"Airlines say they'll fight flight reductions at JFK"

Title:

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Airlines say they'll fight flight reductions at JFK
By BOB DART
Cox News Servicea


Washington — The nation's major airlines threatened Tuesday to go to court or Congress to fight a federal proposal to cut flights at New York's delay-plagued John F. Kennedy International Airport by up to 20 percent.

The Air Transport Association drew its line in the sand as the Federal Aviation Administration began two days of talks with the carriers on how to avoid a recurrence of the situation last summer at JFK, when more than a third of all takeoffs and landings were late.



Transportation Secretary Mary Peters: 'While it is clear we have high hopes for market-based

 incentives, we may very well need scheduling reductions to help solve congestion in the near term.'


It appears that the federal regulators "intend to impose cuts," said James C. May, president of the Air Transport Association, which represents the major carriers. "We are unalterably, adamantly opposed to it."

If the FAA simply declares a cap of 80 or 81 flights per hour at JFK, May said the airline industry has "legal as well as legislative options" to consider.

"We hope we don't have to pursue those," he said.

The cutbacks would have a particularly heavy effect on Delta Air Lines, which has 30 percent of the flights at JFK, and JetBlue, with 29 percent of the flights. American Airlines is third at JFK with 15 percent of the flights.

At the FAA meeting, federal officials said it was more likely that flight reductions would be achieved by charging more for slots at peak periods rather than through a federal edict.

"I have been very candid about our strong preference for using market mechanisms like congestion pricing to preserve passenger choice while reducing delays," said Transportation Secretary Mary Peters.

But she said if that carrot doesn't work, the government will use a stick.

"While it is clear we have high hopes for market-based incentives, we may very well need scheduling reductions to help solve congestion in the near term," Peters warned at the opening of the two-day session.

May said the airlines will fight the Bush administration's "market-based incentives" as vigorously as it does the imposed schedule reductions.

"We are flatly opposed to congestion pricing," May said at an afternoon meeting with reporters.

JFK had the worst on-time departure record of any major U.S. airport though the summer season, and the FAA has proposed reducing the number of flights per hour from an average of about 100 to 80 or 81, depending on the time of day.

"President Bush has made it clear that the conditions travelers experienced this summer are unacceptable and must be fixed," said Peters. "When nearly a third of scheduled flights are canceled or delayed, when passengers are stranded for hours on the runway, it is easy to understand why consumer frustration is reaching the boiling point."

"JFK delays have reached epidemic levels, and unless all of the parties step up, far worse is in store," said Robert A. Sturgell, the acting FAA administrator.

The federal officials accused the airlines of knowingly over-scheduling during prime periods.

"Publishing schedules that offer 61 departing flights between 8 and 9 a.m. — when the airport can handle only 44 departures — is not fair to fliers," said Peters.

The airlines countered that better airspace management and updated technology could fit in more flights on time. May wrote a letter to Peters on Tuesday saying "solutions are available if the government will focus on increasing the efficiency of operations rather than limiting operations and passenger choices."

Upgrading facilities and installing better technology could end the congestion in the long run, but the best short-term solution is a reduction in flights, the FAA suggested.

In his letter, May said cutting back on flights at JFK — "a leading international gateway" — would be both "anti-marketplace and anti-consumer."

Schedule reductions would force "airline passengers to trade delayed flights for no flights or very expensive flights. That's a bad deal!" agreed David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association, a passengers group. "Under the guise of reducing airline flight delays, the Bush administration is going to sacrifice airline passengers' needs at the altar of congestion relief."

Stempler urged airline passengers to "band together and try to reduce the congestion problem ourselves."

"If you can fly during non-rush hours, do it. If you can use less-congested New York-area airports like Islip or Stewart, do it. If you can fly during the weekends instead of weekdays, do it," he said in a prepared statement.