Bill Overview
Title: Ensuring Friendly Skies for Passengers Act
Description: This bill provides the Federal Trade Commission authority to enforce against air carriers certain unfair and deceptive trade practices. It also prohibits air carriers from selling tickets for, delaying, or cancelling a flight when the air carrier knows or should know it does not have sufficient staff to operate the flight.
Sponsors: Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9]
Target Audience
Population: Airline passengers worldwide
Estimated Size: 85000000
- The global airline industry serves millions of passengers worldwide, covering both domestic and international flights.
- Flight cancellations and delays due to insufficient staffing can affect both immediate passengers and the wider community relying on air travel.
- Unfair and deceptive trade practices in the airline industry can penalize passengers financially and logistically.
- This legislation directly addresses operational and service quality issues that can lead to wide-scale disruptions affecting diverse passenger demographics.
Reasoning
- The target population is vast, with approximately 85 million American airline passengers potentially affected by this legislation. However, not all passengers may experience a change in their wellbeing as only those affected by cancellations or deceptive practices would feel the impact.
- The policy's budget allows for incremental changes to enforcement processes and staffing regulations, benefiting passengers primarily through reduced cancellations and improved transparency.
- Individuals directly impacted by improved operations or service quality might report the highest improvements in wellbeing.
- Consideration of demographics such as age, occupation, frequency of travel, and reason for travel (business/leisure) helps represent a broad spectrum of perspectives. This also acknowledges travelers with different degrees of vulnerability to flight changes.
- Not all effects are positive or tangible in wellbeing scores. Some individuals may view regulations as potentially increasing ticket prices or not sufficient to address their concerns.
Simulated Interviews
Marketing Manager (New York City, NY)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a frequent flyer, I've faced multiple last-minute cancellations. This policy would make planning easier and less stressful.
- I do worry about potential ticket price increases due to added airline costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
IT Consultant (Chicago, IL)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My family has been stranded more than once due to flights getting cancelled. Any steps to mitigate this would be a relief.
- I support measures to increase transparency in airline operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Graduate Student (Austin, TX)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Flight cancellations have made me miss important conferences. This policy might reduce such disruptions.
- However, I am concerned about potential increases in fares or delays in implementation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired (Orlando, FL)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Regulations could lead to more reliable travel, which is important as I travel for leisure.
- Concerned about airlines charging higher costs or fees.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Entertainment Journalist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is essential—last-minute cancellations can ruin my work schedule.
- Skeptical about how effectively it will be enforced.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Airline Pilot (Minneapolis, MN)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could affect staffing and work conditions positively.
- However, there might be pressure if the airlines cut corners elsewhere.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Travel Agent (Miami, FL)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Clients often face confusion with unreliable schedules, hoping the policy makes flights more dependable.
- Cautious that airlines might see costs rise, affecting ticket prices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Freelance Designer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any measures to curb deceptive practices and cancellations make travel less nerve-racking.
- Worried about potential ticket cost hikes due to increased regulatory costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
School Teacher (Seattle, WA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy seems like it would help avoid disruptions during precious vacation times.
- I'm concerned it'll trickle down to the customer through price hikes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Business Executive (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen my share of flight issues, so this policy would theoretically benefit my schedule.
- However, the benefits might take time to really surface in changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $51000000 (Low: $30500000, High: $71500000)
Year 3: $52020000 (Low: $31010000, High: $73040000)
Year 5: $54120804 (Low: $32242482, High: $76099126)
Year 10: $59569000 (Low: $35441100, High: $83696900)
Year 100: $86058459 (Low: $51635075, High: $120764843)
Key Considerations
- Airlines will need to balance staffing needs with financial constraints to avoid infractions effectively.
- The role of the Federal Trade Commission will be crucial in overseeing compliance, necessitating potential increases in enforcement budgeting.
- Airline lobbying and opposition might arise, potentially affecting legislative adaptations and resultant financial implications.