DOT's unprecendented FINES for airlines stranding passengers in planes on tarmac

[TangoWhiskey]

http://blogs.wsj.com/middleseat/2009/11/24/a-tougher-dot-hits-airlines-for-stranding-passengers/

For the first time, the federal government has fined airlines over a tarmac delay case, hitting three airlines for $175,000 for their bungling last summer that left a regional jet full of passengers stranded overnight in Rochester, Minn.

The Department of Transportation has been taking a tougher stand against airlines on consumer issues, cracking down on airlines that shirk responsibility in lost baggage cases, for example. On Tuesday, DOT fined Continental Airlines, ExpressJet Airlines and Mesaba Airlines, a unit of Delta Air Lines, for the Aug. 8 episode in Rochester.

full story in link above

 

[ScottM]

The airlines won't care. They will just pass this onto the consumer as the 'airline negligence and inconvenience fee'

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Scott, good point. It's kind of like the recent fines almost levied against the reorganized corporations for their financial and bonus snafus. That just hurts the shareholders again, in round 2. Because it's really the shareholders (or, in this case, passengers) that end up paying the fine.

 

[kkoran]

Can't argue that ExpressJet, Continental, and Mesaba screwed up, the first two by holding the passengers in the plane for hours hoping that the wx would get better, and Mesaba for an error by its gate agent. The problem I (and Mesaba) have with the Mesaba fine is that DoT stretched a rule that applies to air carriers to a company providing ground handling assistance at the request of an air carrier. DoT's position is that "...the functions it took on at RST for ExpressJet when performed by an air carrier are air carrier functions."

Does this mean that if I provide scheduled air service between two points, they won't violate me for operating an airline because I don't have an air carrier certificate? It seems to me that whether a function is an air carrier function or not shouldn't be based on whether it is performed by a someone with an air carrier certificate.

Mesaba only agreed to the penalty to avoid legal costs and hassle of contesting it. I'm sure DoT would have spared no cost in or effort to show they were getting tough on the airlines and standing up for passenger rights.

 

[bbchien]

The airlines won't care. They will just pass this onto the consumer as the 'airline negligence and inconvenience fee'

ROTFLMAO but probably true.