Feel Free to Move About the Airport: Turbulence Continues to Roil the Airline Industry
Published: July 25, 2007 in Knowledge@WhartonWharton professor Serguei Netessine's trip from Philadelphia to Dallas in May was an all-too-typical day in the sky.
After circling Dallas for an hour because of stormy weather, his flight was diverted to San Antonio where he spent several hours on the runway waiting for the storms in Dallas to clear and eating a bag of peanuts for lunch. He arrived in Dallas five hours late and missed most of his scheduled meetings, rescheduled his appointments for later in the day and succeeded in booking -- actually overbooking, as it turned out -- what he thought would be an evening flight back to Philadelphia. He had no choice but to fly home the next day after paying $400 for the only room available at the airport Park Hyatt.
Netessine is one of the thousands of airline passengers this summer who have been stranded on runways or sleeping in airports as a result of cancellations, chronic delays, maintenance problems and overbooking. While airline service is no longer the white-glove experience it once was, it has now gone beyond bad food and snappish flight attendants. Today, when passengers board an airplane, they might well question whether there is a reasonable chance they will make it to their destination in the next few days.
"Previously, airlines worried about dissatisfied customers. Now I don't think they worry about it because the customer service at all airlines is so horrible," says Netessine, a professor of operations and information management.
Airline consumer advocates contend delays are now a routine part of air travel. For the first five months of this year, the major airlines' on-time arrival rate was 73.5%, the lowest for that period in the past seven years, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation's Bureau of Travel Statistics. Complaints about airline service were up 49% from May 2006. As if that weren't troubling enough, airline consumer advocates have testified before Congress that DOT figures do not even measure the true extent of the problems.
The reasons behind the sharp decline in airline service are many. Chief among them is a reduction in airline capacity following years in which the industry hemorrhaged money and major carriers wound up in bankruptcy court because their costs were out of line with revenue. Now, with the supply of airline seats decreasing and demand rising, there are not enough seats to go around, particularly when weather or other problems disrupt schedules.
Wharton management professor Peter Cappelli crafted his own strategy to get around the current service woes on a trip to Birmingham, Alabama. So many of his prior flights had been cancelled that he booked a back-up flight on another carrier -- just in case. Indeed, when he arrived at the gate, he was told the original flight was cancelled because a crew was not available. He went home, got up early the next morning and caught the back-up flight. When he tried to get a refund for the original flight, he was told it eventually found a crew and took off a few hours later. He would not be getting a refund.
"The airlines lose money whenever they have excess capacity because they cut fares to fill planes, but then everyone cuts fares and they all bleed," Cappelli says. "The only time they make money is when demand is rising faster than capacity, which is what is happening now. The carriers are loath to add capacity at the moment despite the fact that demand is increasing. So the planes are jammed and there is no back-up capacity when there are problems."
Symphony or Cacophony?
From a business perspective, reducing capacity is exactly what the airlines should be doing, says Wharton transportation professor W. Bruce Allen.
Flights this summer are booked at historic high levels of nearly 90%. Before the industry was deregulated in 1978, flights typically ran 55% full. "If something happened back then, the airline could easily put you on the next flight because that flight was only half-full, too." He points out that an airline seat is not like canned soup or any other tangible product that can be shelved and sold later if demand is slow. As a result, airlines have honed operations to squeeze the most cash out of every seat they fly, including overbooking to make sure each seat has at least one customer. If airline operations "are running full-cylinder, then it's the most beautiful symphony you've ever heard," Allen notes. "The problem is it's scheduled so tightly that the minute something does go wrong -- wow!"
At the same time that capacity is down, demand has increased. "People have started to believe airline travel is safe again. We've not had any serious terrorism event for a little while, so demand is up," says Netessine, adding that weather is another factor. While bad weather has always been a problem for air travel, advances in weather tracking technology in the past two to three years may be causing airlines to cancel or delay flights in advance more often. "Previously, we would probably be flying in this kind of weather. This is potentially saving lives, but it may lead to preemptive flight cancellations."
According to Netessine, the current level of overbooking comes down to a simple economic trade-off. On one hand, the airline risks flying with an empty seat; that seat comes with a greater cost as fuel prices rise. The other side of the tradeoff is the cost of bumping a passenger. Current law requires airlines to pay passengers $200 if they are bumped but rebooked on another flight within two hours. If the delay extends beyond that period, the passenger gets $400. Department of Transportation officials are now considering several proposals to increase the bumping penalty. Under one proposal, payments could triple.
Built-in Delays
Todd Sinai, a Wharton real estate professor who has studied airlines, says the industry's current problems stem, in part, from the evolution of the current hub-and-spoke strategy. In this type of system, airlines collect large numbers of passengers and baggage into a single airport at once, collate them and send them off on connecting flights.
"What we're experiencing this summer is a reflection of a structural feature of how air travel works in the United States. It is all predicated on driving traffic to and from key airports and doing it at a particular time," says Sinai. "That makes the system very sensitive to hiccups."
Some delays, he notes, are even built into the schedule, so passengers may sit on the runway for 45 minutes -- or more -- waiting for their plane to take off and still arrive at the scheduled time. While that may be frustrating for the passengers, it is not, technically, a delay. "There's really not a lot that can be done," Sinai concludes. "You can increase airport capacity, which at least in the short run might help, but you can immediately expect airlines to add flights and bring it back to the point where the system is at capacity again."
He suggests a better solution is to operate fewer flights with bigger planes at lower frequency and eliminate low-demand destinations although, he concedes, "It's not clear that's actually better than the current situation."
Even if airlines wanted to add capacity, there are constraints. Netessine points out that current aviation rules prohibit planes from taking off before the flight ahead of them is 20 miles away. He says some airline experts have suggested the distance could be safely reduced, allowing carriers to add more flights.
Meanwhile, the nation's air traffic control system, designed in the 1970s, needs to be upgraded to accommodate more flights, but the cost would be enormous. Netessine says airlines -- many of them just emerging from bankruptcy protection -- would find it hard to lay out money to fund an upgrade of the system estimated to cost $40 billion.
Congress is considering legislation that would create a $25 user fee paid by both airlines and private jet aircraft that would replace the current system of fuel, ticket and departure taxes that goes into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. The current payment system is set to expire on September 30. Commercial air carriers support the user fee because they contend the current system results in their passengers subsidizing the operation of corporate jets.
Another source of airline passenger angst is airport security, according to John Clifford, president of International Travel Management, a corporate travel consultant in San Diego. "Service is worse than ever and trending downward with few exceptions," says Clifford. "The world has changed since 9/11. It's a sad fact that part of the challenge in today's environment is dealing with international and domestic security issues."
Whatever the reason for their suffering, passengers have little recourse beyond bumping fees.
"Contrary to popular belief, airlines are not required to compensate passengers whose flights are delayed or canceled," according to Fly-Rights: A Consumer Guide to Air Travel, published by the U.S. Department of Transportation. "If the purpose of your trip is to close a potentially lucrative business deal, to give a speech or lecture, to attend a family function, or to be present at any time-sensitive event, you might want to allow a little extra leeway and take an earlier flight. In other words, airline delays and cancellations aren't unusual, and defensive counter-planning is a good idea when time is your most important consideration."
Various proposals to incorporate an Airline Passenger's Bill of Rights into legislation reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration, which oversees U.S. air travel, have made it through Senate and House subcommittees this summer. The proposals would require airlines to file a plan on how to cope with passengers stranded on the tarmac. Legislation had been proposed that would have required airlines to free passengers stranded on the runway within three hours. That provision did not make it out of committee, but could be added preceding a final vote on reauthorization that will take place before the current law expires September 30.
The airlines have objected to the plan because they say it will reduce carriers' flexibility to prevent additional delays, according to Elizabeth Machalek Merida, a spokeswoman for the Air Transport Association, which represents the major U.S. airlines. She said, for example, if a plane were on the runway for two hours and 45 minutes, and told that it would have a slot ready for take off in another 20 minutes, a three-hour minimum on the ground would force the plane back to the gate, causing additional delays. "We believe the pilots really should be the ones to a make those types of real-time decisions as opposed to a blanket rule that applies to everyone," says Merida.
Paul Hudson, executive director of the Aviation Consumer Action Project (ACAP), argues the on-time statistics generated by DOT do not reflect the true picture of problems in the airline market because they mischaracterize certain events. For example, he says more than 16,000 flight diversions were not counted as a delay. As Netessine discovered in San Antonio, diversions typically result in many additional hours in transit.
Ron Riley, founder of NorthWorstAir.org, a web site devoted to complaints about Northwest Airlines, says the major carriers consistently lie to passengers about the true time of scheduled flights, cover up delays by blaming them on the weather and other legitimate problems, and fail to provide basic services to stranded passengers. "I think the type of activities that Northwest and the other airlines engage in amounts to theft. At some point it becomes fraud. If smaller entities with less political clout did this they would be in jail," he states.
Roman Blahoski, a spokeman for Northwest Airlines, says most delays are caused by factors beyond the carriers' control -- including weather, air traffic control delays, mechanical problems and difficulties assembling crews. "Although cancellations do occur from time to time, Northwest strives to minimize the impact to its customers," says Blahoski. He adds that after a spate of bad weather and high employee absenteeism in June, Northwest is running more than 98% on schedule for its major routes in July.
Hudson says that, unlike consumers of most products, air passengers cannot necessarily vote with their feet. There really is no other substitute for air travel when a cross-country business trip is necessary. A better balance could be brought to the airline industry if it were not exempt from many state and local consumer protection laws as a result of its federal status and regulation by the Federal Aviation Administration, he argues.
According to Riley, many of the industry's problems are rooted in corporate cultures that do not value customer service. "It seems a handful have decided they can treat people really shoddily. They don't care if they lose a customer or a good employee."
But Wharton's Allen suggests that U.S. airlines are concerned about new competition from Richard Branson's low-fare airline, Virgin America, which lands in the United States later this summer. Over the long term, new foreign competition will enter the U.S. market, stirring up competition that may force airlines to improve service, Allen predicts.
Netessine is hoping the air traffic control system can be improved and that the rapid increase in the number of corporate jet take-offs -- related in part to poor service on commercial airlines -- tapers off. "The number of corporate jets is growing exponentially and they take basically as much time to depart as big airplanes. We need some kind of regulation to allow us to free up some space from smaller corporate jets for bigger commercial airliners."
However, he says, burdening air carriers with huge costs to upgrade traffic control may only force them into bankruptcy again.
The airline business will always be capital intensive and prone to boom and bust cycles, according to Allen, who says it seems particularly vulnerable to dramatic change in its financial fortunes. He says he has decided that airlines have a glamour factor that clouds normal business judgment that would smooth the ups and downs. "The rest of transportation is not sexy," he says. "It's dirty and icky and slow, but air has always had glamour. When we regulated airlines, it was separate (from the rest of interstate-transportation)."
Cappelli sees little hope that the airline business will ever find a sustainable, long-term model that will allow it to straighten out and fly right. "If I were a player in the industry," he says, "I'd be thinking about how to get out of it."






Here's what you think...
Total Comments: 10#1 Airline Industry
From my own point of view (and perhaps to toot my industry's own horn) a lot of the unpleasantness of having to deal with the airlines can be alleviated by working with a good travel agent. Speaking for myself, while I can't prevent delays and cancellations, I have frequently been able to reduce waiting times for finding space on replacement flights, and have more than once rescued travelers stranded by weather - if you're booked on Airline A and they cancel, they're not going to tell you that there's space on Airline B or C, whereas I have instant access to that information, and I'm only a cell-phone call away.
Sent: 01:32 PM Thu Jul.26.2007 - CA
#2 Innovate the airline working model not discard it as an industry
The airline business has not seen consolidation, it is still working on the age-old model of global reservation systems and antiquated business models. I had recently an opportunity to make presentations to top airline executives in a conference and it was amazing to see how individually they felt great about ideas being suggested by me but they had no courgae to execute and experiment with the suggested models.
The airline industry in itself is not bad. what is bad is the way it is run with its legacy and "un-enterprising" executives who live the luxury life and in todays difficult job market are afraid to loose their jobs in case something goes wrong.
The customer service is pathetic becuase it is derived from the top down to bottom. The top is worried only about first class and business class passengers the rest -- "cattle class" -- is a pain for them as they pay low fares, carry high baggage and have several connecting flights. The culture of respect, responsibility and concern has disappeared when it comes to economy class passengers. These short-sighted airline staff and executives fail to understand that today's economy class passenger might be tomorrow's business class passenger. The culture of treating people as passengers ought to be replaced in philosophy by senior executives to a culture of "guests". Every person served is a potential advert media. Why spend millions on adverts when people and word of mouth spread faster?
I have several more ideas but I think I will contain my thoughts for now only to the above. If anyone is interested in communicating with me my e mail is KABRAS@aol.com
Sent: 04:45 PM Thu Jul.26.2007 - US
#3 US airlines continuing problems
It seems like I'm delayed everytime I push back from the gate. Yes, I work with my dispatcher to try and alleviate delays. But, like the other day, I sat at the "hold short" in SFO waiting for a takeoff slot so I could merge in with traffic out of LAX, PDX, and SEA because we all seemed to be flying the same North Pacific track to Tokyo! We all chase the track that has the least amount of headwinds, hence fuel burn. So before I embark on a 11:00 flight across the Pacific into forecast bad weather at the destination, I'm delayed on the ground because we STILL don't have an effective interface between individual airline scheduling and the FAA's computers!
Also, I am now required to fly 16-17 days per month in multiple time-zone-changing flights, whereas in the past I flew a monthly schedule of only 12-13 days per month. And I'm doing this for 40% less pay due to the ravaging of our work agreements with the explicit blessing of the bankruptcy courts. At Northwest, since we pilots have had a concessionary contract in place, we have been forced to fly up to monthly maximums that I would have never agreed to in the past because of what I believe are far reaching and not very well understood negative physiological effects. In plain language, I'm operating at the "red-line" and my body knows it! And now the FAA wants us to now fly to age 65. Did I mention that I'm 52 years old and in good physical condition, as can be attested by my twice yearly FAA First Class Medical exams? But I don't remember ever being tested for chronic fatigue and the constant disruption of my circadian rhythm. Where are the studies on this?
For a career that I once loved, I would never, ever want to see a family member enter this field as an airline pilot. We pilots at Northwest saw our management blaming us, ATC, and weather for the 1000+ flight cancellations at the end of last month. The facts are that we told these same executives, as much as 6 months ago, that we were going to have a serious pilot staffing shortage this summer. They thought that they could just recall the 400+ furloughed pilots. Problem was, not too many of the furloughed pilots had the stomach to come back to this work environment. Management's simple resolution of this looming shortage was trying to force us to fly up to and exceed the mandated FAA flight time limitations. This is good management? Hardly.
Perhaps you might now understand why we were incensed when these same executives rewarded themselves with $400 million when Northwest exited bankruptcy at the end of May. Our CEO was rewarded with $26.6 million and tried to feebly downplay that equity grab by saying he was only taking what the BOD's executive compensation committee rewarded him with for "leading" Northwest into and out of bankruptcy. Yes, you guessed it, the same BOD that he had a hand in selecting in the first place.
Want to see the US airlines fixed? It won't happen anytime soon in my estimation as long as we have executive suites in this country manned with people who look at the employees as nothing more than an expense, instead of an asset.
Sent: 06:13 PM Thu Jul.26.2007 - -
#4 US Air Carriers
Based on our experience we would never fly United again (we have also been cautioned about Continental).
My observation through our ordeal is that the US airlines, and United in particular, have become totally consumed with achieving short term goals (achieving quarterly and annual earnings targets) and in so doing management has ignored the demands placed on travellers and employees. It will be interesting if this model will be successful in the longer term.
Sent: 03:18 PM Fri Jul.27.2007 - CA
#5 In need of innovation
Sent: 08:32 AM Mon Jul.30.2007 - CA
#6 The USA isn't alone
One of my relatives,a frequent flier to Southern Africa, has repeatedly told me of delays affecting Kenya Airways, our national carrier, [including the time] he had to be rebooked on a rival airline, South African Airways. It's not just the Nairobi-Jo'burg route that KQ disappoints, but also the Nairobi-Dubai route. Last week, passengers on the Nairobi-Entebbe route were livid when one of their flights was cancelled. The problems have been attributed to KQ's exploding growth of its route network, which has resulted in the number of planes falling behind passenger numbers. The problem is further compounded by lack of real competition. Fly540, our version of Ryan Air and EasyJet, is a start-up that doesn't operate routes in East Africa yet. Uganda and Tanzania lack national carriers. Emirates, the biggest threat, also doesn't fly directly to the East and Southern African routes, and you have to go via Dubai, five hours away! But at least Emirates picks up the slack. I have yet to hear that its Nairobi-Dubai flights are regularly cancelled or delayed.
So Americans, relax. Poor airline customer service is a global problem.
Sent: 11:37 AM Thu Aug.02.2007 - -
#7 THe real conversation -- and did anyone notice the elephant in the room
The nation's air traffic control system, designed in the 1970s, needs to be upgraded to accommodate more flights, but the cost would be enormous. Netessine says airlines -- many of them just emerging from bankruptcy protection -- would find it hard to lay out money to fund an upgrade of the system estimated to cost $40 billion.
The system does need to be upgraded. The airlines don't have to fund this cost today. Like the rest of the capital cost in the system it has been paid for over years.
I believe most of the airlines' problems are capacity related and really do originate from the custodians of the system at the FAA, various leaders and funding committees. It is a technical and pavement problem. Weather can not be controlled at this point so I'll pass on blaming anyone for what arises from Mother Nature. I believe the FAA is still the largest user of cathode ray tubes in the world. Who else uses these things?
However three more 6,000 foot runways between PHL and NYC would reduce the delays by more than 60%on the eastern part of the US. How would that kind of improvement alter the conversation? I am very specific about the length of runway and delay impact as I have studied it, planned for it and deal with the Northeast Plan (FAA guiding force) for 20ish years.
Some delays, he notes, are even built into the schedule, so passengers may sit on the runway for 45 minutes -- or more -- waiting for their plane to take off and still arrive at the scheduled time. While that may be frustrating for the passengers, it is not, technically, a delay. "There's really not a lot that can be done," Sinai concludes. "You can increase airport capacity, which at least in the short run might help, but you can immediately expect airlines to add flights and bring it back to the point where the system is at capacity again."
This is just wrong; Capacity should be added to the level that would handle unconstrained demand as dictated by the consumer demand. Why wouldn’t any user of the system want the airlines to operate with the proper resources? The DOT should be called the department of highways. We have little shortage of highways and where is the clamoring for federal legislation to compensate for those delays. Weather, congestion, operator or accident induced delays none the less.
So let’s do some simple math. Take all the aircraft orders in 1992 (use a 15 year or 20 year planning cycle, your choice) of all the domestic airlines at that time. How much more pavement and airspace capacity would the system need to accommodate the utilization that goes with those orders? Now substrate the amount of capacity added and let’s thinks about the delta. The aircraft were order, financing raised, the FAA validated the traffic forecast (there is a FAA Annual Aerospace Forecast). Where is the infrastructure that supports all this? Between 1995 and 2000 more new entrants exploded and supported demand. More aircraft were ordered and new FAA forecast was done. Where is the runway or terminal capacity? The padding of 45 minute delay in the block time is so the probability for measuring, scheduling and reporting will reflect the improbability that the system would operate in any less time. Additional capacity is not a short term solution but the solution.
Todd Sinai, a Wharton real estate professor who has studied airlines, says the industry's current problems stem, in part, from the evolution of the current hub-and-spoke strategy.
It is not a configuration problem. In fact some very real efficiency has evolved from this system. There are airlines that don’t operate hubs and spokes and are no less affected by the systematic shortfalls.
He suggests a better solution is to operate fewer flights with bigger planes at lower frequency and eliminate low-demand destinations although, he concedes, "It's not clear that's actually better than the current situation." He got the second part of his thought technically correct. I won’t even comment on the first part as it is overly simplistic.
As far as the thoughts on bill of rights, well people are presuming that the angst of their complaints lies with the airline alone. Prior conversation about outlines the custodians’ role in this. I am not a NWA fan or a fan of some of the other poorly operated airlines and would never defend them. However, customers can walk away from them.
But Wharton's Allen suggests that U.S. airlines are concerned about new competition from Richard Branson's low-fare airline, Virgin America, which lands in the United States later this summer. Over the long term, new foreign competition will enter the U.S. market. Does anyone really believe, though, that Virgin or any other operator will be able to wave a wand and not be up against the same system constraints? Due to their scale they may have bigger problems with not having additional capacity to handle disruptions.
Infrastructure at the 21st century level in the US isn’t close to where it should be. Runways need to be built. High-speed trains need to be built (and independently operated), creating long haul alternatives to the competitive transport system. More than 50% of the NYC to Boston market now uses the train. The air service isn’t where it was when The Eastern Shuttle flew wide bodies and widebodies aren't necessary today as the capacity has shifted to a different service.
That said, the train system used between BOS-NYC isn’t even close to what is effective in the EU or Japan. If you’re looking for a competitive force to improve service look no further. The combinations of the runways I mentioned and high-speed rail is also a superior environment solution as well as it would reduce block time and improve fuel burn to available seats.
Will compensation get you where you want to go any faster with any better probability in the current ATC system? Money would be better spent upgrading the system.
Sent: 02:19 AM Fri Aug.03.2007 - US
#8 Southwest Airlines
Sent: 02:04 PM Wed Aug.29.2007 - US
#9 FAA's internal analysis
According to the FAA, about 25% of all flights nationwide are delayed, with busy airports seeing even higher percentages. The agency says that its antiquated radar-based air traffic control system is one of the primary causes of the delays. The FAA is seeking $15 billion to $22 billion by 2025 to build a satellite-based system that can better handle the traffic demand. Funding the new system is problematic, and the FAA has proposed an increase in fuel tax for general aviation aircraft, and for airlines to pay a 50-cent-per-mile user fee for using the airspace and $105 per landing at major airports. So while the FAA's own audits show their flaws the FAA administrator Marion Blakey warned airlines to address scheduling issues or face federal regulation. "If airlines don't address this voluntarily," she said, "don't be surprised when the government steps in." Air Transport Association President and CEO James May said airlines want to fix the problem but can't legally sit down and cooperate on scheduling because of antitrust regulations. "Airlines are happy to talk to the government about scheduling," he said.
Sent: 03:41 PM Wed Sep.12.2007 - US
#10 Look to Indian airlines for inspiration
Simple ordinary behavior is it takes to create that ambience of a great airline. Consider this - at Jet Airways, if for some reason, you do not finish your meal totally when the attendent comes to pick up the empty tray, he/she will immediately ask if you did not like the meal and offer a replacement or a different kind of meal. No one cares in Delta. They could not care less.
Airlines are a great business to be in if it is done right. Singapore Airlines is just one example. I am sure in the years to come, travellers will surely prefer India based carriers to others.
I am a frequent traveller and run a software organization - InfoBeans - out of NY and Pune, India. siddharth.sethi@infobeans.com
Sent: 07:06 PM Wed Nov.14.2007 - US