Search Salon

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Recently in Salon Travel

Tempests in a Thai-pot
Despite sex scandals and overspeculation, Bangkok residents still find reasons to smile.
By Morris Dye
[09/04/99]

Wanderlust
Belize in the dark
We take to the dark so that we may buy some time in the light.
By Michael Perry
[09/03/99]

Travel Advisor
Revisiting "Thelma and Louise"
Our travel expert offers advice on spotting the filmic outlaws' relics in Utah, getting in position for the next solar eclipse and learning about those European B&Bs.
By Donald D. Groff
[09/02/99]

Caught in the crossfire
Is Beirut ready for tourism? Two journalists hit the ground in Lebanon to find out.
By Jessie Deeter and Anne Sengès
[09/01/99]

The carousels of Paris
Long before Disneyland opened on its outskirts, the French capital gave children their own moveable feast.
By Susan Hack
[08/31/99]

Complete archives for Travel

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Acts of air rage are occurring with increasing regularity and maliciousness. While the Trammel-Sheffer incident was triggered by a psychotic break, similar in-flight attacks are often fueled by liquor, drugs or stress. Sometimes they stem from a passenger's basic inability to control violent and aggressive behavior.

According to the Federal Aviation Administration, airlines flying within U.S. airspace reported 283 incidents of disruptive behavior in 1998. These incidents ran the gamut of behavioral maladies, from severely rude and obnoxious behavior -- for example, a passenger verbally threatening to punch an attendant -- to outright physical assault. Compared to the 121 incidents reported in 1994, this figure suggests that in-flight violence in the United States has more than doubled in the last five years. But this statistic reveals only the tip of a dangerous -- and enormous -- iceberg.

Because the FAA records only those incidents that airlines choose to disclose, the actual number of assaults is seriously underreported. Recognizing a similar problem across the Atlantic, Britain's Civil Aviation Authority, counterpart to the FAA, mandated this spring that British airlines report every incident involving disruptive or dangerous passengers and include information such as whether alcohol was a factor. Until the FAA adopts a similar program here in the United States, the understanding and eradication of sky rage will be hampered by inconclusive statistics and the arbitrary interpretations that result.

United Airlines, to its credit, is one of the few U.S. carriers willing to disclose accurate information. In 1998, America's largest carrier reported 635 incidents of disruptive behavior by passengers. Of these, 61 were assaults.

In 1998, 84 U.S. carriers transported 614 million passengers on countless commercial flights. If a single airline (United) reported 635 incidents of disruptive behavior, and the FAA recorded only 283 incidents occurring on all 84 carriers -- well, passenger misconduct data collection methods are laughably incompetent.

David Fuscus, vice president of communications at the Air Transport Association, a trade organization representing U.S. airlines, believes there are at least 5,000 acts of passenger misconduct every year. The reasons, he claims, may be rooted in a stressful air-travel environment. "Planes are more crowded, passengers are less comfortable," he says. "But that doesn't excuse violent behavior."

Few will disagree that the modern airport experience is often an unpleasant one. Passengers endure a succession of difficulties: inadequate parking; confusing check-in procedures; long lines at the check-in counter; more lines at security checkpoints; shrinking airplane seats; insufficient overhead bin space; small in-flight meals if any; and maddening numbers of delays caused by a safe but woefully inefficient Air Traffic Control system. "In May alone," says Fuscus, "there were 40,000 air-traffic-control-delays nationwide."

While liquor is often the spark that ignites disruptive behavior, legions of cigarette smokers, unable to light up in airports or on planes, are also to blame. Of the 266 incidents of passenger misconduct recorded by British Airways in 1997, more than half were caused by frustrated smokers. BA has begun the practice of distributing yellow "warning" cards to disruptive people. The cards inform offenders about possible arrest should the disruptive behavior continue.

Patricia Friend understands these problems. As president of the Association of Flight Attendants, the country's largest flight attendant union with 43,000 members, she believes airlines deserve at least some of the blame for the growing numbers of disgruntled, and often violent, passengers. "Airline advertising unrealistically raises expectation," she says. "Passengers expect a fun, comfortable experience -- and much of the time it's not."

Sophisticated television commercials almost always portray a luxurious first-class or business-class experience -- not the cramped, sometimes meal-less misadventures had by many coach-class airline passengers. But small seats, stifling airplanes and unrealized expectations are no justification for the growing number of passengers who assault airline crew members. "It's symptomatic of what's going on in society today," says Friend. "People are rude, less patient and more aggressive. And when you're flying in an airplane at 30,000 feet, you can't dial 911."

Renee Sheffer's husband, Mike, oversees the Sky Rage Foundation, a watchdog organization launched shortly after his wife's brutal attack. Because no government organization is responsible for the accurate collection of in-flight violence data -- or provides easy access to related information -- the Sky Rage Foundation is a concerned traveler's best friend. Its Web site chronicles incidents on its Rage Page, posts updates about pending air-rage court proceedings, gives professional advice on what to do "when a fellow passenger goes ballistic," offers tips on how to avoid trouble in the first place and explains confusing legal issues.

According to Mike Sheffer, the most perplexing difficulty in prosecuting offenders lies with law enforcement jurisdiction. "The moment the airplane door is closed, an onboard assault becomes a federal issue, which is ultimately handled by the FBI," he says. "But after an attack, it's often local law enforcement officers who meet the inbound aircraft. In most cases, local police do not have the authority to arrest a passenger who is suspected of committing a violent act in flight. They can only detain suspects for a 'reasonable' period until FBI agents arrive." If understaffed FBI offices fail to respond promptly (which has been known to happen, especially when an incident is perceived to be less serious), the suspect may be released without punishment.

Next page | Flight attendants assaulted, pilots stabbed to death