Complain about a product or service

Appeals Court Rejects NY Passengers Rights Law

Passengers must rely on lobbyist-stalled Congress

By Mark Huffman
ConsumerAffairs.com

March 25, 2008

"This court ruling is picture proof of why we have to have federal legislation," said Kate Hanni, President of Flyers Rights.

Ironically, that was the position of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals as well. The court ruled that the New York law, requiring that airlines provide food, water, clean toilets and fresh air to passengers stuck in delayed planes, was not something for the states to mandate. As laudable as its goals, the couort said it found the state to be intruding onto federal turf.

Unfortunately, the outlook for federal action is, at the moment, uncertain. Despite early progress, Hanni says the consumer-friendly legislation has stalled.

"We're on life support in the Senate," Hanni told ConsumerAffairs.com.

The effort to enact passengers' rights legislation was born on a "flight from hell," a 2006 American Airlines flight that encountered repeated weather delays and sat on a runway in Texas for more than 9 hours.

The movement gained momentum in the wake of JetBlue's February 2007 meltdown at New York's JFK, where passengers on several planes were trapped aboard the aircraft on the tarmac during an ice storm.

Opposition from airlines

Airlines, which have cut expenses to the bone, oppose a passenger bill of rights measure that would require them to be prepared to meet long delays on the tarmac. They have also opposed proposed regulations requiring planes to return to the terminal if take off is delayed for more than an hour. The Air Transport Association of America, the industry trade group representing major U.S. airlines, opposed the New York law in court.

In finding for the airlines, the court worried that state laws would create a patchwork of regulations that would be unworkable.

"If New York's view regarding the scope of its regulatory authority carried the day, another state could be free to enact a law prohibiting the service of soda on flights departing from its airports, while another could require allergen-free food options on its outbound flights, unraveling the centralized federal framework for air travel," the court wrote.

Indeed, other states, including California, have enacted, or are working on, their own Passengers' Bill of Rights laws. Those laws now, presumably, are in jeopardy. Hanni would like to see more pressure applied to Congress.

"We need action now, or this summer could be a nightmare for passengers," Hanni said.

Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.

Back to the top |