[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

OK airline stooges, defend this one.

For those who forgot, Express Jet (again, flying as Continental Express) is the airline that kicked a mother and her six-year old child off the plane for no reason other than the fact that her child wouldn't stop saying "bye, bye plane."

Six hour tarmac delay. Contrary to Continental's lies, the passengers COULD have been let-off the plane!

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/fligh...=68496535.blog

[PHXFlyer]

Were you on the flight? If not, you have no business categorizing this as a complaint.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

Were you on the flight? If not, you have no business categorizing this as a complaint.

You can do better than that! Next!

[PHXFlyer]

No, Butc, I'm serious. This is a forum for discussion of airline complaints. You were not on that flight so you, personally, have no complaint and therefore no legitimate basis for posting to the complaints forum. There is a general discussion thread if you care to discuss this topic generally. That would have been the appropriate place for you to post this.

[jimworcs]

Congratulations PHX on your new job... I would have applied myself if I knew that Airline Complaints was looking for a new moderator.

[AADFW]

Agreed Jimworcs. PHX's history of cavalier and grandiose behavior, including relentless and crude attacks on complaintants is clearly documented. Those who have questioned his sanity and credibility are, sadly, very likely on the right track -- especially given the sheer amount of time he spends on this website engaging in petty character assassination and other counterproductive behavior.

It is very clearly in best interests of the board to permanently ban him altogether. I, for one, hope that happens sooner rather than later.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

I wonder if there is someone on here, who is NOT an airline shill, who can comment on the issue of the passengers not being allowed inside the terminal building prior to 6:00 AM.
OK, there were, allegedly, no TSA people in the Rochester terminal. So there was no one who could, officially, vouch for the fact that everyone remained on the "airside" of the security line--assuming that happened when the passengers, eventually, were allowed off the plane. And, yes, there was some question as to whether clearance would be given for landing at Minneapolis. Still, with all that considered, why wasn't the OFFER to deplane extended to anyone who wanted to. In one tarmac/hostage incident said offer WAS made with the warning "you're on your own" as far as getting to your final destination if you choose to deplane. Even with this kind of warning it sounds like some people would have taken the offer. They were less than 100 miles from Minneapolis and I'm sure someone, who wanted to spring for the bucks, could have, eventually, rented a car to make the remaining portion of the trip.

Finally, the Rochester Airport manager suggests Continental was lying about the TSA "second clearance" issue. Were they?

[AADFW]

In the absence of laws inhibiting airlines from engaging in this kind of behavior, I think it would be completely fitting to enact federal legislation that would immunize from prosecution passengers who blow the exits of aircraft upon which they are held hostage for more than a certain number of hours.

Think of it in these terms: if you paid for a Greyhound bus ticket from Minneapolis to Chicago, and the bus driver pulled over to a closed gas station in the middle of the night because the roads became too icy to negotiate, and proceeded to refuse to let any passengers off the bus on the grounds that he did not have permission from the gas station to do so, chances are he or she would be charged with felony kidnapping. If a passenger then attempted to open the emergency door, my bet is that he or she wouldn't be charged with a crime. Why should airline passengers be treated any differently under closely similar circumstances?

It's time for change. Call or write your Congressional representative and demand a passenger bill of rights today!

[Jetliner]

It's interesting that you want someone to respond who's not in a position to. And I say that, because there are other, deeper questions here, that someone who has never been in the business would think or know to ask.

The airport manager is correct. They could have let the people off the aircraft, provided that the people stayed in the concourse. Some airports have a gate that comes down in front of the checkpoint for the night, and nobody can get out. Otherwise, they will have a guard that stays overnight, but in those cases, you can go out, but you can't come back in.

Now, with that said, and the airline being wrong, lying, whatever, there's still an important fact that you left out.

From the story: "That's not the end of it. Adding to the problems for the passengers on Continental Flight 2816: Continental does not serve Rochester, Minn. And, according to the Post-Bulletin, cooperation with Delta – which does fly to the airport – may have been yet another issue."

By the way, for those who didn't catch this, we are talking about Rochester MINNESOTA, **NOT** Rochester, NY.

Sooooo, what this means is that when the plane arrives, they have to have a gate to go to. And someone to ground handle the plane. It sounds like they had neither. In fact, at the time they landed, there may have been nobody in the airport. Checkpoint gate closed, and nobody, not even a mouse. (which is good because if one of the little ba---ards runs up the landing gear the plane is grounded for a C check - they love to chew wires)

Here's what this all boils down to. It sounds like they came up with the TSA thing before they knew what all happened. I don't know, but certainly the best choice would to have at least said "We don't know yet, we are still investigating."

The bigger problem here that I have to ask is why would they land at Ghost town airport for a diversion??? Although the next closest CO city looks like Eau Claire, WI, which would have been quite a bit further away, so that would tell me that they had to get that plane on the ground NOW for fuel. It's a solid 3 hour flight from Houston to MSP, and the NWS may not have projected bad enough weather for MSP when they left Houston, so they would not have had to have an alternate airport on the flight plan, and hence no alternate fuel. So Rochester may have been that or nothing.

But this brings up something that Kate Hani needs to try to push for, actually 2 things. First, if an airplane needs to divert, they should first try for a city that the airline or one of it's partners serves. However, each airport needs to have an airline, or a couple airlines that, if and airplane MUST divert to that city, the other designated airline can ground handle it. Even with that in place, there would still be issues of no gates to spare at times, but in a case like this, you wouldn't have Delta pissing around about if they were going to help or not.

With all of that, I will say that I agree with PHX to some degree. I understand this is a major complaint, after all, Butch didn't post about some lost bag or something, but at the same time, are we going to start posting every news story that is published about every little thing that goes wrong out there?

I guess I see both sides of this, simply because this is a big deal complaint, but at what point do the floodgates open up where people are just posting other people's war stories?

[PHXFlyer]

STATEMENT BY U.S. TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY RAY LAHOOD ON CONCLUSION OF THE PRELIMINARY PHASE OF THE CONTINENTAL TARMAC DELAY INVESTIGATION:

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced today that his department has concluded the preliminary phase of its investigation into the Aug. 8 tarmac delay by Continental Airlines on a flight operated by ExpressJet Airlines. Passengers were stranded in a plane on the ground in Rochester, MN from 12:28 a.m. to about 6:00 a.m. with only pretzels provided by the carrier to eat.

“We have determined that the Express Jet crew was not at fault. In fact, the flight crew repeatedly tried to get permission to deplane the passengers at the airport or obtain a bus for them,” Secretary LaHood said.
“The local representative of Mesaba Airlines improperly refused the requests of the captain to let her passengers off the plane. The representative incorrectly said that the airport was closed to passengers for security reasons, which led to this nightmare for those stuck on the plane,” he said.

Mesaba is a wholly owned subsidiary of Northwest Airlines, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Delta Air Lines.
The representative of Mesaba – the only carrier able to assist Continental at the airport – said that the airport was closed to passengers, apparently because there was no one from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) available to screen passengers. In fact, TSA procedures allow passengers to get off the plane, enter the terminal and re-board without being screened again as long as they remain in a sterile area.

“There was a complete lack of common sense here,” Secretary LaHood said. “It’s no wonder the flying public is so angry and frustrated.”

Members of the Department’s Aviation Enforcement Office interviewed passengers, the flight crew, airport personnel and others with knowledge of the situation. They also listened to audio recordings from the aircraft and the dispatcher. In addition, Continental’s customer service commitment, contingency plan for flight delays and contract of carriage were reviewed.

“This is one of the most thorough investigations ever conducted by the Department’s Aviation Enforcement Office,” LaHood said. The Aviation Enforcement Office is considering the appropriate action to take against Mesaba as it completes the investigation, which it expects to conclude within a few weeks. The Department has proposed regulations requiring airlines to adopt contingency plans for lengthy tarmac delays and to incorporate these plans in their contract of carriage, and asked for comment on whether it should set a uniform standard of time after which carriers would be required to allow passengers to deplane. The findings from this investigation will be used to help formulate a final rule that will provide better protection for airline passengers.

Finally, the preliminary investigation showed that while the crew of the ExpressJet flight did all it could to assist the passengers, more senior personnel within Continental or ExpressJet should have become involved in an effort to obtain permission to take the passengers off the plane.

[PHXFlyer]

Continental Airlines Responds to DOT Findings on Flight 2816:

HOUSTON, Aug. 21 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Continental Airlines (NYSE: CAL) Chairman and CEO Larry Kellner today issued the following statement regarding Continental Express Flight 2816 (operated by ExpressJet Airlines), which was subjected to a lengthy ground delay following a weather diversion to Rochester, Minn., on Aug. 8, 2009.
Kellner is responding to the findings of a U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) investigation (see DOT news release) that the ExpressJet crew was not at fault and that the local representative of Mesaba Airlines (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Delta Air Lines [NYSE: DAL]), improperly refused the requests of the captain to let her passengers off the plane.
"Continental takes responsibility for the care of its customers, whether they are on our regional partners' flights or our own," Kellner said. "We are gratified that Secretary LaHood recognized the crew's efforts to resolve the situation.
"While the result for the customers was clearly unacceptable, it is evident that the ExpressJet crew worked through the night to resolve the situation and was frustrated with Delta Connection's failure to provide reasonable assistance.
"We have processes in place to avoid these situations and those processes clearly broke down in this case. We are working to ensure that doesn't happen again," Kellner said.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

The Department has proposed regulations requiring airlines to adopt contingency plans for lengthy tarmac delays and to incorporate these plans in their contract of carriage,

If such Executive action (or order), as referenced above, came to pass it will be interesting to see who, if anyone, in Congress would try to over-turn this. What is very significant is that we're now past the point of "requesting." We're into "requiring."

It will be very interesting to see how future tarmac delays are handled. What remains to be addressed is the issue of incoming international flights which are diverted. In the case of the latter, I would be surprised if someone could come-up with a rule which says if you land at an airport where Customs And Border Patrol staff are stationed that passengers can not, at least, be allowed to de-plane and remain on the "airside" of the Customs check-point.

And, yes, I was wrong about Continental and/or Express Jet--in this instance. I know I said something negative about Express Jet. Can't remember if Continental was included, but they could have been. Needless to say, however, you can expect me to cut and paste that Continental statement the next time a Continental (mainline) tarmac delay turns to s**t, and the blame can't be shifted onto someone else.

[PHXFlyer]

Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy Slept Here

What remains to be addressed is the issue of incoming international flights which are diverted. In the case of the latter, I would be surprised if someone could come-up with a rule which says if you land at an airport where Customs And Border Patrol staff are stationed that passengers can not, at least, be allowed to de-plane and remain on the "airside" of the Customs check-point.

I know when weather is an issue at EWR Continental flights often, when they are able to, divert to Stewart International (SWF) in Newburgh. It's not only because of the proximity to EWR (busses can be arranged for the relatively short road trip) but also because SWF has full time customs and immigration officers available should the delay become lengthy and passengers would need to deplane and be processed.

[PHXFlyer]

ExpressJet Responds to DOT Review of Extended Tarmac Delay on Flight 2816:

HOUSTON, Aug 21, 2009 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ -- ExpressJet is pleased with the announcement made by Department of Transportation's Secretary, Ray LaHood, today stating the ExpressJet crew was not at fault and in fact, they repeatedly tried to gain permission to deplane the passengers at the airport.
To view the multimedia assets associated with this release, please click http://news.prnewswire.com/viewrelease.aspx?STORY=MTI3
ExpressJet and Continental have a long standing relationship of cooperation with the Department of Transportation (DOT) on passenger rights. ExpressJet was one of the few regional airlines that voluntarily participated in the DOT's task force on developing contingency plans during extended tarmac delays.
Through knowledge gained by participating in the DOT task force, both ExpressJet and Continental adopted an extended tarmac delay program. As the timeline and digital voice recordings accompanying this release prove, both companies know the program and attempted to follow it. The digital voice recordings and timeline will also be available by visiting the press section of www.expressjet.com.
"Safety of flight must be the top priority for any aviation company. I commend our crew and dispatch personnel for remaining committed to this standard," said ExpressJet President and Chief Executive Officer, Jim Ream.
"However, customer service and comfort is also imperative, and I'm pleased that the DOT findings support ExpressJet's belief that our crew made exhaustive efforts to help customers through this weather event," added Ream....

Link to flight 2816 digital voice recordings and timeline of events.

[Gromit801]

(CNN) -- -- A poor decision by a regional airline was being blamed Friday for Continental Airlines passengers getting stranded overnight as their plane sat on a tarmac in Minnesota, federal transportation officials said Friday.

Passengers on a Continental flight operated by ExpressJet sat on the tarmac for nearly six hours on August 8.

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said a representative of Mesaba Airlines improperly refused requests by the plane's captain and crew to let passengers off the plane. They were stuck on the tarmac in Rochester on August 8 from 12:38 a.m. to about 6 a.m. with nothing but pretzels to eat, LaHood said.

"There was a complete lack of common sense here," LaHood said in a written statement. "It's no wonder the flying public is so angry and frustrated."

Mesaba, based in Eagan, Minnesota and owned by Delta Air Lines, was the only carrier able to assist Continental Flight 2816, which was on its way from Houston, Texas, to Minneapolis, Minnesota, when it was diverted because of strong thunderstorms, LaHood said.

The flight's 47 passengers described crying babies, overflowing toilets and cramped conditions.

According to a Department of Transportation preliminary report, Mesaba's representative refused to help passengers off of the plane, incorrectly saying the airport was closed to passengers for security reasons.

LaHood, who called the incident a "nightmare," said federal regulations allow passengers to get off of a plane, enter an airport and reboard without being screened by safety personnel as long as they remain in a secure part of the terminal.

Mesaba said Friday that its employees tried to help.

"Mesaba respectfully disagrees with the DOT's preliminary findings as they are incongruent with our initial internal review of the incident," CEO John Spanjers said in a written statement. "Because Continental Express Flight 2816 diverted to an airport where they have no ground handling service, Mesaba offered assistance as a courtesy during this delay.

"While the investigation is ongoing, Mesaba is fully cooperating with the Department of Transportation and looks forward to the final report."

Mesaba is a wholly owned subsidiary of Northwest Airlines, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Delta Air Lines.

Delta CEO Richard Anderson said the airline is working with Mesaba, Continental and the Department of Transportation to help determine exactly what happened.

In the department's statement, LaHood said that the Continental crew was not at fault for the passengers being stuck.

"In fact, the flight crew repeatedly tried to get permission to deplane the passengers at the airport or obtain a bus for them," he said.

Department of Transportation investigators have interviewed passengers, the flight crew, airport workers and others during an investigation expected to be completed in the next few weeks.

The department "is considering the appropriate action to take against Mesaba," according to the statement.

The investigation did show that while the crew of the flight, operated by carrier ExpressJet, did all it could, higher-level officials should have become involved in the effort.

The Aviation Enforcement Office has proposed regulations requiring airlines to have plans for how to handle lengthy tarmac delays.

[The_Judge]

I am delighted to see that the blame has been placed on Mesaba. I am a bit biased as in late 2006, early 2007, NWA decided to outsource dozens of smaller cities to Mesaba, Express I and any other vulture who would bid on taking it. Rochester and my city, La Crosse (about a 1 hour drive east) went to Mesaba. NWA had been in these cities for decades.
I will go out on a very short limb and say that if NWA had not outsourced to a company that hires kids and obviously inadequately trains them, this would NOT have happened. Anyone with any common sense knows that if a domestic flight diverts to an airport, there is absolutely zero reason why these passengers cannot deplane. Re-boarding would be a sticky issue. My take would be if they are held in a sterile area there should be no problem but I'm sure the TSA would disagree with me. My point, really, NWA is at fault for outsourcing to a company that has employees that have no clue what's going on.

[jimworcs]

We should wait for the final report... as more information is emerging all the time. How about this gem?

The Rochester airport took in another diverted flight, a Northwest plane from Phoenix, just before Flight 2816 landed. The more than 50 passengers on that plane were placed on a bus and made it to Minneapolis by 1:30 a.m.

Leqve said the Delta manager in Rochester offered space on the bus to Continental, which declined."

According to NBC news today, CO and Expressjet are NOT denying this. Rather, they're apologizing, and giving all the pax vouchers for free flights in the future. This doesn't look like the actions of an innocent party.

So Continental and Expressjet were offered an alternative for the passengers, but did not even offer the passengers this choice, so that those who wished too could take the bus to Minneapolis... not so sure that CO or Expressjet are off the hook here.

[PHXFlyer]

Originally Posted by jimworcs

We should wait for the final report... as more information is emerging all the time. How about this gem?

So Continental and Expressjet were offered an alternative for the passengers, but did not even offer the passengers this choice, so that those who wished too could take the bus to Minneapolis... not so sure that CO or Expressjet are off the hook here.

As you say, the final report will be the most telling. However, as I said, listening to the recordings and reading the timeline I don't think even if space on the one bus sent to Rochester was offered (and there was nothing in the "official" record to indicate that it was) that it would not have been a good option for the following reasons:

1. Mesaba (dba Delta Connection) repeatedly refused requests by ExpressJet (dba Continental Connection) to disembark passengers at a jet-bridge. They were told they could park at a stand adjacent to the terminal building and walk across the ramp into the building but the pilot deemed that option unsafe since there were still active thunderstorms in the area. Also, one slip and fall on the wet tarmac or stairs and both ExpressJet and Continental could face a huge lawsuit.

2. The Northwest aircraft from Phoenix was an Airbus A320. The seating capacity of a Northwest A320 is 148. They would have us believe that there were only 50 on that flight? Perhaps there were more but not all wanted to take the bus to Minneapolis? Again, the final report will, hopefully, have more detail. Even if there was room on the (one and only) bus and assuming the headcount on that bus was 50 from the Northwest Airbus, how many more could that bus have accommodated? There were 47 on the Continental Express flight. I Googled some coach companies in the Rochester/Minneapolis area and the largest coach I could find carries 62 passengers. Now with 50 of those seats already spoken for and a planeload of 47 what do you do? It's easy to say 12 seats is better than nothing but how do you tell 3/4 of your passengers "sorry, you're still stuck." Furthermore how do you determine who goes and who stays? Women and children first?

3. At the time the bus option could have been discussed, ExpressJet dispatch/ops was still hopeful that the weather might break providing a safe window for the plane to takeoff and continue on to MSP. Unfortunately that break never happened and the end result was the crew timeout.

[jimworcs]

My point was that this was offered, but neither CO or ExpressJet mentioned this in their "pass the buck" press releases. It also causes me to question the premise for keeping the hostages on the plane. What if the Captain had accepted and allowed the hostages to take the bus? How could that have been offered as an option, if the reason for the hostage situation was that it was impossible to disembark for security reasons? How did the A320 passengers get round the security dilemma? There is a lot more to this story than meets the eye... and I look forward to the full report.

The scrambling of Delta, Continental's and ExpressJet's CEO's rushing to defend themselves, "support the passengers" and co-operate with the DOT to ensure it doesn't happen again are the actions of a desperate rearguard action to try and stop a flyers rights bill. This is the only solution and we should not accept a rule change by the DOT which does not have the power of the law behind it.

[PHXFlyer]

DOT 182-09
Tuesday, November 24, 2009

The U.S. Department of Transportation today levied a total civil penalty of $100,000 against Continental Airlines and ExpressJet Airlines for their roles in causing the passengers on board Continental Express flight 2816 to remain on the aircraft at Rochester International Airport for an unreasonable period of time on Aug. 8, 2009. Continental also provided a full refund to each passenger and also offered each passenger additional compensation to tangibly acknowledge their time and discomfort. In addition, DOT assessed a civil penalty of $75,000 against Mesaba Airlines, which provided ground handling for the flight, for its role in the incident. These precedent-setting enforcement actions involve consent orders that reflect a settlement by the carriers of violations alleged by DOT’s Aviation Enforcement Office. They are the first enforcement orders punishing carriers for extended tarmac delays, as well as the first time a carrier acting as a ground handler for another airline has been punished for failing to properly help passengers leave an aircraft during an unreasonably long tarmac delay.
“I hope that this sends a signal to the rest of the airline industry that we expect airlines to respect the rights of air travelers,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. “We will also use what we have learned from this investigation to strengthen protections for airline passengers subjected to long tarmac delays.”