A potential merger between US Airways and United has its advocates and detractors. One thing it doesn’t have is much hope for improving operations. That’s because the regulations and systems that underpin the industry remain unchanged.
Antitrust rules still prevent all other carriers, including foreign ones, from coordinating their routes and schedules. This is necessary to reduce industry duplication and costs, while preventing fare wars that bleed cash, trying to get rid of excess inventory.
Second, labor laws still can’t avert a strike. Mandatory binding arbitration may be a better way to settle disputes without disrupting operations, which can cripple and in some cases ruin a carrier.
Third, all airlines are still faced with an old, inefficient air traffic control system. Congress has yet to release the funds to upgrade it. New satellite-based methods will speed up departures and arrivals and allow more fuel-efficient direct routes. Even then, it is a decade or more from completion.
Fourth, from a passenger perspective, airplanes will still be cramped and uncomfortable. Fundamental aircraft design dates from the 1950s. This won’t change until accounting and tax rules support aviation R&D.
Lastly, jet fuel will still cost the same: a lot. Alternative fuels are being developed by the US Air Force. Airlines will need to formally join the effort.
Mergers won’t create improvements without a comprehensive change in aviation policy. Absent that, airlines may find themselves in a continued battle for survival, while passengers are hijacked by the false promises of mere corporate transactions.
Matt Andersson, President, Indigo Aerospace, Chicago, Ill.
