Appeals Court Rejects N.Y. Airline Law

LARRY NEUMEISTER | March 25, 2008 10:24 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »

stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust

NEW YORK — A federal appeals court Tuesday struck down a state law requiring airlines to give food, water, clean toilets and fresh air to passengers stuck in delayed planes, saying the measure was well-intentioned but stepped on federal authority.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said New York's law _ the first of its kind in the country _ interferes with federal law governing the price, route or service of an air carrier.

The law was passed after thousands of passengers were stranded aboard airplanes for up to 10 hours on several JetBlue Airways flights at Kennedy International Airport on Valentine's Day last year. They complained they were deprived of food and water and that toilets overflowed. A month later, hundreds more passengers of other airlines were stranded aboard planes at JFK after a daylong ice storm.

The law was challenged by the Air Transport Association of America, the industry trade group representing leading U.S. airlines.

The court said that while the goals of the law were "laudable" and the circumstances prompting its adoption "deplorable," only the federal government has the authority to pass such regulations.

"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.

Assemblyman Michael Gianaris, the prime sponsor of New York Airline Passenger Bill of Rights, said in a statement that the ruling "is a disappointment to anyone who has suffered at the hands of airlines that care more about profits than their customers."

"This is far from over," the Democrat said. Options for proponents of the law include an appeal, a new law or putting pressure on the federal government to create similar rules for long-delayed flights.

In a statement, the air transport association said the ruling vindicates its position that airline services are regulated by the federal government and that a "patchwork" of state and local measures would not benefit customers.

During appellate arguments earlier this month, Seth Waxman, a lawyer for the trade group, said a dozen other states and Congress were considering laws similar to New York's.

A California lawmaker said he would continue seeking approval of his bill, modeled after the New York statute.

"This has nothing to do with the federal jurisdiction of scheduling airlines or the level of service provided," said Assemblyman Mark Leno, a Democrat. "It just deals with basic needs to meet human health. That's a concern of the state."

A recent federal report showed that about 24 percent of flights nationally arrived late in the first 10 months of last year, which was the industry's second-worst performance record since comparable data began being collected in 1995.

Kennedy airport had the third-worst on-time arrival record of any major U.S. airport through October, behind the New York area's other two major airports, LaGuardia and Newark, according to the report.


 
 

Comments
35
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:

Congress needs to deal with this matter--but it's a joke

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:35 PM on 03/26/2008

Last summer I had to fly home for a sudden family emergency. It was all very hectic and on the way back, my son and I sat on the tarmac for 3 hours. It was early in the evening, we hadn't eaten anything all day. I finally asked for some pretzels.The stewardesses also organized games for the passengers, which was kind of fun and killed some time. They were extremely helpful and friendly and it the end they passed out vouchers for a free flight for all passengers. This was United Airlines.
I do have to say though, 3 hours is the limit. I think I would have gone crazy if it had been one minute
more than 3 hours. I do think there should be laws passed that limit the amount of time you can keep passengers stuck on a plane that is not moving.
I can't even imagine being stuck for 7 hours, with overflowing toilets and no food or water. That is criminal!
I do have to say though...even under the best of circumstances, that flying is one of my least favorite things to do.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:47 AM on 03/26/2008

I quit going to American airports when they started letting $5/hr. mouth breathers paw through my luggage three times after it had been X-rayed (in the process, damaging items bought on the trip with NO recourse). And keeping you on a plane against your will, REGARDLESS of the intent, is false imprisonment. I honestly hope the American airline industry (providers, not manufacturers) go out of business. Why? Because I am old enough to remember when flying IN ANY SECTION OF THE PLANE was a pleasure. Now it is just a huge pain in the ass no matter what you pay for the ticket.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:07 AM on 03/26/2008

Here's something to think about. American airline companies are among the worst in basic courtesies! I fly the fliers of other nations when traveling when I can! There is better service, staff with better manners, and greater concern for the comfort of passengers! As for having to suffer under delays in JFK or any other large U.S. airport ~ bring plenty of money and get a hotel room!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:39 AM on 03/26/2008

What is wrong with steppeing on federal authority? It is high time someone did!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:48 AM on 03/26/2008

This war will end when the American people decide that we can no longer afford it. If anybody remembers... during the Vietnam War, the economy was doing great for about the first 5 years. Then, we went into a deep recession. It looks like the same thing is happening during the Iraq war. Maybe it's not just a coincidence.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:35 AM on 03/26/2008

Sorry, I posted this in the wrong forum.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:37 AM on 03/26/2008

These are not the days of sailing the Atlantic for months at a time with deplorable conditions. We pay an awful lot of money to fly on airplanes, wouldn't you think as a courtesy they could provide you a glass of water, as it is their fault your flight is not on time. You basically pay to be abused, which is why I refuse to fly-you are left totally vulnerable to the airlines disposal. It all comes down to basic manners. When you have someone over to your house, you offer them a drink, a bite to eat, and, if necessary, a place to dispose of such food-post digestion(W.C.). Is that so much to ask of someone you are paying a considerable amount of money to do the same?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:17 PM on 03/25/2008

I agree with your premise about supply of human needs (there is an obligation to meet them) but disagree that we a lot of money to fly. Frankly, airfares are dirt cheap. Hell, it would cost me more in gas to drive from Sacramento to Seattle than fly. I'm no expert on airlines but I recall flying before Reagan's deregulation. Yes, flying was rather more expensive. I flew from SF to NY for around $400 or less circa 1981 and today the price is around $600 for steerage rates. Adjusted for inflation it does cost more to fly today. In 1981, however, I was able to sit in my seat without my legs being crushed by the seat in front of me. The food wasn't great but it was typically pasable, with free snacks and drinks, and pleasant flight staff. There were always plenty of pillows and blankets. Flying today is to put it mildly a nightmare. I typically pay for an upgrade on transcontinental flights because steerage is such a grotestque experience and this ends up costing me a lot more than the 1981 fare adjusted for inflation. So, I'm not sure what dereglation has bought us. I will say that it does seem to have helped destroy the US airline industry. But I forgot, we owe so much to free markets...we should just let the markets "adjust" and all will be well.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:50 AM on 03/26/2008

Oddly enough, I find the Court's reasoning in this case to be logical and appropriate. If States could dictate to airlines concerning the passengers who happened to have landed in their State, then it would indeed be a can-of-worms for the legal profession.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:08 PM on 03/25/2008

Congress, are you listening?

Hey! Pay attention!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:26 AM on 03/26/2008

Air Passenger Rights are stupid. There should be a law against holding passengers on an airplane that is sitting on the tarmack for more than three hours. After three hours the airline should be required to unload the passengers and return them to the airport, the only passenger right that makes sense. Anything else is just cruel and unusual punishment.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:49 PM on 03/25/2008

Dam straight!

Back in the 90s I flew a lot of international business trips. The last one I was on was in 1999, and got stuck on the tarmac for 7 hours on a NorthWorst airliner. When I finally got home, I told them that this was the last flight I would ever take. So far, I've held my word.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:49 PM on 03/25/2008

Same experience, same response. I'm amazed this suit got as far as it did. Why would anyone think the trolls in steerage have any rights?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:22 PM on 03/25/2008

Sure, but I have money and they ain't gettin' any.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:25 AM on 03/26/2008

Sounds to me like an incentive to take flying lessons, buy or rent an airplane, and leave the flying to yourself. If these bastards don't care about their customers, then perhaps they shouldn't have any! Take a bus or a train, or if you can, drive your car.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:00 PM on 03/25/2008

Walking or driving may be the only options now. Have you ever tried to go Amtrak on a tight schedule?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:24 PM on 03/25/2008

Yeah, a tight schedule makes Amtrak a limited option. But, why is your schedule so tight? I guess I'm fortunate enough to have earned that luxury.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:24 AM on 03/26/2008

Railroads in this country have suffered at the expense of the highly subsidized airline industry. Reagan when asked why he refused to fund Amtrak stated he didn't know anyone who took a train. We don't even get the option to ride a train because Reagan didn't know anyone who rode one. Like his refusal to believe in acid rain (thus nothing done to remedy it in his administration) we are stuck with morons whose personal beliefs override sanity. Why do we continue to elect fools? - because it's all we ever get to elect anymore.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:24 AM on 03/26/2008

That's what I do, and guess what? It's easy to make changes...LOL.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:50 PM on 03/25/2008

Oh and I live in MI- so I'm too broke to go overseas. I hear Canada is Beautiful . Screw ya and I've got a Brother in law who works for one- but of course they cut his pay and bennies recently too. May be the ebig Whigs could stop skimming so much off the top. Trickle down is BS- Sh*t Rolls Down Hill. It's time this Base begins to shake the fat ass Peaks OFF

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:41 PM on 03/25/2008

"Care More about Profits than their Customers" America Inc business Ethics and guiding Principles.
The ridiculousness (and faulty business vision) Is That If You Screw You Customers You will Loss Your Profits!
I wil be sure not to book any flights on these 'providers' -It'd be like crossing a picket line.
So What Airlines are in this Group? I haven't taken a Train in Forever- great waay to see the country!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:38 PM on 03/25/2008

then just make it a state criminal offense for any corporation to hold anyone against their will ...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:18 PM on 03/25/2008

WHO WRITES THESE HEADLINES- do the headline writers actually read the story??? The Court DID NOT SAY that passengers have NO RIGHTS - the Court said that States cannot pass this type of law over airlines - that the Federal Gov't has the authority to do it - so Where IS THE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS!!! They won't stop the Iraq War - and apparently they don't care about airline passengers.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:05 PM on 03/25/2008

Misleading headline - a staple here at PuffHo.

The court's point was well taken. You can't legislate this at the state level. Period.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 03/25/2008

Given that this is an election year and many politicians might want to get to or return back to the trough, it might be an excellent time for all of the long suffering flying public to LOBBY their congressmen and senators for a federal version of the airline passengers rights bill.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:03 PM on 03/25/2008

Well, this is a fine kettle of fish we find ourselves in now, America. (Paragraph)First we find out in the Medtronic case that a faulty product which is duly regulated by the Federal agency in charge means that the consumer has no recourse through the court against the company or the government for a faulty product which kills him. (Paragraph)Now we are reminded that because the FAA is on the case, airline travelers are part of the package being regulated too, so no state can interfere. They can be trapped in a large metal cylinder without air, water, food or toilet privileges for as long as the airlines feel it's OK, again without recourse. Hmmm. What happened to those fair weather State's Rights advocates who wanted to pack the courts with their ideological kin? (...chirp of crickets in otherwise silent night...)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:01 PM on 03/25/2008

Yet another reason to not fly.
The taxpayers continually have to bail these yahoos out. I say no more.
Next time they trap you have a medical emergency - i.e. chest pains.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:58 PM on 03/25/2008

The real reason that there is no passenger bill of rights is because the passengers didn't pay enough money to the Washington lobbyists to get one.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:41 PM on 03/25/2008

Don't use their "services". Put them out of business. Take the train. Take the bus. Drive yourself. Figure out how long it takes you to go through all the hassle of getting to the plane, how long you'll sit there before you actually leave, how long it will take you to get your luggage (if it shows up when you do) and get to your hotel or whatever your final destination is and compare that to how long it would take for you to drive there.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:39 PM on 03/25/2008

Fine.

CONGRESS?

Back atcha.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:11 PM on 03/25/2008

According to a ruling issued by the DOJ's office of legal council (OLC), airline passengers may be deprived of food, drink and access to bathrooms SO LONG as the intent is not to INTENTIONALLY cause them pain, anguish, and/or discomfort "equal to or exceeding the failure of a major organ."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:14 PM on 03/25/2008

Yep, just another "legalized" torture we're supposed to endure.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:29 AM on 03/26/2008

Excellent. If you're taken off the plane for transport to the closest ICU then maybe you've got a case.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:26 PM on 03/25/2008

clap clap

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:00 PM on 03/25/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in

 
 

Stock Quote

Enter a ticker symbol below:

Data provided by AOL