What's the book corporate America doesn't want you to read? Find out now -- or you could get scammed.

Transportation Department shifts blame in tarmac incident to Mesaba

August 21, 2009

mesabaThis is an interesting twist.

Remember the Continental/ExpressJet tarmac incident earlier this month? Everyone was quick to blame the airline for holding passengers overnight against their will in Rochester, Minn. Now, a preliminary investigation by the Transportation Department has found that Mesaba, a regional carrier owned by Delta Air Lines, was the likely culprit.


Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood posted the findings to his blog this morning, which effectively vindicated ExpressJet’s crew. (Here’s a related news release that just crossed the wire.)

We have determined that the ExpressJet crew was not at fault. In fact, the flight crew repeatedly tried to get permission to deplane the passengers at the airport or on a bus.

Specifically, the DOT found that the local representative of Mesaba Airlines–the only carrier in a position to help the stranded plane–improperly refused the requests of the ExpressJet captain to let her passengers off the plane, telling the captain that the airport was closed to passengers for security reasons.

That, says LaHood, is what led to the “nightmare” for those stuck on the plane.

The Mesaba rep said this apparently because there was no one from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) available to screen passengers. But, in fact, TSA procedures allow passengers to get off the plane, enter the terminal and re-board without being screened again as long as they remain in a secure area.

Continental isn’t totally off the hook. While the crew of the Continental Express flight did what they could to assist passengers, more senior personnel within Continental or ExpressJet should have become involved in an effort to obtain permission to take the passengers off the plane, according to the DOT.

The timing of this report is curious. As my friends over at the Dallas Morning News aviation blog pointed out, the Transportation Department doesn’t usually release preliminary results. I asked my agency contact about that. His response?

[The Secretary] may have wanted it out because he knows he’s going to get questions on it today. Or, he may have wanted it out to make it clear to that forum that the DOT is not sitting quietly on commercial aviation matters. Or, maybe no one told him that we don’t usually announce preliminary results.

Either way, LaHood remains upset about the incident. The Secretary added,

You know, learning more about the facts of this incident hasn’t done a whole lot to temper my anger at the way those passengers were treated. I mean, there was really a complete lack of common sense here. It’s no wonder the flying public is so frustrated.

I’ve asked Mesaba, Delta, Continental and ExpressJet for a comment on the findings, and will update this post when I have them.

LaHood hints that his agency may toughen its rules regarding ground delays.

What has the flying public gained from this investigation? Our findings will be used to help formulate a final rule that will provide better protection for airline passengers. The bottom line is that commercial aviation is complicated by many factors–weather and security among them. But, that passengers should be treated with respect? That part is simple.

Hopefully, it’s more than a hint.

Update (12:30 p.m.) Continental has responded to the DOT report:

Continental takes responsibility for the care of its customers, whether they are on our regional partners’ flights or our own. We are gratified that Secretary LaHood recognized the crew’s efforts to resolve the situation.

While the result for the customers was clearly unacceptable, it is evident that the ExpressJet crew worked through the night to resolve the situation and was frustrated with Delta Connection’s failure to provide reasonable assistance.

We have processes in place to avoid these situations and those processes clearly broke down in this case. We are working to ensure that doesn’t happen again.

Update 2 (2:30 p.m.) Delta has issued a statement.

Because customer service is so important to our industry, I have personally reached out to Continental’s chairman and CEO to ensure we fully understand the facts of this unfortunate incident. Delta is working with Mesaba to conduct an internal investigation, continue our full cooperation with the DOT and share all the facts with Continental.

Update 3 (3:20 p.m.) Mesaba has chimed in.

Mesaba respectfully disagrees with the DOT’s preliminary findings as they are incongruent with our initial internal review of the incident. Because Continental Express Flight 2816 diverted to an airport where they have no ground handling service, Mesaba offered assistance as a courtesy during this delay. While the investigation is ongoing, Mesaba is fully cooperating with the Department of Transportation and looks forward to the final report.

(Photo: Caribb/Flickr Creative Commons)

Christopher Elliott is the author of Scammed: How to Save Your Money and Find Better Service in a World of Schemes, Swindles, and Shady Deals. Critics have called it “eye-opening” and “inspiring” — it’ll “grab your attention and won’t let go.” Order your copy now on Amazon, Barnes & Noble or iTunes.

Tagged as: , , , ,

23 comments

  • Jose

    I am sincerely impressed that the DOT Sec would release a report premature and that he seems to be in touch with the reality out there. But again, a total lack of decency, and common sense was lacking here. I would have called 911 or the FBI and would have been taken off the plane handcuffed but I would at least have had a decent meal and a good night’s rest (in a jail cell)but would have been FREE!

  • John

    Ummm … This is complete bull.
    Sorry but the pilot is ultimately responsible for their passengers and the aircraft. That’s why I get to go to jail if don’t do what a crew member tells me to.
    So let me understand this, in the hours that the passengers were stranded on the aircraft there were no actions that the crew could have taken to get people off the aircraft? How about opening the door?
    The DOT statement suggests that it was perfectly ok for those passengers to be held against their will without basic necessities (you or I do that and its a felony).
    The Secretary’s statement alone sets up the situation when the companies will now blame each other for the mistake. Ultimately the passengers will get nothing for the time they were imprisoned and eryone will be surprised the next time it happens.

  • Jon

    Jose – Not sure how getting to stay in a jail cell overnight means you would be free (actually it would be the definition of “not free”).

    What I don’t understand is how another airline, in this case Mesaba, is responsible for getting another airline’s passengers off a plane. What if Mesaba wasn’t in a position help (What does that mean anyway? Only carrier with an available gate?), does that mean it would been nobody’s fault? There should be a mechanism to get people off a plane under circumstance. I guess I don’t understand the logistics here.

  • SirWired

    x2 John,

    Federal Aviation Regulations Section 91.3

    * (a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

    * (b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.

    Since the plane had not arrived yet, it was still “in-flight” despite actually being on the ground.

    Even if “the terminal was closed to passengers for security reasons”, the Captain is nevertheless authorized to let the passengers off the plane, if deemed necessary. No assistance from Mesaba was needed here. The pilot could have also gotten assistance from the ground control staff.

  • Joe M

    As I understand it the plane was sent to Rochester due to bad weather, meaning, after refueling and the weather cleared, said plane would continue on to the original destination.

    Since most of the regional jets (and to my knowledge any aircraft over the size of a business jet) don’t carry onboard stairs, the only way for the crew to evacuate safely would be to pop the emergency chutes. Once you do that, that plane isn’t going anywhere with passengers for a while. And, I doubt Rochester has the facilities to replace the emergency chutes on site.

    I’m sure the crew was hoping that this delay would not have been as long as it turned out to be. In hindsight, it would probably have been better for Continental (or their regional partners) just to order the chutes opened and score the PR victory… but I can certainly understand the crew wouldn’t be quick to do that and would exhaust every possible alternative before doing that since it could very well have cost them their jobs.

    I think that while they’re putting in assurances that this won’t happen again, give the air crews assurances there will be no retribution if they opt to pop the chutes and evacuate in situations like this. It won’t take too many massive repair bills and planes being out of service before the airlines start jumping in and stopping this nonsense.

  • Jasper

    Why would anybody in their right mind defend the actions of the crew here? I really do not understand that.

  • Chris

    I’d agree that I cannot understand how MESABA gets the blame for this.

    Call up Signature flight and they’ve got the ability to at least pump the lavs if not offload the pax. I want to know what the XJT captain was saying when the NW A320 pulled up to the gate and dropped its passengers off.

    http://www.signatureflight.com/Locations/rst/
    http://www.rochesterintlairport.com/air-services.php

  • http://www.atme.org Kristin Zern

    I don’t think it would be in the passengers best interest to use the emrgency shoots. Seems to me they are reserved for emergency evacuation sitiuation where peole have to exit the plane due to fire, smoke. People often are injured using the shoots.

    The problem is this was an unscheduled stop and I guess Mesaba was the only airline at the airport with the correct stairs for the type of plane.

    It seems like the Mesaba people/person didn’t use common sense or just wanted to go home. This happened after midnight when the airport was effectively closed.

    Clearly that is no excuse. Amd clearly procedures for dealing with circumstances such as these need to be in place at every airport, small, medium or large.

  • John

    Let the finger pointing begin. In the end, no one will accept the blame and the passengers get nothing.

  • Christopher Elliott

    @John, I agree. Wouldn’t it be nice if an airline would just say: “We accept the blame. We’re doing everything we can to make sure this doesn’t happen again. We’re sorry.”

    I mean, I’m constantly apologizing for my stories. Maybe these airlines should try it on for size. It might do wonders!

  • FRANK

    @ Chris….if you are constantly apologizing, then why aren’t you apologizing for the blame you hurled at Continental in the podcast you made on August 11?

  • Christopher Elliott

    @FRANK (are you yelling?) can’t you tell the difference between a story and a podcast?

    I apologize for my stories but not my podcasts.

    ;-)

  • Jeanne

    I don’t get it. Wasn’t there a Delta plane that landed *after* the ExpressJet flight, and those passengers were offloaded from the plane and on to a charter bus to Minneapolis? How does that reconcile with no services available to the ExpressJet flight? I’d appreciate more perspective/info on this, from those of you who are more knowledgeable than I.

    Thanks.

  • Carver Farrow

    I hate to admit it but is makes sense. I can easily see the airplane not having any means of getting the passengers off the plane short of using the emergency shoots. And even if the passengers got off the plane. Then wha?. How would they get inside of the airport given that the doors to the airport are probably locked.

    Where the crew went wrong was in not explaining this to the passengers.

  • Michelle

    Seems that some people are suggesting that an airline can just open the doors and let passengers wander aimlessly around the grounds of the airport. Seems to me that common sense would dictate that’s really not the best idea–for the safety of the passengers, other planes, etc. Also seems to me that people get chased down with guns for wandering around the airport grounds, which is usually a highly-secured area. So instead of debating whose fault it is that this group of people were kept on a plane for a totally unreasonable amount of time, we’d be debating who should pay the lawsuit because someone wandered into the wrong area and got arrested, run over, whatever.

    If a pilot doesn’t have anywhere to off-load a plane–somewhere to send the passengers–they have to keep them on the plane. Yes, they are in charge of the plane, but there is a limit to their control, hence the fact that they were re-routed to an airport where Continental has no services. It’s my understanding that they don’t pick where they get re-routed. Whether or not there were services for the people on the plane would be the fault of the crew, but I believe the inability to off-load the plane lies on the shoulders of Mesaba and the airport. I’m appalled that Mesaba claims they “offered assistance as a courtesy.” First of all, they clearly didn’t assist, and second, there was clearly nothing courteous about their offer.

  • Chicky

    Maybe RJs don’t carry onboard stairs, but there are *always* the roll-along kind available. You can’t tell me the pilot couldn’t have sent the co-pilot out the door (we’re talking a six-foot drop here) to get some stairs?

    Yeah, using the emergency chutes would have ensured the plane didn’t go anywhere, certainly–and I guaran*tee you deploying the chutes would have ensured *someone* did something about that flight–posthate. If whoever was actually operating that flight had been in the position of explaining to the suits why the pilot opted to deploy the chutes, and why one of their aircraft was now out of comission for a while, a rolling staircase would have appeared like magic out of the fog and the passengers would have been out of there. Popping the chutes and putting the aircraft out of service does the one thing that actually means something: it takes money out of someone’s pockets and they will not long stand for *that* state of affairs.

    If something like this should happen again, then passenger to pilot: “Pop the chutes!”

  • Sam

    Check out the audio recordings off the airline’s website and PR newswire. I think it will answer a lot of the questions and eliminate he said/she said. It’s obvious from the tapes that Mesaba and Rochester Airport lied to the press to save their hides. They must not have known their conversations were being recorded. By the way, the other aircraft was Northwest (who owns Mesaba) and stayed out for over 3hrs also.

  • Carver

    @Chicky

    But that assumes the 1) the stairs are accessible and 2) the passengers would be able to get inside the airport once they disembarked. Both seem highly unlikely to me under the circumstances.

  • Chris

    @Sam – Interesting that you suggest the tapes indicate Mesaba lied. I see the tapes as indicating that the ExpressJet dispatcher(s) kept trying to get the flight to MSP that night and Mesaba did, what it safely could, to get the pax off when it had a chance.

    The FIRST priority for Mesaba was to handle its own aircraft (DL & NW) and then any OAL planes.

    By the way, from the recordings, it becomes apparent that, for stretches of time, it was not safe to have ground personnel out on the tarmac due to inclement weather.

  • Colleen

    Chris, I liked to know where you listened to the tapes? The edited parts I heard show that the pilot was practically begging to get the people off the plane but whoever was on the other end kept denying her that option.

  • Joe Farrell

    Guys – there was a simple EZ way off the airplane – legally – without requiring any inflatable slides –

    1. RST has a general aviation fixed base operator. Signature Flight is open 24/7 at that facility. Signature Flight has an adjustable air stair that fits aircraft from 767-smaller regional jets and even business jets. The Captain of the flight could have simply called them on the radio and asked them to bring it over. Total cost – probably about $250

    2. The pax could have then evacuated into either the terminal – or – if the police and everyone else raised as stink – into the Signature terminal which was easily large enough with multiple rest rooms easily capable of handling 50 people off an RJ. Sure – then the pax would need to be rescreened. But that would have taken what? 20 minutes?

    Then how can this be Mesaba’s problem? Mesaba is a DELTA carrier – the problem happened with a Continental carrier. How can we FORCE a Continental carrier to be served by a Mesaba carrier? WE cann force them – thus – how can they be liable? I think I am missing a lot here. From a human perspective sure, Mesaba ‘should’ have helped but they were not ‘legally required to help,’ which means how can we shift blame to Mesaba?

    IMHO the Expressjet pilot should have told Ops they were going to taxi over to the general aviation terminal and unload. The pilot failed her basic duty as a pilot in command. Instead she did what she was told.

  • ed

    during all this, all I could think of was, what is the escalation procedure here? Who is next in the chain of command? If the person you’re talking to doesn’t get what you want done, then go above them…if you can’t get above them, contact your boss to escalate to a higher authority! This stuff is written down somewhere…Why didn’t this get escalated? That’s my question!
    Ed

  • dmo

    what happend to the mesaba agent?. Did he lose his job. More than likely he was a “junior” agent just finishing cleaning an overnighter and didnt know what to do.
    You get what you pay for.
    And its true…the flight should have diverted to a “company” station where assets are available to process customers (especially if the flight cancels-which it did after all that time) (and crew “time-out). The agent in question doesn’t have maximum “duty” time like the “cabin” crews do>>>>>>>>>>>>.

Previous post:

Next post: