gov/products/gao-19-654r.
\109\ GAO-19-654R, supra note 108 at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VIII. AIRCRAFT EVACUATION STANDARDS
The Federal Aviation Regulations require that the design of
an airliner, by virtue of the locations and types of emergency
exits, must permit all passengers to evacuate the aircraft
within 90 seconds with half the exits blocked.\110\ But recent
accidents have raised concerns about whether all passengers
can, in fact, evacuate an airliner in 90 seconds, given
passengers' propensity to carry on large bags, such as roll-
aboard suitcases, and other behavioral shifts over the last
decade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\110\ See 14 C.F.R. 25.803, 25.807; 14 C.F.R. part 25, app'x. J.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example, the National Transportation Safety Board
(NTSB) concluded that it took at least 2 minutes and 21
seconds--51 seconds longer than the FAA assumes--for 161
passengers to evacuate a lightly-loaded American Airlines 767-
300ER after an uncontained engine failure and fire during
takeoff at Chicago O'Hare in 2016.\111\ The NTSB concluded that
``evidence of passengers retrieving carry-on baggage during
this and other recent emergency evacuations demonstrates that
previous FAA actions to mitigate this potential safety hazard
have not been effective.'' \112\ This was not an isolated
event.\113\ The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 directs the FAA
to review the assumptions and methods for certifying transport-
category airplane designs' compliance with the FAA's evacuation
requirement.\114\ The FAA convened an aviation rulemaking
committee last year to conduct that review; the committee's
work continues.\115\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ Nat'l Transp. Safety Bd., NTSB/AAR-18/01, Uncontained Engine
Failure and Subsequent Fire, American Airlines Flight 383, Boeing 767-
323, N345AN, Chicago, Illinois, October 28, 2016, at 27 (2018).
\112\ Id. at 66. The Safety Board found that ``some passengers
evacuated from all three usable exits with carry-on baggage. In one
case, a flight attendant tried to take a bag away from a passenger who
did not follow the instruction to evacuate without baggage, but the
flight attendant realized that the struggle over the bag was prolonging
the evacuation and allowed the passenger to take the bag. In another
case, a passenger came to the left overwing exit with a bag and
evacuated with it despite being instructed to leave the bag behind.''
Id. at 65.
\113\ For example, in-cabin video footage of passengers evacuating
Emirates flight 521, a Boeing 777-300 that crash-landed in Dubai in
2016, shows passengers retrieving large carry-on items from overhead
bins despite smoke billowing into the cabin from a large fire on the
wing that eventually destroyed the aircraft. The Aviation Herald,
Emirates Boeing 777-300 Registration A6-EMW, http://avherald.com/
h?article=49c12302&opt=0; YouTube (Aug. 3, 2016), https://
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUg7zOBB3Ig.
\114\ Pub. L. 115-254, 337.
\115\ FAA, Emergency Evacuation Standards ARC Charter, Aug. 29,
2019, available at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/
committees/documents/index.cfm/document/information/documentID/3983.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to passengers' propensity to carry on large
bags, reduced spacing between seats to accommodate more
passengers per flight may also affect cabin evacuation times.
According to aviation consultant Bill McGee, who will be
testifying before the Subcommittee, ``legroom (as measured in
seat pitch) and comfort (as measured in seat width) have both
been steadily decreasing since the 1980s.'' \116\ Mr. McGee and
others assert that tighter seats--with seat pitch as low as 28
inches and width as low as 16.5 inches in some U.S. airlines'
aircraft--may pose health issues for passengers (e.g., blood
clotting, deep vein thrombosis), in addition to making
emergency egress from a commercial airliner more
difficult.\117\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\116\ Bill McGee, Airline Seat Size: Will FAA Bring Relief to
Squeezed Flyers?, USA TODAY (Nov. 15, 2018), https://www.usatoday.com/
story/travel/columnist/mcgee/2018/11/15/airline-seat-size-faa/
2003043002/.
\117\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 directs the FAA to
``issue regulations that establish minimum dimensions for
passenger seats on aircraft operated by air carriers . . . ,
including minimums for seat pitch, width, and length, and that
are necessary for the safety of passengers.'' \118\ From
November 2019-January 2020, the FAA conducted testing to
evaluate the relationship between seat spacing and evacuation
times at an Oklahoma City facility; \119\ agency staff are now
analyzing the results of that testing, although action is not
expected before the second half of 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\118\ Pub. L. No. 115-254, 577.
\119\ David Koenig, FAA to Test Whether Packed Planes Affect
Evacuation Time, ABC News (Oct. 17, 2019), https://abcnews.go.com/
Business/wireStory/faa-test-packed-planes-affect-evacuation-time-
66358368.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IX. AIRLINE RESPONSE TO CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019
Over the past several weeks, the global community has
closely observed an outbreak of a ``respiratory disease caused
by a novel (new) coronavirus that was first detected in Wuhan
City, Hubei Province, China'' and which continues to expand
internationally.\120\ Last month, the World Health Organization
named the disease ``coronavirus disease 2019'' (COVID-19).\121\
The virus can spread person-to-person and has spread outside of
China, including to the United States, where the first
confirmed person-to-person spread was reported on January 30,
2020.\122\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\120\ CDC, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Summary,
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nCoV/summary.html (last visited on
Feb. 19, 2020).
\121\ Id.
\122\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the outbreak, the three U.S. airlines
serving China--American, Delta, and United--have temporarily
suspended all flights between the United States and China.
Airlines are generally offering refunds and change fee waivers
for previously scheduled travel to China. Some Chinese carriers
continue to serve the United States, although most have scaled
back or cancelled service given new entry restrictions imposed
by the United States and reduced demand.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airline Destinations suspended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Beijing
Hong Kong
Shanghai
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delta Beijing
Shanghai
------------------------------------------------------------------------
United Beijing
Chengdu
Hong Kong
Shanghai
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As of February 3, 2020, the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) has imposed restrictions on entry into the United States
by passengers who have traveled to mainland China within the
last 14 days.\123\ Because COVID-19 outbreak is a public health
crisis, the DOT and FAA roles are limited. While the outbreak
will have effects on air commerce, it will not affect safety of
flight or air traffic control procedures. DOT aviation consumer
protection regulations will continue to apply to canceled
flights and requests for refunds. Both the DOT and FAA are
providing support to Federal public health and security
agencies, such as the Centers for Disease Control, while
mitigating operational effects on the aviation industry.\124\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\123\ DHS, DHS Issues Supplemental Instructions For Inbound Flights
with Individuals Who Have Been in China, Feb. 2, 2020, https://
www.dhs.gov/news/2020/02/02/dhs-issues-supplemental-instructions-
inbound-flights-individuals-who-have-been-china?utm_source=hp_
slideshow&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=dhsgov.
\124\ See, e.g., FAA, Novel Coronavirus Update, https://
www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=94991 (last visited Feb. 26, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
WITNESSES
LMr. Andrew Von Ah, Director, Physical
Infrastructure, U.S. Government Accountability Office
LMr. William J. McGee, Aviation Consultant,
Consumer Reports
LMr. Lee Page, Senior Associate Advocacy Director,
Paralyzed Veterans of America
LMr. Joe Leader, Chief Executive Officer, Airline
Passenger Experience Association
LMr. Matt Klein, Executive Vice President and
Chief Commercial Officer, Spirit Airlines
THE AIRLINE PASSENGER EXPERIENCE: WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT CAN BE
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 3, 2020
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Aviation,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m., in room
2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Rick Larsen (Chairman
of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Larsen. The subcommittee will come to order. I ask
unanimous consent that the chair be authorized to declare a
recess during today's hearing. Without objection, so ordered. I
also ask unanimous consent that Members not on the subcommittee
be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at today's hearing
and to ask questions. Without objection, so ordered.
Good morning. I want to thank the witnesses for joining the
subcommittee today for a discussion on the air travel
experience. According to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation
Statistics, in 2018, U.S. airlines carried 925.5 million
passengers to destinations in the U.S. and abroad, the highest
total since 2003. The FAA's current aerospace forecast predicts
passenger traffic will increase roughly 2 percent per year over
the next 20 years.
In the Puget Sound region, where I am from, the number of
passenger enplanements is expected to grow from 24 million in
2018 up to 55.6 million by 2050.
So, while increased passenger demand creates new economic
opportunities and enhances the Nation's aviation network,
longstanding challenges can hinder growth. Over the last few
years, U.S. airlines have invested in their products, including
IT solutions, such as smartphone apps, to destress the travel
experience.
Today's hearing is an opportunity for this subcommittee to
examine the U.S. airline passenger experience, hear from
stakeholders on ways to improve this experience, and consider
how Congress and the airline industry can foster innovation to
benefit the flying public.
Today's witnesses represent a broad range of stakeholders
with unique insights on the passenger experience, from the
Government Accountability Office, or GAO, to airlines and
industry to consumer advocates. And while the subcommittee will
discuss numerous aspects of the everyday travel experience on
U.S. airlines, there are a few at the top of my mind today.
The first is accessibility issues. According to the last
U.S. Census estimates, 57 million Americans have a disability,
and more than half of those have mobility issues. Last
November, the subcommittee held a roundtable to better
understand this community's air travel experience, including
challenges with boarding the aircraft, inaccessible lavatories,
inappropriate screening techniques, and damaged wheelchairs and
mobility aids.
As mandated by the 2016 and 2018 FAA Reauthorization Acts,
the U.S. Department of Transportation initiated several
rulemakings to improve the accessibility of aircraft lavatories
and regulate emotional support and service animals.
And Mr. Lee Page today joins us on behalf of the Paralyzed
Veterans of America. Mr. Page, thank you for coming. I look
forward to hearing more about these rules and how Congress can
work with industry and stakeholders to help fill in the gaps on
airplanes and airport accessibility.
Discrimination. Throughout this country's history,
discrimination has been a pervasive and persistent issue. Far
too often, viral videos, reports, or personal anecdotes uncover
unlawful practices across the transportation sector on the
basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion and
disability.
According to GAO, passenger discrimination complaints
submitted to the DOT went up from an average of 80 per year
over the past decade to 96 complaints in 2019. Most of these
complaints were related to racial discrimination. Sadly, this
startling statistic does not reflect the numerous other cases
DOT's reporting system has not captured.
So one of the priorities that I have in Congress is to
break down barriers for all people to fully participate in our
economy and society. And the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act
directed the GAO to assess airlines' nondiscrimination training
programs for employees and contractors.
Mr. Von Ah joins the panel from the GAO and will provide an
update on the agency's work on this study.
In addition, Mr. Klein, with Spirit Airlines, I look
forward to hearing more about industry's efforts to reduce
discrimination.
I want to just touch on the future of the airline passenger
experience as well. At the beginning of the 116th Congress, I
set a forward-looking agenda which prioritizes enhancing the
air travel experience for U.S. passengers. To do so, Congress,
the DOT, and industry must work to ensure transparency, prevent
unfair and inequitable practices, and promote reliable and
accessible air service for all Americans.
The last FAA Reauthorization Act included numerous
provisions to enhance the experience of airline passengers,
including establishing minimum seat pitch dimensions in a
commercial aircraft, establishing a DOT aviation consumer
advocate to help resolve air travel complaints, and requiring
carriers to improve the transparency with the accommodations
that they provide passengers caught up in widespread flight
disruptions, among other things.
So I look forward to hearing today's testimony from Mr.
McGee on how recent law will help improve the passenger
experience, and as well, from Dr. Leader from the Airline
Passenger Experience Association on industry's voluntary
efforts to invest in new technologies, equipment, and general
practices to better serve consumers.
I am pleased to convene this first hearing today on
consumer protections in nearly 3 years, to explore the
important issues facing air travelers today. Over the past
several years, the Federal Government and carriers have made
progress in improving the passenger experience. We should
recognize that. We should all recognize there is much more work
ahead.
So my thanks, again, to today's witnesses. I look forward
to identifying ways Congress can ensure all passengers have a
safe, comfortable, and dignified travel experience.
[Mr. Larsen's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Washington, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation
Good morning and thank you to today's witnesses for joining the
Subcommittee's discussion on the air travel experience.
According to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, in 2018,
U.S. airlines carried 925.5 million passengers to destinations in the
U.S. and abroad, the highest total since 2003.
The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) current aerospace
forecast predicts passenger traffic will increase roughly two percent
per year over the next 20 years.
In the Puget Sound region, the number of passenger enplanements is
expected to grow from 24 million in 2018 up to 55.6 million by 2050.
While increased passenger demand creates new economic opportunities
and enhances the nation's aviation network, longstanding challenges can
hinder growth.
Over the last few years, U.S. airlines have invested in their
products, including IT solutions, such as smartphone apps, to de-stress
the travel experience.
Today's hearing is an opportunity for this Subcommittee to examine
the U.S. airline passenger experience, hear from stakeholders on ways
to improve this experience and consider how Congress and the airline
industry can foster innovation to benefit the flying public.
Today's witnesses represent a broad range of stakeholders with
unique insights on the passenger experience, from the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) to airlines and industry to consumer
advocates.
While the Subcommittee will discuss numerous aspects of the
everyday travel experience on U.S. airlines, there are a few at the top
of my mind today.
According to the latest U.S. Census estimates, 57 million Americans
have a disability, and more than half of those have mobility issues.
Last November, this Subcommittee held a roundtable to better
understand this community's air travel experience, including challenges
with boarding the aircraft, inaccessible lavatories, inappropriate
screening techniques and damaged wheelchairs and mobility aids.
As mandated by 2016 and 2018 FAA reauthorization acts, the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT) initiated several rulemakings to
improve the accessibility of aircraft lavatories and regulate emotional
support and service animals.
Mr. Lee Page joins us on behalf of the Paralyzed Veterans of
America. Mr. Page, I look forward to hearing more about these rules and
how Congress can work with industry and stakeholders to help fill in
the gaps on airplane and airport accessibility.
Throughout this country's history, discrimination has been a
pervasive and persistent issue.
Far too often, viral videos, reports or personal anecdotes uncover
unlawful practices across the transportation sector on the basis of
race, color, national origin, gender, religion and disability.
According to the GAO, passenger discrimination complaints submitted
to DOT went up from an average of 80 per year over the past decade, to
96 complaints in 2019. Most complaints were related to racial
discrimination.
Sadly, this startling statistic does not reflect the numerous other
cases DOT's reporting system has not captured.
One of my priorities in Congress is to break down barriers for all
people to fully participate in the economy.
The 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act directed the GAO to assess
airlines' non-discrimination training programs for employees and
contractors.
Mr. Von Ah joins the panel from the GAO and will provide an update
on the agency's work on this study.
In addition, Mr. Klein, with Spirit Airlines, I look forward to
hearing more about industry's efforts to reduce discrimination.
At the beginning of the 116th Congress, I set a forward-looking
agenda which prioritizes enhancing the air travel experience for U.S.
passengers.
To do so, Congress, the DOT and industry must work to ensure
transparency, prevent unfair and inequitable practices and promote
reliable and accessible air service for all Americans.
The latest FAA Reauthorization Act includes numerous provisions to
enhance the experience of airline passengers, including establishing
minimum seat pitch dimensions in commercial aircraft, establishing a
DOT aviation consumer advocate to help resolve air travel complaints
and requiring carriers to improve transparency with the accommodations
they provide passengers caught up in widespread flight disruptions,
among many others.
I look forward to hearing today's testimony from Mr. McGee on how
the recent law will improve the passenger experience, as well as from
Dr. Leader from the Airline Passenger Experience Association on
industry's voluntary efforts to invest in new technologies, equipment
and general practices to better serve consumers.
I am pleased to convene the first hearing on consumer protections
in nearly three years to explore the important issues facing air
travelers today.
Over the past several years, the federal government and carriers
have made some progress in improving the passenger experience, but
there is much more work ahead.
My thanks again to today's witnesses. I look forward to identifying
ways Congress can ensure all passengers have a safe, comfortable and
dignified travel experience.
Mr. Larsen. With that, I understand the sitting-in ranking
member of the subcommittee does not have a statement, and so I
will now turn to the chair of the full committee,
Representative DeFazio of Oregon.
Mr. DeFazio. I thank the chair, thank him for this hearing.
Before we get to the subject matter at hand, I just want to
address briefly the COVID-19 and air travel. Five years ago,
the GAO recommended that in response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak
that DOT work with relevant agencies and stakeholders to
develop a national aviation preparedness plan for communicable
disease outbreaks. That hasn't happened. Through two
administrations, it hasn't happened, and now it is a little
late.
We have CDC trying to deal directly with the airlines to
try and get passenger information. There is ongoing conflict
over that. So last week, the chair and I wrote to Secretary
Chao and asked that she implement the recommendations of the
GAO, and put together a task force and become more involved in
these issues, as CDC shouldn't have to deal with individual
airlines. Policies should be developed from knowledgeable
people at FAA or DOT, so we can begin to better track
passengers.
Now, that is obviously not the subject of the hearing
today. The state of air travel--you know, my first term in
Congress, I introduced a bill called the Airline Passenger
Equity Act, and some of those things that were in that bill
have been enacted and some are still out there. There are still
issues that need to be dealt with for a better passenger
experience.
One thing is complaints. Well, there aren't that many
complaints. Well, GAO says there are, you know, 50 complaints
to the airlines for every 1 that gets to DOT. Who knows to get
in touch with DOT? How do you do that? For a while, I had
gotten a mandate in one or another of the bills that they had
to post something with an 800 number at the airline ticket
counters, and DOT had to maintain an 800 number.
I mean, today, how does anybody know to contact DOT with a
complaint? We need more transparency there so we get a better
handle on how many problems and complaints there really are.
The airlines have record profitability and a big part of
that profitability is ancillary fees.
Now, it is interesting that we have laws--I studied
economics, graduate school, undergraduate--laws of supply and
demand. The airlines, somehow when it comes to ancillary fees
or bag fees, the sky is the limit. It is totally elastic. It is
like there is no point at which passenger bookings fall off.
In fact, when we were doing the FAA bill in 2018, within a
month, all the major airlines raised their bag fees by $5.
United just raised theirs again $5. Are their enplanements
going to drop off drastically? No. But they say if an airport,
in order to enhance the airport experience, the crowded
terminals, the lack of gates which make planes sit idle and on
the runway for hours sometimes at a time, that if passengers--
you know, the passenger facility charge has been fixed for 20
years. If that went up by $1 or $2 or, wow, even think of $5
like the bag fee, no one would ever fly again. They would be
just totally inelastic. One dollar, won't fly.
I mean, the truth is, they want control. And even though we
can make the case to the airlines that--somebody has got to pay
for this. And we have had the airports do an excellent job this
last year, starting with the hearing last year, documenting the
fact, OK, we have to do these projects. Here is an agreed-upon
project. If we just bond it for 30 years and don't do anything
else, because we don't have any more bonding authority, here is
how much interest we are going to pay. Now, if we could
increase the passenger facility charge, the user fee, by this
amount, and they give the table and show, you know, with a
couple of bucks, wow, you cut the interest costs in half.
And what I say to the airlines is, who is going to pay that
interest? You are going to pay it one way or another. You are
going to pay it in a landing fee, a gate fee, a lease fee,
whatever. Someone has got to pay it. So why waste money? Why
not raise money in the most efficient way possible and make the
improvements we need to the system.
But, you know, we have been stuck on that for quite some
time. Passengers with disabilities, we had a hearing last fall
on this. One mishandled mobility aid, or one dropped passenger
is a tragedy and very difficult for a person with a disability.
I mean, it is essentially part of their body and it is
unacceptable.
My local paper, in fact, did some investigative reporting
about airlines' resistance to repairing, replacing critical
essential mobility aids on a timely basis. I think many of you
have seen the photograph of the guy who is taped to an aisle
chair.
This is unacceptable. And, you know, last, we asked DOT or
DOT has asked the airlines to specify their training
procedures, how they are replacing or handling the aids that
are damaged or lost. I have yet to see the results of that.
Maybe we will hear a little bit about that today.
And then emotional support animals. I am pleased to see
that the DOT is taking some action there. Obviously, we get to
peacocks and turkeys and other animals, this is a little bit
out of control. There are legitimate needs for emotional
support and people who legitimately need emotional support and
have legitimate objects with them. Animals should not be
penalized because other people are abusing the system.
And then finally, a serious thing is cabin evacuations. DOT
is conducting some, I think, inadequate testing with, you know,
a partial mockup shell of an airplane having to do with
evacuation times, and dealing with seat spacing and issues like
that.
Before I got to Congress, we had had the Manchester Airport
plane fire, and people were piled up like cordwood trying to
get out of that plane. They died in a survivable incident. It
took another 6 years here in the United States to get that one
seat removed over by the wing, because the airlines didn't want
to lose the revenue. In fact, they came back 2 years later with
a fake study that said, oh, it takes longer to evacuate the
plane if you take out that row of seats. We beat them back on
that, and we still have that, but I am concerned about it. And
we have got to start dealing with the behavior of people.
In the Chicago crash, where it took well over almost 2\1/2\
minutes to evacuate a burning plane, people were dragging their
carry-on bags with them, big bags, and fighting with the flight
attendants over taking their luggage. We have got to figure out
how we are going to deal with those problems. And DOT has to
reevaluate whether or not we can meet the standard, given
customer behavior, something they haven't taken into account.
So there is much before us. I look forward to being
informed by the panel today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Mr. DeFazio's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in
Congress from the State of Oregon, and Chairman, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you, Chair Larsen, for calling today's hearing on the airline
passenger experience--and what it can and should be.
I want to start by saying that I am monitoring the spread of the
coronavirus (COVID-19)--and the aviation sector's role in mitigating
the disease's spread into the United States. Last week, Chair Larsen
and I sent a letter to Transportation Secretary Chao urging her to
implement a five-year-old Government Accountability Office (GAO)
recommendation in response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak that the
Department of Transportation (DOT) work with relevant agencies and
stakeholders to develop a national aviation preparedness plan for
communicable disease outbreaks.
This recommendation has not been implemented and had it been so,
the U.S. Government may be in a better position today to coordinate and
collaborate with industry in responding to the COVID-19 outbreak. This
Committee will continue to track this pandemic and its effects on
public health and our civil aviation industry. We will take actions as
appropriate and necessary.
We are here today, however, to discuss the state of air travel in
the United States. The last opportunity we had to do so in a hearing
setting came in 2017 after a series of errors by the biggest U.S.
airlines--a year or more of air travel plagued by major computer
meltdowns stranding millions of passengers across the country and some
serious altercations and exchanges with passengers during travel, to
name a couple.
We should not wait until the water main breaks before conducting
important, and necessary, oversight of the airline passenger
experience, and so I'm pleased we are here today.
During my first term in Congress, as a Member of this Committee's
predecessor, the Public Works and Transportation Committee, I
introduced the Airline Passenger Equity Act of 1987 to keep commercial
airlines accountable to their passengers. Some of these provisions were
included in the Airline Passenger Protection Act of 1987, but some 30
years and several passenger protection bills later, it appears there is
more work to do.
U.S. airlines have soared to record profitability in recent years--
with a combined after-tax profit of $11.8 billion in 2018 and another
$11.8 billion in the first three quarters of 2019. Recent profitability
is, in part, due to ancillary fees, adding to the cost of air travel
for many passengers today. In 2018 alone, U.S. airlines' fees for
checked bags and reservation changes alone totaled $7.6 billion. And
these fees continue to rise.
Incidentally, several major U.S. airlines--JetBlue, American,
United, and Delta--increased their checked bag fees by $5, within a 30-
day span in 2018. These increases, one after the other, all occurred as
Congress was negotiating the FAA reauthorization bill.
And just a week ago, United announced it will again up its checked
bag fee by $5, unless the passenger pre-pays for the bag before online
check-in. If past behavior is indicative of what is to come, United's
competitors will soon follow suit and raise their bag fees as well.
It strikes me as odd that as carriers continue to increase their
bag fees, passenger demand continues to grow. Yet airlines change their
views on the law of supply and demand when it comes to increasing the
passenger facility charge (PFC)--the most effective funding tool our
nation's airports have to build and maintain their infrastructure. They
argue that even a dollar increase would cause demand to plummet.
If we seriously want to talk about improving the passenger
experience in air travel, we could do a lot on the ground by increasing
the PFC, which has been totally stagnant for two decades. Until then,
terminals will remain clogged with passengers; runways and taxiways
will be in need of additions and rehabilitation; airplanes will sit on
the tarmac waiting for gates; and we'll miss opportunities to create
good-paying jobs across the country.
As the airlines continue to squeeze extra money from passengers,
what are passengers left with?
Packed planes. Aircraft load factors are approaching a 15-year high
(more than 84.5 percent full on average last year).
Mishandled bags. Nearly 3 million mishandled bag reports were filed
with reporting U.S. carriers last year.
Inflexibility. U.S. carriers made $2.7 billion on reservation
changes and cancellations alone in 2018. I've seen these fees as high
as $200 each way, plus the difference in cost for the new flight; and
if flying internationally, a passenger needing to switch dates might
pay $750 or more.
Sometimes little or no reasonable recourse. Most of a passenger's
right are buried in U.S. airlines' contracts of carriage. These
treatises--40 pages on average--``require a reading level of someone
with a college graduate degree,'' according to the GAO.
The traveling experience is even more burdensome for passengers
with disabilities or reduced mobility. There are many issues to discuss
on this matter, but one that jumps to the front is airlines' poor
handling of mobility aids.
An investigative article published last year in the Eugene
Register-Guard, a newspaper in my district in Oregon, detailed alarming
instances of airlines failing to respond meaningfully to complaints of
wheelchair mishandling and refusing to repair or replace damaged
wheelchairs.
According to DOT data--which the public has just started to see
only after Congress imposed a mandate in the 2018 FAA Reauthorization
Act--reporting U.S. airlines collectively mishandled 10,548 wheelchairs
and scooters in 2019. In other words, the airlines mishandled nearly
900 mobility aids per month.
The airlines may argue that considered relative to the total number
of aids that the carriers transported, they mishandled only a couple of
percent. However, the real number is likely much larger since a lot of
these incidents are never reported. And I believe even one mishandled
wheelchair is one too many, as these aids are extensions of people's
bodies. We must ensure these passengers have a dignified traveling
experience, from arrival at the airport to their destination.
We must also ensure the airline cabin is a safe and hospitable
environment for all.
Recent press stories describe passengers bringing animals,
purported to be ``emotional support animals,'' on board aircraft and
those animals biting flight crew and showing aggression to passengers
and other service animals. With the introduction of ``comfort''
turkeys, possums, snakes, and peacocks, the airport terminal and
aircraft cabin have become a zoo.
I was encouraged the DOT proposed a rule earlier this year to start
the discussion on how to address the abuse of emotional support animal
policies. It is my hope this process will result in reasonable
approaches that appropriately protect passengers with support needs
from discrimination while also ensuring the comfort of other
passengers.
Finally, I would like to discuss briefly my concerns regarding the
safety of passengers in the event of a cabin evacuation.
In 1985, before I was elected to Congress, 55 people died during
the botched evacuation of British Airtours flight 28M in Manchester.
After I was elected, I persisted in response to that tragedy until the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) finally adopted spacing
requirements for exit-row seats in 1992.
But evacuations continue to be a problem. After a Boeing 767 became
engulfed in flames following an uncontained engine failure during its
takeoff roll in Chicago in 2016, the scene in the cabin was a complete
melee as passengers tried to evacuate the burning plane dragging huge
carry-on bags with them. To quote from the National Transportation
Safety Board's report:
``In one case, a flight attendant tried to take a bag away from a
passenger who did not follow the instruction to evacuate without
baggage, but the flight attendant realized that the struggle over the
bag was prolonging the evacuation and allowed the passenger to take the
bag.''
The FAA says it should take 90 seconds to evacuate a burning plane.
It took 161 passengers and eight crew two minutes and 21 seconds to
evacuate the 767 at O'Hare. So that to me begs the question: Are the
FAA's assumptions valid about how long it takes for cabin evacuations?
At my insistence, the 2018 law requires the FAA Administrator to
reassess the assumptions and methods behind certification of evacuation
times and report to Congress on the matter. I will be checking in with
FAA Administrator Dickson on the agency's status in meeting this
important safety-critical mandate.
With that, Chair Larsen, I again thank you for holding today's
hearing.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the opening
comment.
And I will now turn to our witnesses. I would note that the
ranking member of the subcommittee does come during witness
testimony. We will finish witness testimony and then go to the
ranking member for a statement, just a heads-up on that for
folks.
I do want to welcome the panel of witnesses. We have Mr.
Andrew Von Ah, the Director of Physical Infrastructure at the
U.S. GAO; Dr. William McGee, aviation consultant for Consumer
Reports; Mr. Lee Page, a senior associate advocacy director for
the Paralyzed Veterans of America; Mr. Joe Leader, chief
executive officer of the Airline Passenger Experience
Association; and Mr. Matt Klein, executive vice president and
chief commercial officer of Spirit Airlines, who is also
accompanied by Mr. Thomas Canfield, senior vice president,
general counsel and secretary of Spirit Airlines. But I
understand Mr. Klein will be giving the opening statement, and
Mr. Canfield is present for possible questions as well.
So, with that, I want to thank you all for being here
today. I look forward to your testimony and, without objection,
all your full statements will be entered into the record. And
since that is the case, your written testimony has been made
part of the record, the subcommittee requests that you limit
your oral testimony to 5 minutes.
With that, we will proceed with Mr. Von Ah with the GAO.
You are recognized for 5 minutes.
TESTIMONY OF ANDREW VON AH, DIRECTOR, PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE,
U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE; WILLIAM J. McGEE,
AVIATION ADVISER, CONSUMER REPORTS; LEE PAGE, SENIOR ASSOCIATE
ADVOCACY DIRECTOR, PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA; JOE LEADER,
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AIRLINE PASSENGER EXPERIENCE
ASSOCIATION; AND MATT KLEIN, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF
COMMERCIAL OFFICER, SPIRIT AIRLINES, INC., ACCOMPANIED BY
THOMAS CANFIELD, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, GENERAL COUNSEL, AND
SECRETARY, SPIRIT AIRLINES, INC.
Mr. Von Ah. Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves,
Chairman DeFazio, members of the subcommittee, thank you for
the opportunity to discuss our recent body of work on airline
consumer protections. My remarks today are based on our reports
issued over the past 3 years on a variety of airline consumer
issues.
Specifically, my statement today covers trends in DOT's
data on airline service, airlines' actions to improve such
service, and what is known about passenger complaints and
airlines' practices on accessibility and discrimination issues.
Our work found that the quality of airlines' operational
performance has generally improved over the past decade. Rates
of denied boardings and mishandled baggage have dropped
precipitously, and on-time performance has remained relatively
steady, with some modest improvement. Airlines have, for
example, reduced involuntary denied boardings by investing in
technology to better predict passenger no-shows, increasing
compensation to volunteers to give up their seats when needed,
or reducing or eliminating overbookings altogether.
They have upgraded baggage tracking technology, and have
instituted practices to mitigate the impact of delays, such as
tracking flights that are at risk of being chronically delayed,
improving communications with passengers through text messaging
updates, and voluntarily compensating some passengers during
extended flight delays.
Nonetheless, when delays or other disruptions occur, they
can be costly and inconvenient for both airlines and
passengers. Airlines are required to compensate certain
passengers who are denied boarding involuntarily and to provide
refunds for canceled flights. Beyond those requirements,
however, DOT officials told us that airlines are not obligated,
though they may choose, to provide accommodations for flight
disruptions, such as cancellations and delays, unless specified
in airlines' contracts of carriage.
In our work, looking at the impact of airline IT outages,
our review of selected airlines' contracts of carriage showed
variation in the types of accommodations provided, and under
what circumstances they will be provided. This can lead to
confusion and frustration for some passengers who may have
incurred----
Mr. Lynch. Would the gentleman move the microphone a little
closer to his mouth? I am sorry, I am having a hard time
hearing you. Thank you, appreciate it.
Mr. Von Ah. Yes, absolutely.
And may feel that they have not been fully compensated.
While operational improvements have been a positive for
consumers, data on complaints tell a bit of a different story.
Complaints received by DOT have generally increased over the
last decade, relative to the number of passenger boardings, by
about 10 percent.
Flight problems and baggage issues are consistently the top
categories of complaints. Complaints related to accessibility
and discrimination, though far fewer, but data shows that
disability-related complaints to airlines have steadily
increased this decade from about 19,000 in 2010, to about
30,000 in 2017, an increase of over 50 percent. And there has
been an uptick of discrimination-related complaints reported to
DOT in the last few years.
Of course, the number of complaints may not reflect the
full adverse experience of passengers. For example, in our
recent work examining the accessibility of aircraft lavatories,
while there may be few complaints, we noted that some
passengers with limited mobility may take extreme steps to
avoid using the lavatory altogether, such as severely limiting
their food and fluid intake in advance of the flight, and
others may choose not to fly at all. More generally, we have
found that complaint data are inherently limited, because a
substantial portion of dissatisfied individuals never complain
and are, therefore, not represented in the data.
Our recent work on accessibility and discrimination issues
is focused on airlines' efforts to provide training on these
topics to their employees. And we found that all the airlines
we examined had developed initial and recurring training in
these areas, though they have been reticent to provide some of
the details to us. With respect to nondiscrimination training
in particular, we found that airline trainings varied, and that
not all airlines covered topics like implicit bias, which our
work found to be a key principle to include in such training.
Looking forward, the 2018 FAA reauthorization bill
contained a number of provisions for DOT with respect to
consumer protections, including provisions to develop leading
nondiscrimination practices for airline training, and to
establish an airline passengers with disabilities bill of
rights. These efforts are ongoing.
DOT has also recently taken initial steps to establish
rules related to the accessibility of single-aisle aircraft
lavatories, which has been something that they have been
working on since 1992, I might add, and regulating service
animals.
In addition, we have open recommendations to DOT to improve
its ability to target and measure its consumer protection
compliance activities, including getting feedback from
consumers on its efforts to educate them on their rights.
Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, this concludes my
statement. I would be happy to address any questions you may
have. Thank you.
[Mr. Von Ah's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Andrew Von Ah, Director, Physical Infrastructure,
U.S. Government Accountability Office
Airline Consumer Protections: Information on the Passenger Experience
Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the
Subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our body of work on
consumer protections for airline passengers. Each year, hundreds of
millions of passengers rely on airlines to get them to their
destination without incident--including some of the 57 million
Americans with a disability, who may require additional assistance from
airline personnel. While airlines maintain that operational performance
and customer service are improving, citing better on-time performance
and higher customer satisfaction scores, passengers may still
experience a range of inconveniences, such as a delayed or canceled
flight, lost or damaged wheelchair, or unsatisfactory experience with
airline staff. Moreover, some non-discrimination advocacy organizations
and others have questioned whether airlines treat all passengers
equally and without bias, citing incidents where Muslim passengers and
passengers of color appear to be religiously or racially profiled.\1\
The Department of Transportation (DOT) is responsible for ensuring that
airlines adhere to consumer protections afforded to passengers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) and Muslim
Advocates, Letter to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), May
11, 2016. Later, in this statement we provide examples of actions DOT
took in response to such concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My testimony today is based on prior reports we issued from
September 2017 through January 2020 on a variety of airline consumer
protection issues--including airlines' denied boarding practices,
impacts of airline IT outages, and airlines' disability and
nondiscrimination trainings, among others.\2\ Specifically, this
testimony describes (1) trends in DOT's data on airline operational
performance from 2008 through 2017 and airlines' actions to improve
such service, and (2) what is known about passenger complaints and
airlines' practices related to accessibility and non-discrimination
issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ GAO, Aviation Consumer Protection: Few U.S. Aircraft Have
Lavatories Designed to Accommodate Passengers with Reduced Mobility,
GAO-20-258 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 7, 2020). GAO, Airline Consumer
Protections: Information on Airlines' Denied Boarding Practices, GAO-
20-191 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 10, 2019). GAO, Airline Consumer
Protections: Information on Selected Airlines' Non-Discrimination
Training Programs, GAO-19-654R (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 22, 2019). GAO,
Commercial Aviation: Information on Airline IT Outages, GAO-19-514
(Washington, D.C.: June 12, 2019). GAO, Airline Consumer Protections:
Additional Actions Could Enhance DOT's Compliance and Education
Efforts, GAO-19-76 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 20, 2018). GAO, Commercial
Aviation: Information on Airline Fees for Optional Services, GAO-17-756
(Washington, D.C.: Sep. 20, 2017). Across our various airline consumer
protection reports, our universe of ``selected'' airlines has ranged
from six airlines in our work on airlines' non-discrimination training
to 12 airlines in our work on consumer protections and DOT's compliance
and education efforts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To conduct our prior work, we analyzed relevant DOT data on
airlines' operational performance and passenger complaints; reviewed
DOT documents and guidance, and applicable statutes and regulations;
and conducted interviews with DOT officials and representatives from
selected airlines and consumer advocacy organizations, among others.
More detailed information on our objectives, scope, and methodology can
be found in each of the reports. For this statement, we updated our
prior analyses on passenger complaints related to accessibility and
discrimination issues and reviewed DOT's recent rulemakings. We
conducted the work on which this testimony is based in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient,
appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on audit objectives. We believe the evidence obtained
provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on
our audit objectives.
Background
While U.S. airlines' business practices were largely deregulated
following the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978,\3\ a number of consumer
protections are in place at the federal level.\4\ For example, some
consumer protections are required by federal statute, such as the Air
Carrier Access Act of 1986 (ACAA), as amended, which prohibits airlines
from discriminating against individuals based on a disability.\5\
Federal statutes have also authorized DOT to regulate certain areas
affecting passengers. For example, DOT has the authority to stop
airlines from engaging in unfair or deceptive practices, or unfair
methods of competition,\6\ and promulgates consumer protection
regulations under its statutory authorities.\7\ Under these
authorities, DOT issued three final rules on Enhancing Airline
Passenger Protections from 2009 through 2016.\8\ These rules have
addressed long tarmac delays, increased compensation amounts for
passengers who are involuntarily denied boarding, and required certain
airlines to post information about their fees and on-time performance
on their websites.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Pub. L. No. 95-504, 92 Stat. 1705.
\4\ Although in law airlines are generally referred to as ``air
carriers'' and ``foreign air carriers,'' we will refer to them as
``airlines'' for the purpose of this statement.
\5\ Pub. L. No. 99-435, 100 Stat. 1080 (codified as amended at 49
U.S.C. 41705). As discussed later, DOT also has specific rules
against discrimination in air travel.
\6\ 49 U.S.C. 41712.
\7\ See e.g., 49 U.S.C. 40101(a), 41702, and 41712.
\8\ See 81 Fed. Reg. 76800 (Nov. 3, 2016); 76 Fed. Reg. 23110 (Apr.
25, 2011); 74 Fed. Reg. 68983 (Dec. 30, 2009).
\9\ See, 14 C.F.R. 399.85, 234.11(b), respectively. If a flight
is oversold, airlines must request volunteers to be denied boarding. A
``volunteer'' is a person who responds to the airline's request for
volunteers and willingly accepts the airline's offer of compensation,
in any amount, in exchange for relinquishing the confirmed reserved
space. Any other passenger denied boarding is considered to have been
denied boarding involuntarily, even if that passenger accepts the
denied boarding compensation airlines are required to provide. See 14
C.F.R. Part 250.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airlines' Operational Performance Has Generally Improved, but
Passengers Filed More Complaints and May Experience a Range of
Inconveniences
Rates of Mishandled Baggage and Denied Boardings Generally Declined
From 2008 Through 2017, While Airlines' On-Time Performance
Remained Relatively Steady
In 2018, we found that airlines' operational performance--as
measured by DOT data on denied boardings; mishandled baggage; and late,
cancelled, or diverted flights--generally improved from 2008 through
2017, the most recent data available at the time of our review.\10\
While rates of voluntary and involuntary denied boardings and
mishandled baggage generally declined, airlines' on-time performance
stayed about the same (fig. 1). For example, over the 10-year period of
our review, the lowest rate of involuntary denied boardings occurred in
2017. Specifically, in 2017, airlines involuntarily denied boarding to
about .003 percent of all passengers (or about 23,000 of more than 680
million passengers)--a slight decrease from prior years. Our more
recent work on airlines' denied boarding practices found that even
fewer passengers were denied boarding involuntarily in 2018.\11\ Rates
of mishandled baggage also generally declined in recent years. For
example, in 2017 airlines posted a rate of 2.5 mishandled bags per
1,000 passengers (a rate of .25 percent of mishandled bags per
passenger enplanement), compared to a rate of 5.25 mishandled bags per
1,000 passengers in 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ GAO-19-76.
\11\ GAO-20-191.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 1: Trends in Measures of Airlines' Operational Performance, 2008
through 2017
In 2019, we identified a number of factors that can cause airlines'
operational issues. For example, passengers might be denied boarding
when airlines overbook their flights (i.e., intentionally sell more
seats than are available on a flight) or have to substitute smaller
aircraft than what was originally scheduled due to maintenance
issues.\12\ We also found that outages associated with airline IT
systems--which are used for flight and crew planning, passenger
reservations or check-in, or for providing flight information to the
Federal Aviation Administration--can cause flight delays and
cancellations.\13\ While we found some outages caused minimal issues,
the impact of others was more substantial. For instance, in 2016, an
outage in one airline's system that is used to check in and board
passengers resulted in the cancellation of 2,300 flights over 3 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ GAO-20-191.
\13\ GAO-19-514.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Rate of Passenger Complaints Generally Increased From 2008 Through
2017
While airlines' operational performance generally improved, we
found in 2018 that the number of passenger complaints reported to DOT,
relative to passenger boardings, generally increased from 2008 through
2017 for 12 selected airlines, peaking in 2015 and declining somewhat
in later years.\14\ Specifically, in that work we found that the rate
of passenger complaints reported to DOT, relative to passenger
boardings, increased about 10 percent, from about 1.1 complaints per
100,000 passengers in 2008 to 1.2 complaints per 100,000 passengers in
2017.\15\ Complaints about operational issues discussed above--which
make up three of DOT's 15 complaint categories--accounted for about
half of all complaints for the 12 selected airlines from 2008 through
2017. More specifically, in 2018 we found: \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ We limited our analysis of passenger complaints in 2018 to
``selected'' airlines that were required to report operational data to
DOT in 2017--the most recent year of available data when we started our
review--because they were the largest U.S. domestic passenger airlines
in 2016. For additional information see GAO-19-76.
\15\ Later in this statement, we discuss some limitations of DOT's
complaint data.
\16\ GAO-19-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flight problems generally accounted for an average of
about 33 percent of all complaints. This category includes complaints
related to delays, cancellations, and missed connections, among other
things. From 2008 through 2017, the rate of complaints in this category
generally increased.
Baggage issues generally accounted for an average of
about 15 percent of total complaints. Complaints were largely related
to lost, delayed, or damaged bags. The rate of baggage complaints
generally decreased over our time period.
Denied boardings generally accounted for an average of
about 4 percent of total complaints. Complaints were related to
airlines' failure to solicit volunteers or providing compensation below
the required amount. Rates of complaints about denied boardings
generally stayed constant over our time period.
Two of the remaining 12 complaint categories tracked by DOT
accounted for about a quarter of passenger complaints. One category
related to reservations, ticketing, and boarding, and the other related
to customer service--such as airline staff having a poor attitude or
refusing to provide assistance, and unsatisfactory seat assignments.
Each of these categories generally accounted for an average of about 13
percent of all complaints over the 10-year period.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ The remaining 10 categories account for 22 percent of all
complaints and relate to issues such as fares and ancillary fees and
advertising.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representatives from Selected Airlines Cited Technological and Other
Actions Taken to Improve Service
Our previous work identified actions taken by airlines or DOT in
response to such operational issues.\18\ DOT's actions are primarily
related to establishing regulations about operational issues. For
example, while DOT does not prohibit airlines from overbooking flights,
it has set compensation amounts for passengers denied boarding
involuntarily. DOT has also issued regulations related to returning
mishandled baggage within 24 hours, tarmac delays, and prohibiting
chronically delayed flights.\19\ Examples of airlines' actions are
listed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ GAO-20-191 and GAO-19-76.
\19\ A chronically delayed flight is any domestic flight that is
operated at least 10 times a month, and arrives more than 30 minutes
late (including cancelled flights) more than 50 percent of the time
during that month. 14 C.F.R. 399.82.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reducing denied boardings. In 2019, we reported that
selected airlines have taken a range of actions, aimed at reducing
involuntary denied boardings.\20\ Some of these actions also provide
additional incentives for passengers to volunteer to be denied
boarding. Actions include reducing or eliminating overbookings;
improving software to better predict passenger no-shows; requesting
volunteers earlier (e.g., at check-in instead of at the gate);
increasing compensation for volunteers; and conducting reverse auctions
to solicit volunteers.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ GAO-20-191.
\21\ In a reverse auction, airlines solicit information from
passengers on compensation amounts they would willingly accept in
exchange for voluntarily giving up their seats and taking another
flight. Airlines can then use that information to select passengers
with the lowest amount of required compensation to be denied boarding
voluntarily.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less mishandled baggage. As we reported in 2018,
representatives from almost all airlines we interviewed reported
investing resources to improve baggage-handling efforts and minimize
the effects to passengers whose bags are lost or delayed.\22\ Among
other actions, airline representatives told us they upgraded baggage
technology; modernized the claims process, so passengers could complete
forms on-line; and instituted replacement baggage programs, where
passengers can get a replacement bag at the airport. One airline also
invested several million dollars to use radio frequency identification
technology to track bags, as well as allowing passengers to track their
baggage via an application on their smartphone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ GAO-19-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efforts to minimize flight disruptions. In 2018, we also
reported that selected airlines had taken numerous actions to improve
on-time performance or mitigate challenges for passengers associated
with flight delays and cancellations.\23\ For example, one airline
began tracking flights that were ``at-risk'' of meeting DOT's
definition of a chronically delayed flight, so it could, among other
things, swap crews or substitute aircraft and avoid these types of
delays. Other airlines told us they use technology, such as text-
messaging updates, to communicate with passengers during delays and
cancellations or increased the number of circumstances for which
passengers are compensated during delays and cancellations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ GAO-19-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Passengers May Experience Inconveniences When Operational Issues Occur
Our prior work has shown that passengers may be affected to varying
degrees by airline operational issues, and that incidents can be costly
and disruptive for some passengers. Airlines are required by DOT
regulations to provide compensation or certain amenities to
inconvenienced passengers under certain circumstances. For example,
some passengers who are denied boarding involuntarily are entitled to
compensation, with the amount varying based on certain factors.\24\
Airlines are also required by DOT's interpretation of the statutory
prohibition on unfair and deceptive practices to provide refunds for
canceled and significantly delayed flights, if a passenger chooses to
cancel his or her trip.\25\ Beyond those requirements, DOT officials
previously told us that airlines are not obligated to provide
accommodations for flight disruptions, such as cancellations and
delays, unless specified in an airline's contract of carriage, although
as mentioned above, some voluntarily choose to do so in certain
situations. This may result in significant inconveniences for
passengers, who may incur costs for lodging, meals and transportation.
However, according to our prior work, available information about the
number and magnitude of these effects is largely anecdotal and cannot
be quantified.\26\ Furthermore, our review of selected airlines'
contracts of carriage in February 2019 showed variation in the types of
accommodations airlines provide and circumstances in which they will be
provided, when operational issues occur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See 14 C.F.R. Part 250. Compensation levels vary based on, for
example, the type of flight (e.g., foreign or domestic) and on the
availability of alternative transportation offered by the airline.
\25\ DOT has not specifically defined what amounts to a significant
delay; individual airlines may or may not set their own thresholds for
a significant delay in their contracts of carriage. Such contracts
govern what, if anything, a passenger is entitled to, although airlines
may--and in our recent work, we found do sometimes--offer additional
accommodations to inconvenienced passengers. See GAO-19-514.
\26\ GAO-19-514.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Civil Rights Complaints Have Recently Increased, and DOT and Most
Airlines Have Training Efforts
Disability-Related Complaints Have Increased Steadily, While
Discrimination-Related Complaints Have Seen a Recent Increase
disability complaints
According to the 2010 U.S. Census, 57 million Americans (roughly 1
in 5) have a disability, and more than half of those 57 million
Americans have mobility issues. Furthermore, older Americans are
representing an increasing share of the U.S. population. As the
population continues to age, the likelihood of this group needing
assistance may increase. Without accommodations--such as effective
communication of flight information, accessible seats, appropriate
boarding assistance, and careful handling and stowage of wheelchairs
and other assistive devices--people with accessibility or mobility
issues may face challenges when flying, or they may be unable to fly
altogether.
As previously mentioned, the ACAA prohibits airlines operating in
the U.S. from discriminating against individuals on the basis of
disability in the provision of air transportation.\27\ Under this law,
DOT has promulgated regulations requiring that airlines provide
passengers with disabilities (1) assistance in enplaning and deplaning;
and (2) compensation for lost, damaged, or delayed wheelchairs or other
assistive devices.\28\ In contrast to all other complaints that
passengers submit directly to airlines, DOT regulations require that
airlines report annually to DOT the number of all disability-related
complaints they received.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Pub. L. No. 99-435, 100 Stat. 1080 (codified as amended at 49
U.S.C. 41705).
\28\ 14 C.F.R. 382.131.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In our May 2017 report, we provided information showing that
disability complaints reported to airlines and DOT generally increased
from 2005 through 2015.\29\ More recent data shows that passenger
complaints reported to U.S. airlines continued to increase (see table
1). In particular, we found that complaints reported to airlines on
disability issues increased by about 50 percent from 2010 (19,347) to
2017 (29,662), the most recent year for which data are available. Based
on our review, the vast majority of passengers chose to file their
disability complaints directly to the airlines. Notably, the number of
passenger complaints on disability issues reported to DOT from 2010
through 2019 ranged from 572 to 944 and averaged about 780 complaints
per year. Complaints reported to DOT rose in 2019, after peaking in
2015 and declining the three following years. In 2017, the last year
data are available for both, complaints reported to airlines and DOT
were most commonly related to failure of airline staff to provide
assistance, seating accommodation issues, and service animal issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ This analysis looked at complaints to U.S. airlines, as well
as foreign airlines that fly to, from, and within the U.S.
Table 1: Disability Complaints Reported to U.S. Airlines and the Department of Transportation (DOT) by
Passengers, Calendar Years 2010 through 2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disability complaints Disability Complaints
Year to U.S. airlines to DOT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010.......................................................... 19,347 572
2011.......................................................... 18,953 628
2012.......................................................... 20,584 741
2013.......................................................... 21,965 683
2014.......................................................... 24,044 784
2015.......................................................... 26,401 944
2016.......................................................... 27,842 865
2017.......................................................... 29,662 840
2018.......................................................... Not available 826
2019.......................................................... Not available 904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: GAO presentation of DOT data. GAO-20-475T
Note: DOT has not yet published its Annual Report on Disability-Related Air Travel Complaints for 2019 and 2020,
which would include passenger complaints to airlines for 2018 and 2019, respectively.
As we have previously reported, the number of complaints may not
fully reflect the inconvenience experienced by passengers or would-be-
passengers with accessibility issues. Some may choose not to fly and
others may have to take inconvenient or uncomfortable precautionary
measures to avoid using the aircraft lavatory.\30\ For example, in our
recent work examining the accessibility of aircraft lavatories,
stakeholders we interviewed told us that some passengers severely limit
their food and fluid intake in advance of the flight, risking
dehydration; use a catheter; or wear a protective undergarment.
Furthermore, because lavatories accessible by the aircraft's onboard
wheelchair are not required on most aircraft (i.e., single-aisle
aircraft) \31\ and there may not be an expectation that the lavatory be
accessible by an onboard wheelchair, passengers may not see grounds to
complain or may not take the time to submit a complaint. More
generally, in our prior work, we found that complaint data are
inherently limited because a substantial portion of dissatisfied
individuals do not submit complaints and are therefore not represented
in the complaint data.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ GAO-20-258.
\31\ Under DOT regulations, only aircraft with more than one aisle
(twin-aisle aircraft) in which lavatories are provided are required to
have at least one wheelchair accessible lavatory. 14 C.F.R. 382.63.
\32\ GAO-19-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
discrimination complaints
A number of federal statutes also prohibit or have been interpreted
by DOT to prohibit airline discrimination against airline
passengers.\33\ Federal statute also allows airlines to refuse to
transport any passenger if the airline determines that the passenger
is, or might be, a threat to safety.\34\ According to DOT guidance,
this determination is made by the pilot in command of the aircraft or
certain other specified airline personnel and cannot be arbitrary, but
must be based on specific facts and circumstances known at the
time.\35\ In its guidance, DOT has unequivocally provided that a
passenger's status in a protected class (e.g., race, ancestry, national
origin, or religion) cannot be the determinative factor in an airline's
decision to deny boarding or remove a passenger from a flight.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See GAO-19-654R for a list of relevant statutes.
\34\ See 49 U.S.C. 44902(b). See also 14 C.F.R. 91.3(a)
providing that the pilot in command of an aircraft is directly
responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of the
aircraft.
\35\ DOT, Passengers' Right to Fly Free from Discrimination
(Washington, D.C.: January 2017).
\36\ DOT, Passengers' Right to Fly Free from Discrimination,
(Washington, D.C.: January 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our August 2019 report showed that the total number of passenger
complaints reported to DOT against U.S. airlines alleging
discrimination generally declined from 2010 through 2015, but began to
increase starting in 2016. Moreover, updated data for 2019 show a
further increase, with 96 complaints filed (table 2). According to our
analysis, from 2010 through 2019, DOT received, on average, 80
discrimination-related complaints a year, most commonly about racial
discrimination. Despite the recent increase in the total number of
discrimination complaints, they account for a small percentage of total
passenger complaints DOT receives, as well as total passenger
boardings. For example, in 2019, of the 9,547 complaints DOT received
against U.S. airlines, 96 alleged discriminatory treatment.
Table 2: Discrimination Complaints Reported to the Department of Transportation (DOT) Against U.S. Airlines by
Passengers, 2010 through 2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ethnicity National
Year Race or ancestry origin Religion Other Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010...................................... 24 54 10 5 25 118
2011...................................... 34 25 27 1 19 106
2012...................................... 40 8 15 7 13 83
2013...................................... 50 1 2 2 5 60
2014...................................... 42 4 8 1 5 60
2015...................................... 43 0 6 2 3 54
2016...................................... 57 0 10 6 8 81
2017...................................... 56 4 7 3 11 81
2018...................................... 53 1 8 1 14 77
2019...................................... 60 4 11 6 15 96
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: GAO presentation of DOT data. GAO-20-475T
Note: ``Other'' includes complaints about discrimination on the basis of color, age, or sex, among other things.
As noted above and previously reported, DOT's discrimination
complaint data does not capture passenger complaints reported directly
to airlines.\37\ In 2018, we reported that DOT officials estimated
that, across all complaint categories, for every passenger complaint
they receive, airlines receive about 50.\38\ While we have previously
requested discrimination complaint data from selected airlines, they
have generally declined, citing the proprietary nature of this
information.\39\ Since 2017, DOT has disaggregated discrimination
complaints into sub-categories, such as racial or religious
discrimination, and published this data in its Air Travel Consumer
Report.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ On its website, when discussing how to file a complaint, DOT
recommends that passengers initially file a complaint with the airline.
However, the website also states that if the passenger is not satisfied
with the airline's response, they may want to then file a complaint
with DOT. In our November 2018 report, we recommended, among other
actions, that DOT assess its procedures and training materials for
coding airline passengers' complaints to help ensure that they are
consistently coded and that potential consumer protection violations
are properly identified. DOT concurred with all six recommendations and
cited actions they had begun taking to address them, such as developing
new training materials for coding passenger complaints.
\38\ GAO-19-76.
\39\ One airline provided us information on discrimination
complaints it received from passengers relative to total passenger
boardings, which showed a relatively constant rate between November
2017 and December 2018. See GAO-19-654R.
\40\ DOT issues a monthly Air Travel Consumer Report, which informs
the public about the quality of airlines' services. This action was
taken to increase transparency, in part, in response to LDF and Muslim
Advocates' letter referenced earlier in our statement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOT and Airlines Have Ongoing Training Efforts on Disability and
Discrimination Issues
We previously identified actions that DOT and airlines have taken
that are intended to ensure that no passengers are discriminated
against on the basis of disability or other protected class. Our work
primarily examined airlines' efforts to train staff and contractors.
However, our work also identified other airline actions (both proactive
and reactive) taken to enhance compliance with consumer protections in
these areas. For example, one airline developed a wheelchair tracking
system in response to a DOT enforcement action to help reduce incidents
of lost or mishandled wheelchairs.
DOT requires that airlines provide their employees and contractor
staff who interact with the traveling public training on the proper and
safe operation of equipment used to accommodate passengers with a
disability, as well as on boarding and deplaning assistance.\41\ While
not required, DOT encourages airlines to implement comprehensive non-
discrimination trainings to help prevent discrimination. DOT has also
developed training materials, available on its aviation consumer
protection website, for airline employees and contractor staff. These
materials include brochures, digital content, and videos on the rights
of passengers with disabilities, as well as tips on providing
wheelchair assistance at airports and onboard aircraft. In 2017, DOT
also developed guidance for airline personnel on non-discrimination
topics.\42\ The material included scenarios for recognizing
discriminatory behavior and provided examples of how to ask additional
questions or conduct additional screening in a non-discriminatory
manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Airlines operating aircraft with 19 or more passenger seats
are required to provide such training. See 14 C.F.R. 382.141(a)(1).
\42\ See DOT, Guidance for Airline Personnel on Non-Discrimination
in Air Travel (Washington, D.C.: January 2017) and DOT, Passengers'
Right to Fly Free from Discrimination (Washington, D.C.: January 2017).
These materials were developed, in part, in response to concerns raised
by advocacy organizations referenced earlier in our statement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
training on disability issues
In 2017 we reviewed disability training programs for 12 selected
airlines and found that they all had disability-related training
requirements for their staff and contractors, with some variations in
the content and format.\43\ Over the course of that work, each airline
demonstrated that it had, as required, initial and recurrent training
for its employees, contractors, and complaint resolution officers
(CRO).\44\ All 12 selected airlines used a mix of training, including
classroom-based training, computer-based training, situational
scenarios, and hands-on training, such as wheelchair handling and
lifting passengers into aisle seats to assist in boarding for specific
groups. We also found that these selected airlines generally consulted
with disability organizations when developing ACAA training programs.
Some airlines also voluntarily implemented quality assurance programs
to improve and sustain their disability-training programs' performance.
Another step some airlines have taken, though not required by the ACAA
or its implementing regulations, is the creation of a disability board,
which serves as a forum for increasing awareness among their workforce
about disability issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ We did not visit each airline or review all training
materials; rather we asked each airline to submit outlines or summaries
that described its disability-training regime. GAO-17-541R.
\44\ See 14 C.F.R. 382.141, 382.143, and 382.141(a)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
training on non-discrimination issues
In 2019, we reported that representatives from all six U.S.
airlines we selected for review told us they provide non-discrimination
training to employees, although not all contractor staff receive that
training.\45\ These representatives told us they provide initial non-
discrimination training to newly hired employees who interact with
passengers--including, for example, pilots, flight attendants, and
customer service representatives--and that most regularly update the
training based on current events or changes in policy. Airline
representatives provided high-level examples describing the content of
their trainings, but with one exception, they declined to provide more
specific information, citing the sensitive or business proprietary
nature of such materials.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ GAO-19-654R.
\46\ Airlines have no legal requirement to provide us with their
non-discrimination training materials or to make such materials
available to the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We found some similarities and differences in what representatives
reported their trainings covered. For example, representatives
generally stated that non-discrimination trainings--which were
typically embedded in larger training programs and combined in-person
and web-based modules--emphasized treating all individuals fairly and
without bias, regardless of race, ancestry, or religion, among other
things. Most also said trainings covered implicit bias--a term that
refers to attitudes or stereotypes about groups of people that
unconsciously affect a person's understanding, actions, and decisions--
and half said they have used DOT's guidance discussed above, with some
airline-specific modifications.
Airlines and DOT Have Taken Initial Steps in Other Consumer Protection
Areas
In our recent work on aircraft lavatories, we found that some U.S.
airlines voluntarily installed lavatories accessible by the aircraft's
onboard wheelchair for some of their single-aisle aircraft.\47\
However, we found that these aircraft only constituted about 4.5
percent of the eight selected airlines' combined single-aisle fleet.
According to airline representatives, providing lavatories accessible
by the aircraft's onboard wheelchair may reduce the number of revenue
generating seats in the aircraft cabin, which can increase airlines'
costs and result in higher fares for consumers. In lieu of lavatories
accessible by the aircraft's onboard wheelchair, airline
representatives said they have added certain features--such as assist
handles or grab bars, and accessible call buttons or door locks--
designed to increase access to certain lavatory functions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ GAO-20-258.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOT has recently issued three notices of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
designed to improve the accessibility of aircraft lavatories, regulate
service animals, and clarify DOT's authority to stop airlines from
engaging in unfair or deceptive practices. For example, in January
2020, DOT issued an NPRM to solicit comments on short-term
accessibility improvements on single-aisle aircraft through the
installation of accessibility features within the lavatory, such as
those mentioned above, without changing the size of lavatories.\48\ In
addition, DOT announced its intention to issue an advance NPRM to
address long-term accessibility improvements and to solicit comments
and gather information on the costs and benefits of requiring airlines
to increase the size of the single-aisle lavatory on new aircraft
models to accommodate a wheelchair as well as an assistant. In 2008,
DOT noted that accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft would
benefit passengers with disabilities, but also expressed concerns that
revenue loss and other cost impacts could be too great for the
airlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ 85 Fed. Reg. 27 (Jan. 2, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 included a number of ongoing
requirements for DOT in the airline consumer protection area. For
example, DOT is responsible for developing leading non-discrimination
practices for airlines, in consultation with airlines and other
consumer advocates.\49\ In addition to our recently published work, we
have ongoing work examining airport accessibility for passengers with
disabilities, as well as DOT's enforcement approach to consumer
protections. We anticipate issuing reports on the results of this work
later this year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ To help inform DOT's leading practices, we identified key
considerations for developing and presenting non-discrimination
training programs, such as demonstrating management commitment for
trainings and including key non-discrimination principles, such as
implicit bias, in training content. See GAO-19-654R.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the
Subcommittee, this completes my prepared remarks. I look forward to
answering any questions you may have.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you very much.
Mr. McGee, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. McGee. Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and
subcommittee members, on behalf of Consumer Reports, the
independent, nonprofit consumer organization, thank you for the
opportunity to address the concerns of millions of American air
travelers. Three years ago, I appeared before this committee
after the infamous Dr. Dao incident, in which a paying
passenger was literally dragged off a United Airlines flight.
We heard promises that day, but conditions have not improved
much for air travelers since then.
A wave of mega mergers since 2001 has left just three major
network airlines, American, Delta, and United, plus major low-
cost carrier Southwest. Many of us warned such lack of
competition would leave Americans at the mercy of an oligopoly,
resulting in worse service, higher fares, and fewer hubs and
nonstop flights, and that is what has come to pass in many
markets. Aircraft cabins are more fully packed than at any time
since World War II, with passenger load factors at 84 percent,
straining the system to capacity. Seats are tighter as airlines
shoehorn ever more passengers in, and the nickel and diming of
fees has exploded. Ancillary revenue reached $75.6 billion
worldwide last year.
Statistics indicate that involuntary denied boardings
increased by 57 percent last year, with almost 21,000
passengers bumped against their will, enough to fill Capital
One Arena. That is why we still advocate banning any forced
bumping of ticketed passengers.
But a central question was never addressed: Why Dr. Dao?
What internal airline calculations determined who will be
permitted to board and who will be bumped, or worse, dragged
off? This is an industry in desperate need of transparency.
Consider, searching through multitudes of flights and fares can
be mind-numbing, due to extraordinarily complex pricing. This
is especially hard, because most travelers fly less than once a
year, and the airlines don't make it easy to comparison shop.
Fees can be even more opaque. Sometimes you can't obtain fees
prior to booking, even for basics like checking bags, picking
seats, changing flights, or even carrying on a bag.
It is common now for airlines to black out seats at
booking, leaving fewer available for selection, thus scaring
customers into paying more. Indeed, basic economy is designed
to attract shoppers and then pressure them by up-selling.
When a flight is delayed, who will be rebooked and who will
not? When it is canceled, who will get a hotel room and who
will sleep on the airport floor? If you are not in a premium
class or an elite frequent flier, watch out.
Even safety itself is opaque. There is no transparency on
the critical maintenance and repairs outsourced to El Salvador,
Brazil, and China, often under far less stringent oversight.
Lengthy contracts of carriage provide few rights and
guarantees. That is why we still advocate for a comprehensive
passenger bill of rights with guaranteed accommodations during
flight delays and cancellations, transparency of fares and
fees, and safe, healthy aircraft seating.
Because the 1978 Airline Deregulation Act overrules most
State consumer protection laws, DOT plays a particularly
essential role in protecting passengers, but, unfortunately,
has largely abdicated that role.
Consider, in 2017 it cited limited public benefit and
withdrew two key rulemakings, while new rulemakings have
dwindled. For 2 years, DOT's Aviation Consumer Protection
Advisory Committee held no meetings. Then DOT appointed someone
from the American Enterprise Institute with no history of
consumer advocacy as the consumer representative.
Enforcement authority is falling far short, as DOT issues
record low fines. Last year, DOT fined American roughly $77,000
for a tarmac delay, and Delta, roughly $68,000. For
corporations that generated more than $44 billion each in
revenues in 2018, that is no deterrent.
In 2016, Congress, led by this committee, directed DOT to
review, and if appropriate, establish a policy to ensure
families with kids 13 and under sit together without paying
extra fees. For years, DOT was virtually silent, so we filed a
Freedom of Information Act request. DOT finally forwarded 136
complaints to us, stating publicly it was unnecessary to act,
quote, ``based on the low number.''
We analyzed those complaints and were horrified to find
cases with children as young as 1, 2, and 3 years old assigned
seats away from family. Other children were autistic, suffered
seizures, or had life-threatening nut allergies. Such policies
also guarantee chaos during emergency evacuations and put
children at risk for in-flight sexual assaults, which the FBI
says are rising. Shocked by DOT's inaction, we created an
online portal and soon forwarded over 600 complaints, more than
four times DOT's original total. DOT should fulfill this
committee's mandate, and we are urging major airlines to fix
this themselves, joined by more than 125,000 individuals who
signed our petition. We also support the Fly Together Act.
Other critical safety issues that haven't been effectively
addressed include FAA's troubling oversight of aircraft
maintenance outsourcing to foreign repair stations, echoing its
failed oversight of Boeing 737 MAX. That is why we support the
Safe Aircraft Maintenance Standards Act.
FAA's emergency evacuation testing has failed to account
for seismic changes: Record passenger loads, tighter seats,
larger passengers, more disabled, more carry-on baggage,
distracting electronics, oversized, untrained support animals,
and, of course, children seated apart from families. FAA's
refusal to close a 67-year-old loophole and require children
under 2 to be properly restrained on commercial flights.
Recent media reports highlighted raging battles----
Mr. Larsen. Mr. McGee, you need to wrap up.
Mr. McGee. Sure. All too often, DOT serves the interests of
airlines, not the flying public. Congress should enact
meaningful passenger rights protections and provide greater
safety oversight. We applaud the subcommittee for its
continuing efforts.
I will be happy to answer any questions. Thank you very
much.
[Mr. McGee's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of William J. McGee, Aviation Adviser, Consumer
Reports
Good morning, Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and
Subcommittee Members. On behalf of Consumer Reports,\1\ the
independent, nonprofit consumer organization, thank you for the
opportunity to speak today regarding the concerns of millions of
American air travelers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Consumer Reports is an expert, independent, non-profit
organization, founded in 1936, that works side by side with consumers
for a fairer, safer, and healthier world, fueled by our trusted
research, journalism, advocacy, and insights. We reach nearly 20
million people each month across our print and digital media
properties, and we use our labs, auto test center, and survey research
center to rate thousands of products and services annually. We have
been active for decades on a wide range of policy issues advocating for
the interests of consumers, including protecting their safety and
rights in air travel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three years ago I appeared before the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee,\2\ at a marathon 4.5-hour hearing to discuss
``Oversight of U.S. Airline Customer Service''--and specifically the
state of domestic airline policies in the wake of the infamous ``Dr.
Dao incident,'' in which a paying passenger was literally dragged off a
United Airlines flight outsourced to a regional carrier. Consumer
Reports would like nothing more than to report that conditions have
improved for airline passengers since then. But unfortunately,
discontent among the nation's travelers with the state of air travel
has been increasing, and for good reason.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ConsumerReports.org; ``Testimony of William J. McGee, House
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,'' May 2, 2017,
advocacy.consumerreports.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Consumers-
Union-McGee-05-02-2017-House-airline-hearing.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Massive industry consolidation since 2001 has not produced the
higher levels of customer service that were promised by airline
executives during the wave of mega-mergers that absorbed America West,
Continental, Northwest, TWA, US Airways, and other carriers and have
left the country with just three major network hub-and-spoke airlines--
American, Delta, and United, and one major point-to-point carrier,
Southwest. These were the mergers that many of us vocally opposed right
here in the House and Senate,\3\ as we warned that a lack of robust
competition would leave American air travelers at the mercy of an
airline oligopoly resulting in lower levels of service, fewer hub
airports, fewer nonstop flights on many routes, and higher fares on
routes not served by Low Cost Carriers. Simply put, due to
consolidation airline executives are responding less and less to the
needs of customers, who no longer have the kinds of meaningful choices
they once did.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ E.g., advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/cu-to-raise-
concerns-about-american-airlines-us-airways-mergers-potential-impact-
on-consumers/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
What's more, in recent years aircraft cabins have become more fully
packed than at any time since World War II, with the most recent annual
passenger load factors averaging 84%,\4\ straining the system to
capacity on a daily basis. Seats have never been tighter, as legroom
pitch and width continue to shrink while airlines attempt to shoehorn
ever more passengers into aircraft. And the nickel-and-diming of fees
has never been higher or more pervasive; in 2018 Consumer Reports
conducted a nationwide survey that found a third of respondents had
recently experienced an unexpected airline fee in the previous two
years, and half of those went over budget due to such fees.\5\ And
these fees continue to get higher. A report released by a leading
aviation marketing firm just two weeks ago estimated that airline
ancillary revenue reached $75.6 billion worldwide last year.\6\ In
fact, airline financial reports indicate that the primary source of
profits of some airlines is ancillary fees, with base airfares becoming
increasingly secondary.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation
Statistics, ``Estimated Full Year 2019 and December 2019 U.S. Airline
Traffic Data'', January 17, 2020, www.bts.gov/newsroom/estimated-full-
year-2019-and-december-2019-us-airline-traffic-data.
\5\ https://www.consumerreports.org/fees-billing/protect-yourself-
from-hidden-fees/.
\6\ IdeaWorks Company, ``CarTrawler Global Statistics of a la Carte
Revenue,'' February 18, 2020, www.ideaworkscompany.com/february-18-
2020-press-release.
\7\ E.g., IdeaWorks Company, ``CarTrawler Ancillary Revenue Series
for 2019,'' July 24, 2019, www.ideaworkscompany.com/wp-content/uploads/
2019/08/2018-Top-10-Airline-Ancillary-Revenue-Rankings.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This monetization of every aspect of air travel--from checked bag
to boarding order to seat selection--has led to new challenges and
complications. As I will discuss in greater detail below, airline
seating and pricing schemes have created a situation in which families
with children discover that they are required to pay additional fees or
upgrades in order to ensure they will be seated together. This creates
situations that many parents find inconceivable, and it creates safety
and security concerns for all travelers.
Many promises were made by executives from United and other
domestic airlines at that hearing in 2017, though few tangible
improvements ended up in airline Contracts of Carriage. Statistics
released by the U.S. Department of Transportation just two weeks ago
\8\ indicate that between 2018 and 2019, involuntary denied boardings
increased by 57%, with 20,868 passengers bumped against their will last
year, enough to fill the Capital One Arena. That's why Consumer Reports
continues to advocate for a clear prohibition on involuntary
relinquishment of ticketed seats--except for compelling safety or
security reasons--and clear guidelines for ensuring that
relinquishments are truly voluntary, in exchange for appropriate
compensation. But amazingly, one of the most central questions of all
concerning Dr. David Dao has never been addressed: Why him? What
internal airline calculations determine which passengers will be
permitted to board and which will be involuntarily bumped--or worse,
dragged off a flight?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ U.S. Department of Transportation, Air Travel Consumer Reports,
www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/air-
travel-consumer-reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Involuntary bumping is just one manifestation of much more systemic
problems for consumers. From the passenger's perspective, this is an
industry in desperate need of transparency. Nearly every aspect of the
customer experience is mired in mystery. Consider:
When booking a trip weeks or even months in advance, the
search through the multitudes of flights, with potentially billions of
fares available on flights worldwide is mind-numbing, a process
economists have described as one of the most complex pricing mechanisms
on the open market. It has spawned cottage industries advising how,
where, and even when to shop, down to the best hour of the week. The
experience can be especially confounding to the millions of air
travelers who fly less than once a year. And the airlines make it
difficult to comparison shop.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/comments-of-
consumers-union-and-us-pirg-to-dept-of-transportation-re-ensuring-
access-to-reliable-airline-flight-information/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fees can be even more opaque than fares. In fact,
sometimes it can even be impossible to determine the full amount of
fees prior to booking. Many of these fees are not optional; they are
charged for basic services such as checking bags, selecting seats,
changing flight reservations, or even carrying on a small bag.
When passengers select seats, it's common now for
airlines to block out seats throughout the cabin, leaving fewer seats
available, a practice that can result in scaring consumers into paying
more to secure seats or upgrading to more expensive classes. Indeed,
the uncomfortable product known as Basic Economy is designed to attract
shoppers and then pressure them by upselling.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ U.S. Senate, Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation,
Sen. Bill Nelson, Ranking Member, ``New Fares and Fees Take Flight:
Basic Economy and New and Increased Fees Continue to Confuse Airline
Travelers,'' January 2018, www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/
44126719-3475-49f6-a974-df2b21e22e10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When a flight is delayed, which passengers will be
quickly rebooked and which will not? When a flight is cancelled, which
passengers will be given accommodations, and which will sleep on an
airport floor? For those not in premium classes or elite members of
frequent flyer programs, there is no transparency on such decisions,
and often little communication.
Even safety itself is opaque. There is no transparency on
the outsourcing of critical scheduled maintenance and repairs for U.S.
airline fleets to facilities in foreign locations such as El Salvador,
Brazil, Mexico, China, and Singapore, often under far less stringent
oversight, yet with the full blessing of the Federal Aviation
Administration.
I spent seven years working in airline flight operations
management, and I don't know that any front-line industry employees can
answer these questions, because airline systems are now intentionally
opaque, with Contracts of Carriage that provide travelers with few
rights and guarantees. They are lengthy, filled with legal jargon, and
designed to protect the airline, not passengers. They typically promise
only that airlines ``may'' rather than ``will'' accommodate passengers
fairly. This is why for years now Consumer Reports and others have
advocated for a comprehensive, consistent Passenger Bill of Rights,
similar to what the European Union has effectively enforced for 16
years now.\11\ It should include standardized accommodations during
flight delays and cancellations; up-front transparency for flights,
fares, and fees; and effective standards for safe and healthy aircraft
seating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ European Union, Air Passenger Rights, europa.eu/youreurope/
citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/index_en.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the federal preemption clause of the 1978 Airline
Deregulation Act overrules nearly all state consumer protection laws,
the federal Department of Transportation plays a particularly essential
role in protecting airline passengers. But unfortunately it's a role
the DOT has largely been abdicating in recent years. Consider:
In 2017, the Department cited ``limited public benefit''
and withdrew two key proposed rulemakings on airline pricing
transparency, a move strongly criticized by Consumer Reports and other
consumer organizations.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ U.S. Department of Transportation, ``DOT Withdraws Two
Proposed Rulemakings,'' December 7, 2017, www.transportation.gov/
briefing-room/dot9117.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department's Notices of Proposed Rulemakings--which
allow the flying public, consumer advocates, and other interested
parties to offer comments on critical aviation issues--have trickled
down to a fraction of the NPRMs put forth under past Administrations.
Ironically, one of the few NPRMs in that trickle is a notice issued
just two weeks ago that proposes to restrict the Department's oversight
of unfair and deceptive airline practices.\13\ We are particularly
concerned that, as is noted in the NPRM, the impetus for this proposal
came from the trade association for the airlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ U.S. Department of Transportation, ``Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking: Defining Unfair or Deceptive Practices,'' February 20,
2020, www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/
notice-proposed-rulemaking-defining-unfair-or-deceptive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For two years, the DOT's Aviation Consumer Protection
Advisory Committee did not hold quarterly meetings, as its predecessor
committee had for many years. When the ACPAC was finally reconstituted
in 2019, the DOT appointed as the consumer representative an adjunct
fellow from the American Enterprise Institute, who had no previous
history of advocating for consumers. This was a stark departure from
the very purpose of establishing the committee.
For three years now, Consumer Reports has joined other
consumer organizations in requesting a meeting with Secretary Elaine
Chao to present our concerns about these issues, just as we have met
with every other DOT Secretary in recent years. To date that request
has been denied.
As for the Department's enforcement authority, all too often the
punishments fall far short of the offenses, according to independent
analysis.\14\ In 2019, the DOT issued just eight enforcement actions
against airlines, a record low number. And in 2018 it levied just $1.8
million in such fines, a new low in dollar amounts. For example, the
hard-fought tarmac delay rules that were enacted a decade ago to end
the airline practice of holding passengers captive on airport
taxiways--often for hours on end, without food or water or even
lavatory access--were initially quite effective, but in recent years
tarmac delays are steadily increasing. This is hardly surprising,
considering that last year the DOT fined American Airlines roughly
$77,000 per delay for 13 flights, and Delta Air Lines roughly $68,000
per delay for 11 flights. For corporations that generated $44.5 billion
and $44.4 billion respectively in annual revenues in 2018, there
clearly is little fear of DOT oversight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ ``It's Official! Airline Fines Hit a Record Low in 2019,''
Christopher Elliot, January 3, 2020, chriselliotts.com/government-
airline-fines-hit-record-low/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps the clearest example of the Department's deliberate
inaction is an issue Consumer Reports has been closely following for
four years. In 2016, Congress, led by this committee, directed the DOT
to ``review, and if appropriate, establish a policy'' to ensure U.S.
airlines allow families with children 13 and under to sit together
without paying additional fees.\15\ After two years of virtual silence
from the DOT, in 2018 Consumer Reports filed a Freedom of Information
Act request.\16\ After another year's delay, the DOT finally forwarded
136 consumer complaints to us, while stating publicly that it was
unnecessary to take action--``based on the low number of complaints.''
\17\ We analyzed those complaints and were horrified to find they
included cases involving children as young as 1, 2, and 3 years old
assigned seats away from their parents; other children seated
separately were autistic, suffered seizures, or were susceptible to
life-threatening nut allergies.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Congress.gov; ``FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of
2016,'' July 15, 2016, www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ190/PLAW-
114publ190.htm.
\16\ Consumer Reports, ``Family Seating FOIA,'' September 23, 2019,
advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/consumer-reports-letter-to-house-
transportation-committee-dot-reply-to-family-seating-freedom-of-
information-act-request/.
\17\ U.S. Department of Transportation, ``DOT's Review of U.S.
Airline Family Seating Policies,'' September 17, 2019,
www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/review-
us-airline-family-seating-policies.
\18\ Consumer Reports, ``Letter to Congress,'' September 23, 2019,
advocacy.consumerreports.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Family-seating-
FOIA-CR-letter-to-House-TI-9-23-19-FINAL-4.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seating children apart from their families also creates a
disruption during an emergency evacuation, posing a threat to all
passengers. Furthermore, a 2018 FBI report \19\ stated that inflight
sexual assaults are on the rise, with children particularly vulnerable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ FBI, ``Sexual Assault Onboard Aircraft,'' April 26, 2018,
www.fbi.gov/news/stories/raising-awareness-about-sexual-assault-aboard-
aircraft-042618.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shocked by the DOT's refusal to act, we established our own online
portal and within weeks had received and forwarded in excess of 600
complaints, more than four times the DOT's original total. Many of the
individuals who reached out to us were clear they did not know about
the DOT's complaint system, and surely would have complained earlier if
they were aware of it.
We continue to urge the DOT to fulfill its mandate to protect the
safety of airline passengers by developing the sort of rule this
committee envisioned in 2016. In the meantime, we are urging the major
airlines to fix this themselves, and are joined by more than 114,000
individuals who signed a petition on the subject in just one week.\20\
Last week, we wrote to American, Delta, and United reminding them how
they can fix this consumer protection issue on their own and ensure
that children sit with family members on planes. Furthermore, we also
support H.R. 5292, the Fly Together Act,\21\ introduced by Rep. Ann
Wagner and Rep. Anthony Brown, that would force DOT's hand, taking away
its flexibility to decide if a rule is ``appropriate'' and requiring it
to issue such a rule. We hope this issue can be addressed without
further legislation, but appreciate the introduction of the bill
nonetheless.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Consumer Reports, ``Airlines: Kids Should Sit with Their
Parents!'', action.consumerreports.org/
fees20200219petition_airlinefamilyseating.
\21\ www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/5292/text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also are concerned about other critical safety issues that have
not been effectively addressed by the DOT and its component, the
Federal Aviation Administration. These include:
The FAA's lack of proper oversight of aircraft
maintenance outsourcing to foreign repair stations, which echoes the
well-documented debacle of the FAA's oversight of the Boeing 737 MAX
development. This is why we strongly support H.R. 5119, the Safe
Aircraft Maintenance Standards Act.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/5119.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA's emergency evacuation testing has failed to
actively take into account seismic changes in air travel extending over
the past two decades, including record-high passenger loads; tighter
seats; larger passengers; increases in carry-on baggage due to checked
bag fees; distracting electronics; the influx of oversized, untrained
emotional support animals; and of course, children being seated apart
from their families.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Consumer Reports, ``Consumer Organizations Letter to DOT and
FAA on Passenger Emergency Evacuation Tests,'' October 21, 2019,
advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/consumer-organization-letter-to-
dot-and-faa-on-passenger-emergency-evacuation-test/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA's refusal to close a 67-year-old loophole and
require children under 2 to be properly restrained on commercial
flights.
At Consumer Reports we hear continually from passengers expressing
frustration at not being heard by indifferent airline executives. In
recent weeks, journalists and social media have highlighted raging
battles over whether passengers can recline their seats when it crowds
passengers sitting behind them.\24\ While passengers fight with each
other or with flight attendants, the real culprits are the airlines
that intentionally make seats tighter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ E.g., CNN.com, ``Her Reclined Seat was Repeatedly Punched,''
February 29, 2020, www.cnn.com/2020/02/18/us/plane-passenger-reclined-
seat-cnn/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In abdicating its critical role to protect and defend the rights of
airline passengers, all too often the Department has taken steps that
serve the best interests of the aviation industry, not the best
interests of the flying public and taxpayers who fund the system.
That's why it's imperative that Congress enact meaningful passenger
rights protections and provide greater safety oversight. And we applaud
the Aviation Subcommittee for its continuing efforts.
I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you
very much.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
I now want to recognize Mr. Lee Page of the Paralyzed
Veterans of America. Mr. Page, you are recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Page. Thank you, Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member
Graves, members of the subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans of
America----
Mr. Larsen. Mr. Lee, I just want to be sure that we can
hear you. Just pull the microphone or someone can help out and
pull the whole box forward.
Mr. Page. Can you hear me now? OK.
Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, members of the
subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans of America thanks you for the
opportunity to testify regarding air travel experience of
passengers with disabilities.
It has been more than 30 years since Congress passed the
Air Carrier Access Act. This law protects the civil rights of
passengers with disabilities in air travel. Although it
improved our experience, the process is far from seamless, and
at times, is even unsafe. PVA members routinely report being
physically harmed in boarding and deplaning aircraft and their
wheelchairs, particularly power wheelchairs, are often damaged
while being stored. They also often encounter air carrier
personnel and contractors who are not appropriately trained in
assisting passengers with catastrophic disability. We believe
most problems result from lack of training, inaccessible
aircraft, and inadequate enforcement of the law.
Commercial air travel is the only mode of public
transportation in which a wheelchair or scooter user must
surrender their assistive device in order to travel. Passengers
must rely on air carrier personnel or contractors to properly
store these devices, and help them board and deplane the
aircraft. For many wheelchair users, this is where the problems
in safely accessing air travel truly begin.
Air carriers use several different types of aisle chairs to
help passengers with disabilities board and deplane the
aircraft. An aisle chair is a small narrow wheelchair that
cannot be pushed by its passenger. Aisle chairs are often
poorly designed and in disrepair. In some cases, the aisle
chair can harm the passenger, because it does not have proper
padding, which can lead to skin abrasions, bruises, or sores.
Furthermore, airline assistants are typically not properly
trained in how to physically lift or transfer a person from a
wheelchair to an aisle chair. They are also too often
unfamiliar with the securement straps.
On my most recent flight, I had a problem with the aisle
chair and the people who came to assist me. The aisle chair
that was used did not meet my needs. The footrest was too
small, and my feet kept falling off the aisle chair as I was
being brought into and out of the plane. Also, the seat straps
were not sufficient to keep me in a secure seated position. As
a result, my hip and lower backside hit every armrest all the
way back to my assigned seat. At my seat, the personnel tried
to lift me up over the fixed armrest into my seat, but they
were not strong enough and ended up dropping me on the armrest
as I slid into the seat.
Passengers with limited mobility must also worry about the
storage of their assistive devices. Damage to wheelchairs can
be a trip-altering event, as well as pose significant health
concerns for passengers who depend on it for mobility.
Customized wheelchairs are not easily replaced if damaged.
Although my wheelchair is typically returned to me without
significant damage, this is not always the case for some of our
PVA members, particularly those who use power wheelchairs.
Damage to assistive devices is typically a result of improper
loading and securement within the cargo area of the aircraft.
Damage ranges from minor tears to fabric upholstery to a
complete electrical power breakdown, rendering the chair
useless to operators. Repair often takes time, leaving the
passenger stranded until it can be fixed.
Disability access is almost nonexistent on most commercial
aircraft. The aisle width of the plane is typically smaller
than that of the individual being transported on the aisle
chair. This means the passengers are bumped and scraped from
row to row to get to their seat, wherever that might be on the
aircraft.
Lack of accessibility also extends to the lavatories on a
vast majority of single-aisle aircraft. A January 2020 GAO
report on the accessibility of U.S. aircraft lavatories for
people who have limited mobility found that although accessible
lavatories are available, carriers do not often choose to
acquire them.
When passengers with disabilities encounter disability
discrimination, they are left with few remedies. Administrative
remedies available through the Department of Transportation are
quite limited. In response to a complaint I filed following my
most recent trip, I received 10,000 bonus miles from the
carrier. Systematic change is what is needed, not more bonus
miles.
Disability-related provisions included in the study on
lavatory access in the FAA Reauthorization Act represents an
important step forward in efforts to improve air travel
experience for passengers with disabilities. However, these
provisions alone will not address the fundamental access
problems to safe air travel for people with disabilities. Thus,
we strongly support the bipartisan Air Carrier Access
Amendments Act, H.R. 1549, which was introduced in March 2019
by Representative Jim Langevin.
This legislation would greatly improve aircraft
accessibility, and strengthen enforcement of Air Carrier Access
Act. As the population ages, the need for greater accessibility
in aircraft will only continue to grow. Better training of
airline personnel and their contractors, increased aircraft
accessibility, and improved enforcement options, will lead to
safer travel experiences for PVA members and all passengers
with disabilities.
PVA thanks you for the opportunity to express our views
today. I will be happy to answer any questions at this time.
[Mr. Page's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lee Page, Senior Associate Advocacy Director,
Paralyzed Veterans of America
Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the
Subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) thanks you for the
opportunity to testify about the experience of air travel passengers
with disabilities and opportunities for reform. PVA is a
congressionally-chartered veterans services organization serving the
needs of veterans with spinal cord injuries and disorders. Nearly all
of our members require the use of some type of assistive device,
including manual and power wheelchairs, scooters, and canes, to
increase their mobility and function; thus, ensuring greater
independence in the mainstream of society.
Over 30 years ago, President Ronald Reagan signed the Air Carrier
Access Act (ACAA) into law. The ACAA, which prohibits disability-based
discrimination in air travel, was the result of a U.S. Supreme Court
decision in Department of Transportation v. Paralyzed Veterans of
America, 477 U.S. 597 (1986). In this case, the Court held that air
carriers were not subject to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, as amended, unless they received direct federal financial
assistance. Subsequently, PVA led the charge on Capitol Hill to pass
protections that would finally end discrimination against people with
disabilities in air travel.
Prior to passage of the ACAA, people with disabilities were
routinely forced to travel with an attendant at their own expense, even
if they did not need assistance to fly safely; required to sit on a
blanket for fears that they might soil the passenger seat; or simply
refused passage. The ACAA has provided passengers with disabilities
improved consistency in air travel. Through this law, air carriers must
provide passengers with disabilities the opportunity to preboard, if
additional time or assistance is needed in boarding the aircraft;
timely assistance in boarding and deplaning; proper stowage of
assistive devices; and appropriate seating accommodations.
Although the ACAA led to improvements in the air travel experience
for passengers with disabilities, the process is far from seamless and
is, at times, dangerous. PVA members routinely report incurring bodily
harm in boarding and deplaning aircraft, and their wheelchairs,
particularly power wheelchairs, are often damaged while stowed. In
addition, members have expressed difficulty in receiving appropriate
seating accommodations on aircraft and often encounter air carrier
personnel and contractors who are not appropriately trained in
assisting passengers with catastrophic disabilities. As a result, some
people with disabilities would rather drive long distances than risk
personal injury or damage to their mobility devices.
Passengers with disabilities who encounter discrimination in air
travel may file a complaint with the specific air carrier and U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT). In 2017, passengers filed 34,701
disability-related complaints as reported by 190 domestic and foreign
air carriers, which represents a 6.5 percent increase over 2016. Top
complaints with U.S. carriers for passengers with paraplegia or
quadriplegia include failure to provide passenger assistance and
appropriate seating accommodations. In 2019, passengers filed 905
disability-related complaints directly with DOT.
We believe most problems for our members in air travel result from
lack of training, inaccessible aircraft, and inadequate enforcement of
the law. Commercial air travel is the only mode of public
transportation in which a wheelchair or scooter user must surrender
their assistive device in order to travel. These passengers must rely
on air carrier personnel and contractors to properly stow their devices
and help them board and deplane the aircraft. For many PVA members,
this is where the problems in safely accessing air travel truly begin.
During the preboarding process, I travel to the bottom of the
jetway in my customized wheelchair. It is on this sloped area that I
transfer from my personal wheelchair into an aisle chair, which is a
small, narrow wheelchair. This device has no means of self-propulsion.
Some individuals are able to perform the transfer independently, others
need the assistance of air carrier personnel. Air carriers use several
different types of aisle chairs to assist passengers with mobility
impairments during the boarding process. Often these aisle chairs are
poorly designed and in disrepair. In some cases, the aisle chair can
cause harm because it does not have proper padding, which can lead to
skin abrasions, bruises, or sores.
The assistance from personnel in trying to coordinate the transfer
and the slope of the jetway can make this a precarious procedure. In
our experience, air carrier personnel and contractors are not properly
trained on how to physically lift / transfer a person from a wheelchair
to an aisle chair. They are also too often unfamiliar with the
securement straps. Once securing the passenger, assistants must
traverse the aisle chair backwards into the plane, down the narrow
aisle, and then transfer the passenger from the aisle chair into the
passenger seat.
Upon entering the plane, accessibility diminishes rapidly. The
aisle width of the plane is typically smaller than that of the
individual being transported on the aisle chair. This means that
passengers are bumped and scraped from row to row to get to their seat,
wherever that might be on the aircraft. Despite requirements for
disbursed removable armrests to facilitate transfers, aircraft
consistently have fixed arm rests in first and business classes of
service, making the process more difficult.
On my most recent flight, in December 2019, I encountered a
recurring problem with the aisle chair and the personnel who came to
assist me. Specifically, when I was boarding and upon my return
deplaning at the same airport, the aisle chair that was used did not
accommodate my needs. The foot rest was too small and my feet kept
falling off the aisle chair as I was being brought into and out of the
airplane. Also, the seat straps were not sufficient to keep me in a
secure seated position. As a result, my hip and lower backside hit
every armrest all the way back to my assigned seat. At my seat, the
personnel tried to lift me up over the fixed armrest and into my seat
but they were not strong enough. This resulted in my being dropped onto
the armrest as I slid into the seat.
People with disabilities are sometimes deplaned without the benefit
of even an aisle chair or other mechanical device. In October 2019, a
PVA member was hand-carried off of an airplane. Although there was no
emergency requiring it, she was informed that allowing individuals to
carry her off was the only way for her to deplane. She reluctantly
agreed even though she expressed her discomfort with the process. While
she was being carried from the aircraft, she was afraid that they would
drop her and could feel the struggle of those attempting to assist her.
Current regulations should have prevented her from enduring this
treatment, but they did not.
Once I am preboarded, the rest of the passengers enter the plane.
Those that are seated in my row, have to climb over me if I am seated
in the middle or aisle seat. This causes further discomfort and
aggravation to myself and others. Upon getting to my destination, the
deplaning process is similar to the boarding process. I am the last
person off the plane no matter if it is my connector city or final
destination. Sometimes, the aisle chair is delayed.
In addition to the difficulties that passengers with limited
mobility face in boarding the plane, they must also worry about the
stowage of their assistive devices. Damage to a wheelchair can be a
trip altering event as well as pose significant health concerns for the
passenger who depends on it for mobility. Customized wheelchairs are
not easily replaced if damaged.
Upon exiting the aircraft, air carrier personnel deliver my manual
wheelchair to the bottom of the jetway where I transfer to it from the
aisle chair. I am fortunate that my wheelchair is typically returned to
me in the condition it was surrendered. Unfortunately, this is not the
case for some of our members, particularly those who use power
wheelchairs. Damage to assistive devices is typically a result of
improper loading and securement within the cargo area of the aircraft.
Damage ranges from minor tears in fabric upholstery to a complete
electrical power break down rendering the chair useless to the
operator. The air carriers are responsible for the repair of broken
wheelchairs, but repairs are not done immediately, leaving the
passenger stranded until it can be fixed. Even if the individual is
provided with a loaner wheelchair, it is not the same as the
individual's customized wheelchair.
As part of the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act (Public Law 115-254),
large domestic air carriers are required to submit monthly reports on
the number of wheelchairs and scooters they enplane and the number that
are mishandled. In December 2019, reporting air carriers reported
enplaning 65,345 wheelchairs and scooters and mishandling 1,001, a rate
of 1.53 percent mishandled. For the entire calendar year of 2019, air
carriers reported checking 685,792 wheelchairs and scooters and
mishandling 10,548, a rate of 1.54 percent mishandled. Although the
percentage of mishandled wheelchairs is low, those affected are
completely disenfranchised from their daily lives until it has been
repaired. They might be forced to miss work, school, social activities,
medical appointments, or other activities of daily living.
Due to the many problems that can occur as part of boarding and
deplaning an aircraft, PVA supported a requirement in Section 432 of
the FAA Reauthorization Act for the U.S. Access Board to conduct a
study to determine the feasibility of in-cabin wheelchair restraint
systems. The Access Board is carrying out the study through the
National Academy of Sciences' Transportation Research Board. PVA
members Peter W. Axelson and Dr. Rory A. Cooper were appointed to the
study committee. If the study determines that flying in a wheelchair is
feasible, we call on Congress to mandate that DOT develop regulations
implementing such a requirement in commercial air travel, which would
bring air travel up to the standards found in other modes of public
transportation.
In addition to problems with boarding and deplaning, aircraft have
limited accessibility. At the end of a long flight, my first stop once
I leave the jetway is the airport restroom. Once I board the aircraft,
I lose the ability to use a restroom because the vast majority of
single-aisle aircraft do not have one that is accessible. A January
2020 Government Accountability Office report on the accessibility of
U.S. aircraft lavatories for people who have limited mobility found
that although accessible lavatories are available, ``carriers do not
often choose to acquire them.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-20-258, Aviation Consumer
Protection, Few U.S. Aircraft Have Lavatories Designed to Accommodate
Passengers with Reduced Mobility 14 (2020), https://www.gao.gov/
products/gao-20-258.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2016, DOT's Accessible Air Transportation (ACCESS) Advisory
Committee conducted a negotiated rulemaking that addressed whether to
require accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft of a certain
size.\2\ In order to assist the committee, PVA conducted a survey of
disability stakeholders to determine what their expectations would be
for an accessible lavatory on new single-aisle aircraft. The survey
included seven questions and netted nearly 950 responses. One of the
questions asked respondents whether or not the inability to use a
lavatory was sufficient reason not to fly. With a 99 percent response
rate, 67 percent of those responding said that the inability to access
a lavatory would be reason enough for them to avoid air travel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Air Travel;
Establishment of a Negotiated Rulemaking Committee, 81 Fed. Reg.
20,265, (Apr. 7, 2016) https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/
04/07/2016-08062/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-disability-in-air-
travel-establishment-of-a-negotiated-rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After six months of negotiations, the ACCESS Committee voted on
October 14, 2016, to approve a set of terms that when fully implemented
would require accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft with 125
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) maximum certified passenger
seats.\3\ Despite agreement of the committee members and DOT on a
proposal that would ultimately require fully accessible lavatories on
single-aisle aircraft, the Department has yet to move forward with
publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking on such a requirement. This
is extremely disappointing and a failure of the regulatory process if
the agreement of the regulated entity and the beneficiary is not
sufficient to propel forward a process that has already been decades in
the making.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ U.S. Department of Transportation, Resolution of the U.S.
Department of Transportation Access Committee, Nov. 22, 2016, https://
www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/
ACCESS%20Committee%20Final%20Resolution.11.21.16.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When passengers with disabilities encounter disability
discrimination, they are left with few remedies. The administrative
remedies available through DOT are quite limited. The Department can
issue cease and desist orders. DOT can also levy civil penalties for
ACAA violations; however, the largest financial penalty in recent years
was in 2016 for $2 million.\4\ That fine, much of which was credited to
the carrier, was an anomaly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ U.S. Department of Transportation, United Airlines, Inc. Order
2016-1-3, https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/eo-2016-1-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any remedy for the passenger must come from the carrier and is
typically limited to bonus miles or gift cards. I filed a complaint
with regard to the improper transfer that I encountered last December.
The carrier determined that the ACAA was violated and provided me with
10,000 bonus miles. Systemic change is what is needed, not more miles.
The experience of our members and other passengers with
disabilities in boarding and deplaning aircraft and the general
inaccessibility of commercial passenger aircraft have compelled PVA to
lead the charge to improve the air travel experience of veterans and
all people with disabilities. We appreciated the opportunity to work
with the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2018. We also appreciated the opportunity to
appear before the Subcommittee during last September's FAA oversight
hearing to highlight the provisions related to the experience of
passengers with disabilities in air travel.
The FAA Reauthorization of 2018 included 11 provisions focused
solely on improving the air travel experience of passengers with
disabilities. In addition to those already discussed, were provisions
that will inform air travel passengers about their rights under the
ACAA, improve the assistance they receive from air carriers, and
establish formal lines of communication between the air travel
industry, the disability community, and DOT to address barriers to air
travel. As a result of these provisions, we are particularly pleased to
note that PVA will be represented on the recently announced Air Carrier
Access Act Advisory Committee required under Section 439.
One of the provisions in the FAA Reauthorization that we believe
could address the systemic training problems is the requirement in
Section 440 for the Secretary to perform a review, and as necessary, to
revise the regulations governing timely, dignified, and effective
assistance for passengers with disabilities. The Secretary was also
required to determine whether the regulations governing training
programs for assisting passengers, like paralyzed veterans, are
sufficient and whether hands on training should be part of the required
regular training regimen. We understand that the advisory committee
will be reviewing this requirement and ask that the Subcommittee
conduct appropriate oversight of this requirement to ensure that DOT
takes the current training deficiencies seriously as they are a health
and safety issue for PVA members and other passengers with
disabilities.
The disability-related provisions in the FAA Reauthorization Act
and the study on lavatory access also included in the law represent an
important step forward in efforts to improve the air travel experience
of passengers with disabilities. However, these provisions alone will
not address the fundamental access problems to safe air travel for
people with disabilities. Thus, we strongly support the bipartisan Air
Carrier Access Amendments Act, H.R. 1549, which was introduced in March
2019 by Rep. Jim Langevin (D-RI). This legislation would greatly
improve accessibility within aircraft and strengthen enforcement of the
ACAA.
The Air Carrier Access Amendments Act would ensure new airplanes
are designed to accommodate the needs of people with disabilities by
requiring airlines to meet defined accessibility standards. These
standards would address safe and effective boarding and deplaning,
visually accessible announcements, seating accommodations, lavatories,
and better stowage options for assistive devices. The legislation would
also require removal of access barriers on existing airplanes to the
extent that it is readily achievable--easily accomplishable and may be
done without much difficulty or expense. We see no reason why these
concepts, which are mainly drawn from the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA), would not successfully translate to air travel.
Unlike the ADA, the ACAA does not impose specific physical access
requirements for aircraft. Because of the ADA and other disability
civil rights laws, other forms of mass transportation in the United
States are accessible to people with disabilities, including those who
use wheelchairs. Meanwhile, the interior of most commercial passenger
aircraft are quite hostile to passengers who use wheelchairs. There is
not an accessible path of travel to safely board and reach an airline
seat; lavatories are inaccessible; and limited personal space typically
means passengers crawling over their fellow passengers who are unable
to stand up and move.
We believe that it is time for aircraft to accommodate the needs of
passengers with disabilities, including those who use wheelchairs. It
is one of the few areas of sanctioned discrimination against a minority
group in transportation. As the population ages, the need for greater
accessibility in aircraft will only continue to grow. All fare paying
customers should be able to independently access aircraft without
depending on unsafe, inefficient assistance. Only then will air travel
truly be a viable option for all members of the flying public.
H.R. 1549 would also strengthen ACAA enforcement by requiring
referral of certain passenger-filed complaints to the Department of
Justice and establishment of a private right of action. The requirement
for DOT to refer certain ACAA complaints to the Attorney General would
appropriately recognize that the ACAA is not a customer service
standard but a civil right. The Attorney General would then be able to
pursue a civil action on behalf of a passenger.
Equally important, the law would establish the right of passengers
with disabilities to seek relief in the courts for ACAA violations.
Unlike laws governing access for people with disabilities in other
forms of transportation, the ACAA does not explicitly allow people with
disabilities to enforce their civil rights, if needed, in a court of
law. Prior to 2001, some courts \5\ had held that the ACAA allowed for
a private right of action. Following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision
in Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275 (2001),\6\ however, the
Second,\7\ Fifth,\8\ Ninth,\9\ Tenth,\10\ and Eleventh \11\ U.S. Courts
of Appeals have ruled that there is no private right of action under
the ACAA. At its recent midyear meeting, the American Bar Association
adopted a resolution supporting a private right of action under the
ACAA.\12\ We also believe that Congress must act to restore this right
to paralyzed veterans and all passengers with disabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Fifth and Eighth Circuits
had previously ruled that there is a private right of action under the
ACAA. Shinault v. American Airlines, Inc., 936 F.2d 796 (5th Cir. 1991)
and Tallarico v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 881 F.2d 566 (8th Cir.
1989).
\6\ In Sandoval, the Court held that a private right of action
should not be implied absent obvious congressional intent.
\7\ Lopez v. Jet Blue Airways, 662 F.3d 593 (2d Cir. 2011).
\8\ Stokes v. Southwest Airlines, 887 F.3d 199 (5th Cir. 2018).
\9\ Segalman v. Southwest Airlines Company, 895 F.3d 1219 (9th Cir.
2018).
\10\ Boswell v. Skywest Airlines, Inc., 361 F.3d 1263 (10th Cir.
2004).
\11\ Love v. Delta Airlines, 310 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 2002).
\12\ Amanda Robert, Air Travelers Should Have a Private Right of
Action if Discriminations Against, ABA House Says, ABA Journal, Feb.
17, 2020, http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/resolution-106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The administrative remedies currently available provide little
relief and have netted few in improvements in air travel for passengers
with disabilities. Establishing a private right of action would
institute additional remedies, without removing DOT's role in the
administrative process. It would also provide relief directly to
passengers with disabilities. Furthermore, the private right of action
would allow for injunctive relief to foster policy changes that would
allow passengers and airlines to partner together to make changes that
would benefit all passengers with disabilities.
We believe that better training of airline personnel and their
contractors, increased aircraft accessibility, and improved enforcement
options will lead to safer travel experiences for passengers with
disabilities. PVA members and other people with disabilities have
waited long enough for true access to air travel. The future has
arrived, and we know what the process can be like for passengers with
disabilities. We simply need to have the will to do it.
PVA thanks you for this opportunity to express our views. We would
be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Page.
I want to now turn to Mr. Joe Leader, chief executive
officer of the Airline Passenger Experience Association. You
are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Leader. Thank you. Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member
Graves, Chairman DeFazio, and members of the subcommittee, my
name is Dr. Joe Leader, and I proudly have served since 2015 as
the chief executive officer of the Airline Passenger Experience
Association, APEX.
It is one of the largest international airline associations
in the world. During my tenure as CEO, we came together with
IFSA, the International Flight Services Association, giving us
a combined history of 96 years of proudly advancing every major
airline and valued supplier worldwide.
I am before you today because I believe deeply in the
advancement of airline passenger experience. Like each of you,
I began my journey as an airline passenger. Twenty years ago,
while working as a high-tech executive, I was featured in a
magazine as an airline's most frequent flyer. As a part of that
honor, I met with the airline CEO and shared with him a page-
long list of ideas on how the airline could better serve its
customers. They implemented nearly every single idea.
With that introduction, please allow me to address the
subject of the airline passenger experience, what it is, and
what it can be. APEX neutrally tracks, verifies, validates and
certifies ratings for over 1 million flights per year across
approximately 600 airlines globally, for the Official Airline
Ratings (TM) via TripIt, the leading travel
management app worldwide. Only 1 in 17 airlines makes it to
APEX Five Star status, while another 1 in 17 makes it to APEX
Four Star status.
I am proud to share with you that the United States reached
an incredible milestone last year as Alaska, American, Delta,
Hawaiian, JetBlue, JXS, Southwest, Spirit, and United all
reached either four or five stars, as independently rated by
their airline passengers.
Spirit Airlines has proudly joined me here today at this
hearing to share how their Invest in the Guest philosophy has
improved their independently verified passenger ratings,
thereby advancing themselves to an APEX 2020 Four Star airline.
In good news for all Americans, the inflation-adjusted cost
of air travel has dropped by approximately 50 percent over the
past two decades, keeping air travel costs lower than historic
totals, even after including all ancillary revenue fees. From a
dynamic market perspective, competition has driven U.S.
airlines to offer more variety in types of airline passenger
experience than ever before.
Innovation has enabled U.S. airlines to offer better
options to their customers, including the disabled. To that
end, APEX served a leading role on the U.S. Department of
Transportation ACCESS Advisory Committee, advancing closed
captioning and audible description options. Voluntarily, U.S.
airlines have been placing these enhancements across new in-
flight entertainment systems, both in seatback screens and in
bring-your-own device options.
For better accessibility, manufacturers are creating better
options for improved ease of access for wheelchair-bound
passengers. This resonates personally for me with the Paralyzed
Veterans of America testifying here today, as my wife
personally served a quadriplegic before she became a medical
doctor and surgeon, and my father proudly served in the U.S.
Army, and flies frequently with my family using his wheelchair.
What does the future bring for U.S. airline passengers? Our
customers will enjoy flights more than ever, with expanded
entertainment and connectivity options. The number of aircraft
with in-flight entertainment screens worldwide will continue to
increase, while bring-your-own device options will surge to
cover nearly all remaining commercial U.S. aircraft this
decade.
As an example of innovation, each new screen installed by
Delta weighs approximately 2 pounds less than its predecessor,
saving millions of gallons of fuel despite more screen size for
passengers. New technologies for our key airline suppliers will
make future seatback screens nearly as thin and light as
seatback hard plastic. Seating advancements have enabled
passengers 2 to 3 inches more legroom than historic seats in
existing space, as I have indicated in my written testimony.
U.S. airline ticket prices should continue to track lower
than the rate of inflation, as airlines now burn 53.7 percent
less fuel per passenger than the 1990s. This helps benefit our
passengers, our airlines, and our world, with a carbon emission
reduction averaging 2.3 percent less each and every year for
the past decade alone.
Our U.S. airlines are voluntarily spending tens of billions
of dollars enhancing airports to better serve their customers,
including implementation of face-matching from the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security that securely interlinks with
their airlines without any transfer of photos. Other new
technologies being deployed by our airlines are advancing to
complete journey management, including ground transportation,
automated bag tracking all along your journey and remembering
your personal preferences.
This is only the beginning of----
Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Leader. Thank you.
Mr. Leader. I will be wrapping up, yes, Chairman.
Mr. Larsen. You are wrapped up. Sorry. I got to move on.
Mr. Leader. Of course.
[Mr. Leader's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Joe Leader, Chief Executive Officer, Airline
Passenger Experience Association
Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and Members of the
Subcommittee.
My name is Dr. Joe Leader and I proudly have served since 2015 as
the Chief Executive Officer of APEX, the Airline Passenger Experience
Association, one of the largest international airline associations in
the world. During my tenure as CEO, APEX came together with IFSA, the
International Flight Services Association, giving us a combined history
of 96 years of proudly advancing nearly every major airline and valued
supplier worldwide.
I am before you today because I believe deeply in the advancement
of airline passenger experience. Like each of you, I began my journey
as an airline passenger. Twenty years ago, while working as a high-tech
executive, I was featured in a magazine as an airline's most frequent
flyer. As a part of that honor, I met with the airline CEO and shared
with him a page-long list of ideas on how the airline could better
serve its customers. They implemented nearly every single idea.
With that introduction, please allow me to address the subject of
``The Airline Passenger Experience: What It Is and What It Can Be?''
APEX neutrally tracks, verifies, validates, and certifies ratings for
over 1 million flights across approximately 600 airlines globally for
the Official Airline Ratings (TM) via TripIt, the leading
travel management app worldwide. Only 1 in 17 airlines makes it to APEX
Five Star status while another 1 in 17 reaches APEX Four Star Status. I
am proud to share that the United States reached an incredible
milestone last year as Alaska, American, Delta, Hawaiian, JetBlue, JSX,
Southwest, Spirit, and United all reached either Four or Five Stars
status as independently rated by their passengers. Spirit Airlines has
proudly joined me today at this hearing to share how their ``invest in
the guest'' philosophy has improved their independently verified
passenger ratings thereby advancing themselves to an APEX 2020 Four
Star airline.
In good news for all Americans, the inflation-adjusted cost of air
travel has dropped by approximately 50% over the past two decades \1\
\2\--keeping air travel costs lower than historic totals even after
including all ancillary revenue fees.\3\ From a dynamic market
perspective, competition has driven US airlines to offer more variety
in types of passenger experience than ever before \4\. Innovation has
enabled US airlines to offer better options to their customers
including the disabled \5\. To that end, APEX served a leading role in
the US Department of Transportation's ACCESS Advisory Committee
advancing closed captioning and audible description options.
Voluntarily, US airlines have been placing these enhancements across
new in-flight entertainment systems in both seatback screens and bring-
your-own device options. For better accessibility, manufacturers are
creating better options for improved ease-of-access for wheelchair
bound passengers.\6\ \7\ This resonates personally for me with the
Paralyzed Veterans of America testifying here today as my wife
personally served a quadriplegic before becoming a medical doctor and
my father proudly served in the U.S. Army and flies frequently with my
family using his wheelchair.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Belobaba, P., Hernandez, K., Jenkins, J., Powell, R., &
Swelbar, W. (2015). Productivity trends in the US passenger Airline
Industry 1978-2010. Transportation@MIT, 1-24. Retrieved from https://
transportation.mit.edu/sites/default/files/documents/MIT_Air_Passenger_
Report.pdf
\2\ IATA. (2019). Economic Performance of the Airline Industry.
Retrieved from https://www.iata.org/contentassets/
36695cd211574052b3820044111b56de/airline-industry-economic-performance-
dec19-report.pdf.
\3\ Hill, Catey (March 26, 2019). Marketwatch. ``The uncomfortable
reason you're seeing dirt cheap airfares right now.'' Retrieved from
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-uncomfortable-reason-youre-
seeing-dirt-cheap-airfares-right-now-2019-03-26.
\4\ Kim, S., Kim, I., & Hyun, S. S. (2016). First-class in-flight
services and advertising effectiveness: antecedents of customer-centric
innovativeness and brand loyalty in the United States (US) airline
industry. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 33(1), 118-140. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2015.1038420.
\5\ Most studies report complaints by disabled. This study shows a
reduction in complaints by one airline, and other positive remarks
alongside complaints. Major, W. L., & Hubbard, S. M. (2019). An
examination of disability-related complaints in the United States
commercial aviation sector. Journal of Air Transport Management, 78,
43-53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2019.04.006.
\6\ The level of implementation is still low. See United States
Government Accountability Office, GAO. (2020). Few U.S. Aircraft Have
Lavatories Designed to Accommodate Passengers with Reduced Mobility.
Aviation Consumer Protection. Retrieved from https://www.gao.gov/
assets/710/703687.pdf.
\7\ Taylor, Stephanie (February 12, 2020). APEX: ``New Aircraft
Lavatory Concept Is Accessible to Passengers in Wheelchairs.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
What does the future bring for US airline passengers? Our customers
will enjoy flights more than ever with expanded entertainment and
connectivity options. The number of aircraft with in-flight
entertainment screens worldwide will continue to increase while ``bring
your own device'' options will surge to cover nearly all remaining
commercial US aircraft this decade \8\ \9\. As an example of
innovation, each new screen installed by Delta weighs approximately 2
pounds less than its predecessor saving millions of gallons of fuel
despite even more screen size for passengers \10\. New technologies
from our key airline suppliers will make future seatback screens nearly
as thin and light as seatback hard plastic. New technologies from our
key airline suppliers will make future seatback screens nearly as thin
and light as seatback hard plastic. Seating advancements have enabled
passengers 2 inches to 3 inches more legroom than historic seats in
existing space.\11\ US airline ticket prices should continue to track
lower than the rate of inflation as airlines now burn 53.7% less fuel
per passenger \12\ than the 1990s. This helps benefit our passengers,
our airlines, and our world with a carbon emissions reduction averaging
2.3% less each and every year for the past decade alone \13\. Our US
airlines are voluntarily spending tens of billions of dollars enhancing
airports to better serve their customers including implementation of
face-matching from the US Department of Homeland Security that securely
interlinks with our airlines without any transfer of photos \14\. Other
new technologies being deployed by our airlines are advancing to
complete journey management including ground transportation, automated
bag tracking all along your journey \15\ \16\, and remembering personal
preferences for food and beverage ordering in-flight. This is only the
beginning of a decade of advancing one-to-one airline customer service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Delta continues to invest in seatback screens rather than BYOD.
Modolo, K. (n.d.). 3 ways Delta Flight Products is revolutionizing
aircraft interiors. Delta News Hub. Retrieved from https://
news.delta.com/3-ways-delta-flight-products-revolutionizing-aircraft-
interiors.
\9\ APEX Experience Magazine (April-May 2018).
\10\ Delta Professional. (April 25, 2019). How Delta's new wireless
IFE tech helps cut emissions. Retrieved from https://pro.delta.com/
content/agency/in/en/news/news-archive/2019/april-2019/how-delta-s-new-
wireless-ife-tech-helps-cut-emissions.html.
\11\ Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors (September
2019).
\12\ IATA/ATAG Geneva Meeting (January 2020).
\13\ IATA. (December 12, 2019). Carbon Emissions Per Passenger
Decrease More Than 50% Since 1990. Retrieved from https://www.iata.org/
en/pressroom/pr/2019-12-12-01/.
\14\ Abandoned. See Metz, R. & CNN Business. (December 5, 2019).
Homeland Security drops plan to use facial recognition on traveling US
citizens. CNN Business. Retrieved from https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/
02/tech/homeland-security-facial-recognition-citizens-at-airports/
index.html.
\15\ Delta News Hub. (n.d.). Delta introduces innovative baggage
tracking process. Retrieved from https://news.delta.com/delta-
introduces-innovative-baggage-tracking-process-0.
\16\ IATA. (June 2, 2019). Resolution: RFID Baggage Tracking Set
for Global Deployment. Retrieved from https://www.iata.org/en/
pressroom/pr/2019-06-02-05/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While I recognize that this merely scratches the surface of
advancements, I look forward to your questions so that I may share
innovations that our airlines and key suppliers are advancing to best
service customers across the United States and around the world.
2020 Official Airline Ratings Winners
FOUR AND FIVE STAR RECIPIENTS OF THE 2020 OFFICIAL AIRLINE RATINGS
(TM) (All Listed in Alphabetical Order)
FIVE STAR GLOBAL AIRLINES
Aeroflot
Aeromexico
Air New Zealand
American Airlines
All Nippon Airways
Asiana Airlines
Cathay Pacific
China Airlines
Delta Air Lines
Emirates
EVA Air
Japan Airlines
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
Korean Air
Lufthansa
Qantas
Qatar Airways
Singapore Airlines
SWISS International Air Lines
Turkish Airlines
Virgin Atlantic
FIVE STAR MAJOR AIRLINES
Air Astana
Air Tahiti Nui
Alaska Airlines
Avianca
Bangkok Airways
Copa Airlines
Hawaiian Airlines
JetBlue Airways
Kuwait Airways
Middle East Airlines
Royal Brunei Airlines
Virgin Australia
Vistara
FIVE STAR REGIONAL AIRLINES
Aeromexico Connect
JSX
FOUR STAR GLOBAL AIRLINES
Aerolineas Argentinas
Air France
Air Italy
British Airways
China Southern Airlines
El Al
Etihad Airways
Finnair
LATAM Airlines Group
LOT Polish Airlines
Scandinavian Airlines (SAS)
Thai Airways International
United Airlines
Vietnam Airlines
FOUR STAR MAJOR AIRLINES
Aer Lingus
Air Europa
Austrian Airlines
Caribbean Airlines
Fiji Airways
Gulf Air
HiFly
Icelandair
Kenya Airways
Malindo Air
Oman Air
Philippine Airlines
SriLankan Airlines
FOUR STAR LOW-COST CARRIERS
Atlantic Airways
Citilink
GoAir
Interjet
Norwegian
Southwest Airlines
Spirit Airlines
WestJet
And the 2018 Crystal Cabin Award Winners Are . . .
11 April, 2018 in Industry Written by Caroline Ku
APEX CEO Joe Leader was on the judging panel and also presented the
IFEC award.
IFEC award winner: Bluebox aIFE: Accessible IFE for passengers with
visual impairment_Bluebox Aviation Systems (cooperation partners Virgin
Atlantic Airways & The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association
Entertainment for All! United Airlines' New Accessible Inflight
Entertainment System Wins Crystal Cabin Award April 04, 2019
CHICAGO, April 4, 2019 /PRNewswire/--At this year's annual Aircraft
Interiors Expo in Hamburg, Germany, United Airlines was awarded the
Crystal Cabin Award for Inflight Entertainment and Connectivity for its
new onboard entertainment interface, which recently debuted on the
airline's 787-10 Dreamliner fleet. The highly coveted award, which is
the standard by which airlines, manufacturers, suppliers and design and
engineering firms are judged, recognized the efforts of United and its
partners at Panasonic Avionics to provide customers with what is the
most accessible airline entertainment system in the world.
``Accessible and relevant inflight entertainment plays a major role
in customers enjoying their flying experience and we wanted to create a
system that all United customers could enjoy, including customers who
have varying vision, hearing or mobility requirements,'' said Toby
Enqvist, senior vice president of customers at United. ``Together with
Panasonic, we spent three years building a system that is truly
inclusive, and we look forward to adding it to more aircraft soon.''
This new system offers the world's most extensive suite of
accessibility features on seatback entertainment, which accommodates
any level of vision, as well as provides support for customers with
hearing and mobility issues. These features include:
Text-to-speech with reading granularity options
Customizable voice volume, speed and pitch
Explore by touch features including screen magnification,
customizable text size, high contrast text options, color correction
options and color inversion options
Custom messaging tailored for customers with hearing
disabilities
Additional navigation options for mobility impaired
passengers who are unable to swipe or use handset features
The system also provides the following enhancements that improve
the overall experience for all customers:
Split screen capabilities that allow customers to watch a
movie and view the flight map simultaneously
A relax mode that lets customers customize a selection of
soothing videos and relaxing audio playlists
Movie and television recommendations based on remaining
flight time, previously watched content and movies and shows that have
been added to a customer's favorites list
New Aircraft Lavatory Concept Is Accessible to Passengers in
Wheelchairs
12 February, 2020 in Comfort Written by Stephanie Taylor
Image via Acumen Design Associates.
Acumen Design Associates and ST Engineering have jointly developed
ACCESS, which they describe as ``the world's first expanding aircraft
lavatory,'' to improve the flying experience on single-aisle aircraft
for passengers with reduced mobility (PRMs). As narrow-body flight
times grow in length, the need to make lavatories more easily
accessible is imperative.
In certain countries, there's currently no legislation regarding
the availability of an accessible lavatory on narrow-body jets, but
arguably, there's more need for the facility than ever. With new
aircraft types such as the Airbus A321XLR featuring a range of up to
4,700 nautical miles, narrow-body jets are now capable of flying
longer, even transatlantic routes.
Daniel Clucas, senior designer at Acumen Design Associates
(Acumen), said: ``Many PRMs avoid flying because of the compromises
they have to make--especially when using the on-board lavatory. During
our research, we heard first-hand how those who do fly will even avoid
using the lavatory altogether if possible.''
Standard ACCESS footprint. Image via Acumen Design Associates
Expanded ACCESS lavatory footprint. Image via Acumen Design Associates
ACCESS has been designed for line-fit or retrofit on Boeing 737 and
Airbus A321 aircraft with input from accessible aviation consultant and
founder of Rocket Girl Coaching, Mary Doyle; campaigner, lobbyist and
founder of Flying Disabled, Chris Wood; and entrepreneur and founder of
easyTravelseat, Josh Wintersgill, among others.
During the research process, Doyle stated, ``I believe there are
four main things that can improve the onboard experience: more space,
highly sanitized work surfaces, greatly improved physical supports for
unassisted transfer and anti-slip flooring. And whilst lavatories serve
a functional need, I believe they should look beautiful too, in keeping
with excellent customer experience.''
The resulting solution created by Acumen and ST Engineering uses a
moving wall to offer PRMs 40% more space than a standard lavatory
module.
Clucas explained, ``The standard lavatory is 33 inches wide with a
20-inch wide doorway. ACCESS fits into that footprint, so it doesn't
take up any additional cabin space, but in its expanded state is 51-
inches wide, with an extra-wide entranceway of 24 inches.'' This allows
for passengers in a wheelchair to enter the lavatory independently,
rather than having to be transferred behind a curtain. It also provides
enough room for a carer or family member to enter the space, if
necessary.
According to Clucas, the process of expanding or shrinking the
lavatory, which is carried out by a crewmember, takes a matter of
seconds using a latch on the outside wall of the lavatory and leaves
enough room for people to move around in the galley.
The expanded lavatory opens into the entranceway in the aisle at
the rear of the aircraft, and covers what Clucas refers to as ``the
assist space''--where a crewmember would stand in the event of an
emergency. ``In the same way business-class cabin doors have a back-up
mechanism; we will need to prove there is an adequate fail-safe that
can stow the lavatory away in the event of an emergency while it is in
its expanded state,'' he noted.
ACCESS builds on a previous product created by Acumen and ST
Engineering, the ARC lavatory upgrade kit, which was shortlisted for a
Crystal Cabin Award in 2019. Similar to ACCESS, the Zen-inspired Boeing
777 lavatory design featured ``cutting-edge hygiene technologies--such
as antimicrobial surface finishes, touchless faucet and flush
mechanisms and under-floor membranes to remove odor--combined with
floor-to-ceiling lighting and minimalist, curved architecture to create
a striking interior,'' Clucas said. ACCESS also includes features such
as vertical, horizontal and fold-down grab bars and a lowered sink
height.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you very much.
I now want to recognize Mr. Klein for 5 minutes, Spirit
Airlines.
Mr. Klein. Good morning, Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member
Graves, Chairman DeFazio, and members of the Subcommittee on
Aviation. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My
name is Matt Klein. I am the chief commercial officer of Spirit
Airlines.
Spirit Airlines is the largest ultra low-cost carrier, or
ULCC, in the U.S. We serve over 50 U.S. domestic airports and
25 international destinations. Our total prices, including all
ancillary products and services, are, on average, more than 30
percent below those of other airlines on our routes.
Corporate travelers and more affluent consumers have many
choices in today's market. Spirit's product is designed for
highly price-sensitive travelers, mainly ordinary individual
consumers, families, and small and medium businesses who pay
for their own tickets and who face narrower options. This
continues to be an underserved segment in today's market, and
we are proud to fill the need.
We are the fastest growing airline in the U.S. for the past
1, 3, 5 and 10 years, consistently running high load factors.
So it seems American consumers are responding very favorably to
the choice we provide in the market for air travel.
What may be less widely known are the tremendous strides
Spirit has made in the past few years to become one of the most
reliable airlines in the country. We ranked fourth nationally
in on-time performance out of 10 reporting carriers in 2018,
and based on unofficial statistics, in 2019 as well, beating
out three out of the four big airlines and all the other low-
cost carriers.
We also rank strongly on completion factor and on baggage
handling. None of that is easy to do for a smaller airline, as
we have less built-in redundancy and inherently greater
challenges in recovering from unforeseen events.
We believe Spirit's combination of low prices and reliable
service adds up to terrific value for our guests and we are
seeing a positive reaction from consumers, both in our
satisfaction surveys as well as in our increasing customer
repeat rate.
And it is not just about operational reliability. Over the
past 3 years, Spirit rolled out a broad-based and ongoing
initiative we call Invest in the Guest. That program comprises
enhanced service training for our crews and other guest-facing
personnel, as well as investments in technology, like enhanced
airport kiosks, and our new self-bag drop machines that will
help speed our guests through the check-in process at the
airport.
We also recently announced a complete refresh of our
interior cabins, featuring all new seating that provides
significantly greater comfort, personal space, and usable
legroom. Later this year, we will begin installing next-
generation, full-streaming Wi-Fi across our fleet, the first
ULCC to do so. I believe we are the only major U.S. carrier to
have wheelchair accessible lavatories installed on most of our
aircraft.
Spirit operates one of the newest and most fuel-efficient
fleets in the Americas, ranking consistently as a leader in
fuel consumption per passenger. All new aircraft coming into
our growing fleet feature next-generation engines that burn
about 16 percent less fuel than even the most recent
generation, not just fuel efficiency, but also noise
efficiency.
In addition to several other awards in the past 2 years, we
are proud to have won Seattle's prestigious Fly Quiet Award for
2 years in a row.
In the U.S., the large distances, the dispersal of families
across the country and the needs of our interconnected business
environment all make air travel more essential than in other
countries.
At Spirit, we recognize our products may not be for
everyone; yet, we are very proud to offer low-price, reliable
service to those who may have no other option. And with the
strong discipline we exert on the prices charged by other
airlines, we are also pleased to help drive savings for all
travelers, whether they fly us or not.
Thank you, again, for the opportunity to speak with you
today.
[Mr. Klein's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Matt Klein, Executive Vice President and Chief
Commercial Officer, Spirit Airlines, Inc.
Good morning Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and members of
the Subcommittee on Aviation. Thank you for the opportunity to testify
today. My name is Matt Klein. I am Chief Commercial Officer of Spirit
Airlines.
Spirit Airlines is the largest so-called ``Ultra Low-Cost
Carrier,'' or ULCC, in the US. We serve over 50 US domestic airports
and 25 international destinations. Our total prices including all
ancillary products and services are, on average, more than 30% below
those of other airlines on our routes. Corporate travelers and more
affluent consumers have many choices in today's market. Spirit's
product is designed for highly price-sensitive travelers, mainly
ordinary individual consumers, families and small and medium businesses
who pay for their own tickets and who face narrower options. This
continues to be an underserved segment in today's market, and we are
proud to fill the need. We are the fastest growing airline in the US
for the past one, three, five and 10 years, consistently running high
load factors, so it seems American consumers are responding very
favorably to the choice we provide in the market for air travel.
What may be less widely known are the tremendous strides Spirit has
made in the past few years to become one of the most reliable airlines
in the country. We ranked fourth nationally in on-time performance (out
of 10 reporting carriers) in 2018 and, based on unofficial statistics,
in 2019 as well, beating out three out of the four big airlines and all
the other low-cost carriers. We also rank strongly on completion factor
(i.e., low cancellation rate) and on bag handling.
None of that is easy to do for a smaller airline, as we have less
built-in redundancy and inherently greater challenges in recovering
from unforeseen events. We believe Spirit's combination of low prices
and reliable service adds up to terrific value for our Guests, and we
are seeing a positive reaction from consumers, both in our satisfaction
surveys as well as in our increasing customer repeat rate.
And it's not just about operational reliability. Over the past
three years, Spirit rolled out a broad-based and ongoing initiative we
call ``Invest in the Guest.'' That program comprises enhanced service
training for our crews and other Guest-facing personnel, as well as
investments in technology like enhanced airport kiosks and our new
self-bag drop machines that will help speed our Guests through the
check-in process at the airport. We also recently announced a complete
refresh of our interior cabins, featuring all-new seating that provides
significantly greater comfort, personal space and usable legroom. Later
this year, we will begin installing next-generation, full-streaming
WiFi across our fleet, the first ULCC to do so. I believe we are the
only major US carrier to have wheelchair-accessible lavatories
installed on most of our aircraft.
Spirit operates one of the newest and most fuel-efficient fleets in
the Americas, ranking consistently as a leader in fuel consumption per
passenger. All new aircraft coming in to our growing fleet feature
next-generation engines that burn about 16% less fuel than even the
most recent generation. Not just fuel efficiency, but also noise
efficiency: in addition to several other awards in the past two years,
we are proud to have won Seattle's prestigious ``Fly Quiet'' award for
two years in a row.
In the US, the large distances, the dispersal of families across
the country and the needs of our interconnected business environment
all make air travel more essential than in other countries. At Spirit,
we recognize our product may not be for everyone. Yet, we are very
proud to offer low-priced, reliable service to those who may have no
other option and, with the strong discipline we exert on the prices
charged by other airlines, we are also pleased to help drive savings
for all travelers, whether they fly us or not.
Thank you again for the opportunity to speak today.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Klein.
As noted earlier, Ranking Member Graves is here, and I will
recognize him for 5 minutes for his opening statement.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Airline
travel has truly revolutionized this planet, giving us access
to areas that never were previously accessible, giving us
integration and exposure to cultures, to people, to resources
that we previously would not have had access to.
We have been able to deliver doctors and life-saving
medicines to folks in need. We have been able to lift folks out
of poverty. We have been able to introduce technology and
innovation, improving lives around the world, as a result of
aviation technology and commercial air travel. It really is
amazing to sit and go through the exercise of thinking about
potentially not having that amazing technology.
But also, right here in the United States, as I recall, in
2017, we had 841 million airline passengers. By 2038, that is
projected to reach 1.28 billion passengers. The whole
experience doesn't start when you get on the plane.
The experience actually starts well before that. We have
three kids. I know going through the exercise of schlepping all
the luggage, loading them up in the car, going perhaps to a
remote parking spot, taking the shuttle, getting to the
airport, trying to find the right gate, checking in your bags,
trying to get through security, trying to get actually checked
in on the plane, seated. And that whole experience, it is
pretty intimidating. And I will say it again, when you have
three kids that you are--I know I am supposed to say in tow,
but usually following, it is pretty intimidating and it is
pretty overwhelming.
And so, I do think--it is 2020, and, Mr. Leader, or Dr.
Leader, you talked about some of the technology that is out
there today, and it really is amazing. It is fantastic the way
tech has been integrated into airplanes in terms of the AV-type
opportunities.
One of the home airports that I represent and share with
Congressman Richmond, New Orleans Airport, they actually allow
us to check bags at the parking lot, at the parking garage,
which is fantastic, and not having to take them on the shuttle
and everything else that we have to do.
But there are other areas where we can improve, where we
can use technology to help improve that experience, because the
cumulative experiences I hear from constituents all the time
does need improvement. And looking at the statistics, the
upward trend in passenger travel, it is going to become more
challenging. It is going to get worse, not better, in terms of
the volume, and we need to ensure that we are using technology
that has a system that can actually accommodate or facilitate
it and allow it to be a pleasurable experience.
In the United States, as you know, we have gone from eight
major carriers down to four. It is interesting in that if I
remember the numbers correctly, when you look at the
complaints, when you look at the complaints about airline
travel, as I recall, over half of them, over half of them are
complaints concerning international carriers, not our domestic
carriers.
Now, I haven't done the math or looked at the statistics,
but I am going to guess that we have multiple times more folks
flying on domestic carriers than we do international. And as we
have seen in this committee across issues, there is a culture
difference among international carriers versus domestic, and
certainly something that we need to continue to focus on.
I also want to make note that in the FAA bill that we did
in 2018, we had included over 40 different provisions related
to consumer issues and passenger experience. As the chairman
noted, perhaps there are a few that we need to continue
focusing on and working together with everyone in this room to
continue to improve the experience as best we can. But I do
want to make note, everything from seat sizes to strollers,
evacuation standards, involuntary bumping, oxygen masks,
protecting pets on planes, and I believe a dozen different
provisions, Mr. Page, related to passengers with disabilities.
So, certainly, progress has been made as the FAA works to
implement those. But I will say it again, and I think the
chairman noted, we certainly need to ensure that we continue to
revisit this, this is an iterative process, and continue to
improve the experience as much as we can.
Lastly, right now, obviously, one of the things on people's
minds is coronavirus, and we need to make sure that we all
continue to focus on this. Outbreaks in South Korea, Italy,
Iran and other areas are infecting more new patients on a daily
basis than are occurring in China. And if outbreaks can happen
there, they can happen here. We need to work in a bipartisan
manner, and ensure that we focus on this particular issue,
aviation travel, air travel, and ensure that we are making this
experience as safe as possible.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back and appreciate the
opportunity to give an opening statement.
[Mr. Graves of Louisiana's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Garret Graves, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Aviation
Air transportation has truly revolutionized the world, giving us
access and exposure to many areas, people, cultures, and resources that
were in many cases practically inaccessible before. Air transportation
has allowed for the delivery of life saving medical care, the reduction
of poverty, the introduction of technology and innovation, and other
developments in areas that otherwise may not have experienced those
benefits.
For passengers, the cumulative experience, as I often hear from my
constituents, is that air travel does need to be improved. And as
passenger levels continue to increase, this will become even more
challenging. Here in the United States, we expect passenger volume to
grow from 840 million people in 2017 to 1.28 billion in 2038.
The passenger experience doesn't begin when you board the plane--it
begins well before that. It involves purchasing the tickets, getting to
and parking at the airport, checking your luggage, going through
security, finding your gate, getting seated on the plane, and then
reversing the entire process once the flight lands. Especially when
traveling with children, as I frequently do, it can be a challenging
experience--and it's a challenge for those involved in working to
improve the passenger experience.
Technology can help do that. At New Orleans Airport, for example,
passengers may check their bags in the parking lot, which is incredibly
helpful. There are more ways that policies and technologies can improve
the passenger experience, and we need to identify them.
As we continue to consider the passenger experience in the U.S., we
need to keep in mind that the number of major commercial carriers has
been reduced from eight down to four, and approximately half of
passenger complaints relate to international carriers and travel.
I also want to note that in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, we
included over 40 provisions addressing consumer issues and the
passenger experience, everything from seat size to strollers,
evacuation standards to involuntary bumping, and oxygen masks to
protecting pets on planes--as well as a dozen provisions addressing the
concerns of passengers with disabilities. DOT and FAA are in the
process of implementing these provisions, and this subcommittee should
ensure the law is being implemented properly while we examine what more
may need to be done.
Finally, coronavirus is on the minds of many. Our subcommittee
needs to focus in a bipartisan manner on the impacts that outbreaks
have on air travel and how we can ensure that people stay as safe as
possible.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
I now want to move on to Member questions. Each Member will
be recognized for 5 minutes, and I will start by recognizing
myself.
I will start with Mr. Page. Last fall, during the
subcommittee's recent roundtable on accessibility, you
discussed PVA's collaboration with the administration on a
recent rule to improve lavatory access in single-aisle
aircraft. Can you give us your thoughts on the proposed rule
and where we are on its development?
Mr. Page. Well, as you know, the Department put out the
NPRM, and comments are going back in reference to that. Spirit
testified they are an airline that most of their planes have
Space-Flex 1, which is a lavatory at the end of the airplane,
that a person in an aisle chair can actually traverse back and
get into the lavatory, with assistance from the flight
attendant.
You know, as GAO just mentioned, most of the airlines are
not purchasing accessible lavatories, and Boeing and Airbus
have a product on the market. So the real deal is, you know,
when are they going to start buying those lavatories?
Mr. Larsen. Mr. Leader, can you elaborate a little bit more
on technological investments to improve accessibility?
Mr. Leader. Certainly. Chairman Larsen, when it comes to
restrooms, the Space-Flex option that Spirit has implemented
was done on a voluntary basis. It is designed so that you can
have two lavatories that actually become one, so it is more
accessible for people that need the additional space and room.
We have other new technologies that, as I have put in my
written testimony, will enable airlines to actually use space
that could not otherwise be used in the aircraft for a more
accessible lavatory, by actually expanding the lavatory out.
As I have worked with our airlines across the U.S., this is
a central area of concern, one in which I am very proud of what
Spirit Airlines has done, as a market leader in this space, and
one in which I think you will see all of our airlines more
assertively doing as they do cabin redesigns and new orders
from our friends at Airbus and Boeing.
There are more options than before. Our airlines care. And
the big requirement--and this is what Space-Flex allows--is you
have two lavatories for use for most of the passengers, because
we do want to serve all passengers, but when it comes to
serving our disabled passengers those two lavatories become one
for greater ease of access. It is the perfect type of
compromise that advances our industry.
Mr. Larsen. Mr. Klein, you did note where Spirit is on
lavatory accessibility. What kind of different--what level of
investment was necessary to make that happen?
Mr. Klein. Well, we did go through a retrofit of--I would
say at the time it was roughly half of our fleet went through a
retrofit in order to put those accessible lavs into the
aircraft. Now, every new delivery we take moving forward, which
I think that project finished up about 2 years ago, and since
then, every new delivery we have it is right there as it comes
in.
If I may add one other piece to that, to what Dr. Leader
mentioned, is we also have on our aircraft the widest aisles
that you can possibly have on a single-aisle aircraft. It is
important to us. We put certain types of seats in that create
more width for the aisle as well, just to help address the
issues that Mr. Page mentioned earlier.
Mr. Larsen. And all of your planes are single-aisle?
Mr. Klein. Yes, that is correct.
Mr. Larsen. Spirit is all single-aisle?
Mr. Klein. All single-aisle, that is correct.
Mr. Larsen. Mr. Page, back to you on wheelchairs in the
aisle and the design of the wheelchairs they use. I have never
seen a wheelchair used that isn't sort of basically metal pipes
with cushions and so on.
Is there some research going into looking into redesigning
and using different materials so you have a lighter, stronger
aisle wheelchair to help out with the folks in the disability
community?
Mr. Page. You have got two products. You have got the aisle
chair, which is what airlines and the airports use to get on
the plane.
Mr. Larsen. Yeah.
Mr. Page. And then you have the on-board wheelchair, which
would take you back to the restroom, if needed. Access Board
just put out an NPRM with the standards for the on-board
wheelchair. There are no recent standards for the aisle chair.
The aisle chair is what gets you on the plane, and that is the
one that gives you trouble, as I described in my testimony,
because, basically, my seat is 18 inches by 19 inches, and I am
sitting on a 14-inch aisle seat. And the width of the aisle is
narrow also.
So your question of standards, there are three or four
different products that the airlines use. The Columbia is the
most widely used across the industry, and there are a couple
others that are used, but, you know, they are not specifically
designed for someone with a permanent disability such as
myself.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you. I am going to turn now to Mr.
Graves. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Von Ah, I will ask you a question. In your testimony,
you indicated that the number of denied boardings have
decreased or gone down, including in 2018. However, Mr. McGee's
testimony indicated a trend otherwise. Do you have any idea of
the differences?
Mr. Von Ah. Sure. No, absolutely. Thank you for the
question. In 2019, it is correct that those numbers have gone
up. For involuntary denied boardings, they have gone from about
11,000 or so in 2018 to, I think it was 21,000 or so in 2019.
We looked into that data a little bit more carefully, and found
that that is really all a result of two specific airlines.
American and Southwest were responsible for all of those
additional denied boardings involuntarily.
I might add that part of that might be in our work on
denied boardings, some of the airlines warned us that because
of some of the Boeing MAX issues, there may be an uptick in
that number for this year. So that might be part of the
explanation for that.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. And just very quickly in regard to
that, as I recall, those two airlines that you noted are the
two airlines that had the largest investment in the MAX fleet,
I believe.
Mr. Von Ah. That is correct.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. OK. So it is likely there is a
direct correlation there?
Mr. Von Ah. There is definitely--there is possibly a
correlation, sure.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you.
Mr. Klein, do you have any idea, I am not sure if you all
have kept statistics indicating the number of first-time air
passengers that Spirit has accommodated? You lower the bar in
terms of access to airline travel, right?
Mr. Klein. Absolutely. So it is a great question. We
actually don't have specific statistics on knowing--we don't
survey guests to say, is this the first time you have ever
flown? What we do know is when we go into certain new cities,
for example, when we entered Haiti, we knew there were a lot of
people from south Florida that were flying for the first time
to places like Haiti, creating access for people in south
Florida.
We know, for example--we just announced service yesterday
from New Orleans to Honduras, San Pedro Sula. We know there are
going to be people in New Orleans that are going to be taking
their first flight when we start that service in June, for
example.
So we don't know exactly what those statistics are. What we
do know is when we go into new routes, we definitely attract
new guests that are infrequent travelers as well. They may not
have the opportunity to fly often.
And what we do is we go into new routes, we grow markets.
We stimulate with low fares. On average, what we will do is
grow markets in the whole industry. As we get competed with, we
will grow markets by 30 percent and fares come down by 22
percent, on average, in the 12 months following our entry into
service.
So we do know that we are driving new growth, and those are
industry numbers. We act as a discipliner of sorts on fares for
our competitors. They choose to compete with us. And when they
choose to compete with us on price, the whole market grows.
And that can even happen in large routes as well, routes
where people fly all the time, say New York metro area, Newark
to Fort Lauderdale, very large market. We entered that in
October of 2016. The market grew. From a large route, it almost
doubled. It grew by 88 percent even though there was a lot of
service in the market already. We seek out those kinds of
underserved opportunities and create the travel opportunities
for those that don't get to fly often.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you. Look, I can tell you,
from one of our home airports in New Orleans, every time I walk
in the Spirit area of the airport, it is absolutely the people
that are there for tourism, that are there having a good time,
in many cases, still out from the night before, but that is
fine.
But it clearly--it appears, anyway, that it is opening up
aviation access to folks that previously wouldn't have made
that decision. You know, it is actually comparable in some
cases, to, hey, should we drive here or should we fly to New
Orleans? And it is fantastic to see that whole group, what I
believe, just anecdotally, opening access to a whole group of
travelers that previously wouldn't have chosen that option, or
would have seen it being out of reach. So I certainly do
appreciate that.
Dr. Leader, Mr. McGee, I mentioned that we had 40 changes
to kind of addressing passenger issues in the FAA bill. Would
you all like to comment on where you see sort of best
opportunity for the experience as a result of some of the
revisions in that bill, either of you, or both?
Mr. McGee. Certainly. One of the key provisions was the
minimum seat standards, which we view not just as a comfort
issue and as a value issue, but more important as a health
issue due to deep vein thrombosis and as a safety issue due to
evacuations.
I touched on in my opening remarks the evacuation issue.
The testing that is being done by the FAA down in Oklahoma City
right now is not sufficient. There is ample evidence that they
are not reflecting real-world scenarios, and seats is a big
part of that.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you.
Mr. Leader. I will speak to that briefly. I agree that in
Oklahoma City, the FAA tests are not what they could be, but in
the opposite direction, they tend to use--my understanding is
they are using older, full-size seats, not the slimline seats
that are being utilized by airlines.
It really, from my perspective, is about serving total
available space to passenger comfort. What I really like about
some of the new seats that our airlines are doing instead of
the thick Styrofoam that was a flotation device, it is now made
of space-age materials that are designed to provide greater
comfort in flight, and where knee space is becoming one of the
areas of focus.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you very much. I appreciate
your answer.
I yield back.
Ms. Davids [presiding]. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair will now recognize the chairman of the full
committee, Mr. DeFazio.
Mr. DeFazio. I thank the chair.
Mr. Von Ah, I just want to confirm this. It is 4.5 percent
of the eight largest U.S. airlines fleet, single-aisle, have
lavs that are accessible to people in wheelchairs. Is that the
current figure?
Mr. Von Ah. That is correct. That is what our data showed,
yes.
Mr. DeFazio. All right. We have all these planes rolling
off the assembly line, are sitting on the ground somewhere, all
the MAX planes. Are you aware of whether or not they are
ordering accessible lavs in those planes?
Mr. Von Ah. I am not aware that they are doing that, sir.
And, in fact, none of the Boeing planes--none of the fleet of
Boeing planes have the accessible lavs that Boeing offers when
we looked at it.
Mr. DeFazio. So, Mr. Klein, how much more expensive is it
to have--I don't know, you might not want to give me an exact
figure--but to have an accessible lav like you are getting from
Airbus on your new planes?
Mr. Klein. Yeah. Chairman DeFazio, I don't know the exact
answer to that question. There is some expense involved with
that, but I don't--we can get that number for you.
Mr. DeFazio. And you don't lose seating capacity with these
new lavs?
Mr. Klein. We do not. That is correct.
Mr. DeFazio. So I wonder what the resistance is?
Mr. Klein. I don't think it is smart for me to speculate on
what other airlines may be choosing for their product.
Mr. DeFazio. Right. Yeah. This might be something that
warrants more of a mandate. Because, I mean, we are losing
opportunity when you are making a new plane and there are
things that could go in it. For instance, secondary barriers,
which we mandated in the bill, which are not going into the new
planes because of DOT dragging its feet, and now what we are
hearing about accessible lavs.
Mr. Page, have you ever flown Spirit? Have you experienced
their accessible lav?
Mr. Page. Truthfully, I have not flown Spirit before, but I
have seen the accessible lav in 2016 during the ACCESS Advisory
Committee.
Mr. DeFazio. Do you think it is suitable?
Mr. Page. It works very well. For a person who is on an
aisle chair with the assistance of a flight attendant, you can
get in.
As Dr. Leader described, it is two bathrooms side by side.
They split the foldable wall that opens up, and so you actually
have two sinks and two lavatories. And it is big enough to
close the door and be in there on the aisle chair, so it works.
Mr. DeFazio. All right.
Mr. McGee, you referenced the emergency evacuation. Again,
the tests that are being conducted, why do you think they are
inadequate? I mean, what are the inadequacies in those tests?
Mr. McGee. Well, from the experts at the FAA that we have
spoken to, real-world testing hasn't really been done in an
effective way by the FAA in about 20 years, because they have
relied on computer modeling.
And so the testing, as you noted, Mr. Chairman, in your
remarks, involves a truncated section of a fuselage. It is not
even an entire aircraft. It doesn't reflect these seismic
changes that have taken place over the last 20 years.
Load factors are a good 20 points up on average since the
late 1990s. Americans are larger. There are more disabled on
board. There are more carry-ons due to the checked baggage
fees. There are more distractions from electronics. There is
this issue with the animals, the support animals that in some
cases are oversized or not trained.
You combine all this together, and then you add the issue
that we raised earlier about families traveling together where
children are separated from their parents, you put that all
together, and then you have an emergency evacuation. And we
can't stress it enough, an American Airlines survey of its own
passengers last year found that 87 percent of people flying on
American flew less than once a year. So they are just not
familiar with this.
It is just a bad recipe all around, all of these factors
combined.
Mr. DeFazio. What do you think we could do about the issue
of--I mean, flight attendants, say, inform you, don't get your
carry-on bags. But we had the Chicago incident, and the flight
attendant gave up trying to stop someone because they figured
it was taking longer to get the bag away from him. What can we
do about that?
Mr. McGee. We think that the FAA needs to enhance the in-
flight briefings. It is an issue that just hasn't been stressed
enough. It is life and death. And there is ample photographic
evidence of real-world accidents in which people are going down
slides with carry-ons and laptops.
Mr. DeFazio. Do you think maybe we should impose--it should
be emphasized, and also a penalty should be mentioned?
Mr. McGee. It is something that certainly needs to be
considered by the FAA, yeah.
Mr. DeFazio. Right. How about some way to lock on approach
and takeoff the overhead bins? It seems like it wouldn't be too
difficult for the manufacturers to come up with an electronic
locking system.
Mr. McGee. I have spoken to some experts about that. A few
of them expressed concerns about emergency equipment that might
be in overhead bins. Like, it can obviously be----
Mr. DeFazio. Well, you can leave that one off.
Mr. McGee. Right. Exactly. It can obviously be moved. It is
an excuse that can easily be addressed.
Mr. DeFazio. All right. OK. Thank you. I see my time has
expired.
Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, Mr.
Balderson.
Mr. Balderson. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And thank you all, panel, for being here today.
I want to kind of switch gears a little bit. My first
question is for Mr. Klein.
Last month, this committee held a hearing on the future of
America's aviation maintenance and manufacturing workforce. It
is no secret that our aviation airlines industries are facing a
major labor shortage that is expected to grow in the coming
years. Industry forecasts show that North America will need
over 200,000 civilian pilots, and almost as many maintenance
technicians over the next 20 years.
On February 5, 2020, United Airlines announced an expansion
of their Aviate pilot program and signed a purchase agreement
to become the only major U.S. carrier to own a flight training
academy.
Can you discuss any recent actions from Spirit Airlines
that would invest in education and workforce development?
Mr. Klein. Yes. We have done some investment in this. We
have what is called flow through agreements with some regional
carriers where pilots go through, they get their flight hours,
they become pilots at regional carriers, and then come to
Spirit Airlines after a period of time.
Additionally, we have just used--and this is on behalf of
the Spirit Foundation, which is a nonprofit arm of Spirit
Airlines--we are investing in what I would call education
centers and facilities that do pilot training and also do
mechanics training, technician training. And we are doing that
for two reasons. One is to make sure the pipeline continues to
grow. The second is we think it is extremely important that we
have a more diverse workforce in both the pilot ranks as well
as the technician ranks.
So we are also investing in places that promote both female
and minority training for those individuals that want to join
the aviation industry. We think it is an important part that
can help diversify the workforce at the same time.
Mr. Balderson. OK. My second question, also to Mr. Klein,
but if anyone on the panel would like to jump in and give their
thoughts, please do so.
If the workforce shortage in the aviation space is not
addressed, whether it is with air traffic controllers,
maintenance technicians and engineers, or pilots, what
consequences will we see for consumers?
Mr. Klein. Well, certainly it is very important to have
highly skilled professionals as part of the workforce. It is
hard for me to speculate about the future because right now we
are not having issues with recruitment or training and
retention of the professionals that you are speaking of. It is
hard to speculate about the future.
I would just assume that, if we start to have those kinds
of issues, you will see the free market work, where salaries or
things of that nature would become more important for those
individuals, and you will see that kind of demand drive more
people entering that part of the workforce.
Mr. Balderson. OK. Thank you very much.
Would anybody else like to add?
Mr. McGee.
Mr. McGee. Yes. Thank you.
For about 15 years now at Consumer Reports we have been
investigating and advocating about aircraft maintenance
outsourcing by U.S. airlines, much of it outside the country to
foreign repair stations. We have advocated it as a safety issue
from a consumer perspective, not from a labor perspective, but
the two issues are intertwined because we have decimated an
entire generation of mechanics here in the United States,
because the work has been shipped overseas for much lower
salaries.
And that is something you just can't get back overnight.
Younger people coming out of the military, coming out of
school, looking for careers who once found a very good career
in airline maintenance are not finding it now.
Mr. Balderson. OK.
Would anybody else like to?
Mr. Leader.
Mr. Leader. Yes. I would like to speak on that briefly,
Congressman Balderson.
From my perspective, we are seeing the right balancing
occur. When the FAA mandated higher number of hours for pilots,
we saw it suddenly drive more pilots to get more experience at
smaller airlines or part 135 operators, and then they are
actively seeking to move up through the airlines.
When it comes to maintenance, I have been at maintenance
facilities across our airlines, it is a very sought-after job
and one that I believe will continue to grow. The economics of
continuously outsourcing labor to aircraft that are primarily
based in the United States does not make economic sense given
the cost to ferry aircraft elsewhere.
I think you will see a strong, growing base here in the
U.S. and one that our airlines are investing in independently.
And from APEX--so we have the IFSA Foundation, which last year
surpassed over $1 million given out in educational scholarships
to help advance their industry forward.
Mr. Balderson. Thank you very much.
Mr. Klein, you leaned forward.
Mr. Klein. I was just going to add to what Dr. Leader just
mentioned, is we do some outsourcing of some of that work, but
we do it in Puerto Rico. It is the decision we made to help
support the Territory there. And we are using a highly skilled,
highly trained professional organization there, and we are
doing it--so we do have a small ferry cost to get the aircraft
to Puerto Rico. We felt that was a good investment for the
Territory to continue to do that work there.
Mr. Balderson. OK. Thank you all very much.
Madam Chair, I yield back.
Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr.
Cohen.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Discontent among airline travelers has been increasing, and
it is for a good reason. While airlines are experiencing record
profitability and executive salaries are getting larger and
larger, the flying public is being squeezed like sardines in
shrinking seats, charged unreasonable amounts of money due to
an increase in new ancillary fees, and faced with fewer choices
as competition decreases.
When it comes to unreasonable airline fees, the airlines
have gone beyond imaginable levels. In 2018, fees for checked
baggage and reservation changes amounted to a record $7.6
billion. That was $4.9 billion for checked baggage and $2.7
billion for reservation changes. Even worse, some airlines have
recently increased these fees.
The flying public is exasperated, and so are many members
of this committee, and I am.
As passenger levels continue to grow in the years ahead, it
is imperative that we work as a committee to ensure that
airline policies and practices are transparent and reasonable,
not erode public consumer protection.
Mr. McGee, you discussed the proliferation of these fees in
your testimony. In your opinion, wouldn't you say the fees that
we have gotten used to, like checked baggage and ticket
changes, are growing, and how is that factoring into the
consumer experience?
Mr. McGee. It has had a very negative impact for many
consumers, and we don't think that the DOT complaint system is
capturing that discontent.
At Consumer Reports, we have the advantage of surveys with
tens of thousands of readers, and when we ask them about
airline service, which we do every year or two, the top of the
list of complaints is fees, particularly baggage fees. It is
not just that there are existing fees, but that the existing
fees keep increasing, as was noted earlier. Just this month,
United and JetBlue raised their fees.
Mr. Cohen. And that is the reason why Senator Markey asked
me to introduce a bill in the House, which I was proud to do,
H.R. 5195, with Chuy Garcia from Illinois, and other
transportation colleagues. That would be the FAIR Fees Act.
This bill would prohibit the charging of fees, including
cancellation, change, and bag fees, that are--it would require
those fees to be reasonable and proportional to the cost of the
services. They can still charge them, but they would have to be
reasonable and proportional.
Mr. Klein, Spirit Airlines is quite upfront about the fact
that it relies on ancillary fees as part of its business model.
That being said, the pricing of some of these fees is
confounding. A recent search for bag fees found costs more than
doubled depending on time and place of purchase.
What is the rationale for charging variable baggage fees
depending on when a traveler buys their ticket?
Mr. Klein. Congressman Cohen, as you mentioned, our
business model highly relies on ancillary revenue. We are not
shy about talking about that.
What we do in our business model is make sure that we
reduce the base fares. So the fares are reduced. Other airlines
don't necessarily do that, that you are mentioning. What we do
is bring the fares down so that customers that don't need to
check bags or don't need to have a specific seat assignment
have the ability to fly that may not otherwise be able to fly.
Mr. Cohen. And I understand that, and I appreciate it, but
my question is, why do you charge more depending on when a
traveler buys a ticket? You have got the same luggage space.
You have got the same luggage. Why do you charge more if they
buy their ticket at a different time?
Mr. Klein. Certainly. So what we want to make sure we do is
encourage people to think about when they are making their
purchase decision. We want them to get that discount by
assigning the bag fee to their record when they buy their
ticket upfront.
The standard price is if you just add your bag to your
record whenever you want to. We want to give people a discount
for adding that bag to their record at time of purchase.
Mr. Cohen. How does that affect your airline? You have got
a certain space for baggage. It is not going to increase or
decrease depending on when that person brings their bag and
puts it on the plane. Shouldn't it be the same fee because it
is the same amount of service you have to give them for that
baggage space?
Mr. Klein. Well, the answer to your question is no. We
disagree with that. We think it is better to give people a
discount for adding their bag fee upfront, because if they do
that and can think about how they are thinking of their
overall--to Mr. McGee's point, we want people to get the best
upfront price they can and----
Mr. Cohen. I have limited time, and I appreciate it.
Mr. McGee, he called on you. Do you agree with his
analysis?
Mr. McGee. No, we don't. We believe that with the fee
situation with the airlines, there are two problems. That is
why we supported your legislation.
One is the transparency. Consumers are confused by the
fees. These are pages from the Spirit and United websites. You
can't always determine the cost of a bag until you enter
specific flight information.
The other issue beyond transparency is that many of the
fees are quite arbitrary. As was pointed out here, in 2017,
when Chairman DeFazio asked United and American what is the
costs internally of changing a ticket, and the executives were
deer in the headlights. They couldn't answer it.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you very much.
And with Spirit Airlines, get a flight from Memphis to New
Orleans. Thank you.
Mr. Klein. Thank you, sir.
Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Spano, is now recognized.
Mr. Spano. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate it.
I wanted to talk about an issue that is on a lot of
Members' minds. The ranking member referenced it just a moment
ago during his opening comments with respect to the COVID-19
virus.
On Sunday, the first two cases of COVID-19 were diagnosed
in Florida, one of which was in Hillsborough County,
Hillsborough County being part of the congressional district
that I happen to represent, which is Florida 15. It spans much
of the area between Tampa and Orlando. And so most, if not all,
of my constituents, when they fly somewhere, they will fly out
of Tampa or Orlando International Airports.
The airport I primarily use, Tampa International, announced
that they have taken several steps to prevent the spread of the
virus at the airport. And so those steps include increased
cleaning and sanitation of high-touch areas, providing extra
hand sanitizer in key areas, reminding travelers and employees
to practice good hygiene, and so forth and so on.
A few questions related to the specific issue. Number one,
if I may, I want to ask the panel, have you seen any similar
actions at airports across the country, and, if so, what are
those actions?
Anybody can respond.
Mr. Leader. I can speak to this. APEX provided guidance to
all of our airlines, not just in the U.S., but worldwide on
nine key steps that they need to be taking now.
I want to stress to Members of Congress and to members of
the public, it is completely safe to fly right now. We have
gone through this now and had different instances of people
flying on aircraft. There has not been traceable transmission
on aircraft to this date.
We believe that will continue to be the case, because there
is vertical air circulation through HEPA filters that are 99.97
to 99.99 percent effective onboard aircraft.
With that said, the steps that we have outlined to airlines
are clearly communicating to passengers and to staff the safety
steps the airline is taking; broader waivers for changes and
cancellations, which we are proud that several airlines in the
U.S. have taken; enhancing customer contact details and
traceability should we need to be able to have that on board;
flight crew awareness on how to act in this instance.
We have dealt with tougher situations--for example, with
Ebola--which created much more significant aircraft incidents.
We haven't had those yet, but they are prepared. Aircraft
decontamination procedures, having a flight aircraft
decontamination and procedures in place, for example, on door
handles of restrooms and other high-touch surfaces.
And then most importantly, to your point, Congressman,
working with airports and Government authorities to make sure
that we are prepared, as Tampa has done, to have a cleaner
environment on the airport side, because the TSA security area
is a very high-touch area that needs to be very closely
maintained during this thing.
And then enhancing the ability for airline employees and
supplier staff to call in sick as needed so that we never have
someone come on board the aircraft or to work that might be
spreading COVID-19.
Mr. Spano. All right. Thank you, Mr. Leader.
Anybody else?
Mr. Von Ah.
Mr. Von Ah. Congressman, I would just mention, in our work
we found that all of the airports that we looked at--this was
back a few years ago--had individual plans in place for dealing
with situations like this.
Some of the challenges we noted in executing those plans
related to coordination and communication--communication from
Federal agencies in terms of what they should be doing, what
the real threat was, what the real issue was, and communication
amongst contractors and others in the airport area to make sure
that everybody knows what they should be doing.
I would also mention that we don't really have a national
plan for the aviation system. This is a recommendation we still
have open for DOT.
Mr. Spano. My next question was going to be, what, if any,
recommendations do you have as far as what we can do to support
the airports? So that goes to that question.
Any other suggestions on what we might be able to do in our
purview to help assist the industry as a whole at airports
specifically?
Mr. McGee.
Mr. McGee. Yes, Congressman. We have been looking at the
websites of most of the major U.S. carriers, and to their
credit many of them have very large notices on the home pages
about the coronavirus, particularly on international routes
where they have canceled flights.
But we have seen this before with other force majeure
events, natural disasters, et cetera, that we think that
communication could increase. For those that are not directly
affected yet--in other words, if you are planning a trip and
you are uncertain--the communication from the airlines could be
much better. It is not sufficient.
Mr. Spano. Anyone else want to speak to that?
Mr. Leader. I think that what we should do from a U.S.
Government perspective to further enhance traveler safety is
working with the TSA to make sure that we have--following
Tampa's example, I would love to see the TSA have hand
sanitizer available for passengers at stations, to have Lysol,
you know, the fact that my phone is placed where people's shoes
go in a TSA bin. It would be wonderful to have, during this
time in particular, additional steps taken by the U.S.
Government.
Mr. Spano. Thank you, Mr. Leader.
I yield back.
Ms. Davids. The gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Stanton, is
recognized.
Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Chairwoman.
As has been discussed by several of our witnesses today,
air travel for those with disabilities poses a number of unique
challenges. More often than not, it could be a very stressful
experience. And in some instances those with disabilities
choose not to fly rather than deal with the obstacles that
exist from the curb to the aircraft and beyond. However, for
some, avoiding air travel altogether simply isn't a viable
option, and we must do more to improve accessibility for those
with disabilities.
Mr. Page, in your testimony, you discussed many of these
challenges, from inaccessible restrooms, to injuries during the
boarding process, to lost or damaged mobility aids. You also
discussed the need for proper training for those assisting
passengers with disabilities, particularly when boarding and
deplaning an aircraft.
One area, though, that hasn't been discussed much that I
would like to explore is what happens to passengers with
disabilities in the event of an emergency? For those with
disabilities, exiting an aircraft in the best of circumstances
is a challenge, but in an emergency it may be virtually
impossible, especially considering current aircraft design and
airplane training procedures.
Currently regulations require that all passengers be able
to evacuate the aircraft within 90 seconds with half of the
exits blocked. Yet when the FAA ran evacuation tests between
November 2019 and January of this year to evaluate the
relationship between seat spacing and evacuation times, those
tests did not include people with disabilities.
This not only concerns me, but also raises questions about
the accuracy of these tests and how reflective they are of the
flying public.
I understand that passengers with disabilities should
receive a safety briefing from the flight crew, the goal of
which is to provide greater awareness of their accessibility
needs, yet I am concerned that this briefing rarely happens. In
the case of my outstanding legislative director, Tracee Sutton,
she indicates to me that briefing has never happened when she
flies.
Additionally, it is not clear to me what procedures are in
place to assist those who are not able to evacuate on their own
in an emergency.
So, Mr. Page, can you share your thoughts on the FAA's
choice to not include people with disabilities in its
evacuation tests?
Mr. Page. OK. Thank you.
Yeah, that is disappointing, that they are not included in
the tests. To kind of echo your thoughts, for me, being a
person with permanent disability, when it comes to boarding and
deplaning, I am first on and last off.
I have had the evacuation briefing from flight attendants
on occasion but not on a full-time, regular basis. But in that
briefing the emergency evacuation process was explained to me
as basically I would be dragged out of the plane by sitting on
the floor and taken out the best they can. The definition of
``timed escape'' is not really defined to me by the flight
attendant at that time.
Mr. Stanton. I am equally disappointed. It is clear that
the required training procedures for professional staff in the
airline industry need to be improved.
I want to turn to our friends at Spirit Airlines. You
talked about some of the improvements you made, and I really
appreciate those improvements. However, according to the DOT,
your airline ranked 13th out of 17 U.S. carriers for mishandled
wheelchairs and scooters last year. So I wanted to hear
directly from you what steps you are taking to improve your
ranking in this important regard.
Mr. Klein. Yes. It is something, Congressman, that we know
we had to improve upon. We have improved upon that. I am happy
to say, although there is a lot of work we can still do, for
the first 2 months of this year our complaints are down 45
percent year over year as it relates to disability-related
complaints overall.
As it relates to the securing and the delay of bringing the
assistive devices back to the guests, we are down 29 percent on
that number as well.
So we do agree there is work to do. This is a topic that is
extremely important to us and one that we feel passionate
about. We know there is more we can do, and we are basically
doing that just with better training, quite frankly. It is
better training and making sure that we are saying the right
things and making sure that the training is being followed
through upon.
Mr. Stanton. You have an opportunity for your airline in
particular to be a market leader in this area and maybe work
with your staff to make sure that the necessary security
protocols are followed for all passengers, including especially
passengers that happen to have disabilities. Obviously it is
lacking, based on my analysis, and that is an area that needs
great improvement.
Mr. Klein. Yeah, it is disappointing to hear this
information. And I can't speak specifically. I wasn't prepared
to speak to that today. But we will definitely take that away
and make sure it is not something that we are lacking on. This
is extremely important.
Mr. Stanton. Thanks so much. Thank you.
Mr. Klein. Yes.
Mr. Stanton. I yield back.
Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from New York, Mr. Katko, is now recognized.
Mr. Katko. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And thank you all for being here today. As I was sitting
here listening to some of the testimony and reflecting about my
many, many years of traveling, I can't help but think that,
from the time I started traveling and flying until today, it is
a vastly different experience, and it is nowhere near as
pleasant and nowhere near as comfortable. And I am not the
tallest guy in the world, but I am 6, 3", and it is hard for me
to fit in the seats in a lot of airlines. You can't even move
in them. And there is no headrest. You can't even put your head
back, because there is nothing there.
So it is not as pleasant an experience for me, so I am kind
of curious. If I have time, I am going to drill down on some of
those experiences.
But, Mr. Von Ah, I want to ask you quickly. Consumer
complaints between 2008 and 2017 increased. Is that because
airline service deteriorated, or is it because consumers are
more aware of their ability to file complaints with the DOT?
Mr. Von Ah. It is hard to pinpoint the exact reason why,
Congressman. I think there are a number of factors that play
into why and how a consumer will complain.
What we have noticed is that they did increase about 10
percent over that period relative to the number of boardings,
but passenger complaints, they stay relatively static to DOT.
They sort of get the same kinds of complaints in the same kinds
of categories from year to year.
What we noted in our testimony and what we found in some of
our work is that we have seen notable increases in complaints
related to disabilities, as well as some spikes in
discrimination complaints.
Mr. Katko. Thank you.
Mr. McGee, Consumer Reports, first of all, I love the
organization. I think they serve a great job for the public.
And I don't think I have ever bought a car without looking at
Consumer Reports. So thank you for that. I appreciate that.
Mr. McGee. Thank you, Congressman.
Mr. Katko. And especially having teenage boys now who are
driving, I am always trying to make sure I get a car that keeps
them safe. So thank you for that.
There is a disparity between your complaint numbers and
those of DOT. Can you explain why that may be? Or what is your
take on that?
Mr. McGee. Certainly. I think the best microcosm for that
is the issue I raised earlier of families traveling together.
When we submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the
DOT to find out complaints about families who had been
separated from young children on flights, they forwarded us 136
complaints over about 2 to 3 years.
We then put a portal on consumerreports.org asking people
to let us know, and we would forward those complaints to the
DOT, and we received more than 400. We are up to 600 now, just
within weeks.
So to us, that clearly underscores that the DOT complaint
system is insufficient. Most consumers don't get off a flight
after a bad experience and say, ``Honey, we need to contact the
DOT.'' They are not aware of it.
In the European Union, for example, there is signage all
throughout European airports letting you know how and when you
can complain, both to the EU and to the airlines, and we
strongly suggest that the DOT needs to do more to let people
know that the complaint system is there.
Mr. Katko. Let's talk about that for a minute.
And, Mr. Von Ah, I want to give you an opportunity to talk
about that.
I don't know if it is DOT's role or not, but it can only
help the industry do better. And I know a lot of times I get--I
fly American all the time, and they do a wonderful job about
asking questions all the time. And I have those little
certificates. When someone does a good job on the airplane, I
give it--I turn one in for them, and that is great.
But how can we do something along the European model? And
what would you suggest it look like? I am not sure it should
come from DOT, but if it does, what would it look like, and
what would you suggest?
Mr. Von Ah. Well, before I get to that question,
Congressman, I just wanted to mention, I think DOT, they will
tell consumers to go to the airlines first with complaints,
because that is the way that a consumer is going to get more
immediate resolution of that complaint.
When DOT is looking at complaints, they are looking for
something that is pervasive, it is repeating, it is happening
over and over again, that is more broad, that has a broader
consumer impact.
So that is just one notice to why they would not see as
many complaints as Consumer Reports might get, for example, or
the airlines themselves, as we have pointed out, or DOT has
actually reported that airlines get maybe 50 complaints for
every 1 complaint that DOT gets.
In terms of the DOT publicizing or making it known how to
complain, they have made some improvements to their website, so
consumers do have a little bit better idea of what rights they
have available to them and how to complain. But that is on
their website. You have to go to their website to see it. That
is not something that is available in airports.
Mr. Katko. Yeah, but I don't think people would know it, if
you are flying, necessarily know, I am going to go to the DOT
website and voice my complaint.
Mr. Von Ah. That is correct.
Mr. Katko. Mr. McGee, what do you think that would look
like if we tried to set something up? What would you suggest on
how we do it?
And I don't think it is such a bad thing, because I think
airlines want to be good and want to provide good service, and
they generally do. I understand the competitiveness and why you
have to have smaller seat space and all the other things. I got
it. But what can we do to help them be more conscious of the
complaints out there?
Mr. McGee. Well, Mr. Von Ah's point is a good one in that
the DOT does suggest that consumers go to the airlines to fix
things. They are not in the European model where they will step
in and try and redress grievances.
But the more serious problem from our perspective is that
the DOT has stated to us repeatedly that they work on issues
based on complaints. So when we said we had 136 complaints from
families with autistic children and children with allergies and
all kinds of serious problems, who in their right mind would
say that those 136 complaints are less than 10,000 complaints
about scuffed baggage?
So they need to have perspective on complaints. Some of the
most serious complaints are low in numbers, and yet they said
specifically they would not act on the families traveling
together issue because, quote, ``the numbers were too low.''
Mr. Katko. Yeah. We have got to figure out a way. Maybe in
a separate submission, if you have ideas what that would look
like, maybe we can figure out something. I think having a more
healthy discussion on the concerns, and maybe people knowing
where to go if there is a concern, now airlines can see what
the concerns are, and all airlines can access, and all
Americans. I think it might be better to have that
transparency.
Mr. McGee. We would be happy to assist.
Mr. Katko. I thank you.
I yield back.
Ms. Davids. Thank you. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr.
Carbajal.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Von Ah, in your written testimony, you discuss the
growing number of complaints from passengers alleging racial
discrimination. Can you elaborate on this topic? And to your
knowledge what are some of the steps airlines are taking to
address this important issue?
Mr. Von Ah. Thank you for the question, Congressman.
Those complaints, when we have looked at them, the
discrimination-based complaints are typically about racial
discrimination. Some of the things that we have noted in our
reports are things where it may be a misunderstanding or there
is always a push and pull between the pilot's ability to remove
a passenger for safety reasons, but they are not allowed to
discriminate, and so there may be just misunderstandings about
what is going on with that.
But we didn't really get into pinpointing exactly the cause
of some of those complaints. So it is hard to comment exactly
on what the airlines are doing.
Mr. Carbajal. That is a little disconcerting. If we don't
know, is there a way to step up our ability to dive into that a
little bit further?
Mr. Von Ah. So DOT does follow up on every one of these
complaints. In particular, discrimination complaints are one of
those categories that they do pay close attention to and
forward to the airlines. So that is one way that they are
addressing the issue.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you.
You also touched on increased barriers that passengers with
disabilities face. I found it notable that you mentioned that
the number of complaints filed by people in wheelchairs may not
fully reflect the inconvenience experienced by these
passengers.
Why do you believe there is an underreporting from this
particular group?
Mr. Von Ah. Yeah. Thank you for that question.
There are a number of reasons why. First and foremost,
there is no requirement that these rest--we looked at
lavatories specifically. There is no requirement from DOT that
lavatories be accessible to persons with disabilities. And so
they may not have an expectation that they can complain,
because it is not a requirement. So that is one reason why.
I think that some of the things that we also heard are
people take extreme measures to not have to use the lavatory in
the first place. So if they are not using it, they are not
going to necessarily complain about the lack of accessibility
in that lavatory.
And then, as was noted I think in some previous discussion,
people just choose not to fly.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you.
Mr. Page, I coming to you. From the perspective of
Paralyzed Veterans of America, would you have anything else to
add?
Mr. Page. I am sorry. Say it again.
Mr. Carbajal. Do you have anything else to add?
Mr. Page. Yeah, I was just getting ready to echo what he
said.
Yeah, in reference to a lot of our members, they dehydrate
themselves the day before when it comes to flying, because we
know that there is no access to the lavatory on the plane
currently, because it is just not accessible.
And in reference to complaints, back to DOT, I echo what
Mr. McGee said. PVA has started to file a lot of complaints,
and so we have gotten some action from DOT on a lot of
different issues. But it was a row to hoe that we built over
there trying to get some response from the Department on a lot
of different issues.
So, yeah, definitely there is a lot of work left to be
done, for sure.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you.
Madam Chair, I yield back.
Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
The gentlewoman from the District of Columbia, Ms. Norton,
is now recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much.
Mr. McGee, I noted in your testimony that you raised an
issue that has been of special interest to me and to this
committee itself. You reference on page 6 of your testimony a
2018 FBI report that stated--and here I am quoting you--``that
in-flight sexual assaults are on the rise, with children
particularly vulnerable.''
You go on to say that you were shocked--I must tell you we
were as well--by DOT's refusal to act. So you did it yourself.
And within weeks you said you had in excess of 600--I am
quoting you again--600 complaints, more than four times the
DOT's original total.
I have a bill called the AWARE Act, it has a Republican
cosponsor, that would require the Justice Department to report
this data. And I will note that a similar bill has passed this
committee. It is the chairman's bill, I am an original
cosponsor, that would require that sexual assaults be measured
on airlines and then made public. That bill passed this
committee in November.
So my question to you, particularly given your testimony,
Mr. McGee, is, how many of the 600 complaints that you quoted
in your testimony that you handle dealt with sexual assault in
particular?
Mr. McGee. Many of them, ma'am, raised the issue. We did
not have an actual case cited to us, but repeatedly we heard
from parents and caregivers that they were concerned about it.
In some cases, they got off the plane. They said: If my child
is not going to be sitting near me, we are not going to take
this flight.
And, conversely, we hadn't thought about this, but we heard
from the business travel community, and we heard that many
corporate travelers don't want the responsibility of sitting
next to a young child--we are talking 5, 6, 7, 8--who is not
their own. They don't want to take on the responsibility.
Ms. Norton. They don't want that responsibility?
Mr. McGee. They don't want the responsibility to have to
ensure the child's welfare, with oxygen masks, with
evacuations.
And so the FBI report is chilling reading. And when we had
that in mind, when we read through these complaints, we saw
parent after parent say: What are the airlines thinking? How
could you possibly--you might as well be an unaccompanied
minor. The airlines have very strict policies on unaccompanied
minors. They don't allow children under a certain age to travel
as unaccompanied minors. They give them special attention.
For all intents and purposes, if I am the parent and I am
in row 12 and my 6-year-old is in row 18, that child is an
unaccompanied minor.
And so that is why we were shocked that the DOT doesn't
take this more seriously enough to act. Again, not all
complaints are created equal. You can't compare the threat of a
child being assaulted to damaged luggage.
Ms. Norton. Here, on the one hand, we are talking about
children who are completely defenseless, don't know what to do,
and we don't know how many are adults as well. And this is, as
I say, it has shocked this committee, so that there is a bill
that should be going to the floor soon.
Could I ask you as well, Mr. McGee, have you found any
difference in the quality of customer service between the
regional airlines and the legacy airlines?
Mr. McGee. Well, we have found that, when we talk about the
legacy airlines, many of their flights, up to 50 percent of
departures on a given day, are in fact operated, they are
subserviced, they are outsourced to regional carriers that the
passenger doesn't book with. And so we have written about this
and advocated about this at length over the years.
There are two sets of rules. There are safety issues that
in some measure have been addressed after the crash in Buffalo
of Colgan Air, but there are also customer service issues.
There are different standards.
The bottom line is you are buying a ticket on United,
American, Delta, but you are flying on an aircraft that is not
operated by United, American, or Delta.
And so, from an FAA perspective, there could be different
standards in terms of safety, in terms of maintenance, in terms
of pilot training. And, from a customer service standard, there
can be differences----
Ms. Norton. Do you think legislation is needed on that?
Mr. McGee. Absolutely. We have advocated for years that
there needs to be tighter control of regional carriers
operating on behalf of major carriers. And we find repeatedly
that many passengers have no idea they bought a ticket on
airline A and they are flying on airline B.
Ms. Norton. So simply knowing would help----
Mr. McGee. Absolutely.
Ms. Norton [continuing]. Who is actually flying you.
Thank you very much. I will look into that.
Mr. McGee. We would be happy to assist you, ma'am.
Ms. Norton. Thank you.
Ms. Davids. The gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Johnson, is now
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you.
Mr. McGee, when the Trump administration came to power
there was a Department of Transportation Aviation Consumer
Protection Advisory Committee that was in place that was by law
to meet quarterly.
Did that quarterly meeting schedule change once the Trump
administration came to power?
Mr. McGee. Yes, Congressman, it did. For the first 2 years
there were no meetings. They were finally reinstated in 2019. I
participated in one on behalf of Consumer Reports last year. It
has continued, but it has been infrequent since then.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. So it has not been holding the
quarterly meetings that are required by law?
Mr. McGee. That is correct. It has not been quarterly, no.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. And now the Department of
Transportation appointed someone as its consumer
representative, I think you testified to earlier, someone from
the American Enterprise Institute?
Mr. McGee. Yes. And that individual has no career record of
ever having advocated on behalf of consumers. So we were rather
shocked by that.
This is a committee with several members, and traditionally
under other administrations that role was filled by someone
with a robust history of advocating for consumers. This person
does not.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Well, now, how has this appointment
impacted consumer access to a satisfactory passenger experience
on airlines?
Mr. McGee. Well, it has many effects, and we, as consumer
advocates, we work with colleagues outside of Consumer Reports,
with many other consumer organizations that advocate on behalf
of airline passengers, and we treat those meetings very
seriously. We look forward to them, and we have very robust
agendas.
And now we go in, and we feel that we are not being heard
in the same way. We don't have someone on the inside of that
committee advocating for passengers the way that we believe
there should be.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you.
Mr. Von Ah, GAO's testimony to date describes the growing
number of complaints each year from passengers alleging racial
discrimination. Can you describe what airlines are doing to
address racial discrimination in air travel?
Mr. Von Ah. So thank you for that question, Congressman.
Our work looked at the training that airlines have provided
for nondiscrimination. I would just mention that we didn't get
specific information about those airline trainings. I would
note that that training, it was hard to understand exactly who
got the training, how often they have got it.
And we did note that in some of the leading practices that
we developed in terms of nondiscrimination training, some of
those trainings did not include a number of the things that we
would consider to be best practices, things like implicit bias
training, ensuring there is a robust discussion amongst the
people in an interactive training environment.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Have you seen the Department of
Transportation make any significant efforts to address racial
discrimination in air travel?
Mr. Von Ah. They do take that issue very seriously, and
they do follow up on those complaints. However, that kind of
training that I just mentioned is not required by DOT, although
airlines do have that kind of training. But they don't require
it.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you.
Mr. Klein, your company uses arbitration clauses in your
contracts with airline consumers, correct?
Mr. Klein. Yes. That is correct, sir.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. And that is because it is more
efficient and cost effective for the company to force people
into arbitration than it would be to allow them to file
lawsuits in court against the company. Is that correct?
Mr. Klein. So we do get lawsuits in court all the time,
sir.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. But it is more cost efficient for
the airline when you can divert cases away from court into the
arbitration process, correct?
Mr. Klein. So, sir, in our case we have many more court
cases that take place than actual arbitrations.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. No, no, no. That is not my
question. My question is, it is more cost efficient for the
airline to divert cases to arbitration than it is to allow
cases to proceed to litigation in court. Isn't that correct?
Mr. Klein. Sir, that may be accurate. I can't speak to the
full accuracy of that at this time.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Well, otherwise, you would not do
it. You are low-cost, ultra low-cost airline, you are looking
to cut corners as much as you can, and people taking you to
court is just more expensive than arbitration. I mean, that is
a simple equation, isn't it?
Mr. Canfield. Congressman, I am general counsel of Spirit,
so maybe I am better suited to answer this, the question.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. I know you know the answer to the
question, then.
Mr. Canfield. We do provide some context for arbitration.
Many consumer businesses do. It is an attempt to achieve better
consistency of results.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. And it is cheaper for the airline,
isn't it?
Mr. Canfield. I am sorry, sir?
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. It is cheaper for the airline to
divert customers into arbitration than it is to allow them to
proceed with litigation. That is the question. And is that
true, or is that false?
Mr. Canfield. I really can't say, because I don't----
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. All right.
Ms. Davids. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Canfield [continuing]. Know if we have enough
arbitrations to make a statement one way or the other.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you.
Ms. Davids. The gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Brown, is now
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I have a statement and not a question, but I will preface
by thanking each of you for being here today in this hearing on
airline passenger experience.
In 2018, the GAO found that airlines' operation performance
generally is improved from 2008 through 2017 as measured by the
Department of Transportation data on denied boardings,
mishandled baggage, and late and canceled or diverted flights.
This is due in part to the airlines making investments in
technology, airport infrastructure improvements, and expanding
flight operations.
However, there is always room for improvement, especially
regarding safety. I think that a passenger's experience
includes even the unexpected, unscheduled, and unfortunate
series of events that occur during emergencies.
In November of 2019, this committee held a roundtable on
the air traveler experience for persons with disabilities. The
roundtable highlighted safety concerns regarding seat size and
passenger evacuation. Federal aviation regulations require that
the design of an airliner must permit all passengers to
evacuate the aircraft within 90 seconds with half of the exits
blocked.
Recent accidents have raised concerns about whether all
passengers can, in fact, evacuate an airliner in 90 seconds,
and I believe the chairman of the full committee alluded to
that. The example of this is an uncontained engine failure and
fire that occurred in Chicago in 2016.
I am concerned that current standards do not take into
account passengers with disabilities. Aircraft manufacturers
like Boeing and Airbus are responsible for successfully
demonstrating to the FAA that each aircraft design meets this
bar. But FAA standards, like seat size and aisle width, that
have not been updated in 20 years, make it extremely difficult
for passengers with disabilities to evacuate.
In November of 2019, the FAA started tests aimed at setting
a minimum standard for seats and the space between rows to
ensure safety. However, there was no indication that the
volunteers being used for the tests encompassed all
demographics and legal requirements.
We must ensure that the FAA considers all groups of people
when testing cabin evacuations to ensure the safety and
consumer experience of the passenger.
So I want to thank you, Madam Chair, for the opportunity to
put this statement in the record, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Lynch, is now
recognized.
Mr. Lynch. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, for holding
this hearing.
And I want to thank our witnesses for helping the committee
with its work.
So Members of Congress are frequent flyers. I had a flight
on Monday down here. I got the 6 a.m. shuttle down from Boston.
And maybe it is because it was the 6 o'clock shuttle, but half
the plane was empty. Yet because of the seating assignment
protocol--and I am thinking about the coronavirus here--because
of the seating assignment protocol, the first dozen rows are
all jam packed with people cheek by jowl, shoulder to shoulder
on that flight, and then the back of the plane was completely
empty.
So even though the assurances that you have given, Mr.
Leader, about the HEPA filter and all of that, certainly having
everybody jammed in with each other while the rest of the plane
is empty is probably not a good practice.
So, Mr. Klein, you run an airline. Will this take an act of
Congress to change the seating protocol so that people aren't
piled up when there are half-empty planes? Is that something
that you can take on yourself without being directed to do so?
Mr. Klein. In a way, Congressman Lynch, we don't frequently
deal with half-empty planes, so our planes are full.
Mr. Lynch. You are lucky, yeah. But, if this thing goes a
year, and HHS is saying we could be dealing with this for a
year, you are going to see--a lot of airlines are going to see
half-empty planes.
Mr. Klein. So you bring up an excellent question and an
excellent point and one that, frankly, we are not dealing with
today yet. Planes continue to run full, and it is hard for me
to comment on that, but it is a good point----
Mr. Lynch. OK. I don't want to waste all my time on this.
It is probably indicative of the problem we have here. This is
a very heavily regulated industry. All I am saying is it should
be simple, it shouldn't be hard.
Mr. Klein. There are some places where----
Mr. Lynch. I know there is a loading issue.
Mr. Klein. Correct. There is a weight and balance issue as
well, so that is the----
Mr. Lynch. I don't want to waste all my time on this.
Mr. Klein. OK. Fair enough.
Mr. Lynch. I think it should be easily fixed, and I will
deal with the other airlines individually.
The other issue that we are dealing with is--so the CDC is
actually asking for information from the airlines. OK, so you
get a passenger who is on a flight, they fly to their
destination, they get off. You know, 3, 4 days later, they test
positive for coronavirus.
So now the CDC is trying to get the information from the
airline, from the flight manifest, the PNR, the passenger name
record, usually has a phone number and an email, so they can
tell the passenger that was sitting next to the person that
tested positive: Hey, you have been in contact with--direct
contact with someone who has tested positive recently for
coronavirus.
So we are having a tug of war. The airlines don't want to
give up the information. They don't want to cooperate. And so
we have a dilemma here. And I am asking you again, Mr. Klein,
not to put you under the gun, but what is the airline position
on this?
Mr. Klein. I can speak specifically to Spirit. And we may
be in a position--I may want Dr. Leader to finish up after I
give you the Spirit perspective.
Mr. Lynch. Sure.
Mr. Klein. Is the information that has been requested by
the CDC is extremely important, and it hasn't historically been
collected by airlines.
Mr. Lynch. The name, contact phone number, and the email?
Mr. Klein. I can comment. Yeah, so passengers that booked
directly with the airline, all that information is stored in
the passenger name record, as you mentioned. If you book
through a third party--so, for Spirit Airlines, think of
someone booking through, say, Expedia.
Mr. Lynch. Yeah, but will you give what you got?
Mr. Klein. Well, we don't get the information from the
customers through that transmission of data.
Mr. Lynch. Some customers you do.
Mr. Klein. We do if--and we have the information. What I
was going to say is we have the ability through our system. It
is very inefficient, but we are collecting, per the CDC
requirements to collect information. As a directive has come
in, we have been able to address that.
Not every airline can, because it is not automated. And it
is information--like email address and cell phone number of
each individual passenger is not something that is stored on
the record. So you have to go get that information upon check-
in. It is inefficient and hard to get. I am not saying it is
not important to get. We have the ability to do that in our
reservation system.
I will hand it over to Dr. Leader maybe to talk about other
airlines, because that might be important.
Mr. Lynch. Mr. Leader, you are recognized.
Mr. Leader. Yes, of course.
So the from the global distribution systems that are used,
when airlines are collecting information directly, if they have
an email and phone number, they are happy to provide it to the
CDC for the safety of our public.
In instances where historically Expedia and other online
travel agencies have held back this information, I think you
are going to see a wall break down, because if the CDC requests
it, I believe that the OTA behind the reservation will offer it
to the airline, which historically they have not.
Mr. Lynch. It is important information to have, especially
for that passenger and their family. They want to know that
they have been in contact with someone so they can take those
precautions.
Madam Chair, I yield back.
Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Mr.
Carson.
Mr. Carson. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I know many of my colleagues mentioned discrimination, but
much of the aviation industry has comprehensive reporting
requirements regarding incidents which occur on airplanes, and
for good reasons.
However, there is very little required from airlines to
report when they remove someone from an airplane. At present,
the DOT only reports on discriminatory removals when passengers
complain. This disproportionately impacts American Muslims,
Sikhs, and Arab Americans, a problem which predates the Gore
Commission on Aviation Safety from 1997.
Most recently, the DOT has entered a consent decree with
Delta arising from two cases of discriminatory removals.
What can be done to require full reporting and rationale
for removal to prevent customers, flight attendants, or pilots
from causing American Muslims, Sikhs, Arab Americans, and
others--African Americans--to be stereotyped and removed from
flights for simple acts such as speaking Arabic or wearing a
hijab?
Mr. Leader. So from the airline passenger experience
perspective, I can tell you that our U.S. airlines have an
incident--two different things.
Number one is the level of sensitivity and training that
has been done by each of our airlines keeps getting better and
better each year. We see examples, for example, at Starbucks,
where there was insensitivity. Airlines learned from that quite
readily, because no airline wants to be in that instance.
In terms of reporting, airlines do collect incident reports
any time there is a confrontation with a passenger or an
incident with a passenger that leads to removal from an
aircraft. They each have procedures that are much, much better
and very well orchestrated in terms of serving their customers,
not allowing an incident to occur that is to the detriment of
their customer as happened to Dr. Dao. So that is an area of
great improvement.
My one concern is, to your point, Congressman, is that we
need to do better about underlying, unseen bias, and our
airlines continue to focus on training and awareness to not
allow that to ever impact decisions. And I can turn it over to
Mr. Klein to speak about Spirit's activities on that front.
Mr. Klein. Yeah, certainly.
So we have greatly improved our antidiscrimination
training. It is something, again, we take seriously, and it is
an area that we saw that we had improvement we could make, and
we have invested in that. It is for all of our guest-facing
team members, so it is not just on the aircraft. It is also at
the airport as well. So it is extremely important to us and
something that we do take seriously.
And to Dr. Leader's point, the removal rate on aircraft, it
is largely not related to some of the examples that you have
raised. Most of the time we are dealing with guests that are
being incredibly disruptive, maybe from having too much fun in
the destination they were just at before they got on the
aircraft, and then that causes calls to law enforcement
officials to help assist us if we can't diffuse the situation
ourselves, which is always what we try to do first before we
call in law enforcement to help us, if necessary.
Mr. Carson. Sure.
Yes, sir?
Mr. McGee. Congressman, one of the key issues here is the
term ``airline employee'' itself. You will notice that at some
past hearings before this committee some airline executives
have referred to their team members.
That is a euphemism that disguises the fact that many
frontline employees of airlines are, in fact, not employees,
they are outsourced.
And so the levels of training, compensation, et cetera, no
reflection on the people themselves, but on the airlines that
outsource this work.
Today we talked about outsourcing maintenance and we talked
about outsourcing flights to regional carriers. What many
customers have no idea is that they interface, these are people
on the front lines interfacing with customers at airports, they
may even be wearing airline uniforms, but they are not airline
employees.
So these training issues, unless you address the
outsourcing issue, it is very hard to address the training
issues.
Mr. Carson. It is a great point.
Yes, sir?
Mr. Klein. Yes. So Mr. McGee does raise a good point there.
And what we do at Spirit Airlines is every single team member
or family member, even if they are part of an outsourced
organization in some of our airports, come to our headquarters
in Florida and go through the exact same training as our team
members that are on the specific Spirit payroll.
So they come in, they have the same exact training. In
fact, I spend time and my colleagues spend time meeting each
and every single person during our new-hire orientation. We
take time out of our day to make sure we spend that hour and a
half with them during their 3-plus weeks, and sometimes, in
cases, it could be 6 or 8 weeks of training.
So I understand what Mr. McGee is raising. We agree and
think it is extremely important to make sure that outsourced
employees are trained and taught the same way as an actual
employee.
Mr. McGee. We appreciate that, but that is not the case at
all airlines in the U.S.
Mr. Carson. OK. Thank you, gentlemen.
I yield back, Madam Chair.
Ms. Davids. The gentleman yields back.
Are there any further questions from members of the
subcommittee?
Seeing none, I would like to thank each of the witnesses
for your testimony today. Your contribution to today's
discussion has been very informative and helpful.
I ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing
remain open until such time as our witnesses have provided
answers to any questions that may be submitted to them in
writing and unanimous consent that the record remain open for
15 days for any additional comments and information submitted
by Members or witnesses to be included in the record of today's
hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
If no other Members have anything to add, the subcommittee
stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:03 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
Submissions for the Record
----------
Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Last Congress, we came together to pass a long term, bipartisan,
comprehensive FAA Reauthorization that made significant strides in
improving the passenger experience, including for passengers with
disabilities.
I am pleased that this subcommittee is holding hearings to ensure
the intent of Congress is fulfilled.
I have no doubt that we will hear complaints and concerns about the
customer experience today.
Most Members of Congress are frequent fliers, and we've all
probably had at least one less-than-pleasant experience.
But we shouldn't forget the numerous instances where flight
attendants, gate agents, pilots, and ground crew have provided great
service.
Bottom line: air travel is now safer, more affordable, and
available to more people than ever before.
In the last FAA Reauthorization, Congress acknowledged that all
passengers must be treated with dignity and fairness.
But, in order to ensure a robust aviation sector, airlines must be
able to compete with one another and offer different products at
different price points.
Another important issue that will come up today is the impact the
coronavirus is having on airlines and the passenger experience.
We need to ensure that the Government's efforts, led by HHS and
CDC, are well coordinated with the airlines and consider operational
factors and passenger rights.
While I look forward to this hearing, it is unfortunate that the
Department of Transportation and additional airlines were unable to
participate.
I understand that the inability of DOT to participate today was
solely a question of timing, and I think we all agree their presence
would have added to today's discussion, particularly on the impacts of
coronavirus.
Nevertheless, I want to thank the Chairman and the witnesses, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Letter of March 13, 2020, from Kenneth Mendez, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, Submitted
for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America,
1235 South Clark Street,
Suite 305,
Arlington, VA 22202, March 13, 2020.
The Honorable Rick Larsen,
Chair,
Subcommittee on Aviation, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington,
DC.
The Honorable Garret Graves,
Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Aviation, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington,
DC.
Dear Chair Larsen and Ranking Member Graves,
On behalf of the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America (AAFA),
thank you for holding the hearing on the Airline Passenger Experience
on March 3rd. AAFA is the leading patient organization advocating for
people with asthma and allergies, and the oldest asthma and allergy
patient group in the world.
We were pleased to see that the hearing included a focus on
passengers with disabilities. I am writing to encourage you to ensure
that the committee's continued work in this area takes into account the
experiences of passengers with asthma or allergies, both disabilities
requiring accommodation.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),
over 25 million Americans have asthma, and over 50 million have
allergies. Like anyone else, this sizable portion of the population
often travels by air for business, family visits, or pleasure. Travel
by plane can be particularly risky for these passengers, particularly
if they experience an asthma attack or allergic reaction mid-flight.
AAFA has supported many common-sense policy goals to help protect the
safety and lives of children and adults with allergies and asthma as
air travelers:
AAFA supports the recent Department of Transportation
(DOT) Traveling by Air with Service Animals Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking allowing airlines to limit the boarding of emotional support
animals.\1\ Animal dander is one of the most common allergens, and can
also trigger asthma attacks in those living with asthma. We support the
use of trained service animals for documented medical needs, but the
proliferation of non-service animals in the cabin on flights has
created increased risk for people living with allergies and asthma.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Traveling by Air with Service Animals Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOT-OST-2018-0068-
4724
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AAFA also urged the DOT to ensure that the health needs
of people with asthma and allergies are also accommodated.
Specifically, people with medical documentation of severe allergies to
animals, or of asthma triggered by animal dander, should be able to
access seating a specific distance from any animal on a flight. This
common-sense measure is not always provided. For example, we heard from
a member of our community, who had a letter from her physician
requiring a 30-foot distance from animals on the plane. In this case, a
flight crew informed her that her needs would only be met if a seat was
available. This is not an acceptable approach: someone with severe
allergies on a plane is entitled to protection of her rights and
health, and airlines should be required to provide this reasonable
accommodation.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AAFA supports the availability of epinephrine auto-
injectors in the main cabin of commercial flights. Currently,
epinephrine is only required to be present in the locked cockpit, and
is typically available on in a vial that must be drawn out with a
syringe--a task that can be impossible for laypeople, and difficult
even for medical professionals if turbulence is present. Auto-injectors
such as ``epi-pens'' are easier to use, but not all people with
allergies have their own on hand. Both children and adults can have new
or undiagnosed allergies that first manifest on a flight. We have
therefore urged the FAA to issue regulations requiring airplanes to
include epinephrine auto-injectors in adult and pediatric dosages in
all onboard emergency medical kits, so that they can be easily accessed
and administered in an anaphylactic emergency.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ AAFA Letter to Administrator Dickson, March 9, 2020. https://
www.aafa.org/media/2626/aafa-letter-faa-urging-airplane-regulations-
require-epinephrine-autoinjectors-onboard.pdf
As these examples illustrate, for passengers with asthma or
allergies, the passenger experience is still fraught with too many
risks. We urge the Committee to affirmatively include people with these
potentially fatal conditions in your work on the passenger experience,
so that we can reduce the risk of preventable serious injury and death.
AAFA would be happy to work with the Committee on these important
issues.
Thank you very much for your time and attention.
Sincerely,
Kenneth Mendez,
President and Chief Executive Officer,
Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America.
Statement of Airlines for America (A4A), Submitted for the Record by
Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana
A4A welcomes and appreciates the Committee examination of the U.S.
airline passenger experience. While we unfortunately are unable to
participate at this particular hearing, we did want to share some
information for the record that brings context and data to what is
happening in the airline marketplace.
Record High Customer Satisfaction
In May 2019, J.D. Power noted customer satisfaction had climbed to
record high levels, further stating that:
``Airlines continue to deliver on the operational side of air
travel. New technology investments have dramatically improved
the reservation and check-in process. Fleets are newer and
travelers generally feel that they are getting great value for
their money. These improvements have been most profound in the
traditional carrier segment, where customer satisfaction has
climbed considerably.''--Michael Taylor, J.D. Power (May 29,
2019).
A4A also commissioned Ipsos to conduct a poll of the American
people in January 2020, asking those who had flown in 2019 about their
overall satisfaction with their air travel experience. For the third
consecutive year, only one percent indicated they were very
dissatisfied. In fact, 39 percent said they were very satisfied, and 45
percent said they were somewhat satisfied, for a combined score of 84
percent, up from 80 percent in 2015.
Record Capital Investment by Airlines and Airports
As J.D. Power noted in May 2019, ``This is probably the best time
in modern history in which to fly.'' \1\ We agree and believe this
recognition is due in no small part to the industry-wide investments
made by U.S. airlines and airports. Over the past 10 years, U.S.
passenger airlines alone spent $139 billion on new aircraft,
refurbishment of aircraft interiors (e.g., larger overhead bins, lie-
flat seating in premium cabins), upgraded airport lounges, renovated
gate areas, new ground equipment, improved information technology,
increased USB power access and faster and more reliable Wi-Fi, in
addition to improved food, beverage and inflight entertainment options.
Airlines continue to streamline the check-in process with advanced
mobile app capabilities and modern kiosks and enabling passengers to
track their bags throughout the journey. Similarly, since 2008 there
has been over $200 billion invested in across the country--including
$38 billion over the past three years--to revitalize airport terminals,
security checkpoints, bag systems, parking structures, roadways and
innovative baggage tracking technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/2019/05/
29/j-d-powers-best-airlines-customer-satisfaction-2019-southwest-
jetblue-alaska/1256499001/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Investment in the Workforce
From 2010 to 2019, U.S. passenger airlines increased their payrolls
by 70,000 full-time equivalent workers, an 18.5 percent increase, with
annual payroll expenditures rising from $32 billion to more than $55
billion. In addition to the fact that airline job growth outpaced
overall U.S. employment growth during this period, the average airline
employee wage increased over 50 percent, not including benefits.
Historic Affordability and Convenience
Consumers have enjoyed benefits from a thriving and competitive
aviation marketplace. According to the Bureau of Transportation
Statistics (BTS), 2018 inflation-adjusted fares were the lowest ever
recorded. Further, our own analysis of BTS data shows that the
inflation-adjusted price of domestic air travel, with both fares and
ancillary charges included, fell 6.9 from 2010 to 2018. This included
four consecutive declines from 2014 to 2018. Along with rising consumer
incomes and household wealth, the affordability and increasing schedule
convenience and plentiful service have resulted in access to the skies
for an increasing share of the population. Prior to deregulation of the
industry in late 1978, aviation was a luxury good limited largely to
businessmen and the affluent households. At that time, only 63 percent
of Americans had ever taken a trip on an airline. By 2019, that figure
had grown to 86 percent, including 70 percent within the past three
years. As affordability and choice of business model and inflight
product continues to grow, the mobility and opportunities afforded by
aviation will continue to change the lives of millions of Americans.
Extremely Low Rate of Complaints
From 2010 to 2019, the number of passengers enplaned on U.S.
carriers rose 28 percent from 720.5 million to an estimated 925.5
million. Despite this incredible increase in travelers in only nine
years, complaints to the DOT about U.S. airlines fell below one per
100,000 passengers enplaned in both 2018 and 2019 as financial
stability and investments in physical and human capital paid off.\2\
Airlines will continue to make investments to reduce this number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Source: DOT Air Travel Consumer Report
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robust Competition
While safety of operation is always the paramount priority, it is
closely followed by the passenger experience. U.S. air carriers
continuously review a broad array of policies to improve customer
service because they know full well that passengers have many choices
of airlines in a highly competitive marketplace. In fact, competitive
choices for domestic flyers have continued to increase, and contrary to
some assertions, traffic analysis shows the average number of
competitors on all domestic itineraries has increased from 3.33 in 2000
to 3.39 in 2010 to 3.48 in 2018.\3\ Competition is alive and well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Source: Compass Lexecon analysis of DOT Origin-Destination
Survey (Data Bank 1B) and http://darinlee.net/pdfs/
airline_competition.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There should be no misconception, airlines vigorously compete on
customer service. The relative financial stability of most of the last
decade has enabled the industry to make record investments of up to $20
billion per year in the customer experience and has driven the
improvements we see today. The industry strives for perfection with the
ultimate goal of providing a safe, efficient and enjoyable travel
experience for the 2.5 million passengers who fly each day.
Disabilities Issues
Airlines are committed to providing safe air travel for all
passengers and accessible travel for passengers with disabilities. A4A
and our members have a strong history of proactively working with
disability groups and addressing air travel accessibility to strengthen
that commitment. A few examples include:
A4A is a member and active participant in the DOT Air
Carrier Access Act Advisory Committee. That Committee is addressing
issues such as:
Bill of Rights for Passengers with Disabilities;
Assistance at airports and on aircraft and related
training programs;
Use of technology to improve access;
Accessibility of ticketing practices;
Seating accommodations, including pre-flight seat
assignments and access to bulkhead seating; and
Stowage of assistive devices.
The industry is actively participating in the
Transportation Research Board study on the Feasibility of Wheelchair
Restraint Systems in Passenger Aircraft. We are working to ensure this
study takes a data-driven approach to address all Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) safety requirements.
The industry is currently partnering with Paralyzed
Veterans of America (PVA) to create the Assistive Technology for Air
Travel Committee (ATAT) under the Rehabilitation Engineering and
Assistive Technology Society of North America--known as RESNA--to
improve the handling of wheelchairs in air travel. The leadership for
the ATAT includes PVA, Invacare--a wheelchair manufacturer--and A4A.
The Committee is developing three documents:
Standards for wheelchairs that will be used in air
travel;
Wheelchair handling guidelines for airlines; and
Guidelines for passenger information and instructions
for preparing wheelchairs to be stored and transported in commercial
aircraft.
We anticipate and are hopeful that the wheelchair standards and
wheelchair handling documents will be finalized this year.
The industry regularly participates in disability groups
conferences and meetings to directly hear how we can improve service.
In 2016 the airline industry participated in the DOT's
Negotiated Rulemaking on accessible inflight entertainment, accessible
lavatories on single aisle aircraft, and service animals. We are
pleased to share that the Negotiated Rulemaking resulted in agreements
on inflight entertainment and accessible lavatories, an agreement we
continue to support. As a result:
DOT issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for
Phase 1 of the accessible lavatory agreement, A4A filed comments
supporting the proposal; and
DOT issued a NPRM on service animals, comments are due
April 6, 2020. The industry will be filing comments in support of the
proposal.
In advance of the Negotiated Rulemaking, airline representatives
participated in a collaborated effort with DOT and advocacy groups to
create guidance for carriers and passengers on the accessibility areas
on which the DOT receives the most complaints. These guidance materials
are used by industry and are publicly available on DOT's website today.
The airline industry supported creating accessible
websites and accessible airport kiosks, DOT adopted a kiosk and website
regulation in 2013.
Customer Commitment
While we are proud of the customer service trends outlined, we also
are acutely aware and highly sensitive to the fact that not every
passenger has shared in the investments made and not every passenger
experience is always positive. Airlines recognize that the onus is on
each carrier operating in the marketplace to foster a customer-centric
environment. Our industry is dedicated to diligently and continually
improving the customer experience for all passengers. In this area, our
work is obviously never done, but please know the industry remains
committed to the effort. We believe our industry does good things for
people by connecting them to their families and friends and being an
enabler of commerce. We hope that certain, and often times very rare,
instances do not eclipse the dignity and respect shown by airline
employees to millions of travelers every day.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony.
Appendix
----------
Question from Hon. Steve Cohen to Matt Klein, Executive Vice President
and Chief Commercial Officer, Spirit Airlines, Inc.
COVID-19
Question 1. It has been reported that some of the most germ
infected areas on airplanes include overhead air vents, seat covers,
tray tables, armrests, seat-back pockets, headrests and window shades.
What steps is your airline taking to ensure that all these areas are
disinfected in between each flight?
Answer. A response was not received at the time of publication.
Question from Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana to Matt Klein, Executive
Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, Spirit Airlines, Inc.
Question 1. Aviation is an international industry which involves
customers of many different cultures, races, and religious backgrounds.
How do Spirit employees bridge these cultural differences?
Answer. A response was not received at the time of publication.