The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, operators of JFK, LGA, EWR and Stewart Airports, is considering a policy to bill or sue in the courts disruptive airliner passengers for the costs of delays to arriving or departing passanger flights. The news reports notes that the PANYNJ had 400 disruption events, like the infamous stupidity of actor Alan Baldwin last year who would not turn off by Federal law his cell phone during taxing and pre-takeoff, causing the plane to return to the gate and triggering delays of that and other flights. The program will include as the linked article notes, a PR campaign at the airports informing of this policy.
Part of this may be to recover some of the $100 of 1000's of costs for PA police and staff needed to deal with such issues, to help comp airlines for their hassles, as well as the costs such disruptions to other airliners and customers. Part of this may be way to improve the PA's situation with the public in the region, one that has taken a bad turn since last August as huge cost overruns and delays at the WTC rebuilding site and the large jack up in tunnel and bridge tolls between NY City and NJ they operate. It could also reduce the costs of police and other staff if they had fewer events, meaning more money savings or they being available for real emergencies. By taking a strong stand to seek financial recovery on the small number of dumb and disobedient pax who screw up the plans of 1000's of other pax and airliners they may be starting a new trend to seriously discouage such bad behavior that could be copied by other airport authorities and maybe seriously reduce this problem.
ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 22175 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (4 years 2 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1702 times:
Reading further statements by the panynj, it seems that they are making an attempt to shift blame for summer delays to pax, and to make it easier for airlines to enforce the ridiculous rule requiring pax on delayed aircraft to sit without using devices despite no active taxiing and no pending takeoff. This at the same time the FAA is considering eliminating that rule in the first place.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Cadet985 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 1974 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (4 years 2 months 2 days ago) and read 1578 times:
A friend of mine just shared this on Facebook. Here's what I said on there:
First...why would the PA impose this fine, and not the FAA or airlines? Secondly...aren't there better ways the PA can spend their time/money? I've flown out of all three airports, and have never had a flight delayed due to an unruly passenger. Weather issues, traffic issues, waiting for passengers from a late connection, a flat tire....those are all delays I've experienced. I'm not against this idea, I'm just trying to figure out if it's that big a deal, and something that the PA could even implement.