Attention All Passengers (17 page)

For 2012, the current dance card for the airline industry entails seven large airlines outsourcing flying to twenty-two regional carriers (prior to the melding of the recently merged United and Continental; all the details are provided in Appendix A). But it's worth noting that Delta and United partner with eight different regional airlines each, while US Airways partners with nine regionals.

Confused yet? Little wonder that William Swelbar, the MIT research engineer who analyzes the aviation industry, maintains that the next wave of consolidation in the airline business will take place among the regionals: “I believe we're at a point where there are too many.” So to further muddle matters, imagine how confusing it is for the regional airlines themselves, since in many cases they are operating for companies that compete with each other, and sometimes they compete with themselves. Chautauqua, to cite just one example, partners with five mainline carriers: American, Continental, Delta, US Airways, and sister company Frontier. (A complete breakdown is provided in Appendix B.)

Of course, all this is subject to change, since these partnerships are struck—and struck down—on a constant basis. In some cases, regionals are owned by major airlines and/or their parent companies. US Airways Group owns Piedmont and PSA, while Alaska Air Group owns Horizon Air. And AMR, American's parent, also owns American Eagle but not its AmericanConnection partner, Chautauqua. On the other hand, quite a few regional carriers are sister companies; Pinnacle Airlines Corp. owns Colgan, Mesaba, and Pinnacle. And Republic Airways Holdings, which owns Frontier, also owns Chautauqua, Republic Airlines, and Shuttle America. I wish I were clever enough to have fabricated this, but it's all true.

What's become clear is that even the most frequent of flyers do not understand all these complexities. And make no mistake: there are real and tangible differences between mainline airlines and regional airlines, and real and tangible concerns over their growing presence in American aviation. These concerns include sales transparency issues that mask duplicity to consumers; service and performance standards that imply a bait-and-switch; and onboard comfort and amenities that are not up to par. What's more, gates and airports and skies are being clogged by smaller airplanes, and those planes are producing more carbon emissions. Finally, industry experts note there are two levels of safety among mainlines and regionals, not one as the FAA maintains.

Transparency: What Airline Did I Just Buy a Ticket On?

Commuter carriers certainly have their detractors, but they could not have a stronger advocate than Roger Cohen, president of the Regional Airline Association. In fact, I found myself laughing at the skill he displays in finessing every widely perceived drawback into an advantage. Here are some highlights from my lengthy conversation with him comparing regional airlines to their major airline partners:

• Don't regionals offer fewer onboard amenities? “Regionals and mainline carriers have morphed together now that there are no meals.”

• Aren't the cabins smaller? “That provides easier access. And there are no middle seats.”

• But the overhead bins are smaller, too? “Checking a bag planeside is better for passengers.”

• What about boarding the airplane on the ramp, outside in the elements? “Not having a jet bridge is a lot faster.”

And yet . . . even Cohen concedes: “It may not be identical in all respects.”

But no one can disagree with the statistics he proudly touts. The FAA's 2011 forecast projects passenger enplanements on regional airlines to rise from 170 million passengers in 2011 to 296 million passengers by 2031; during this same period the nation's regional fleet is expected to increase from 1,771 to 2,764 airplanes. Today even the most veteran aviation professionals are shocked to learn that 53 out of every 100 commercial flight departures in America are operated by regional partners. That's a staggering statistic, and by all estimates the number will continue to grow.

In fact, analysts estimate that in the twenty years to come, the only substantial growth in the U.S. aviation market will occur within the regional sector. Yet even these stats don't quite tell the story, because the United States is a “mature” market and this alleged growth actually just reflects a shell game wherein regionals are mostly poaching passengers from mainline airlines. As for keeping pace with such expansion, Cohen said, “One thing our [regional airline] members have demonstrated is an ability to adapt almost instantaneously.”

That's a hard point to argue, considering that Chautauqua simultaneously operates on behalf of five different mainline airlines. It's worth noting that sometimes regionals serve major carriers without branding themselves as the mainline partner; for example, Gulfstream International Airlines operates for Continental Connection, but the aircraft's livery does not reflect the colors and logos of Continental. However, in most cases the partner's airplanes are painted to reflect the mainline carrier, which often adds to the confusion.

I told Cohen about my experiences on the FAAC, and how I advocated for greater transparency so that consumers will always be aware of the airlines they are booking. He replied that he considers transparency a fait acompli: “It couldn't be more transparent. You'd have to be blind or deaf to not know it.” Yet in the context of how much commuter aircraft have improved in recent years, he also stated: “It's very rare that someone even knows they're on a regional aircraft these days.” Seems like a textbook case of having and eating your cake: there is full transparency, and it's so effective that passengers don't even realize when they're flying a regional.

Over time I raised the transparency issue with dozens of experts, and I was struck by the equally strong opinions on both sides of the argument. When I told MIT's Swelbar about the many readers of
Consumer Reports
who write about confusion over regional codesharing, he responded, “I'm totally surprised by that. I'm struck that people are not aware. The more experienced traveler knows it.” It is a critical enough issue that in October 2010 the NTSB held a symposium on “Airline Codesharing Arrangements and Their Role in Aviation Safety.” Even so, Tom Haueter, the NTSB's director of the Office of Aviation Safety, maintains there should be no consumer perplexity: “They're all [Federal Aviation Regulations] Part 121 carriers. I get a little frustrated. Usually it's not totally secret. Do you really think American Airlines is operating such a small aircraft? There's always a little word there on the ticket. It's pretty clear.”

Like so much else about commercial aviation, it's apparent there's a disconnect between how industry experts view the airlines and how passengers view the airlines. I came to agree with analyst Bob Mann, who says the issue is under the radar because that's how airlines have marketed regional partnerships.
1
Millions of American passengers have no idea what carrier they are booking when they buy a ticket on a regional.

The DOT Inspector General's Office has been fighting for more detailed safety reporting from regional airlines in the wake of the Buffalo crash, and a source told me that some regional airlines don't have the resources to do this, so their mainline partners or the FAA must assist. He also thinks that in many cases regional aircraft livery—fuselage paint jobs—are deceptively reminiscent of the major carriers' livery.

Michael Levine, the law professor who was a senior executive at several U.S. airlines, sums it up: “I'm for identifying the operator. If Delta wants to brand it, then Delta needs to be responsible for how well it is operated. But Delta should be permitted to brand it and shouldn't have to operate it.” Unfortunately, I don't think this is enough. If mainline carriers are selling tickets on regionals, they should be responsible for ensuring the safety of these operations.

Further complicating matters is that, yes, there are rules in place for revealing the operators of regional carriers when consumers book such flights. But such rules are often violated. Proof came in December 2010, when the Families of Flight 3407 issued a statement calling for full disclosure of every regional carrier operating flight segments on a given itinerary. This followed a report in the
Buffalo News
that numerous online ticket sites—Cheapair, Expedia, Kayak, Priceline, Travelocity, and TripAdvisor—as well as USAirways.com make it “difficult if not impossible for its customers to determine this information.”
2

That's why we at Consumers Union were happy to report in January 2011, one month after we submitted our final recommendations to the FAAC, that the DOT announced a new ruling that requires airlines and other online ticket sellers to disclose codesharing agreements on the same travel booking screens, next to all itineraries. DOT secretary LaHood stated: “When passengers buy an airline ticket, they have the right to know which airline will be operating their flight. For years we've required airlines to inform consumers about codesharing arrangements, and we'll be monitoring the industry closely to make sure they comply with the provisions of the new legislation.”

But despite these best efforts, confusion over regional codesharing still reigns in some quarters. And it's not helped by the DOT itself, or its FAA subsidiary. The record for an FAAC meeting in October 2010 in Denver reflects my concerns: “Mr. McGee stated that a similar issue exists with FAA safety statistics. He noted that family members of passengers killed in accidents involving regional operators flying on behalf of legacy carriers have taken offense at FAA and DOT statements that there have been no fatal major air carrier accidents in the United States since 2001.”

Karen Eckert calls such announcements “wordsmithing” and says, “It's meant to detract and distract from the business that needs to be done. You see, even the next [regional] accident will take fifty lives and not three hundred and fifty lives, so they've got cover. It's insured.”

Service and Performance Lag Behind the Big Airlines

For those who believe regional airlines offer worse service than mainlines, empirical evidence confirms that's not a misconception. An examination of DOT statistics for 2010 shows that in nearly all the major service categories, regional airlines performed worse than their mainline counterparts, and often performed much worse.

For example, in on-time performance, most regionals were in the second tier, and Comair ranked dead last with an on-time rate of just 73.1 percent; four of the top five carriers for canceling flights were regionals as well. As for mishandling baggage, regionals filled the seven lowest spots in the rankings of the eighteen largest airlines. American Eagle, which ranked eighteenth, had a mishandled baggage rate more than four times greater than top-ranked AirTran. And when it came to involuntarily bumping passengers, regionals once again occupied the bottom of the rankings, with Mesa and American Eagle far outpacing the remaining sixteen carriers in this category. The regionals fared better only in the consumer complaints category, with most ranking near the top, above their mainline partners. Ironically, it's not clear if this is due in part to complaints being filed against mainlines
because
of their regional partners.

Pat Friend of the Association of Flight Attendants, my fellow FAAC member, says regional flying is all about economics: “They call it rightsizing. Nothing stops [mainlines] from buying small planes—but they don't do that.” On the very week of the terrorist attacks in September 2001, airline labor leaders were addressing the salary differential—what they termed “bridging the gap”—between legacy carriers and their regional partners. Friend adds, “That still is our goal, to bridge this gap. Our argument is that the job is the same regardless of the size of the airplane.” In fact, for flight attendants working regional routes, the job can be even tougher, since only a single attendant is often assigned to such small aircraft, and taller crew members are forced to slouch.

Aviation law professor Paul Dempsey asserts that all this workplace feuding is ultimately felt by passengers and denigrates the product, as passengers are being funneled into smaller and smaller aircraft. Or as columnist Joe Brancatelli puts it, “If you have to fly a route with fifty-seat airplanes then you're unprofitable. You're diluting your brand.”

Onboard Comfort and Amenities Don't Measure Up

Back in chapter 1, Jami Counter of TripAdvisor used SeatGuru.com standards to analyze airline seating comfort, but I also asked him how rankings of airline seating comfort extend to regional carriers. He immediately responded: “Everything I've just said does not apply.” In fact, Counter acknowledged the regional airline product is “inferior” to its mainline counterpart: “I hate to say it, but the airlines have been able to game the system. They've glossed over it from a marketing perspective.”

Strong words from an airline seating expert. But whether it's seats that are not as wide or seats that offer much less legroom or cabins that require passengers of average height to stoop, there's no denying that mainline airplane cabins and regional airplane cabins are apples and oranges—or apples and grapes. On one of Alaska Airlines' commuter partners, pitch is down to just 29 inches and the width is only 17 inches, woefully inadequate for the average American butt.

There's also the issue of smaller or even nonexistent overhead bins, so even carry-on baggage must be checked at the gate, thereby increasing the chances of mishandling and delaying the total flight experience. As noted, regionals often require outside boarding on portable stairs, even in wet and oppressive weather of all kinds. Smaller planes are also much noisier, and for those subject to airsickness, much more susceptible to turbulence as well. In fact, many regional aircraft are not equipped to fly above bad weather the way mainline jets often do. A SAAB 340 or deHavilland Dash-8, both operated by US Airways Express, provide bumpier rides than even the smallest of jets.