Advocacy groups all jump on the bandwagon when something changes to the better for consumers. However, though change seems to happen quickly, it is almost always a product of a long range effort or opportunity. Two recent efforts by Travelers United that resulted in the rollback of new luggage size rules by the airlines and a letter sent from the Department of Justice about airline collusion are examples of this.
Opportunity
An example of opportunity was the defeated move, launched several months ago, by the International Air Transport Association (IATA) to reduce the size of carry-on luggage.
An advocate from Travelers United was working on the Senate side of The Hill in Washington, DC, on the day that the proposed IATA changes were announced. This advocate, who already had appointments with members of the Senate Commerce Committee members’ staff, had an opportunity to speak directly with a group of Senate staffers. The next day one Senator, Robert Menendez (D, NJ), immediately sent out a press release and a letter to US airlines denouncing the move. The next day another handful of Senators echoed Melendez’s position.
Travelers United immediately called Boeing to ask them about their new designs for overhead luggage bins that are being installed on aircraft. This outreach provided the largest size luggage that would be acceptable. Those measurements showed that current carry-on baggage sizes did not have to be changed and that installation of these new luggage bins would eventually solve the problem a lack of overhead bin storage.
Later in the day, this advocate from Travelers United met with representatives from Southwest Airlines, who were as surprised as anyone about the proposed changes. These new IATA changes would reduce the carry-on luggage sizes by almost 40 percent on Southwest Airlines. They had no interest in such a new rule.
At followup meetings, Southwest was encouraged to announce that they would not follow such a rule. They did so at the beginning of the next week. American Airlines and the other US carriers all said that they would refuse to implement the IATA luggage rules.
A week after announcing this new program, IATA was forced to withdraw its proposal.
Would these actions have taken place with no consumer group encouragement? Who knows? But, having consumers active on Capitol Hill certainly helps keep issues like this in the forefront.
Long range, patient efforts
Since the approval of the American Airlines/US Airways merger, Travelers United has maintained a steady stream of meetings with the Department of Transportation (DOT), Department of Justice (DOJ) and Congress. At virtually every meeting Travelers United brings up the successful efforts of airlines to maintain “capacity discipline.” Travelers United also shows examples of airline executives lauding each other for maintaining capacity discipline and they have called it the underpinning of airline profits.
Travelers United has continually called this capacity discipline a form of collusion since the AA/US merger. Collusion does not have to only do with price fixing, but also with setting conditions that eliminate competition.
Representatives of Travelers United have visited Representative and Senate offices regularly, explaining their concerns with the lack of competition and the overdone consolidation in the airline industry. Capacity discipline was brought up each time. They have also been discussing the airlines efforts to restrict comparison shopping by restricting information made available to consumers.
In early June, the chairman of Travelers United met with DOJ lawyers to complain about capacity discipline and about the growing strength of international alliances. The group also discussed with DOJ how many of the remedies implemented in order to allow the merger were being undermined by recent DOT actions, especially in regards to gate allocation in the Dallas market.
Meetings on The Hill, perhaps, resulted in a letter from Senator Blumenthal to DOJ, asking about capacity discipline and whether or not certain airlines’ refusal to distribute fare information through all websites might be in violation of antitrust rules.
Eventually, DOJ sent out its letter announcing an investigation of the airlines for collusion over capacity discipline. Others are raising the issues of attempts by the airlines to restrict competition and the ability of consumers to compare prices.
Where all this goes will be determined over time. The only lesson to be learned at this time is that change takes time and constant consumer pressure on the system to counteract corporate lobbyists and money.
When opportunity presents the ability to change the system or prevent anti-consumer actions, consumer organizations need to be engaged. And, when desired change is the objective, consumer groups need to work slowly and surely to make those changes gradually.
Charlie Leocha is the President of Travelers United. He has been working in Washington, DC, for the past 14 years with Congress, the Department of Transportation, and industry stakeholders on travel issues. He was the first consumer representative to the Advisory Committee for Aviation Consumer Protections appointed by the Secretary of Transportation from 2012 through 2018.
