sterbo

How can something so fundamental to the well being and rights of any of us paying to fly on a commercial carrier be so mired down in bullshit?

I don't know about anyone else here, but I've experienced (and suffered) a long term delay aboard an aircraft and the pitiful ordeal endured by all of us on board, most poignantly the children. It has forever jaded my opinion of the way we allow corporations to do business at the expense of the average person...


"On the list of annoying air-travel experiences, the trapped-alive feeling that goes with a long wait on the runway is a special form of passenger abuse.

Washington should step up and oblige airlines to answer for extreme cooped-up conditions in the cabin. The flying public is entitled to the basics - food, water, fresh air and clean lavatories caused by long, plane-bound waits.

The issue was pushed forward in snowy blizzards during the winter months of 2006-07. Horror stories came to light when planes were stuck on the tarmac for up to eight hours while crews ran out of snacks and water and toilets backed up.

A federal appeals court has rejected a bid by New York state to require that airlines provide the bare necessities during long waits or face fines up to $1,000 per passenger. The judges said the federal law that deregulated the airline industry in 1978 prohibits state action in determining levels of service, such as the comfort rules during lengthy delays.

Two proposals - one in the Senate co-written by California Democrat Barbara Boxer and the other in the House authored by Napa Democrat Mike Thompson - would oblige airlines to offer the food-water-facilities guarantee after a three-hour wait on the ground. Both were born of the passenger furor generated a year ago and drew instant support in the months after the airline incidents.

But these bills have gone nowhere because of conflicts over an aviation funding bill and airline objections.

The court case in New York should slap Congress into doing its duty. Requiring basic service in extreme situations isn't much to ask. Passengers deserve better treatment."*


*abridged

(Unabridged: A passengers' bill of rights)

__________________

Freedom_User

Agreed. I fly all the time and it's ridiculous.

sterbo

So, since no one seems to take exception to the Airlines being forced to make some kind of accommodation to passengers being stranding aboard, what's the solution?

Is it fair to institute a required time frame whereby a given passenger can opt to exit the plane regardless of whether it's at the gate still or out sitting on the tarmac and if so what would that be?

Is this just another example of those greedy corporate fingers picking our pockets with their endless excuses of the hardships they would have to endure if such actions were enacted?

I mean, this isn't rocket science. I've been sitting on the damn plane for 2 hours (or worse), my work schedule (or vacation) has gone to shit and I want my life back.
Roll a van (or bus depending on how many want off) out to the plane, and let me have my life back, eh?
.
.
.

Andrew87

This is a tough decision for me, in theory I agree with sterbo, but I tend to oppose any added government restriction on private organizations.

I suppose a better answer would be: If you don't like it, then don't fly.

__________________
The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants. -- Albert Camus

Freedom_User

I am required to fly for I have shops both on the East coast and West coast. I do not have enough technology to build my own rocket ship and fly my ass to the other end.

And to Sterbo, I do fly ALOT.. And one of the things that gets me is... The Airlines have been flying unsafe planes. I was watching CNN earlier this morning and it's a huge issue of unsafe planes.

sterbo

Yea, I hear ya.
More on that a little later on

Uh huh.
Well there's always the option of removing "government restriction on private organizations."
I'm sure that would fix the problem, straight and simple...

.

Andrew87

No, you are not required to fly, you choose to fly because it is the fastest method. You are perfectly capable of driving, taking trains, etc.

If you just have to have things your way I'd suggest you invest in a private jet.

sterbo

Come on Andrew, you are really reaching here mate.
I mean, what's up dude.
Do you just like to argue just for argument's sake or what?

Although in this case, I have to admit your at least a bit entertaining...

Andrew87

Way to totally exaggerate what I was saying. Obviously, an unsafe airplane that falls from the sky can harm uninvolved 3rd parties. Government restriction is necessary in that regard.

My point was that when you choose to use an airline for transportation, I don't believe they should be required to cater to your every demand.

Long story short: If you don't want to wait on the runway for a few hours (when it could take potentially days to drive the same distance), then utilize other methods of transportation.

sterbo

Really? Let's hear it then.
What exactly were you saying?
.
.
.