Bill could prevent hours of delay spent on tarmac

The Baltimore Sun

I recently was on a flight that was scheduled to depart from New York's JFK at 6:45 p.m. but didn't take off until 11:45 p.m. We were held hostage on the airplane for several hours; no beverage or food service was offered. We were not allowed to buy food, nor were we allowed to exit the aircraft. Once we finally took off, we had only one beverage service. Food was available for purchase, but it ran out. The whole experience suggests we need a passenger bill of rights. What's the status of that legislation?

Before I answer your question about legislation - and yes, there is news about a passenger rights bill by Sens. Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat, and Olympia Snowe, a Maine Republican - let me say this again: Do not get on an airplane without something to eat, something to drink and something to take your mind off your troubles, whether it's an iPod, a great book or a pen and pad.

Because, folks, flying these days isn't exactly poetry in motion. But it could improve under the Boxer-Snowe bill, introduced in January. One of the components is a three-hour limit on tarmac-sitting.

The bill has its proponents and opponents.

Kate Hanni is executive director of Flyersrights.org, founded soon after her Dec. 29, 2006, flight from San Francisco to Dallas. It was diverted to Austin, Texas, where the plane and its passengers sat for nine hours.

If the bill sounds familiar, that's because it has been tried, and it died. But, Hanni said, this bill contains some of the best provisions of all its other legislative kin, and she thinks with the new makeup of Congress, this one could pass, and needs to, she says.

"Without some kind of a mandate and penalties, we don't believe that the airlines will change," she says.

"So much of what Congress is proposing already is being done," David Castleveter of the Air Transport Association, which represents the airlines, said in an e-mail. "On the other hand, a mandatory three-hour deplaning rule would have many unintended consequences that would harm - not benefit - the traveling public."

It seems a simple matter that if people are on a plane, they need to get off a plane if they've run out of food and water and the toilets are overflowing. But as with most things in life, what seems simple rarely is. This one involves airport logistics, security, labor issues and more.

But, isn't it just common sense that confined people confined are unhappy? And unhealthy, Hanni said. I asked her what it would take to get Congress to act. "A body bag," she replied.

Copyright © 2021, The Baltimore Sun, a Baltimore Sun Media Group publication | Place an Ad
36°