Skip to comments.
Congress sticks its nose into JetBlue fiasco (2 articles)
Posted on 02/16/2007 8:46:39 AM PST by EveningStar
Thanks to the stupidity of JetBlue, we now have Congress coming to the rescue with more regulations.
JetBlue debacle spurs passenger rights bill in congress
Boxer to introduce legislation in Senate to boost fliers' rights
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aviation; barbaraboxer; jetblue; michaelthompson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-100, 101-102 next last
To: Howlin; onyx; Clemenza; Petronski; GummyIII; SevenofNine; veronica; Xenalyte; CheneyChick; ...
2
posted on
02/16/2007 8:48:09 AM PST
by
EveningStar
(Hillary Clinton is Hugo Chavez in a pantsuit - P. J. O'Rourke)
To: EveningStar
The Pelosi Regime cracks down.
3
posted on
02/16/2007 8:48:15 AM PST
by
Brilliant
To: EveningStar
Dear Congress,
F*** Off.
Yours,
NYleatherneck
4
posted on
02/16/2007 8:49:27 AM PST
by
NYleatherneck
(It ain't a World War until the French surrender.)
To: Brilliant
The Pelosi Regime cracks down.
All Hail the mighty Nutcase Nancy!
5
posted on
02/16/2007 8:49:39 AM PST
by
TLI
(ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA, MMP AZ 2005, TxMMP El Paso Oct+April 2006 TxMMP Laredo - El Paso)
To: EveningStar
"We think that one size doesn't fit all," said ATA spokesman David Castelveter. "We think the best solution continues to be to allow the flight crews and their operational experts to make these type of decisions." Because that's working so well now.
6
posted on
02/16/2007 8:51:13 AM PST
by
Wolfie
To: EveningStar
These small delays are nothing to the delays in military standby.
7
posted on
02/16/2007 8:51:36 AM PST
by
mountainlyons
(Hard core conservative)
To: EveningStar
So now Congress is like the Local Newschannel "On Your Side?"
Have a complaint about a business or a service? Congress can help.! Joe in Birmingham contracted a lawn service to treat his yard. 3 weeks later cinch bugs has eaten up his entire yard, but he still received a bill from the service company.
8
posted on
02/16/2007 8:52:07 AM PST
by
Sax
To: NYleatherneck
Break me off a piece of that.
9
posted on
02/16/2007 8:52:10 AM PST
by
LIConFem
To: EveningStar
---there is no issue sufficiently trivial to escape Congressional notice---
10
posted on
02/16/2007 8:52:34 AM PST
by
rellimpank
(-don't believe anything the MSM states about firearms or explosives--NRA Benefactor)
To: EveningStar
I don't see how a passenger's bill of rights is going to do anything.
What will it mean, the right to at least two bags of peanuts instead of one? JetBlue already has a choice which consists of more than just nuts.
Imagine what they will try to write in the bill if they keep those 6 Imams in mind...
11
posted on
02/16/2007 8:52:44 AM PST
by
wastedyears
( "Gun control is hitting your target accurately." - Richard Marcinko)
To: EveningStar
More INTRUSIVE Socialist government.
12
posted on
02/16/2007 8:53:17 AM PST
by
EagleUSA
To: rellimpank
The airlines are asking for this because they are too greedy and cheap to cancel flights.
13
posted on
02/16/2007 8:54:01 AM PST
by
EveningStar
(Hillary Clinton is Hugo Chavez in a pantsuit - P. J. O'Rourke)
To: Aeronaut
14
posted on
02/16/2007 8:55:14 AM PST
by
EveningStar
(Hillary Clinton is Hugo Chavez in a pantsuit - P. J. O'Rourke)
To: EveningStar
I agree that it's a bit silly for the government to be getting involved here, but I've never understood why the airlines always feel compelled to lie through their teeth in these delay situations that inevitably come up in bad weather.
I believe the blatant dishonesty is a big part of what pisses people off so much. One day this kind of mistreatment is going to cause an ugly incident.
15
posted on
02/16/2007 8:55:48 AM PST
by
jpl
To: EveningStar
That happens in every regulated industry. One bad actor causes consequences for all which drive up costs. That said, where was JetBlue management during this debacle?
16
posted on
02/16/2007 8:56:15 AM PST
by
babaloo
To: EveningStar
Folks, I know I'm going to take heat for this but...
I've been stuck on flights like this. To the point of wanting to get up, after 8 hrs, go to the door, and pop the emergency slide...
Quite frankly, the FAA and airlines have had sufficient time to cure this particular ill and they flat out refuse to do it.
Push the empty planes AWAY from the frigging gates and get people OFF!
So where's the hard part here people (i.e. Congress / FAA / Airlines)...? A three year old can figure this out but you can't? Of what use are you then?
Therefore... I'm going to regret it...
(1) Pass a law that after 1 hr. an aircraft is required to return to the gate.
(2) People who were required to get off a plane are required to be on the first plane out; no skipping. No other flight may leave until those people are on their way.
Flail away... But I've had it....
17
posted on
02/16/2007 8:56:22 AM PST
by
Freeport
To: jpl
The airlines are asking for it. They are unwilling to regulate themselves. Idiots.
18
posted on
02/16/2007 8:57:34 AM PST
by
EveningStar
(Hillary Clinton is Hugo Chavez in a pantsuit - P. J. O'Rourke)
To: EveningStar
Good. Kidnapping and Wrongful Imprisonment are usually crimes, except when an airline does it to you.
Last week we were herded onto a United flight like were escaping from the Nazis. They waited until the last person walked on the plane to announce that they didn't have a First Officer. We sat on the runway for an hour. Yes, that's criminal behavior.
19
posted on
02/16/2007 8:57:53 AM PST
by
jiggyboy
(Ten per cent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
To: EveningStar; Tijeras_Slim; FireTrack; Pukin Dog; citabria; B Knotts; kilowhskey; cyphergirl; ...
20
posted on
02/16/2007 8:59:42 AM PST
by
Aeronaut
(Hebrews 13:4)
To: EveningStar
Smart politics. Most people think these situations suck, and it's clear that the airlines themselves and market forces aren't solving the problem. And it's a problem almost everyone can personally identify with.
The opposition to this are just a very small minority of folks who parrot lines about 'socialism' and 'principle,' who do a terrible job of articulating their point and actually convincing people that they are right.
People who expected Ma Pelosi to quickly fall on her @ss will be very disappointed.
21
posted on
02/16/2007 8:59:53 AM PST
by
HitmanLV
("I mean, that's a storybook, man!")
To: EveningStar
With millions of people flying all the time and the Airline industry treating them like cattle. I do think it about time that passengers had some rights. It was not just Jetblue, Delta passengers where stuck for 11 hours also. I don't understand why they did not let the people back to the terminal rather than having to sit for 10 or more hours.
Its' bad enough that Airlines treat passengers badly, seats have become extremely uncomfortable and people are packed in like Sardines.
Constant lost luggage, bad air etc.
22
posted on
02/16/2007 9:00:32 AM PST
by
Strutt9
To: EveningStar
Why didn't someone call the cops and tell them they were being held hostage against their will for over 8 hrs?
I 'good' lawyer will claim Jet-Blue kidnapped their clients and earn them both a fat pay-check.
To: EveningStar
Think these regs will apply to Pelosi's private jumbo jet?
24
posted on
02/16/2007 9:01:25 AM PST
by
Tzimisce
(How Would Mohammed Vote? Hillary for President! www.dndorks.com)
To: EveningStar
Some here are old enough to remember when flying was somewhat enjoyable. Even in coach you were treated as a respected
customer.
Let's face it... today you must prepare yourself and endure... like a trip to the emergency room of an urban general hospital:
Go stand over there... you'll be called when we want you.
Bend over and be quite... you came here didn't you?
Don't ask questions, we're doing all we can.
We don't need congress, but we sure need some 'customer service'.
25
posted on
02/16/2007 9:01:55 AM PST
by
nctexan
To: Freeport
I understand your frustration. As I said the airlines are asking for it by not regulating THEMSELVES. If you don't practice self-regulation, you invite government regulation.
This is how we lose our rights: by not taking personal / corporate responsibility.
26
posted on
02/16/2007 9:02:07 AM PST
by
EveningStar
(Hillary Clinton is Hugo Chavez in a pantsuit - P. J. O'Rourke)
To: NYleatherneck
27
posted on
02/16/2007 9:02:44 AM PST
by
wastedyears
( "Gun control is hitting your target accurately." - Richard Marcinko)
To: EveningStar
|
By what authority can an airline hold a passenger on it's plane against the passengers will?
|
|
|
To: Freeport
The problem with your "first out no skipping" rule is you're assuming the flight is being delayed because of conditions at the outbound airport. What if the flight is being delayed not because of conditions there but because of conditions at the destination airport or on the flight path? Why should people flying to LA not be able to leave because there's a plane destined for Denver that's waiting for usuable conditions there.
29
posted on
02/16/2007 9:06:14 AM PST
by
discostu
(Feed her some hungry reggae, she'll love you twice)
To: jpl
I agree that it's a bit silly for the government to be getting involved here, but I've never understood why the airlines always feel compelled to lie through their teeth in these delay situations that inevitably come up in bad weather.Not that I condone lying, but airlines lie to limit providing ammunition for lawsuits.
30
posted on
02/16/2007 9:06:27 AM PST
by
highlander_UW
(I don't know what my future holds, but I know Who holds my future)
To: Strutt9
This is what happens when companies get greedy and don't police themselves.
31
posted on
02/16/2007 9:07:05 AM PST
by
EveningStar
(Hillary Clinton is Hugo Chavez in a pantsuit - P. J. O'Rourke)
To: NYleatherneck
The airlines are asking for it.
32
posted on
02/16/2007 9:07:49 AM PST
by
EveningStar
(Hillary Clinton is Hugo Chavez in a pantsuit - P. J. O'Rourke)
To: EveningStar
Well, at least according to Fox News, the government is already involved. Judge Napolitiano on last night's O'Reilly factor stated that passengers do not have a right to force their way off of the plane because, since the passage of the Patriot Act, such action would subject them to criminal penalties up to 20 years in prison.
He further indicated that the only avenue for redress would be for individual or class action lawsuits for pain, suffering and damages. If this is accurate, their needs to be further government involvement either by new laws or regulation or the removal of the provisions that prevent passengers from freeing themselves under this circumstance.
33
posted on
02/16/2007 9:07:58 AM PST
by
Truth29
To: jpl
I've never understood why the airlines always feel compelled to lie through their teeth in these delay situations that inevitably come up in bad weather. I believe the blatant dishonesty is a big part of what pisses people off so much...Bingo. I look at the clock and see that we're well past the start of the boarding time. I just KNOW we ain't gonna take off on time. It usually goes something like this after they've forced us to board:
(10 minutes after we've boarded) "Uh folks we're waiting for the food truck, that should be here in just a couple of minutes, we're loading the last of the baggage and then we'll close the main door..."
(10 minutes later) "Uh folks we've just discovered a little maintenance issue here we need to take care of, we're gonna call Maintenance on that..."
(10 minutes later) "Uh folks Maintenance should be here in just a couple of minutes..."
Then Maintenance comes and goes, now they decide that they need to fuel the tanks, now we've lost our take-off spot, etc., etc.
34
posted on
02/16/2007 9:08:40 AM PST
by
jiggyboy
(Ten per cent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
To: EveningStar
I see a great chance for Southwest to take even more business from the Mainstream Airlines.
Have a comercial showing the inside of an airliner after 11 hours on the taxiway waiting. Have the toilets overflowing, passed out passengers lying in the aisle, maybe a flight attendant ignoring everyone and filing her nails. Then the voiceover says "Southwest Airlines: we don't imprison our passengers". Listen to the other airlines screech at that.
35
posted on
02/16/2007 9:09:12 AM PST
by
KarlInOhio
(Samoans: The (low) wage slaves in the Pelosi-Starkist complex.)
To: Freeport
"Therefore... I'm going to regret it...
(1) Pass a law that after 1 hr. an aircraft is required to return to the gate.
(2) People who were required to get off a plane are required to be on the first plane out; no skipping. No other flight may leave until those people are on their way."
I'm going to regret it too, but as a super-frequent-flyer, I'm kinda/sorta with you. The airlines do what they do because they have a captive audience. But I'd take a different tack than you propose: I'd ask Congress to simply indemnify passengers from civil or criminal liability arising from deployment of emergency slides when their plane has been on the ground away from the gate for more than, oh say a couple or three hours. If the airline and airport can't get you to a gate, fine: this would acknowledge your right to walk off. Perhaps this would motivate airlines and airports to treat passengers better in such circumstances.
To: I see my hands
They don't have the authority. What they did was arrogant and criminal.
37
posted on
02/16/2007 9:09:42 AM PST
by
EveningStar
(Hillary Clinton is Hugo Chavez in a pantsuit - P. J. O'Rourke)
To: EveningStar
will they stick their noses when Skycrappers run into Jets causing terminal, and permanent delays!!!??? what about those passengers's bill of rights?
To: discostu
To bad... No exceptions. Why you ask? Every time (multiple BTW) I've been in these situations, the next scheduled flight to the SAME destination leaves.
If the weather is sufficiently bad to ground one flight, you can bet your backside that your carrier isn't the only one impacted. Bad weather impacts the whole system.
This keeps the airlines from blaming a mechanical breakdown on "weather"... Yeah, and it does happens.
39
posted on
02/16/2007 9:11:04 AM PST
by
Freeport
To: EveningStar
Sooooo true! Years ago, air travel was very very good.. now, they could care less for the passengers. Soon, all passengers may or maynot have seats... and must stand in planes so that they can pack in more and more people. (only kiddin)
40
posted on
02/16/2007 9:11:36 AM PST
by
Strutt9
To: KarlInOhio
"Southwest Airlines: we don't imprison our passengers"
ROFL
To: highlander_UW
airlines lie to limit providing ammunition for lawsuits.That would be rather counterproductive. Being caught in a lie tends to compound the liability.
42
posted on
02/16/2007 9:12:29 AM PST
by
Squawk 8888
(Is human activity causing the warming trend on Mars?)
To: rellimpank
there is no issue sufficiently trivial to escape Congressional notice There is certainly no indication from gubmint that private industry has the ability to handle their own affairs. In the immortal words of the Pit Yorkie "You can't professionalize unless you Federalize".....
43
posted on
02/16/2007 9:12:50 AM PST
by
Thermalseeker
(Just the facts, ma'am)
To: Freeport
I can see the rule if both flights have the same destination. But across the board the rule would be idiotic.
44
posted on
02/16/2007 9:14:44 AM PST
by
discostu
(Feed her some hungry reggae, she'll love you twice)
To: Freeport
I agree with you as well. I fly pretty often and I've been stuck on the tarmack for upwards of 4 hours before. One time in particular, they pushed us away from the gate to get an ontime departure and then announced we wouldn't be taking off for 30 minutes. That became 4 hours before it was all said and done. To add to the insult, when we finally got clearance to take off...they had burned up too much fuel running the AC/lights and we had to go back to the gate. It was infuriating.
After about 90 minutes they should be required to deplane everyone. At least in the airport I can walk around and get something to eat.
45
posted on
02/16/2007 9:16:49 AM PST
by
Malsua
To: EveningStar
Have Boxer consult with her friend albore about...now what's that he's been promoting...oh, yes, global warming. albore will have a ready answer to the weather conditions. BARF!
46
posted on
02/16/2007 9:18:49 AM PST
by
lilylangtree
(Veni, Vidi, Vici)
To: discostu
47
posted on
02/16/2007 9:19:47 AM PST
by
Freeport
To: Squawk 8888
That would be rather counterproductive. Being caught in a lie tends to compound the liability.I imagine that depends on the nature of the lie...if they can exaggerate something that has a modicum of truth in it then it would be difficult to fight that one through. But again, I'm not condoning lies...just offering my opinion why an airline (or any other business) might utilize them.
48
posted on
02/16/2007 9:20:37 AM PST
by
highlander_UW
(I don't know what my future holds, but I know Who holds my future)
To: EveningStar
I have no problem with ensuring that the laws regarding airport procedure should include a provision whereby passengers may disembark (even if requiring a waiver) from a grounded aircraft if the wait is going to be longer than a certain amount of time.
Keeping people in planes on the tarmac for seven hours really ought not to be allowed, let alone required by federal regulations, as appears to be the case today.
49
posted on
02/16/2007 9:21:23 AM PST
by
Maceman
(This is America. Why must we press "1" for English?)
To: All
Although I'd rather see the Airlines take action instead of Congress, I agree that there needs to be a time limit set as to how long a plane can sit outside of the gate. I'd be pretty steamed if I sat in those planes for up to 11 hours with no food and a smelly restroom.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-100, 101-102 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson