Effect Is Most Notable At Smaller Airports

A report published last week by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) finds that flight cancellations have become more likely since the imposition of a three-hour tarmac delay rule, and that the effects are most pronounced at airports serving communities of 50,000 or fewer.

According to the report, airlines and other aviation stakeholders maintain that the tarmac delay rule has changed airline decision-making in ways that could make cancellations more likely. To test this claim, GAO developed two regression models, which controlled for a variety of factors that can cause cancellations and measured whether the time period following the imposition of the tarmac delay rule is correlated with an increase in cancellations.

The two models assessed flights canceled before and after leaving the gate, for the same 5 months (May through September) in 2009 and 2010. In both cases, GAO found that there was an increased likelihood of cancellation in 2010 compared to 2009. And, the data shows that the longer a flight is delayed, the more likely it is to be cancelled. While a flight at the gate was 24 percent more likely to be cancelled in 2010 than in 2009, flights sitting on the tarmac after a delay of between two and three hours were 359 percent more likely to be cancelled.

The GAO report indicates that EU requirements provide airline passengers with more extensive protections, such as care and compensation, for flight delays, cancellations, and denied boardings than do U.S. or Canadian requirements. But these protections may also increase costs for airlines and passengers. For example, some airline officials in the United States and the EU told GAO that increases in the amount of denied boarding compensation has increased their overall costs. Additionally, enhanced passenger protections, such as those in the EU, can create enforcement challenges if regulations are unclear or not universally enforced.

The report goes on to state that airports in rural communities have higher rates of delays and cancellations than airports in larger communities, but DOT data provide an incomplete picture of this difference. DOT's data include flights operated by the largest airlines, representing about 70 percent of all scheduled flights. GAO analysis of FlightStats data, representing about 98 percent of all scheduled flights, show more substantial differences in flight performance trends by community size than DOT data. DOT has historically not collected data from smaller airlines because of the burden it could impose on these airlines, but without this information, DOT cannot fully achieve the purpose of providing consumers with information on airlines' quality of service.

GAO recommends that DOT collect and publicize more comprehensive data on airlines' on-time performance and assess the full range of the tarmac delay rule's costs and benefits and, if warranted, refine the rule's requirements and implementation. DOT did not comment directly on the recommendations, but indicated that it would soon begin a study of the effect of the tarmac delay rule. It also recommends that the Secretary of Transportation should fully assess the impact of the tarmac delay rule, including the relationship between the rule and any increase in cancellations and how they effect passengers and, if warranted, refine the rule's requirements and implementation to maximize passenger welfare and system efficiency.

In an article in Bloomberg News, FlyersRights.org founder and president Kate Hanni said she "completely disagrees" with the finding by the GAO, and DOT spokesperson Olivia Alair indicated that internal agency analysis has not turned up any direct correlation between the rule and increased flight cancellations. She said that, since the rule was imposed, flight delays of more than three hours have fallen from 693 the year before it was enacted to 20 the first year it was in effect.

FMI: www.gao.gov, www.dot.gov. www.flyersrights.org