Originally Posted by
FlyJSH
Health and safety issues are one thing, but assuming no one is a diabetic who packed their medication in their checked bags, you want us to just divert at the first sign of trouble?
So if given the chance to hold for a couple of hours or diverting to an airport where I may not be able to get the pax off the aircraft, I should take the diversion? Also, if I hold, I may be able to get the pax to their destination rather than putting them in some crappy outstation, you say I should opt for the outstation?
In my tiny little world, holding two hours may mean I get the pax to a hub. Diverting could mean I put them in an outstation that is 100 miles from the hub, but the way ATC works, could mean an additional several hours waiting for a departure clearance (the mainline would rather use a slot for a 73 than a Saab). Do you like the idea of overnighting it Armpit, Arkansas and losing a day off your trip rather than taking a hold?
So, oh wise one, you tell me what I am supposed to do.
But that's the whole issue, the support isn't there. I didn't say "divert at the first sign of trouble", I said holding for hours with additional complications (no food, bathrooms, diabetics, etc), whether it's in the air or on the ground. When a px buys a ticket, it's a contract, the company should deliver on that contract, or do the best they can and try to make up the difference. Holding on the ground for hours is just not acceptable. I'm glad the FAA is stepping in, and I don't care if some airlines get their toes stepped on. If the airline business model isn't flexible enough in terms of profit and operations to return to the gate or compensate passengers, someone needs to step in. It's cliche now, but at some point corporations no longer serve the public, they only function to serve their stockholders, which I think is a fundamental difference between corporations and non-incorporated businesses. So it goes back to what I said earlier, "if you can't do the right thing, someone has to step in and make you do it". If this raises ticket prices and drives away business, so be it, because we were operating under false pretenses before in terms of the actual cost of operating an airline.
Who's going to be the crew that declares an emergency, because they have passengers couped up for 3+hrs on the ground with no services? Who's going to be the first passenger to open up that emergency exit in the same situation? 3hrs may not be all that bad, compared to some of the worst occurances of this, but that's what we are trying to prevent hopefully. Everyone is going to have to work together on this, FAA, government, airlines, public, etc, but unless there's actually some sort of force pushing this to happen, I doubt it would improve on it's own.