Agency Would Handle Air Travel Complaints : Airlines: Rising fares in California have spurred introduction of legislation that could create another voice for consumers.

Unhappy with any of your flight experiences within California? If so, would you like to have a public outlet where you can register your complaints?

That’s the idea behind a proposed law that would establish an agency called Airline Consumer Information, to be run by California’s Public Utilities Commission.

The bill, SB1723, is making its way through the legislature, but there is considerable airline opposition, and court challenges are a possibility.

If created, the Airline Consumer Information office would look into consumer complaints about prices, services and related subjects. It would not, however, have final authority on matters of routes and prices. Under deregulation, the carriers have the right to set their own policies on those matters.

While the new office wouldn’t have any enforcement authority, the expectation is that by focusing public attention on individual airline problems, safety and service will be improved.

Higher fares are the major reason for the bill. Prices have shown a marked increase in recent years, especially after the PSA/USAir and Air Cal/American mergers. Rates on intra-California flights, including the oft-flown Los Angeles-San Francisco route, have risen as much as 40% over the rate of inflation since the outset of deregulation in 1978, according to the PUC.

An office of Airline Consumer Information could also address the issue of allocating the much-sought-after landing slots and gates at crowded and over-used airports. One of the avowed purposes of deregulation was to foster competition, but without airport terminal facilities, an airline cannot start or expand services. As a result, the fewer services available, the higher the fares.

The U.S. Department of Transportation, which also serves as a forum for complaints about carriers, encompasses several areas of consumer protection: charters, domestic baggage liability, overbooking/denied-boarding compensation, and seats in a no-smoking area.

The new office would be funded by imposing a tax on airlines that earn more than $25 million annually for flights within California, a qualification that affects virtually all of the carriers serving the state. One obvious concern is that affected airlines would simply pass the cost of the tax, which has yet to be determined, on to consumers.

In a sense, then, passengers would wind up paying for the opportunity to protest the added cost of their tickets. Proponents of the bill believe, however, that the possibility of higher fares for lesser flights is still cause for action.

“The basic purpose of the bill is to obtain accurate information on air service in California, which would enable us to make investigations, recommend action and propose legislation,” said Rocky Saunders, a consultant to Sen. David Roberti (D-Hollywood), who sponsored the bill.

“Ultimately, we would like to lobby Congress to release some authority to states to regulate airlines, but not like before deregulation. We want to be able to stimulate competition, and we need the tools to do that.”

The office would publish its findings at least once a year, and possibly quarterly, Saunders said.

Airlines, not surprisingly, are far from happy about the prospect of an Airline Consumer Information office, and at any hint of reregulation.

“We’re strongly opposed to this bill, which would create a costly and duplicative office that would focus on subject matter that falls under the jurisdiction of the federal Department of Transportation,” said Alan Wayne, a Los Angeles-based lobbyist for the Air Transport Assn., which represents the major American carriers.

“Passengers already have the consumer affairs office of the Department of Transportation, as well as the state’s Department of Consumer Affairs. The call for this new office is based on some misconceptions.

“People who recall some of the low fares on PSA and Air Cal don’t realize that those fares were artificially deflated to start. And there’s a good deal of comparing apples to oranges--unrestricted coach fares you can buy 10 minutes before flight time versus highly restricted nonrefundable advance-purchase fares.”

The travel agency community is also concerned about the impact of such a new state office. “The bill could have a dire effect on air traffic in California,” said Susan Tanzman-Kaplan, president of the Southern California chapter of the American Society of Travel Agents.

“We’re not against the bill, but as it’s written--very broadly--it has to be analyzed to see what the real fallout will be for consumers.”

Another bill affecting consumers that is expected to be introduced in Sacramento this legislative session is one authorizing a comprehensive two-year study of the travel industry. Such a study would be designed to help determine ways of improving the current travel promoters law in California plus any other legislation affecting travel.

The travel promoters law, among other provisions, calls for anyone who sells travel in California to issue and deliver tickets or vouchers to clients within two business days after full payment, or deposit all full payments into a trust account.

Protection against scam operators and tour operator failures, two problems that have plagued consumers, are key issues to be analyzed.

The bill was drafted under the aegis of the California Coalition of Travel Organizations, which includes several trade associations including ASTA, the Assn. of Retail Travel Agents, United States Tour Operators Assn. and the National Tour Assn.

If approved by the state, the study would be conducted by an advisory group of 10 that would be four travel agents, two representatives from the state attorney general’s office, two representatives from the California Consumer Union and two members yet to be identified.