Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Gov't imposes 3-hour limit on tarmac strandings

Mon Dec 21, 2009 10:29 AM EST
business, politics, us, transportation-department, tarmac, strandings, tarmac-strandings
Joan Lowy, Associated Press
< PreviousNext >
showing 1 of 2 photos
<p>A U.S. Airways Express plane is prepared on the tarmac at Reagan National Airport, after a massive snow storm shut down air travel over the weekend, in Washington, on Monday, Dec. 21, 2009. The government has imposed a three hour limit on tarmac strandings at airports. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)</p>

A U.S. Airways Express plane is prepared on the tarmac at Reagan National Airport, after a massive snow storm shut down air travel over the weekend, in Washington, on Monday, Dec. 21, 2009. The government has imposed a three hour limit on tarmac strandings at airports. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

Advertise | AdChoices

WASHINGTON — Stinky toilets, crying babies, airless cabins — the Obama administration said Monday passengers don't have to take it any more. It ordered airlines to let people get off planes delayed on the ground after three hours.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said the three-hour limit and other new regulations are meant to send an unequivocal message to airlines not to hold passengers hostage on stuck planes. Coming on the eve of the busy holiday travel season, the announcement was hailed by consumer advocates as "a Christmas miracle."

The airline industry said it will comply with the regulations — which go into effect in 120 days — but predicted the result will be more canceled flights, more inconvenience for passengers.

"The requirement of having planes return to the gates within a three-hour window or face significant fines is inconsistent with our goal of completing as many flights as possible. Lengthy tarmac delays benefit no one," said Air Transport Association President and CEO James May.

LaHood, however, dismissed that concern.

"I don't know what can be more disruptive to people than to be stuck sitting on a plane five, six, seven hours with no explanation," LaHood said at a briefing.

This year through Oct. 31, there were 864 flights with taxi out times or flight diversions of three hours or more, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Transportation officials, using 2007 and 2008 data, said there are an average of 1,500 domestic flights a year carrying about 114,000 passengers that are delayed more than three hours.

Last month, the department fined Continental Airlines, ExpressJet Airlines and Mesaba Airlines $175,000 for their roles in a nearly six-hour tarmac delay in Rochester, Minn. In August, Continental Express Flight 2816 en route to Minneapolis was diverted to Rochester due to thunderstorms. Forty-seven passengers were kept overnight in a cramped plane because Mesaba employees refused to open a gate so that they could enter the closed airport terminal.

It was the first time the department had fined an airline for actions involving a ground delay. Transportation officials made clear the case was a warning to the industry.

Under the new regulations, the only exceptions to the requirement that planes must return to the gate after three hours are for safety or security or if air traffic control advises the pilot in command that returning to the terminal would disrupt airport operations.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said she thought the 3-hour rule would not cause any problems for security. "I can't imagine it would. I call it the rule of common sense," she said.

Airlines could be fined $27,500 per passenger for each violation of the three-hour limit.

The regulations apply to domestic flights. U.S. carriers operating international flights departing from or arriving in the United States must specify, in advance, their own time limits for deplaning passengers. Foreign carriers do not fly between two U.S. cities and are not covered by the rules.

Tarmac strandings have mostly involved domestic flights, but the department is studying extending the three-hour limit to international flights, LaHood said.

"This is the beginning," LaHood said. "We think we owe it to passengers to really look out for them."

Airlines will be required to provide food and water for passengers within two hours of a plane being delayed on a tarmac, and to maintain operable lavatories. They must also provide passengers with medical attention when necessary.

Airlines will also be prohibited from scheduling chronically delayed flights. They must designate an employee to monitor the effects of flight delays and cancellations and respond to consumer complaints. And they would have to post flight delay information on their Web sites. Carriers who fail to comply could face government enforcement action for using unfair or deceptive trade practices.

Provisions sponsored by Sens. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, in pending legislation would also impose a three-hour limit, but the new regulations go even farther, giving passenger rights advocates many of the reforms they've sought for years.

"No more will they be able to strand passengers for over three hours in hot, sweaty, metal tubes," said Kate Hanni, founder of Flyersrights.org. Hanni, who called the rules a Christmas miracle, was stuck on an American Airlines jet in Austin, Texas, for over nine hours in December 2006 when storms forced the closure of Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, stranding more than 100 planes.

Past efforts to address the problem have fizzled in the face of industry opposition and promises to reform.

Congress and the Clinton administration tried to act after a January 1999 blizzard kept Northwest Airlines planes on the ground in Detroit, trapping passengers for seven hours. Some new regulations were put in place but most proposals died, including one that airlines pay passengers who are kept waiting on a runway for more than two hours.

The Bush administration and Congress returned to the issue three years ago after several high-profile strandings, including a snow and ice storm that led JetBlue Airways to leave planes full of passengers sitting on the tarmac at New York's Kennedy International Airport for nearly 11 hours.

After those incidents, DOT Inspector General Calvin Scovel recommended that airlines be required to set a limit on the time passengers have to wait out travel delays grounded inside an airplane.

A year ago, the Bush administration proposed airlines be required to have contingency plans for stranded passengers, but the proposal didn't include a specific time limit on how long passengers can be kept waiting. It was denounced as toothless by consumer advocates.

___

AP Airlines Writer Harry R. Weber contributed to this report from Atlanta. Associated Press Writer Suzanne Gamboa in Washington contributed to this report.

___

On the Net:

Department of Transportation http://www.dot.gov

Air Transport Association http://www.airlines.org

© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Joan Lowy's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: Washington DC
  • Public Discussion (29)
James Andre

About time. I think it should be two hours max.

  • 7 votes
Reply#1 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 11:22 AM EST
sunnyday1982

Unless there is some type of emergency at the airport itself or on the runway, it shouldn't be more than hour...there is plenty of room in the sky for all of the pilots to fly off course by a mile or two for a little ways and still get to their destinations on time...right?

  • 1 vote
#1.1 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 7:40 PM EST
James Andre

I don't think so. LAX or Laguardia can have ten or more planes stacked for landing and take off. Rearranging all those planes could easily take more than an hour.

  • 1 vote
#1.2 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 8:39 PM EST
sunnyday1982

Well, then they NEED to 'un-stack' the planes...they shouldn't have so many planes taking off at once...or make the airports bigger...it's really not that difficult to figure out!

  • 1 vote
#1.3 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 10:38 PM EST
Real World Engineer

Well, then they NEED to 'un-stack' the planes...they shouldn't have so many planes taking off at once

Major urban area have lots and lots of flights. It is not like most airports are in the middle size towns of the midwest or something.

or make the airports bigger...it's really not that difficult to figure out!

You can't just make the airports bigger in alot of areas.

It is very costly, it has impacts on the housing/business in the area, and it can hae a big impact on the environment.

  • 1 vote
#1.4 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 11:17 PM EST
Reply
Kim-298921

As a person who loathes flying (it's claustrophobia, which I can manage with some calming breathing and such, most of the time) and finds the customer service given to passengers to be worse than appalling, this is good news.

  • 5 votes
Reply#2 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 11:47 AM EST
Tony in Arizona

It's a shame the government had to get involved to create this mandate. This should have been a common sense approach taken by all the airlines. It just shows the horrid lack of judgment by airline executives in this matter, but also probably speaks to the numerous other issues facing the industry if all their business decisions are as abysmal as this one.

  • 4 votes
Reply#3 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 2:21 PM EST
jdoyle

It's a shame the government had to get involved to create this mandate.

This is just one example where businesses can not be trusted to police themselves.

  • 6 votes
#3.1 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:43 PM EST
Reply
Tim Boothby

3 hours? Make that one. tops!

  • 5 votes
Reply#4 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 2:39 PM EST
James Andre

Yeah, that's how I feel - 45 minutes is too long. But logistically, I don't think much less than two hours is feasible.

  • 5 votes
#4.1 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 2:48 PM EST
Reply
moltke5104

Now if only they instituted something on people bringing their kids on 8 hour international flights, maybe requiring they remain upright and buckled at all time, of course i am a little biased on that topic.

    Reply#5 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 2:45 PM EST
    Lzrdsgal

    I would freak out if I was in a plane for 11 hours, talk about hell on earth!!!!

    • 1 vote
    Reply#6 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:22 PM EST
    Be careful what you wish for

    Wow! If you think it's bad now, just wait until they impose this and all of you complaining get to return to the gate.

    Once they get back there, the airline will have to find new flight crews because the crew times out. The airlines love to send crews out because they're "good by fifteen minutes." They finally go over the 16-hour duty day rule imposed by the FAA, but since you're already out on the tarmac waiting in line to go, they have to continue the trip. Since this can take 2 hours, your delay just gets longer. And don't forget that some major airports have restrictions on when flights can depart and arrive (DCA). Ultimately many flights will have to cancel and you'll be left taking the next flight as a stand-by passenger. Good luck getting home then.

    As a crew member, it doesn't matter to me. By 14 hours, I'm exhausted because I haven't gotten to take a nap like you do in your seat. I'll be happy to pick up my bags and walk off the plane to go back to a hotel or head home.

    Instead of a knee-jerk reaction, why don't we institute some real change? Why don't we invest in technology that updates the outdated ATC systems currently in place? Fix the system. Don't make it worse.

      Reply#7 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:26 PM EST
      KitKat51

      Fine by me. I am happy to wait a day rather than have an exhausted pilot flying my plane! That is the very last place a mistake needs to be made! Go on to bed and send me a new crew!

      • 2 votes
      #7.1 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:04 PM EST
      Little Sure Shot

      I wait on a tarmac for 3 hours, I want to return to the gate. There is nowhere I need to be so badly that I have to stay stalled on a runway.

        #7.2 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:08 PM EST
        Reply
        jbird

        Im not catholic, but hail Mary! Since congress was bowing to the airline lobby pressure, Im glad DOT did something!

          Reply#8 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:36 PM EST
          KitKat51

          YEE-HAW! It's about time! There is absolutely NOTHING more miserable than being held hostage on an airplane!

            Reply#9 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:44 PM EST
            jbird

            "The regulation provides exceptions only for safety or security or if air traffic control advises the pilot in command that returning to the terminal would disrupt airport operations."

            Unfortunately this provides a big enough loophole that you could taxi a 747 through...

            • 1 vote
            Reply#10 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:56 PM EST
            ilanrab

            Clearly this is just the beginning of this whole branch. The airline industry's managers have been put on notice. They can either shape up, or...

              #10.1 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:52 PM EST
              sunnyday1982

              Yeah, now all they need to do is reign in the TSA workers and then we can have some real progress!

              • 1 vote
              #10.2 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 7:43 PM EST
              jbird

              Yes. The TSA white shirts can finally get the hint that they are not god, no matter what their wives tell them in bed.

                #10.3 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 9:55 PM EST
                Reply
                ilanrab

                This is not the end of the story. There's bound to be conflicts arising. For example, the tugging between the passengers who deserve to get off the plane because it makes no sense to keep them there, and those who "have" to get to their destination no matter what (those die-hards would stay on the plane much longer than 3 hours.)

                • 1 vote
                Reply#11 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:04 PM EST
                Nicole-1272536

                If there is not a gate for the plane to return to, this will mean they will use stairs outside the aircraft then onto a bus.

                • 2 votes
                Reply#12 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:06 PM EST
                jbird

                very difficult for the traveling disabled...

                • 3 votes
                #12.1 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:22 PM EST
                Reply
                Al 616

                It wouldn't be so bad if the airlines would just honestly tell the passengers what the cause of the delay is. Not knowing is the worst part. I usually do better when I know what's wrong...even if it's a loose screw on the wing that they are fixing. Being kept in the dark drives me bonkers.

                • 2 votes
                Reply#13 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:41 PM EST
                Bummer of Oregon

                I've had that problem a couple of times. During a vaction to the Midwest to visit relatives, we would sometimes get delayed and the captain would say, "Sorry folks, just a delay. We'll have it done and....*muttermuttermutter*" before shutting off the intercom.

                  #13.1 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:06 PM EST
                  Reply
                  prone2xs

                  I don't know, but 3 hours still seems excessive to me. Once I get on the plane I expect to leave. I would not want to wait for more than one hour.

                    Reply#14 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:55 PM EST
                    sunnyday1982

                    It's kind of like going to the doctor, unless there is a valid emergency, you should expect to be seen on time, as with the airlines, you pay for a ticket to go some place at a certain time, and you should be able to leave on time unless the is an emergency, it's common courtesy, maybe it's just me, being raised in the Midwest, with common sense values...

                    • 1 vote
                    Reply#15 - Mon Dec 21, 2009 7:47 PM EST
                    tdk022755

                    Three hours is too long. If you can't get it off the ground in an hour, then let me off.

                      Reply#16 - Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:42 AM EST
                      Leave a Comment:
                      You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                      You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                      (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                      Newsvine Privacy Statement
                      As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                      FUN STUFF:
                      • Leaderboard |
                      • E-Mail Alerts |
                      • Top of the Vine |
                      • Newsvine Live |
                      • Newsvine Archives |
                      • The Greenhouse
                      COMPANY STUFF:
                      • Code of Honor |
                      • Company Info |
                      • Contact Us |
                      • Jobs |
                      • User Agreement |
                      • Privacy Policy |
                      • About our ads
                      LEGAL STUFF:
                      • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                      • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                      • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com