While I was busy, and the site was down, last week, many of the large traditional U.S. airlines announced plans to reduce capacity in the face of ever-higher jet fuel costs. Presumably, such reductions in capacity should bolster airlines’ ability to raise fares to the point where fuel costs can be better funded.
A blurb in the New York Times reminds us of one side-effect of those reductions:
Virgin America opposes an effort by six rivals to protect takeoff and landing slots they may not use in New York, Chicago and Washington this winter because of high fuel costs. The request by AMR’s American Airlines, UAL’s United Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Northwest Airlines, the US Airways Group and AirTran Holdings is “anticonsumer,” Virgin America’s lawyer told regulators in Washington. Under federal law, carriers must use slots at restricted airports or risk giving them up to rivals. The six want to waive the requirement so they can trim flights without later losing the access.
While I appreciate the airlines’ strategic motives in not releasing unused slots, I think Virgin America has a point about the practice being anticompetitive.
Of course, considering how congested those airports can be…perhaps the landing slot bank could do with a little capacity reduction as well.