Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, March 28, 2008
Mike Gallagher :: Townhall.com Columnist
So Sue Me
by Mike Gallagher
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


I suppose I’m the only person in America who isn’t fawning over Kate Hanni, the godmother of the airline “passenger’s bill of rights” movement.

When I interviewed her on my radio show yesterday to get her reaction to a court ruling striking down her attempts to mandate a state law that gives passengers guaranteed water, food, and working toilets in the event of a lengthy delay, it didn’t really go very well. I guess she thought I would share her frustration that her efforts were overturned by the court.

She seemed quite surprised that I didn’t. Because I think an effort to create a state law to form a passenger’s bill of rights on an airplane is a terrible idea.

Allow me to explain why.

Slowly but surely, there is a mindset developing in our country that if life deals us an unexpected challenge or obstacle, somebody better pay. We are an impatient society that demands instant gratification. And if a business doesn’t make something right for us, then we’d better by-God get the government to do so. Attorneys circle like vultures, waiting for the next big payday.

Just this week it was announced that Virginia Tech University is offering $100,000 to each of the families of those tragic souls who were slaughtered in the Virginia Tech massacre in an effort to thwart any and all lawsuits that the families might file against the school or the state of Virginia.

Think about that for a moment: it is so inevitable that families of victims killed by a madman are going to sue the deep-pocketed state or university that they have to offer a pre-emptive payment.

Why in the world should the state of Virginia be financially responsible for the actions of a lone nut with a gun?

That’s easy. Because our tort reform-challenged culture allowed it to happen. Some evil terrorists kill thousands on 9/11 and Congress creates a multi-billion dollar victims compensation fund, again, so the surviving family members won’t sue anybody.

The airline passenger’s bill of rights has the same undercurrent of entitlement. Kate Hanni was once a stranded passenger who was so irate about her experience that she began this movement.

And it sure sounds great, doesn’t it? Who could object to passengers stuck on an airplane being guaranteed water or working toilets? All of us who have ever been delayed by bad weather or a back-up can appreciate the effort.

But if one looks at the big picture with a little bit of logic, one sees the perils of expecting the government to cure all that ails us. In the case of the airline passenger bill of rights, the courts recognized that if one particular state can mandate things like drinking water and peanuts on a stranded airplane, other states can jump in and demand a certain brand of beverage or a sodium-free diet.

Besides, air travel service is the purview of the federal government, not individual states.

But since this is such an emotionally-charged topic, it’ll probably just be a matter of time before some grandstanding, pandering politician on the federal level will hop on this bandwagon and we’ll be stuck with yet another set of federal laws that regulate how many quarts of water we’re guaranteed on a stranded airplane.

Incidentally, applying common sense to this issue would lead us to remember that flight attendants, pilots and co-pilots don’t want to be stuck in the plane any more than the passengers do. And the airlines don’t make any money with a plane stuck on a runway for hours. They make money in the air.

But stuff happens. Things go wrong. Thunderstorms create back-ups, giant jets can’t easily maneuver in and out of a gate like we park our car in the garage. People expect the airlines to get us from point a to point b, even in challenging conditions.

And a so-called passengers bill of rights isn’t going to change any of that.

This is the typical liberal approach to doing things.

Don’t believe me? Let me take you back to the Kate Hanni radio interview this week on my show. One of the first things the architect of the passengers bill of rights movement said to me was that she was encouraged early on by the court deliberations because a “good liberal judge” was asking all the right questions. Surprised, I asked her, “You mean as opposed to all the other evil conservative judges?” “Exactly!” she replied.

The interview went downhill from there.

I later read that Kate makes her home in the California wine country. I can almost picture her sipping a glass of red wine, eating some expensive French cheese, and trying to figure out new ways to create more layers of state and federal government bureaucracy that would keep us knee deep in bottles of Perrier and Ritz crackers on a Boeing 757.

I don’t like the idea of a single person being stuck on an airplane any more than Kate Hanni does. I truly understand the concerns about pregnant women or elderly people who feel quite literally imprisoned on a delayed flight sitting on the tarmac. I have a son who is a diabetic and the idea of him being without insulin, food or water for hours terrifies me.

That’s why his mother and I always remind him to bring plenty of snacks and bottled water with him on every flight he takes, as well as his insulin. Just like a seasoned motorist in winter conditions knows to have sand, a shovel and other life-saving items in the trunk, we all need to go to the airport expecting the best but preparing for the worst.

Most importantly, no airline in the United States should be forced by more laws to do what they should be doing in the first place.

You want a guarantee that nothing will go wrong during your next flight?

Take a bus.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Mike Gallagher is a nationally syndicated radio host, Fox News Channel contributor and guest host and author of Surrounded by Idiots: Fighting Liberal Lunacy in America.

Be the first to read Mike Gallagher's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Two or three quibbles here
1) About the Virginia Tech pay-out, they
probably got their idea from the U.S. Government
who gave the 9/11 victims over a $1,000,000. a
piece if I remember correctly. I think that not
all of it came from the government. I know that I, along, with thousands of others donated
money to them. But that may have been on top of
what the government gave. I was not happy when
I found out that there was a government pay-out,
and even less so when I learned of how poorly
the guys who went over to Iraq were treated in
many instances.

2) "the idea of him being without insulin"....that
should be "his" (not him). See, Phyllis Schaffley, the world does need English majors,
in spite of what you say.

3) I am not sure what the lawsuit with the
airlines is truly all about, if it is what you
say it is or if it is what I think is a perfectly
legitimate reason to be darned angry. Why does
a person have to stay on the airplane if it
isn't going anywhere. I have sat on a plane from
7:00 p.m. till 3:00 a.m. (the longest period of
time) and the only reason I can figure out
why is that if I had left the plane I might have
used another airlines. And golly gee, that is
exactly right. But I was not allowed to make that decision.

4) So maybe I will sue you. Do you make a lot
of money? I want to make it worth my while.

Gallagher
Conservatives should be ashamed of Gallagher. He's a world class fool.

You imagine your guest Kate drinking red wine and expensive cheese?

What garbage.

You know what, I imagine you sitting there, shinning your gun, withholding your man-love desires, drinking a Pabst, complaining about "young people these days," with a bible on your lap. See? Stereotyping is fun.

Airlines have too much power
Many times airlines load passengers into the plane knowing full well that there will be a long delay in the runway. This is cruel and unusual punishment. There should be a law that if the passengers wait longer than 30 minutes and the airline can't guarantee a departure in the next 10 minutes then passengers can exit the plane. Passengers do not have to be docked into a specific landing position to leave the plane, it can be treated just like an emergency would be and exit doors used to allow passengers to exit. There are times passengers have been held captive for up to 4hrs! And this is not unusual, infact airlines are arrogant about it. Here is where it gets worse, if a passenger wants to exit after boarding - it becomes a federal case. Go figure! There is no reason for airlines to keep people seated on the plane when it's an act of God like weather - let them off.

Mike, while I will generally agree
that it is already too easy to sue someone over minor quiblles and collect huge bucks, I will heartily disagree on the Va Tech issue.

When Va Tech prohibited concealed carry on campus in a State which allowed concealed carry they assumed ALL responsibility for protecting the students. From what I saw on the news reports about unarmed guards and lax security I would say that they not only failed in that responsibiity but they were borderline criminally negligent.

So to the unfortunate parents of the victims I say, sue away.

All posters
All posters who echoed Kate Hanni in some form and voiced "there ought to be a law" and encouraged lawsuits make Mike Gallagher's point. Of course, common sense says passengers shouldn't be forced to stay on planes, etc., etc., but lawsuits to prevent such stupidity only encourages trial lawyers to troll for more business. The marketplace will force airlines to correct such stupidity long before lawsuits correct it. Liberals always want to have government correct inequities; conservatives realize the marketplace corrects them without giving government more power.

Some homespun logic
I agree we have become a nation of victims. Someone is responsible for everything and no one wants to be responsible for themselves. Grow up people!! Stuff happens! Planes fail sometimes with catastophic results despite following all the maintenance rules and guidelines. Stuff breaks. The weather sux sometimes.

Doctors sometimes make mistakes despite years of training. You can't be 100% perfect all the time. Sometimes people die even if the doctor made no mistake. Suing to hold someone responsible when there really is no negligence just makes things more expensive and creates feeling of entitlement.

If you want the airlines to not put you on the tarmac for three hours, don't fly! If enough people quit flying, the airlines would make changes to attract you, to entice you back. They would bring the luxury back. They would bring the comfort and convenience back. Don't whine about it while continuing to give the airline your money. Fly a different airline or don't fly at all.

Cuts Both Ways
I don’t necessarily agree with the slippery slope argument. I think Ms. Hanni does have a point. Airlines have the backing of federal power to keep you sitting on the tarmac for as long as they like…regardless of the situation. Don’t think so? Try getting off one after push-back.

There should be a mechanism in place that forces the airlines to limit the confined wait to a reasonable period. Federal laws should cut both ways.

Finally, this was unnecessary: “I later read that Kate makes her home in the California wine country. I can almost picture her sipping a glass of red wine, eating some expensive French cheese, and trying to figure out new ways to create more layers of state and federal government bureaucracy that would keep us knee deep in bottles of Perrier and Ritz crackers on a Boeing 757.”

It lends nothing to your argument and allows some to avoid the issue and discredit you.

A little communication...
...on the part of the airlines would go a long way to alleviate these problems.To spend hours on a tarmac without any explanation of why AND an estimate of time of departure is uncalled for.That also requires the tower and maintenance personnel keeping the crew informed.

Otherwise,drive your car where you can make most of the decisions.

Not Government Meddling
If the airlines cannot develop its own plans for correcting serious delays let them go to hades. Perhaps things will change shortly. The Chinese have now gotten an airline and the Japs have produced an airliner. According to Toyota and Honda histories, the US companies will not be able to compete and US travelers will no longer have to rely on the whacko US airlines. And the Chinese airline, it will not get off the ground due to the amount of lead in the plane. And do not blame the delays on weather, FAA, and other government meddling. Weather has not changed for decades, notwithstanding the Owlgore syndrome. The FAA is the same old government entity that I would like to go away, along with Education, Homeland, and dozens of other meddlers.

ECON CONS CAN GO BEYOND PALE TOO
Yeah Mike, I'd like to sue you...if only we had a Conservative Ideology Court to decide disputes between the Social, Economic and Nat'l Defense conservatives.

I'm a conservative Republican and political historian since 1964. We, conservatives sometimes forget that our primary beliefs are rooted in the individual's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That right should only be curtailed when its exercise injures the exercise of that right by others.

Our belief in Capitalism is based upon the same freedom since it fosters competition which delivers more products, at cheaper prices, to more consumers. 100 years ago, our great Republican President, Teddy Roosevelt, argued unrestrained Capitalism leads to the destruction of the free market by trusts and monopolies. The result was the adoption of anti-trust laws which protect the free market by probhibiting trusts and monopolies from despotic control over the market place.

The airline industry today consists of a handful of companies that reduce services, raise prices and stifle competition to the detriment of passengers. The only control over airlines is exercised by the oil cartel which was exempted from Teddy Roosevelt's 100 year old anti-trust laws by Congress in the 1990s.

We conservatives should champion an individual's right to not be denied food, water and toilets for an unreasonable length of time. Instead, you argue that we should abdicate that duty to Napa valley wine drinking, brie eating socialists.

Gallagher, you and I are both a couple of Irish Micks. It is our ancestral heritage to defend the little guy against ALL bullies, be they government or corporate. As conservatives that heritage becomes a sworn duty.

John McNeal
Riverside, IL


The Great Patriot: Thanks for sharing!
.

skywalker81
"Doctors sometimes make mistakes despite years of training. You can't be 100% perfect all the time. Sometimes people die even if the doctor made no mistake."

I seldom go to the doctor these days without being reminded of how far health care standards have fallen. I know there is a lot of bureaucracy that is responsible for this, but still…doctors run people thru their offices like an auto parts assembly line in a factory. I have told my doctor about symptoms I was having only to have him not hear me and then later say “Oh, I misunderstood” No. He did not misunderstand. He was not listening. I am VERY clear when communicating about my health.

I have also had my doctor dismiss concerns that I have had saying “Well, maybe we should leave that until another time.” Translated,” I don’t want to answer questions or deal with concerns on multiple issues because I won’t make as much money. Make another appointment so I can charge you again.”

I have no doubt that doctors deserve a lot of the law suites brought against them.

Sarah writes: "Airlines have too much

power"

Actually, pretty much EVERYTHING Sarah wrote is wrong!

Once an aircraft is out of the designated gate area, it is turned over to the FAA... the guys in the big tower.

At that point, the pilot may request anything, such as permission to return to the gate, but it's up the the FAA whether or not the request is granted.


Virgina Assumed Responsibility
Virginia Tech and the Commonwealth of Virginia owe the victims and families of the shooting a settlement -- a much larger settlement than being offered -- because they refused to permit concealed carry on campus.

By this unjust and unconstitutional violation of the students' Second Amendment rights the state and college assumed the the responsibility and the duty to protect the safety of those to whom they denied the ability to protect themselves.

Tort reform
Compensitory damage rightly should be awarded to the plaintiff (if proven as the damaged party). If lawyers get a share from the plaintiff, that's their business.

Punitive damage award (often completely disproportionate to the actual provable damage) should go to the treasury to pay down the deficit. Lawyers should have no finger in the pie. After all we are "punishing" the fat cat evil defendants (= companies or anyone with deep pocket) for the good of society in order to set an example. So plaintiff and lawyers should be left out of the settlement.

Perhaps it will help turn back the "all lawsuits all the time mentality" we are being peddled by the lawyers.

Legal immigrant

The problem is
that once you board a plane you are, in effect, a prisoner of the airline, the FAA and Homeland Security. At a bare minimum you should be afforded the right to free yourself of the airplane and attempt to make other travel arrangements. When you buy a ticket for a flight you should have a reasonable expectation that the flight will depart within a reasonable amount of time from the scheduled departure time. If it doesn't, you should be able to back out of the contract. If you order a pizza at 5:00PM and it arrives in time for breakfast are you going to pay for it?

A little common sense and understanding that the consumer should be allowed to vote with his feet. Nine hours is an absurd amount of time to keep people cooling their heels without information, nor the ability to walk out without risking being tackled, shackled and hauled off to jail.


immigrant
No, that is not the answer. The answer is that in civil law and tort cases there should be NO PUNATIVE damages.

If a degendent needs "punishing" it should go to criminal court. Punative damages are just one more case where the lawyers in congress have perverted the law in this country and the liberal SCOTUS has allowed them to get away with it.

VTech
The administration handled that situation in a most negligent manner.

They have ample reason to fear lawsuits.

Federal and state lawmakers need to immediately scrape any law that denys a citizen the right to carry a gun. All there massacres are committed in gun free zones, school and malls.

I notice now there are secutity people in malls in Texas b ut they are not armed. What good would they be if some nut starts shooting besides calling the police who would show up about the time the nut ran out of bullets and killed himself.

In my opinion VTech has a lot of liability.

Personal responsibility?
Except for Skywalker, sounds like this nation is addicted to victimhood...maybe this nation needs to adopt a 12 Step Programs for recovering victims.

I'm going to keep writing this on every column this morning in an abiding faith that all will take an open mind to consider the following -

Deal with life on life's terms.

Booker T. Washington wrote that man is best measured not by his position attained in life, but by the obstacles he overcomes.

Ta
Nancy

-Kilroy makes a good point...

"When you buy a ticket for a flight you should have a reasonable expectation that the flight will depart within a reasonable amount of time from the scheduled departure time."

I don't think anyone argues that point...

While I'm pretty much opposed to government interference or control over a lot of things, the airline industry is, to my mind, an exception, but not the way Ms. Hanni would like.

It "used to be" that all airlines had to apply to the FAA to operate in/out of any airport, and even the number of flights and arrival/departure times.

While there have always, and will always be delays for any number of reasons, congestion was not an issue, and certainly not the serious issue it is today.

Gallagher is also right in that a "Passenger Bill of Rights" is not the way to go, and "Besides, air travel service is the purview of the federal government, not individual states."

Ms. Hanni didn't do her homework!



Patronize the airline
that handles delays best. This is an opportunity for savvy carriers to make themselves shine, not a call for gov't intervention.

For skywalker81
On the nail!

For oldsocialworker--also weeds out the carriers who are unsavvy (such as the deservedly-defunct Pan-Am).

Mike, you are a buffoon
I agree with Vic, Mother of 4 and any others who think the VT 'offering' is ridiculous for many reasons.
First the loss of a family member can NEVER be compensated for, BUT a larger good could come from the lawsuits that are bound to be filed on behalf of the families.

- When the Universities around the country 'erected' these so-called "gun free zones" they infringed (IMO) on the law abiding citizen to exercise his 2nd Amendment Rights (the current DC case being deliberated by the Supreme Court may settle it but if not VT might).
- In creating the "gun free zone" and after much evidence from other VT-like incidents, by not rescinding the directive the University was knowingly putting ALL of their students, faculty and, employees at risk. In essence their policy actually created a "killing field" for any would-be shooter.
Someone has to challenge this idiocy!

W/O=

All
While I commented earlier on the VA Tech issue saying that I believed that they were and should be liable for damages it was not my intent to say the same thing about the airlines. The situations are not the same.

The last time I flew it was a round trip from South Carolina to Pittsburg, PA (Monroeville) and back. The trip to Pittsburg wasn't too bad taking about 12 hours total. The trip back was awful. It took 14 hours to get back and this was before 9-11. Other friends at work had made the same trip by car in 12 hours.

I can imagine now with all of the other headaches in security and further reductions in the number of flights that that same trip will include some "tarmac sitting" time and it would take 16 hours. The point of all of this is that making this trip via aircraft is no longer the optimal way to do it.

If enough businesses and people start putting that together and driving the airlines will either fix the problems or go out of business. There is no need for civil suit.

That is if the government doesn't bail them out as well.

AND
As for airlines...it is as Anne says (I paraphrase)
- Once a plane pulls away from the gate it is considered an 'on-time' departure...great for advertising but murder on the passengers who now are subject to sitting on the tarmac sometimes for hours without a means of re-dress.

Perhaps a 'wheels-up' will dissuade airlines from pushing planes away from the gate in bad weather for instance just to be able to use an advertising tag line.
AND maybe if passengers who were subjected to such delays (for no GOOD reason) were refunded something like 50% of their fare this would either cease or at the very least drop off dramatically WITHOUT the lawsuit mentality kicking in.

W/O=

The Latest
Looney Lawsuit & jury award came just this week against Starbucks when the "barista's(?)" were given a mega-million dollar award for the crime of having their 'supervisors' (who also POUR COFFEE) partake in the 'community tips.

Now a trial lawyer in Massachusetts has jumped on THAT gravy train and filed suit on the same grounds there!
I am waiting to see the outcome of this because in Massachusetts there is a law on the books that forbids anyone earning more than minimum wage to accept tips...
AND I believe the 'coffe-jerks' at Starbucks earn quite a bit above the minimum wage.
This is just another example of why we absolutely need Tort Reform...which will only happen with a Republican President and GOP majority in Congress!

W/O=

Letting passengers off the plane?
Sarah -

The reason that they don't let people off the airplanes during delays is that it would be a security nightmare. Imagine 400 people x 20 or 30 (or more) planes ADDED to the 100s of others waiting for upcoming flights in already crowded terminals... IF they were let off the plane "like an emergency" and allowed to just roam where they wanted to go, how would the airline contact them to advise them that they need to get back on the plane? What if 2 minutes after those 100s of people got off the plane, it was cleared to leave, but now they have to go find all those people, get them back on the plane, and by this time, there is another delay. Do we start all over? It's like a traffic jam... it sucks to be sitting in the middle of the interstate with 1000s of other drivers, but would you advocate everyone getting out of their cars and going to the nearest restuarant to wait for the traffic to move again? If you want guarantees and personalized service, find an airline that offers it (good luck with that) or buy your own plane.

Big Mac
Anti-trust laws are actually used more often to protect big corporations who find themselves suddenly unable to compete with younger, smaller competitors who can charge lower prices. In essence, these laws usually reduce the amount of competition in any given industry rather than increase it. Anti-trust laws are bad for the economy and bad for the country. They do not protect the market and more often than not serve to increase trusts' and monopolies' "despotic control over the market place."

There is a difference
There is a difference between being stranded on a plane and stranded in an airport. What recourse does someone have if s/he is sitting on a plane for hours other than holding airlines legally responsible? Without law, you are at the mercy of the airlines, which is what is causing the problems now. At least Kate Hanni is trying to do something about it, whereas Mike Gallagher would apparently give companies free reign. What is the problem with letting passengers off so they can go back in the airport to purchase food or use the restroom? To hold retain them on the plane against their will is tantamount to stripping them of their freedom, which is antithetic to American values. No company should be given that kind of power. The problem with not holding a company legally responsible is that a company will almost always do what is in its own best interest and not what is in the best interest of the customer.

Re: Tort reform
A jury awards punitive damages, which are then either upheld or amended by a judge. In other words, not every award is as large as the jury initially awards. Assuming not every jury member on every court case is a liberal, it is simply false to blame large punitive damages on liberals. How does one put a price on human life and suffering? Yes, accidents happen, but so does negligence. Legal action is an added incentive that ensures the effort to keep accidents, malpractice, etc. to a minimum.
Keep in mind that anyone can sue for anything, yet that does not necessarily mean the case will be allowed to proceed. Cases are sometimes thrown out by a judge for being invalid. More often than not, the cases allowed to proceed are indeed valid.

Sorry, ...
... I'm not with Gallager on the VA Tech issue, either, but for a different reason. "Stuff" like that doesn't just happen; it is CAUSED. Cho was not just "one nut with a gun." To wit:

"...was Cho taught to hate? Whatever he learned in his classes --- did it enable him to rage at his host country, to hate the students he envied so murderously? Was he subtly encouraged to aggrandize himself by destroying others? Was his pathology enabled by the PC university? Or to ask the question differently --- was Cho ever taught to respect others, to admire the good things about his host country, and to discipline himself to build a positive life?

"And THAT answer is readily available on the websites of Cho's English Department at Virginia Tech. This is a wonder world of PC weirdness. English studies at VT are a post-modern Disney World in which nihilism, moral and sexual boundary breaking, and fantasies of Marxist revolutionary violence are celebrated."

"Was Cho taught to hate?"
James Lewis
April 20, 2007
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/04/was_cho_taught_ to_hate.html

Class Action Lawsuit
The attorneys will get a multi-million dollar verdict. You the passenger will get 20 coupons to be redeemed for a beverage and peanuts on a flight sometime in the future.

Lawsuits and life
Big Mac -

I'm wondering if your argument is based on the idea that airlines ENJOY having their planes (and passengers) sitting around on the tarmac during delays? Or is it based on the idea that airlines are just big corporations who don't CARE? If it's the former, I believe you're operating from an incorrect frame of reference. If it's the later, I would tend to agree to a point, but still, the bulk of delays are due to factors more related to the inefficiency of the entire system (of which the airlines are a part, but not the only part), and not some arrogant lack of concern on their part. There are airlines who are less concerned about passenger comfort than others, but in MOST cases, they aren't the only airline in town. So competition still exists, unless, of course, most people are price-sensitive to the point that they only look at the less expensive flights, in which case caveat emptor.

M Sederoff -

Get a new doctor, your's is apparently an a**. YOU control it, just leave and he will soon find that he has plenty of time to spend with the few patients he has left.

Mother of 4 -

Bingo! VTU and the state of Virginia bought into the gun-grabbers' logic that their "ban" would apply to psycho killers. They should pay for that error in judgement.




V-tech must pay?
With the logic that V-tech should pay because they did not allow the students to carry weapons then does the same logic go for all the victims of gun crimes (or any crimes, for that matter) in Washington DC? After all it is the government who is saying they cannot have the weapons to protect themselves. Just a thought.

I Have a Grievance, The Govt. Owes Me!
What about waiting in long lines?

The next time I'm at the grocery checkout and stuck behind a little old lady who's 4 feet high with 27 different expired coupons and 87 tins of cat food on sale for buy 5 get 1 free, I expect the government to have massage therapists on hand to be there to rub my temples and shoulders, lest I go mad.

Don't have to be smart to be on radio
Mike is an affable guy, somewhat entertaining. But he proves that you don't have to be particularly knowledgeable or smart to be on the radio.

In this case, he fails to explain WHY her effort was rejected (constitutional grounds involving interstate commerce, not on merit)and he fails to make the distinction between rights and desires. He fails to acknowledge that people trapped on a plane ARE being held prisoner. If they were in a cab and the driver refused to let them out, he would be charged with unlawful imprisionment. If I had a customer in my business and locked him in, likewise. For that reason certain basic human rights have to be obsrved. Airline passengers, in lieu of being allowed to legally debark from the tarmac and walk home, should be given rights to at least minimal consideration in terms of bodily needs, comfort, and convenience.

Mike can't make this kind of distinction, as it requires an intellectual subtlety he lacks. He fails to realize that now, people will simply fly less, further destroying the very airlines he seeks to defend. He'll be defending a govn't bailout of them in a couple of years as "neccessary for commerce".

BTW, Mike himself hawks an expensive paid service that ships your luggage to your destination rather than having you check it on the airline. That's how great their service is these days. It also displays how elitist he is, as only a wealthy person could even afford to have a company drive out to their home, collect bags, drive them to a shipping facility, ship the heavy objects, pick them up in the destination city, then drive them to your hotel. It costs hundreds for a family per trip.

Yet another Republican Marie Antoinette, which is why I, after 25 years of voting Republican, am done with them. They've turned out to be everything movies depicted them as. Venal, corrupt, uncaring, self-interested.

right there with you
I hate the idea of being stuck on a plane for hours either, but agree that turning to the government anytime something bad happens is a terrible idea.

Look at how much money was thrown at New Orleans after Katrina. It's didn't solve the problems. And the city has yet to recover.

I understand that it isn't always possible to use a different airline if one treats you poorly.

However, using the power of the pocketbook is almost always better than using the sledgehammer of government. To take the analogy a little further. If you use a sledgehammer to open a pecan, you're not likely to be happy with the result.

Clark Howard was mad at this decision too. After thinking about it a bit, I'm gonna let him know I disagree and send it to "Clark Stinks".


passenger bill of rights
"And the airlines don’t make any money with a plane stuck on a runway for hours. They make money in the air. " - Mr Gallagher does not seem to know that once a plane pulls away from the gate, it is considered to be in the air by the pilots union. This is why they pull away from the gate as soon as they can even if they have to sit on the tarmac, because they have more hours "in the air". Why should passengers suffer to jack up union wages? And since the passengers cannot individually fight the union, and the airlines don't care, the passengers are left with 2 choices: Organize a national passengers political action group, or demand government action.

Lawsuits and life - cont...
immigrant -

Vic is right... punative damages are an attempt to allow private individuals the right to assess "fines". That is the purview of criminal law. Civil law exists to "make whole" the injured party, not "make rich". I am tempted by the idea of banning "percentage" fees for lawyers too (make them charge a rate, either flat or hourly), but my in-born distaste for having government involved in private contracts forbids it.

Bubba -

Right on... Notice the one thing almost ALL of these shooting sprees have in common: They END when SOMEONE kills the shooter, either the shooter or the police or someone else with a gun. More law-abiding citizens carrying guns (legally) increases the probability that the psycho won't get the chance to use his last shot on himself, and concurrently decreases the number of people shot before someone puts a stop to it.

oldsocialworker -

AMEN.

I Am Sans Pareil -

Tell me you're kidding about that Mass law regarding minimum wage and tips!!! THIS is the kind of stuff that drives me nuts! It's none of the government of Mass's BUSINESS how a restuarant handles its tips. Tipping is a matter between the customer and the server, regardless of who the server is and how much they already get paid. This is the kind of stupid stuff that happens when we let the government, which is largely composed of people who couldn't make change at a cash register, much less run a business, make laws about how businesses work.

tekende -

While I am reluctant to dismiss your comment about the ineffectiveness of anti-trust laws (I'm always open to a "government doesn't work" argument), I'd be interested to know where you came by the idea. It seems counter-intuitive.





VT is responsible
They do not alow guns on campus for students to protect themselves.

I would sue for everything they have.

Lawsuits and life - yet more
Rob Ratten -

Wrong on two accounts... as I mentioned above in regard to another post, you seem to believe that the airlines "get off" on holding passengers on the tarmac for fun. I think you would have a hard time making that case. The reason (also mentioned above, and by others) that passengers can't get off the planes have to do with security (and I mentioned a couple of other factors as well, having to do with getting them back ON the plane when it's time to go). And the other thing you're wrong about is "a company will almost always do what is in its own best interest and not what is in the best interest of the customer." which is pure balderdash. The best interest of the customer IS the best interest of the company when competition is in play, and unless you're willing to make some kind of "black helicopter" conspiracy theory that airlines get their rocks off making passengers angry, it is in this case also.

Also: "How does one put a price on human life and suffering?" does not have ANYTHING to do with punative damages. IF an entity, through negligence or malice, caused death or suffering, and we wish to PUNISH them, there are criminal laws for that purpose. The lie of punative damages in loss-of-life or injury cases is easily pointed out: simply walk up to someone and ask them how much money they would accept to allow you to kill their loved one. OBVIOUSLY, they would not give you a number, so a monetary settlement to the family is NOT punishment. It is simply part of the great American legal system lottery game, which costs US untold amounts every year, and at the same time prevents companies from doing things due to the "risk" of a lawsuit.

We do not need a bill of rights.
We have one.
If I am stuck on a plane and I can not use the toilet or get water. It my duty to walk of the plane. If some one tries to stop me that is what the second amendment is for.

Opps, I forgot we do not have that bill of rights either.

Lawsuits and life - yet more
sedonaman -

I agree, but let us be wary of taking the RESPONSIBILITY of VTU and the state of Virginia to protect its students to the point of absolving Cho from responsibility for his actions. The REASON those things are important is because it shows that VTU COULD and SHOULD have seen this coming and done something about it, NOT that it caused it to happen.benehogan -

HAHAHAHA... It would be even MORE funny if it wasn't SO true.

meloissa -

Sounds reasonable to me... if the city of Washington, DC claims that I shouldn't have a gun because it will protect me, and it doesn't, then it is liable.

Shells -

Perhaps a law mandating that the store open more check-out lanes... and if it has no more, it should build more...

Part of the problem
was explained to me by my daughter who works for UPS. Her job is to supervise the loading of planes and get it done so the plane canget off on time. She told me airlines flights buy airtime. If they can't get off the ground and to their destination within that time frame, they are cancelled and have to rebuy airtime. Seems crazy, but she is in big trouble if her planes aren't loaded on time. She hasn't missed yet.

There will be
a federal passengers'-rights law one week after all the politicians have to ride on the same public airlines on which we the people have to fly.


MrBananaGrabber
I'll give you $5 for the animation rights to Mr. Banana Grabber. :)

to all
The reason that once in a while a planefull of passengers has to endure the unendurable is really not hard to understand. In a word weather- add another acronym ATC.
Beleive me NO airline wants to subject its CUSTOMERS to such an ordeal.
What happens occasionally is that unexpected local weather gets worse than forecast - and sometimes that bad weather isn't even at the airport where many planes are stuck.
In such an event the planes trying to depart are held on the ground( not a "runway" but on taxiways or ramps.
other planes that were ready to leave the gate are held at the gate - meanwhile arriving planes can't get to the gates to unload because the taxiways are jammed with planes that left the gate to depart - but a"ground hold" prevented them from taking off.
It doen't take long before the taxiways and ramps and gates are all full and nobody can move on the airport,
Believe me - no airline wants this condition to take place- they lose untold ammounts of money through the delays at that airport and a lot more because planes and crews are out of their normal sequences and trips all down the line are then delayed or cancelled.
The FAA is inadequately staffed to handle these weather problems- they can barely handle normal traffic.
When these conditions arrise the Captains on these planes are constantly trying to remedy the situation - even by trying to taxi to a hangar, a cargo ramp - or any place that people could be let off the plane and bussed to the teminals.I spent many flights fighting with the "ground operations people" trying to find a solution. That is very selcom possible, so since noplane can move until the traffic stop is lifted everybody is stuck.
as the now depleted vacation destion.

to all part two
Whose fault is it? - well folks it's partly your fault-- passengers demand that planes operate frequently between busy city pairs so airlines schedule many flights to accomodate them. Bigger planes could operate less frequently and handle the load- but passengers want to depart when THEY want to - and smaller Metropolitan airports can't handle jumbos anyway.
Deregulation is the primary culprit - it has allowed many new airlines to operate-- many new entrants don't even own the planes they fly, the facilities they operate from, they even farm out their crew training, but who cares? the fares are now cheaper and everyone can fly. O f course nobody can make any money this way as the new entries only fly the popular destinations- and skim off the cream- while the legacy companies fly the more marginal routes.
One sure thing- no new law is going to have any seffect at all.
There are other problems -but it would take much time to cover it all.
Hope this helps

Could we outlaw talk show blowhards?
Just let one of these numbskulls get stopped for speeding or have to wait in a queue for 19 minutes or have the slightest little inconvenience enter THEIR precious little lives and we all get to hear them whine and cry about it for weeks. Federal LAW keeps you from demanding they let you off the plane. A LAW, in that case, which requires water and toilets and only in the case of delays over 2 hours or so hardly seems excessive. I want Mikie stuck next to a three hundred pound woman with diarheaa crapping in barf bags for 10 hours. Of course, Mikie has a black card ( I thought he would NEVER shut up about it ), Mikie flies first class, Mikie takes charters and, of course, Mikie tells them he is a NATIONAL TALK SHOW HOST and gets special treatment constantly. The law needs to be federal, that's the only problem with it.

Equal Protection!
Hanni's efforts are too focused. We need to expand government's influence into all aspects of our lives. What about the poor wretches that are stuck in traffic (be it caused by weather, accidents, contruction, etc.)? Being trapped on a federal highway, the must have the same rights and resources as airline passengers. The same goes for Post Office lines, voting centers, national parks and any other federal managed systems which cause delays in my daily activities. The states can then adopt parallel and more intrusive regulations in the defense of our 'right against inconvenience' for the areas they regulate. I expect my rights to not stop once I leave the confines of an airliner delayed on some runway.

oops
sorry about the typos and the unerased sentence

Ron
Then I think we should hope to keep the politicians off the flights because we do not need more government rules/laws/mandates.

~~~~~~~~
The airlines will take responsibility when it hits their pocket book. I heard said one time that the only real vote (or power) we have is with where we choose to spend our money. It really fits a lot of situations but especially this kind. When you sit on the tarmac for any amount of time it is a good idea to contact the airline, afterwards. If you/we don't tell them that we don't like something how do they know? Maybe if they are flooded with e-mail, letters, calls and complaints from every single person from every single flight delay they will get the point that it matters. If we care enough to complain then maybe they realize we care.

Nam 65 and Anne
congrats - you understand the situation -sorry if I bored you

If in 1946
government would have replaced the hundreds or thousands of taxes with a single proper tax for each level of government, we would have a first-class nation-wide system of high-speed railroads that would transport many people that don't need the speed of jets to get them where they're going and provide a more pleasant trip. This would cut down on the number of flights to a level that could be easily handled by each airport.

SoonerRed
Look at utitlities companies--power, phone, cable, etc. All subject to a gigantic litany of government policies which differ depending on where you're talking about. But most of these companies have one thing in common: they and the government (usually at the local or state level) have worked together to create an environment in which one or two companies are allowed to provide each service and competition is fiercely discouraged, if not completely outlawed.

A great current example is satellite radio. XM and Sirius have recently merged and become one corporation; to my knowledge they are now the only satellite radio provider in the country. They are currently lobbying the FCC or whatever for a similar situation to that of the utilities. They want to remain the only satellite radio provider and not deal with competition. No decision on this has been handed down yet, but the fact that they can do this at all and actually have a really good chance at succeeding is absolutely ridiculous.

for all
there is no way that planes can let passengers off a plane at other than a gate -except for a very few mobile stairs mounted on vans. but the FAA won't let that happen anyway - nor would any airline or pilot allow that as the risk is too great with all those running engines- and no communications, Beleive me if there were a way the airlines would use it

Gilroy
your comment on pilots pulling away rom the gate is nonsense- we leave when scheduled, or requested by operations to satisfy some operational need.
Pilots get paid for actual flying hourd, away from base hours, or on duty hours. Very seldom doesa that work out to actual flying time being greater.-That is with the major airlines.
As to pay - if you read the papers you know that most pilots pay has been cut in about half- and their retirement plans have dissapeared.
Doctors kill their mistakes one at a time --and their operating tables are stationary.
Would you like your next flight commanded by a dropout? that's where the industry is headed as it's much easier to earn a living in other fields and qualified candidates are going elsewhere.

So Sue Me
Agree with viruddh: The airlines tend to refer to some obscure "rule" that prevents returning passengers to the gate once the aircraft door are closed. Therein lies the real problem - instead a law that directs the airlines to provide food, drink, lapdancers, etc, why not an FAA policy that requires an aircraft to return to the gate after a set period of time on the tarmac with no end in sight....

Gee Mike
My heart is with you but my baseball-sized prostate is not. I cant imagine a torture worse than six hours in an airless airplane without access to a bathroom.
I agree that bringing the legislators and judges will make flying less affordable, and since these same regulation nazis are making driving unaffordable by refusing to understand that petroleum is the life-blood of our economy.
The other point you make, about our lawsuit-crazy society is all too true. Why did the relatives of the victims of 9/11 score such a lottery-like bonanza? It was obscene.

Solution?
The reason why people seat on the runway for hours is because we don't have enough runways.

The reason we don't have enough runways is because the cost of litigation derived from NIMBY has made building anything, anywhere, almost impossible.

America is in decline because for every new idea there are ten restraining orders.

Other countries create new infrastructure; new airports, new buidings, new roads, new swiming pools, new parks: We create lawsuits.

There is still only one big hole on the ground at the site of 9/11. No construction going, just plenty of lawsuits.

Every profession, every industry, has to play defense rather than taking risk at innovation. Every word, every decision has to be cleared by an attorney. Every facet of our life invaded, and distorted by the spectre of court action.

Even our soldiers have to clear with legal before firing.

If the USA was an organism the name for litigation would be cancer.



SoonerRed
"The lie of punative damages in loss-of-life or injury cases is easily pointed out: simply walk up to someone and ask them how much money they would accept to allow you to kill their loved one. OBVIOUSLY, they would not give you a number, so a monetary settlement to the family is NOT punishment. It is simply part of the great American legal system lottery game, which costs US untold amounts every year, and at the same time prevents companies from doing things due to the "risk" of a lawsuit."
So what was wrong with the wrongful death lawsuit against Robert Blake?

You want off the plane?
BOMB!!!


M. Gallagher
Wrong. Planes leave the gate "on-time", knowing full well that they will sit on the tarmac, sometimes for hours. They do not inform the passengers until it darn well suits them to do so. They have done nothing, individually, or as a group, to improve this. This is, mind you, an additional delay AFTER getting to the airport two hours early to have security strip apart my kids backpacks and shoes (while Mahmoud and Ahmed breeze right through). So, even though I am a small-gummint kind of person, I agree that the airlines need a reality check. As for VT- it was handled about as well as Columbine. Cho killed two people then went on the larger rampage some time later. Not only did VT remove their ability to defend themselves, their response to the first homicides (essentially no response) was criminally negligent. If it was my child, money would be no matter- I would want heads to roll, from the top dog down to everyone involved in Security. They screwed the pooch and they know it.

What's with the paranoia?
What I find so interesting about this conversation is the paranoid subtext. It's as if some of us think the airlines are out to get us. As others have pointed out, the airlines are commercial entities looking for profits. Americans have voted with their pocketpooks and, for the most part, said they want the cheapest flights no matter what. Now we have to have legislation so the airlines will provide services that we didn't want to pay for. Government, please save us from ourselves!

Ms. Hanni
I believe Ms. Hanni is a realtor. I have a long list of complaints about the realtors I've worked with, including downright dishonesty. As with the airlines, there are laws that regulate the real estate industry, but it's no guaranty against bad service. Would Ms. Hanni suggest I pursue further regulation of the industry? I think not. I just found another realtor. Ms. Hanni seems to have a lot of extra time on her hands.

passenger’s bill of rights
Mike,
I agree with you, the airliens are currently over regulated as it is. I experienced a logn lengthy delay last summer coming from Europe through Philidelphia to Phoenix Az, adn due to a thudnerstorm, the ramp at PHL was closed several tmes for safety, that left us in congested backedup ramp traffic with several other aicraft for several hours. AS a result the flight cancelled and the aircraft retruned to the gate, were other folks were inthe the similar situation. No passenger bill of rights will do anythign when weather and other factors beyond the airlines control is going to solve this probelm. In our case, Air Traffic Control was directing aircraft through one open space between two weather fronts, and you could imagine with 100's of other flights trying to leave at the same time was causing a huge backup. One item would be if the FAA and our friends in congress repalce the 1950's era ATC system with a SAT based system, this would greatly improve the ATC traffic, especially in severe weather conditions.

Phil.. No, you didn't bore me at all..

In fact, I'm glad you had the patience to explain all that... Well done.

flydcjets writes: "... the airlines are

currently over regulated as it is."

That depends of WHAT regulation we're looking at.

You're absolutely correct... "a SAT based system, this would greatly improve the ATC traffic, especially in severe weather conditions."


But, it still won't address the problem of 48 scheduled arrivals/departures in an hour, when the airport can only handle 30....



Passenger Rights.& Entitlement
Regarding passenger entitlement to certain rights:
Here’s a suggestion for those caught in an extreme situation where an airliner is held, for what ever reason, causing passengers to be without food, water or toilet facilities. In such an extreme and rare circumstance, all it takes is for a passenger to open any door which automatically activates the emergency slide. This grounds the aircraft causing it to return to the terminal. End of problem.

Re: VA Tech liability for the shooting: The fact that Qualified students were, and still are, denied the right to be armed establishes liability. So Yes, the University should be sued.

Hey Ragnar, How are you doin'?

Been a while since we've seen you on the threads.



Captain
Phil - Excellent explanation, thank you sir. I also have to agree with Mr. Gallagher - I have very rarely seen Congress improve one item without either (a) taxing the living h#ll out of people to do it, at a far inequitable cost to benefit, (b) scr#wing up six items for every one they "improve" or (c) both. They are lawyers, folks. Lawyers don't know cr@p and get paid to look good while they "eloquently" blather on about it. Do not trust them with anything you are loath to lose...

And, as I frequently had to use PHL, after considering the Thousands Standing Around, (TSA) the delays, the overfull flights, the sardine sized seats, the lack of any food or drink not costing my months pay, and the general feel of a concentration camp at a full run of most airports I have discovered the pleasures of AMTRAK. Interestingly enough, at under 600 miles or so, the trip is very much more pleasant even though it may take a bit longer. I may even try an overnighter...

Flight Time
I think you hit it on the head this time.
kNEE jERKING LIBERALS THINK THE GOV. IS THE ANS TO EVERTHING.
But I LIKE Red Wine I just don't think the gov. should give it to me.

Just let me off the freakin' plane...
Look, if the plane has been sitting on the taxiway for four hours, is out of water and food, and the bathrooms and A/C don't work, then just LET ME OFF! Is that so much to ask, really? Surely there could be a secure area of the airport set aside with restrooms and vending machines where passengers who are on the edge of mutiny can be taken until the plane is ready to take off. It's not like a plane with no food or water and non-functional bathrooms is going to be able to make a flight of more than about ten minutes anyway.

I don't want a bill of rights. Just let us off the plane in the extreme cases. Don't leave folks sitting in hellhole airplanes because of silly government one-size-fits-all regulations.

agree with Hardcase!
Just let us off the plane!!!!

I was stuck on a flight from Las Vegas for over two hours - (the flight itself was only 45 minutes). Why? because some drunk guy was creating a scene. Because of the new terrrorists laws, everyone had to stay on the plane until the FBI (not the police) came and interviewed all the flight attendants and pilots.

Anne
Been flying my butt off trying to make some extra retirement money till the FAA finally says I have to quit. I recently got a 5 year reprieve to age 65, but Im not counting on another one. LOL

Responsibly for actions taken...
Mike I do think you are right and you are wrong and I will tell you why I say this. First “WE” created this problem by teaching our children that they have rights. What we forgot to teach them was some rights have to be earned and some can be taken away but one should never demand what you do not own.
Second; there are way too many lawyers trying to make as much money as they can at any cost and getting away with it. Lawyers like government office should be elected and not allowed to just open an office just like a Congressmen or Senator is via the number of people in a State.

The biggest problem I think is that company owners now think they can do whatever they want and do not have to answer to anyone. Yet; the government and the lawyers working together allow this to happen because companies will give election donations so they can continue to do what they wish. It is not who you know rather how much will it cost me to have it my way.

How; would you like to sit on a plane with bathrooms overflowing and no water to drink because the water is packed for takeoff or landing and the plane was not slated for fleet at the last stop? Right; you would not but then you may be in first class and not have that problem at all. Companies should be made to take responsibility for bad decisions and if they will not do the right thing on their own then they should be made to do so via the government not the state.

Last thing is why are we the STATE or the GOVERNMENT paying for what a mad person did and we had no control of it, so go after the person that did it. You know responsibly for actions taken!

???
I found the argument of the column pretty obvious and I am dismayed at the number of "conservatives" that support the idea of the basic human right-to-food-and-water-when-stranded-at-the-airport. The only mistake that Mr. Gallagher made is to stereotype Ms. Hanni consuming expensive cheese and wine. While the description is probably accurate and also somewhat funny, at the end it detracts from the point.

Of Two MInds
Generally I favor limiting legal intervention in such matters. SO I would normally agree with the original article.

The problem here is that the airlines have quasi-legal power granted to them by the government which allows them to restrain and/or arrest those who try to leave. As the airlines effectively have the power to imprison, there may be a valid argument for legislatively defining the terms of that imprisonment.

Were it not for the powers granted to airlines, I would be in total agreement with the article.

Inhumane conditions on airplane
I am reminded of what a spokesperson for one of the airlines (Delta?) said years ago when his company was sued because a pair of dogs was subjected to poor conditions during a flight: "It's not as though we treat our human passengers well."

Perhaps what the passengers should be allowed to do is to take little jars into the non-working toilet, and then deliver their little gifts to the cockpit. Or to whomever is responsible for the decision to lock them into that idle airplane for hours.

Litigation has gotten out of hand. It is unreasonable to sue for exorbitant amounts of money as payment for discomfort. However, passengers should have the right to leave an unsanitary and dangerous environment if they choose. Someone in charge must have been thinking that the reason for the delay could be solved quickly, and that having to wait for all the wandering passengers to return to the flight would just cause further delay. That was a bad judgment call, and whoever made it should face some consequences. If the airline cares. The helplessness of mulling that line of thought over led to Kate Hanni's activism.

I now have a relative working for an airline who can get me virtually free flights in the U. S. and radically reduced-cost flights elsewhere. Somehow, I am not in a hurry to fly anywhere. Sigh.

Nothing is cost-free
... and certainly not a passengers' rights law.

I agree that it is harmful on many levels to encourage a "someone must pay!" damages mentality, and stupid to try to legislate Murphy's Law out of life.

But we also have to consider that making it illegal to hold passengers on the tarmac longer than x amount of time without y list of amenities for z number of people will inevitably decrease the availability of flights, and increase ticket prices. Fewer planes and flights to schedule is the only way to make sure none of them are delayed longer than some specified amount of time.

In a heavier-traffic environment, gambling on loading the passengers onboard, when the possible length of delay is still uncertain, and then being able to meet the passengers' originally contracted expectations closely enough for mutual satisfaction, would be too costly: the risk of violating the law would be too high. Flights would instead just be cancelled, and passengers left sitting in terminals and rerouted, the compensation for their inconvenience producing additional cost to the airlines. Today airlines avoid cancelling flights and rerouting passengers by managing delays 365 days a year. With a federally mandated constraint on the length of delays, they would have to just run fewer flights, and make the decision to cancel them earlier in the scheduling process. This would decrease options, increase ticket prices, and increase passenger inconvenience.

You might not be able to fly to Cleveland at all on the day you need to. After you adjust your expectations on that head, and pay more than twice what you used to pay for a ticket to Cleveland, the arrival you then hoped for on Thursday might not occur until Saturday morning. But by golly, you won't have been stranded on a tarmac for an hour and a half.

Every mandate costs, folks. Every single one.

V Tek & Tort Reform
Mike, you are an inspiration to idiots everywhere.If you had your tort reform, you and your family would be driven Pinto autos with exploding gas tanks, riding on Firestone 500 tires, taking phen-fen, thalidomide, vioxx, using dalkon birth control shields, getting dow-corning breast implants, etc. As far as Va Tk is concerned, please send you kids there. In addition to being massacred by a nut and being run by incompetents, the school had 3 students overcome with Carbon monoxide poisoning last September resulting in permanent brain damage to 2. Yes, keep your tort reform. . .

Virrudh ...
See Phils post ... you cannot get oof that plane UNLESS it pulls into a gate. If it pulls into a gate the ATC will consider it out of rotation. That means you really are not going anywhere. And you can try to take another airline, but if it is weather or some other general matter (the airport is shut down for some reason), then I don't care who you talk to in the airport, yer going nowhere.

You can make the decision to stay home and take a bus.

VT is a good school, and during the mess they got all bungled up in who, what, where, and when. You don't just run out and hollar "run, somebody's shooting." If you did it would be a riot, and most folks would run the wrong damn way. Those families deserve what it takes to properly bury their kids. The Cho family has not enough money to help them. Ambulance chasers should be barred from the area.

21 years in uniform (Army) tells me the best thing to do is keep pressure on the airlines to make sure they have contingency plans for those inevitable problems. Nothing beats a solid plan executed well.

Consumer not Government
I believe the consumer is a far better solution to improving business performance. As a Business owner, I don't need the government telling me how to treat my customers. My business grows each year, so evidently my customers like the way I treat them. Those that don't are free to use the services of my numerous competitors. In the area where I live, we used to have just one large store that had terrible customer service. Our only other option was to travel about 30 miles or so to a similar store. Some of you think the government should have stepped in and passed numerous laws regulating how many cash registers had to be open etc. Instead, another company built a store a few miles from the store with crappy customer service. They offered similar products with about the same prices. However, their employees were friendly and helpful. The store that ran better and provided better service is now flourishing, while the first store is having a going out of business sale. That's a much better way to improve service than to have government bureaucrats dictating every detail of how a business must operate.

Economy
It costs a lot to provide extra services for passengers. It is easy to get snacks that are easy to fix for people. If I had children with me, I would bring enough to last for any delays. I really think the airlines should provide good clean water and a clean restroom. The flights aren't long anyway. As far as all the griping and people suing all the time, it is disgusting. There are very few times that anyone should sue. I do not see how anyone could spend money that they receive from the death of a loved one. All the suing is helping to destroy this country.

Get over it!
I was once stuck in the belly of an American Airlines plane on the tarmac of JFK for 6 hours. The flight was from Dalls to London and one of the navigation systems went down. By law, they cannot make the flight with only 1 system so they tried to repair it at JKF. They didn't. We remained overnight in Manhattan at the expense of American Airlines. The next day I caught another flight to London.

The time I spent in that aircraft was miserable and by the close of 6 hours a mutiny was in the works. However, once we were free from the belly of the beast I let it go. S#*t happens! I didn't run out and get a lawyer, I let it go! It wasn't as though American Airlines conspired to make me uncomfortable, it just happened. Besides, their
explanation for the incident was reasonable.

The problem with our society is that there are way too many emotional retards. They cannot fathom that s#*t happens, instead they see malfeasance and incompetence that resulted in their inconvenience. They determine it their mission to rid the world of these evil people and to protect others from the same fate that they suffered. It is nonsense and most of these lawsuits (or legislation for that matter) should never see the inside of a courtroom.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.