Travel Safety/Security - Flight 2816 Udate-fines all around.

Mesaba Airlines got hit with a $75,000 for not opening the Rochester, Mn terminal.

From the article: (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gpzpxENOJlq5qouSmP0wWNjw2BUwD9C6375G1)

The government is imposing fines for the first time against airlines for stranding passengers on an airport tarmac, the Department of Transportation said Tuesday.

The department said it has levied a precedent-setting $175,000 in fines against three airlines for their role in the stranding of passengers overnight in a plane at Rochester, Minn., on Aug. 8.

Continental Express Flight 2816 was en route from Houston to Minneapolis carrying 47 passengers when thunderstorms forced it to divert to Rochester, where it landed about 12:30 a.m. The airport was closed and Mesaba Airlines employees — the only airline employees at the airport at the time — refused to open the terminal for the stranded passengers.

Continental Airlines and its regional airline partner ExpressJet, which operated the flight for Continental, were each fined $50,000. ExpressJet spokeswoman Kristy Nicholas said the airline can avoid paying half the fines if it spends the same amount of money on additional training for their employees on how to handle extended tarmac delays.

The department imposed the largest penalty — $75,000 — on Mesaba Airlines, a subsidiary of Northwest Airlines, which was acquired by Delta Air Lines last year.

"I hope that this sends a signal to the rest of the airline industry that we expect airlines to respect the rights of air travelers," Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in a statement. "We will also use what we have learned from this investigation to strengthen protections for airline passengers subjected to long tarmac delays."

ExpressJet spokeswoman Kristy Nicholas said the airline can avoid paying half the fines if it spends the same amount of money on additional training for their employees on how to handle extended tarmac delays.

How about not lying about "security" reasoning you used as a scapegoat for your airline's incompetence?

The fine should have been doubled simply for her stupid statement.

Anyone else here up for splitting the cash among the passengers onboard?

Mike

Anyone else here up for splitting the cash among the passengers onboard?

Mike
I would agree, but I'm not sure $3700 is enough.

I'm sure the passengers are being offered compensation now. If not, I hope they get lawyers and sue. It should be an easy case.

Nice fine !

I'm sure the passengers are being offered compensation now. If not, I hope they get lawyers and sue. It should be an easy case.

From the original article:


Besides the fine, Continental also provided a full refund to each passenger and "offered each passenger additional compensation to tangibly acknowledge their time and discomfort," the department said.

From the original article:

Thanks for doing the research. I think if I was one of the passengers, I would refuse the first couple of offers. It sounds like you could score a lot of free flights at least.

I'm sure the passengers are being offered compensation now. If not, I hope they get lawyers and sue. It should be an easy case.
Easy to win, but in many of these suits, the lawyers wind up with (nearly) all the loot.:td:

ALready discussed by multiple forums. Here it is:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/continental-onepass/1020325-co-fined-100k-rochester-stranding.html

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/delta-skymiles/1020333-faa-fines-mesaba-dl-subsidiary-role-august-8-rj-stranding-2.html

Regards

Nice fine !

Not nearly large enough. Add a couple of zero's.

Not nearly large enough. Add a couple of zero's.

TSA should fine the airline for falsely using them as a scapegoat. The excuse did sound like some regulation that TSA would require, however...:rolleyes:

"I'm sorry sir, the TSA will be back in the terminal in 6 hours and then you can deplane and use the restroom."

Easy to win, but in many of these suits, the lawyers wind up with (nearly) all the loot.:td:

It takes a lot of billable time to produce those boxes of documents. ;)

Interesting that the pilots weren't named at all in this. I seem to recall a bunch of second-guessing after the incident claiming that the pilots should've just dumped the passengers out onto the tarmac and to h@!! with the consequences. This might be some justification for their (non-)role in all of this.

This is an interesting one to me. While I agree that the airlines - all three involved - were at fault to some extent, the enforcement via "deceptive trade practices" is a slippery slope. Sure, CO has the policy in detail as part of their Customer Commitment or whatever. But I'm not entirely sure what deceptive practices Mesaba engaged in (http://www.wanderingaramean.com/2009/11/cost-of-overnight-diversion.html). Sure, they were a bunch of idiots and didn't know what they were doing on the ground, but does that really qualify as deceptive practices?

Sure, they were a bunch of idiots and didn't know what they were doing on the ground, but does that really qualify as deceptive practices?

Disclaimer: this is pure speculation on my part. But it all depends on how you define "deceptive".

Somewhere along the way, Mesaba's problem on the ground didn't get properly escalated along its internal chain of command. Someone at higher channels obviously knew that deplaning the passengers wasn't a security threat and, in fact, was the proper thing to do. If they'd been properly notified, this whole incident goes away.

I'm guessing that someone lower on the chain on command (a) thought it was a security threat, and (b) wasn't willing to follow proper procedures to escalate the problem up the chain of command. That lack of willingness to escalate could be seen as "deception"; if the person said "my ruling is final", when they knew very well that an appeal was possible ... that would be deception.

Disclaimer: this is pure speculation on my part. But it all depends on how you define "deceptive".

Somewhere along the way, Mesaba's problem on the ground didn't get properly escalated along its internal chain of command. Someone at higher channels obviously knew that deplaning the passengers wasn't a security threat and, in fact, was the proper thing to do. If they'd been properly notified, this whole incident goes away.

I'm guessing that someone lower on the chain on command (a) thought it was a security threat, and (b) wasn't willing to follow proper procedures to escalate the problem up the chain of command. That lack of willingness to escalate could be seen as "deception"; if the person said "my ruling is final", when they knew very well that an appeal was possible ... that would be deception.
Oddly enough, ticket counter agents for the airlines never seem to have problems at other times asking us (TSA) questions. Nor do any other airline employees that I know of. All airlines have local TSA numbers and they do call us from time to time when they have questions, about all sorts of things: what can go in luggage, and even several times at SAT to REOPEN the checkpoint after hours.

What seems to be "deceptive" is this IS common knowledge, TSA is soooo easy to get hold of (every airport has a control center staffed and open 24 hours a day) and the airline seemed to lie about it.

Oddly enough, ticket counter agents for the airlines never seem to have problems at other times asking us (TSA) questions. Nor do any other airline employees that I know of. All airlines have local TSA numbers and they do call us from time to time when they have questions, about all sorts of things: what can go in luggage, and even several times at SAT to REOPEN the checkpoint after hours.

What seems to be "deceptive" is this IS common knowledge, TSA is soooo easy to get hold of (every airport has a control center staffed and open 24 hours a day) and the airline seemed to lie about it.

I don't think that TSA was a part of this at all. If anything, they should hold the airline accountable, separately from the FAA, for using them as an excuse. Getting the passengers off the plane should have been a priority, even if it meant re-screening them a later time. Hopefully, the fines will raise awareness of the issue for future flights.

I don't think that TSA was a part of this at all. If anything, they should hold the airline accountable, separately from the FAA, for using them as an excuse. Getting the passengers off the plane should have been a priority, even if it meant re-screening them a later time. Hopefully, the fines will raise awareness of the issue for future flights.
I agree and that's what I was saying. If the airline employee really believed TSA was needed to unload the passengers, that could have happened with 1 phone calls.

But I don't think that TSA should fine the airlines. Even though some or quiet a few airline employees hate us - actuallly quiet a few airline employees have thanked me for what we do - we are partners. We work together, and one thing that TSA can do, in my opinion, is take the brunt of negative opinion. We are not in the business of making money, airlines are. And airport security is sort of like a contradiction: provide security and at the same time ensure, as much as possible, the free flow of people and commerce (as oppossed to security at many other institutions who has the primary function or preventing the free flow of people).

I can not tell you how many times passengers have come up to me personally, and other TSOs I personally know, complaining be ause of what the airlines told them - to make short, it's not the airlines fault, blame TSA, when I know for a fact that many of these "problems" lay with the airline and they are just passing the buck. All we do is shake ou head, and and NOT bring it up with the airline, usually.

Just my opinion.

I wonder if these fines are DOT's way of demonstrating that a Passengers Bill of Rights is not needed?

I can not tell you how many times passengers have come up to me personally, and other TSOs I personally know, complaining be ause of what the airlines told them - to make short, it's not the airlines fault, blame TSA, when I know for a fact that many of these "problems" lay with the airline and they are just passing the buck. All we do is shake ou head, and and NOT bring it up with the airline, usually.

See, this doesn't do you, or your agency, any good at all. If TSA just sits there and takes abuse when it doesn't deserve it, TSA creates the impression that it's an unfeeling, intransigent agency that is more concerned about its rules than the overall goal of improving security.

(Obligatory retort: "but that's what TSA is, right?" Alternatively, insert your favorite TSA slam here.)

If we want TSA to stand up and admit when it's wrong, we ought to encourage it to stand up and admit when it's right, too.

I don't think that TSA was a part of this at all. If anything, they should hold the airline accountable, separately from the FAA, for using them as an excuse. Getting the passengers off the plane should have been a priority, even if it meant re-screening them a later time. Hopefully, the fines will raise awareness of the issue for future flights.

I pretty much always arrive at CLT around midnight. At that time I don't see any TSOs in the airport, the airport LEOs man the exit since no one is allowed in at that time. I guess each airport may be different, but I agree that TSA had minimal to no part in this.

If we want TSA to stand up and admit when it's wrong, we ought to encourage it to stand up and admit when it's right, too.

No need to encourage them. They do that well enough on their own. It's the former that they refuse encouragement on.