An Airline Passengers' Bill of Rights?

A month ago, I wrote about what the U.S. government could do do to avert another debacle for airline passengers like the one that affected Southwest Airlines’ ticket-holders over the end-of-year holidays.

I listed a range of actions I’ve been recommending for years, including better enforcement of existing Federal laws, improved regulations that could be issued by the U.S. Department of Transportation within its existing authority, and changes that would require action by Congress.

All of these proposals have been falling on deaf Federal ears for years, with both Republican and Democratic Party administrations and members of Congress devoutly committed to the rhetoric of “deregulation” even while continuing and expanding subsidies to airlines with few if any strings attached.

Put perhaps airlines have finally gone too far in assuming that they can rip off their customers with impunity.

As the new session of Congress begins to set its agenda, a group of Senators led by Sen. Edward Markey and Sen. Richard Blumenthal have introduced legislation for an Airline Passengers’ Bill of Rights (S. 178) that addresses, at least to a degree, almost all of the major items on my legislative wish list.

Among its other provisions, S. 178 would end Federal preemption of state and local consumer protection laws applicable to airlines; create a private right of action in Federal or state courts (including small claims court) for violations of consumer protection laws by airlines; prohibit airlines from blocking interline agreements that facilitate accommodating competitors’ passengers in the event of cancelled or delayed flights; require that information about all airline ticket prices and fees be made available to the public; limit ancillary fees (including those for checked or carry-on baggage and cancellations and changes to tickets or reservations) to amounts reasonably related to the actual cost to the airline of providing those services; and require payment of $1,350 cash compensation to each ticketed passenger whenever a flight is cancelled or delayed more than four hours.

Some of the provisions of S. 178, particularly with respect to interline agreements and fare transparency, leave airlines more wiggle room than I would like. The bill refers to “information about prices” but doesn’t explicitly refer to fares, rules, or the “tariff” (the accepted term of art for the totality of prices and rules). A “fare” is a price associated with a set of rules, and information about prices without the complete rules that apply to them can be inadequate or even misleading. The bill would encourage, but not require, interline agreements.

But the amount of the statutory damages — roughly twice the maximum of EUR600 (about US$650 at the current exchange rate) required by law in the European Union — would create a strong incentive for airlines to clean up their act and put in place whatever fallback arrangements, including interline agreements, would help them accommodate passengers and avoid having to pay such high compensation when they cancel or delay flights.

Urge your U.S. Senators to co-sponsor S. 178, and urge your U.S. Representative to introduce a similar bill in the House.

The same bill was introduced in the previous 2021-2022 session of Congress, but never got a hearing, much less a vote, or made it out of the committee to which it was assigned. The spectacle of tens of thousands of passengers stranded over the holidays when Southwest Airlines’ flights were cancelled may, however, have made more members of Congress willing to consider legislation to rein in airlines’ most egregious anti-consumer practices.

Senators Markey, Blumenthal, and others also introduced a much more limited FAIR Fees Act (S. 209) that contains only the fee-related provisions of the Airline Passengers’ Bill of Rights. Perhaps the sponsors of this bill think that these provisions have a better chance of passage than the larger package. S. 209 would be a good thing, but the goal for travellers should be enactment of S. 178, which would address the issue of fees but also other, more significant, airline scams.