The state of commercial aviation before and after the passage of the Airline Deregulation Act received much controversy from many different sides in the aviation industry. The Airline Deregulation Act caused many problems before and after it was enacted by the United States government. There were several possible courses of action. Two of these are included here as well as the problems and advantages of each. In conclusion, the rationale for the new law enacted by the government is presented.
5.2 Case Analysis: Airline Deregulation Act
I. Summary The Airline Deregulation Act was a bill that was passed through the United States Congress and signed by President Jimmy Carter on October 28, 1978. The act was to supersede the Civil Aeronautics Board control and authority over the United States airline industry. The new law was enacted to privatize the airline industry, so that new or smaller private airline companies could profit from air transportation services. According to textbook readings
…show more content…
Problem
There were many problems before the Airline Deregulation Act was enacted by the US government. The problem was that the Civil Aeronautics Board limited the industry from its full potential. This ranged from limiting the air services available to the American consumers to allowing more companies to profit from the air transportation services.
Another problem with the Airline Deregulation Act after it was passed was that the airline industry opposed for it to be enacted. One problem was that the airline industry opposed deregulation as under regulation they would lose their protection from the Civil Aeronautics Board and their profitable routes they monopolized from. Under regulation there would no longer be an oligopoly as Eastern, American, and Trans World Airlines would have to compete for their profitable routes with other private airlines. The Civil Aeronautics Board would no longer be able to influence the market in their favor.
III. Significance of the
The pros of an airline implementing a policy that bigger customers need to buy a second seat is that the weight capacity regulations will be followed to. As well as the cons of an airline implementing a policy that larger customers need to buy a second seat would result in a bigger people who travelling will not uses that airlines anymore, airlines would be glowered on by family or relatives of larger customers, airline’s policies could be vigorously monitored for discriminatory actions against overweight persons. As mentioned in the book there are no federal laws prohibiting discrimination against obese individual, although there are some places such as Wisconsin, DC, and California provide legal protection. (Harvey & Allard , 2012, p. 234)
During the infancy of aviation no federal safety program existed. Some states passed legislation that required aircraft licensing and registration. Local governments passed ordinances that regulated flight operations and pilots. What this created was a patchwork of safety related requirements. In 1926 Congress passed the Air Commerce Act, which created the Department of Commerce. Historically the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) dates from the Air Commerce Act of 1926. This was the first federal legislation of the government in aviation safety. The government finally realized that by regulating aviation a safer aviation industry could be attained. For example the Post Office suffered one fatality for 463,000 hours of flying versus non-regulated flying there was one fatality per 13,500 hours. As seen by regulating aviation safety is vastly increased.
whether or not that city had enough gates for the new carrier, and whether the
In 1978, deregulation removed government control over fares and domestic routes. A slew of new entrants entered the market, but within 10 years, all but one airline (America West), had failed and ceased to exist. With long-term growth estimates of 4 percent for air travel, it's attractive for new firms to service the demand. It was as simple as having enough capital to lease a plane and passengers willing to pay for a seat on the plane. In recent news, the story about an 18-yr British...
After September 11th, 2001, the airline industry experienced a significant drop in travel. The reasons for the airline industry downfalls also included a weak U.S and global economy, a tremendous increase in fuel costs, fears of terrorist's attacks, and a decrease in both business and vacation travel.
In today's competitive marketplace, all firms are seeking ways to improve their overall performance. One such method of improvement, recently adopted by many firms, is benchmarking. Benchmarking is a technique used to evaluate internal business processes. "In this analysis, managers determine the firm's critical processes and outputs, baseline those processes, then compare the performance of each process against a standard outside the industry" (Bounds, Yorks, Adams, & Ranney 1994). To effectively improve a business process to world-class quality, managers must find a firm that is recognized as a global leader, not just the industry standard. Successful benchmarking requires tailor-made solutions, not just blind copying of another organization. Measurement and interpretation of data collected is the key to creating business process solutions.
The results of airline deregulation speak for themselves. Since the government got out of the airline business, not only has there been a drop in prices and an increase in routes, there has also been a remarkable increase in airline service and safety. Airline deregulation should be seen as the crowning jewel of a federal de-regulatory emphasis. Prices are down: Airline ticket prices have fallen 40% since 1978. Flights are up: The number of annual departures is up from 5 million in 1978 to 8.2 million in 1997. Flights are safer: Before deregulation, there was one fatal accident per 830,000 flights, now the rate is one per 1.4 million flights. So what's the problem?
According to the International Air Transport Association, 2001 was only the second year in the history of civil aviation in which international traffic declined. Overall, it is believed that the IATA membership of airlines collectively lost more than US$12 billion during this time (Dixon, 2002).
Before we discuss government intervention and its affect on an industry’s competition we must first seek to understand the five forces framework. The theory, discussed in 1979 by Micheal Porter seeks to evaluate the attractiveness of an industry. Throughout this essay I will explore the theory and then relate government action and its well-documented affects on the airline industry.
Operating an air - express transportation industry requires large capital investments, and therefore it can impede the entry of new firms into the industry. For one, Airborne has already its own set of aircrafts and even operate its own airport, and it would be hard for a new firm to compete with this.
In the Travel Pulse article "Airlines Leaving Us Little Choice – Like A Monopoly," posted by Rich Thomaselli, the practice of monopolization is observed in the airline industry. The author criticizes large airlines on their growth that has led to at “93 of the top 100 [airports], one or two airlines controlling a majority of the seats” (Thomaselli). The scornful article was written after recent events that have caused the Department of Justice and five States to sue two of the biggest U.S.
As aviation matured, airlines, aircraft manufacturers and airport operators merged into giant corporations. When cries of "monopoly" arose, the conglomerates dismantled.
Based on publicly available data the four mega-carriers have, information is 2018 or most currently available:
Shortly after World War I, the U.S. Government discovered the abilities of the modern airplane and created the idea of utilizing aircraft to transport mail across the country. In 1917, Congress approved funding to experiment with the idea of delivering mail by air. By 1920, the Post Office was delivering mail across the entire country, eliminating over 22 hours in delivery times of a coast-to-coast route. With the success of the airmail service and the growing popularity of civil aviation, the U.S. Government recognized the need to develop set standards for civil aviation and in 1926 created the Air Commerce Act of 1926. The Air Commerce Act of 1926 called for the government to regulate air routes, navigation systems, pilot and aircraft licensing and investigation of accidents. The act also controlled how airlines were compensated for mail delivery. Later in 1930, Postmaster General Walter Brown made recommendations which were later known as the Watres Act which consolidated airmail routes and opened the door for longer-term contracts with the airlines. Brown handled the situation regarding new contracts poorly by only inviting a hand selected list of large airlines to the negotiation table. This move pushed smaller airlines to complain and the issue was pushed to Congress. Following congressional hearings President Roosevelt later decided Brown’s scandal was too much to deal with and canceled all mail contracts completely and handed over air mail delivery responsibility to the U.S. Army. That decision was a disaster, and one month later, air mail was handed back over to the private sector. This time, however contract bidding was more structured and fair to all. It was then clear that the airline industry was back in full swing...
The state owned airlines suffer the maximum from this problem. These airlines have to make several special considerations with respect to selection of routes, free seats to ministers, etc which a privately owned airline need not do. The state owned airlines also suffers from archaic laws applying only to them such as the retirement age of the pursers & hostesses, the labour regulations which make the management less flexible in taking decision due to the presence of a strong union, & the heavy control &interference of the government.