In yet another sign that the government has adopted a “get tough” approach in dealing with the airline industry, the Federal Aviation Administration today proposed near-record penalties against two airlines for safety violations.
The FAA wants United Airlines to pay a $3.8 million civil penalty for allegedly operating one of its Boeing 737 aircraft on more than 200 flights after the carrier had violated its own maintenance procedures on one of the plane’s engines.
The government also proposed a $5.4 million civil penalty against US Airways for allegedly operating eight aircraft on a total of 1,647 flights from October 2008 to January 2009 while not in compliance with certain airworthiness directives or the airline’s maintenance program.
The fines are said to be among the highest in the FAA’s history if measured by the number of planes involved.
Here’s what the FAA alleges:
On April 28, 2008, a United 737 returned to Denver after shutting down an engine due to low oil pressure indications. During teardown of the engine a week later, United mechanics found that two shop towels, instead of required protective caps, had been used to cover openings in the oil sump area when maintenance was done in December 2007.
As a result of United’s failure to follow its maintenance procedures, between February 10 and April 28, 2008 it flew the aircraft on more than 200 revenue flights when it was not in an airworthy condition.
United’s maintenance procedures specifically require use of protective caps or covers on all components that could be adversely affected by entry of foreign materials.
As for US Airways’ violations, here’s an excerpt. The full list is here.
US Airways, Inc. failed to meet the requirements of its Maintenance Policies and Procedures Manual, which required inspections related to engine work on a Boeing 757 aircraft. The airplane was flown on 505 flights from May 2, 2008 to December 3, 2008.
From October 20, 2008 to November 14, 2008, US Airways, Inc. operated one Boeing 767 aircraft on 51 flights after failing to perform the inspections, tests, and samplings required by its maintenance program on that aircraft.
From October 1, 2008 to November 24, 2008, US Airways, Inc. operated one Boeing 757 aircraft on 121 flights without proper maintenance.
You get the idea.
US Airways issued the following statement.
Safety is at the forefront of everything we do at US Airways. Today’s proposed penalty dates back to challenges we experienced during the integration of maintenance systems and processes on flights that occurred in 2008 and January 2009. Our team worked cooperatively with the FAA to investigate and correct any discrepancies to the FAA’s satisfaction.
Over the past nine months, we and the FAA have completed a formal review of our aircraft maintenance tracking systems as well as a comprehensive review of our maintenance program. This collaborative process included efforts to identify the issues, drill down to find the root cause and develop comprehensive fixes.
We appreciate the FAA’s guidance and oversight throughout this process. The changes we have made have improved upon an already solid maintenance program. With these challenges behind us, we look forward to continuing our relationship with the FAA to deliver on our common mission of safety first.
US Airways will continue to work with the FAA in a cooperative manner to promptly achieve a negotiated resolution of the FAA’s civil penalty proposal.” (LCCG)
So what does this mean to airline passengers?
Hard to say. To those wondering if their next plane will crash, I don’t think these fines indicate that air travel is any more — or less — safe. It does, however, suggest that some of the recent government steps to clamp down on airline misbehavior may not be a fluke.
That’s good news for travelers.
(Photo: Elsie esq./Flickr Creative Commons)
✓ Get the latest travel news, tips and commentary from Elliott’s E-Mail, the subversive newsletter from industry gadfly Christopher Elliott. You’ll travel like a pro. Sign up here. It’s free.
Similar Posts:
- “We’ve had a lot of cracks about the whole inspection thing”
- Airline complaints up 77 percent
- Full text of SD 1544-09-06 authorizing pat-downs, physical inspections
- Government fines Continental, Hawaiian and US Airways for consumer rule violations
- Government issues “precedent-setting” fines against three airlines in Rochester delay incident
Sign up for my 
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
Airlines have the auto industry mentality. Who recalls the story of the Chevy Corvair. It was a death trap on wheels. Yet, it continued to be sold. What about the Mustang and the gas tank rupturing? My point. It seems the airlines figure it’s cheaper to keep up the bad behavior and pay the fines, than to do anything meaningful to fix it. Basically, if a plane crashes, all the money we’ve saved by neglecting will more than cover the lawsuits. We walk away ahead and no less for wear.
Justin
Any chance that the airlines will just pass along those fines to passengers?
@Zach
I’m sure they would if they could. However, in many markets, air travel is a commodity and thus the airlines have little pricing power over the baseline ticket. More likely, they would try to recoup the revenue from an ancillary source, i.e. more secondary fees.
@Zach Everson
Exactly! Now, if the fines could be imposed such that the airlines were forced to take them out of profits, or CEO bonuses…
Someone should be in jail for these violations, not getting fines.
Key point of the story, the government “proposed” the amounts of the fines, NOT mandated the amount of the fines. Keep following this story through its lifecycle, I’d be surprised if the airlines end up paying an amount equal to 10% of the “proposed” fines. We see it over and over where the FAA sets a fine, only to give in to political/airline lobby pressure and reduces the amount of the fine to chump change. Meanwhile the (all) airlines continue with poor maintenance/customer service and get by with it.