[PHL]

Picked this up on flyertalk.com. Frankly, the fine should have been higher ($140,000). But it's so like Tempe to neither admit or deny wrongdoing and just pay the hush money to make it go away. I can think of a lot of places $140K could help out around the system....


Order 2008-12-13
OST-2008-0031 - Consent Orders

Issued and Served December 23, 2008

This Consent Order concerns violations by US Airways, Inc. of the Department’s oversales rule, 14 CFR Part 250, and the statutory prohibition against unfair and deceptive practices, 49 U.S.C. § 41712. The violations stem from the carrier’s failure 1) to solicit volunteers before involuntarily denying boarding to passengers on oversold flights, 2) to furnish the required written notice to passengers who were denied boarding (“bumped”) involuntarily, and 3) to provide in a timely manner bumped passengers with the appropriate amount and type of denied boarding compensation. The order assesses US Airways a civil penalty of $140,000.

A recent review of US Airways’ passenger complaint records from July 2007 to July 2008 conducted by the Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings and of passenger complaints involving US Airways during the same period sent directly to the Enforcement Office revealed numerous instances in which the carrier bumped passengers, but did not follow one or more of the provisions of 14 CFR Part 250.

In mitigation, US Airways states that it did ultimately compensate all of the passengers identified by the Department. In addition, US Airways states that it has revamped its applicable training program to ensure that all airport staff are current on all Part 250 rules. US Airways is also reexamining its policies and procedures relating to overbooking to ensure a smoother process at the airport when it becomes necessary to seek volunteers or deny boarding.

In order to avoid litigation and without admitting or denying the violations described above, US Airways, Inc., agrees to the issuance of this order to cease and desist from future violations of 14 CFR Part 250 and 49 U.S.C. § 41712. US Airways, Inc., further agrees to the assessment of $140,000 in compromise of potential civil penalties otherwise assessable against it. The Enforcement Office believes that this compromise assessment is appropriate in view of the nature and extent of the violations in question, serves the public interest, and provides a strong incentive to all airlines to comply with the Department’s denied boarding regulation.

[Dog Wonder]

PHL, on Dec 23 2008, 08:51 PM, said:

US Airways states that it has revamped its applicable training program to ensure that all airport staff are current on all Part 250 rules.

Any, or all, airport staff.

Please define Part 250.

Thank you.

[hp_fa]

Here.

[Dog Wonder]

hp_fa, on Dec 23 2008, 11:34 PM, said:

Here.

All airport staff have been trained to go to that link?

[tadjr]

Part of the new process is any time someone is placed on the HKN list (holding confirmed needing seats) they are to get a copy of the Take Flight booklet which outlines volunteer and invol compensation. They are supposed to be reprogramming the kiosks to advise customers on the list to ask an agent for the booklet as well.

[HP2USFA]

Listen... every airline on this board has been fined by the DOT for violating this rule. Which is why there's now 'contracts' on the ticket jackets.

To say that this proves anything other than some misinformed GA/GS's dropped the ball is stretching at best.

There is/was/never will be a directive from the SandCastle to violate any DOT regulation.

I always wondered what happened to those conspiracy folks when they shut down the X-Files chat boards...

[tadjr]

HP2USFA, on Dec 25 2008, 03:39 AM, said:

Which is why there's now 'contracts' on the ticket jackets.

Which is something we havent had in over 6 months. We no longer use/offer them.
But we do have copies of the COC available if someone asks for one.

[hp_fa]

HP2USFA, on Dec 25 2008, 02:39 AM, said:

Listen... every airline on this board has been fined by the DOT for violating this rule. Which is why there's now 'contracts' on the ticket jackets.

Last I knew the Contract of Carriage had been eliminated from the boarding jackets as a cost cutting move.

HP2USFA, on Dec 25 2008, 02:39 AM, said:

To say that this proves anything other than some misinformed GA/GS's dropped the ball is stretching at best.

There is/was/never will be a directive from the SandCastle to violate any DOT regulation.

The misinformed GA's and GS's are a byproduct of how US conducts business. Keeping wages ridiculously low and allowing life to be miserable for the GA's causes turnover, which limits the amount of institutional knowledge that they have for dealing with situations.

Oversold flight, to the point of needing to involuntarily deny boarding to paid customers, is one of the most stressful part of the GA's job. While the plane closes the door and proceeds on its merry way, the GA's are dealing with folks who are quite upset watching the plane leave, who are often irrational and screaming and either dealing with the issues at the gate or sending them to the customer assistance counter since the GA's either have a plane of the ground needing the gate or need to be at another gate for another flight.