The Fiasco at Lambert Airport April 22nd

[Todd Renshaw]

I think it is interesting you are writing about the greed of "business" when Lambert International Airport is owned by the City of St. Louis (see: http://www.lambert-stlouis.com/flystl/about-lambert/ ) and the Missouri Highway Patrol is part of the State of Missouri.

In other words, these are government, not business.

But Mike, aren't airports somewhat beholden to their airline "clients?" If the airport goes into lockdown, it's the airlines that really lose. So I would expect that there's a lot of behind-the-scenes pressure to have zero false alarm events.

Am I off base here?

 

[Mike Peregrine]

These government agencies - while by the definition of law are public servants - operate completely based on fiduciary concerns and their ability to self-sustain through budget. The entire federal and state governmental system is run as a business. It's only when confronted with the reality of liability and the threat of mass litigation that policy such as this gets challenged. And that is typically only the result of waiting for actual damages to occur. In other words, someone has to die before a policy will change, or there has to be an enormous uproar generated by the people who support those in office and who threaten to take their support (primarily financial!) away and give it to someone else. There's absolutely no sense it, but that is exactly how it works. According to the statements made in the posted articles, the reasoning behind the airport failing to take action had to do with doubts concerning the storm, and the decision not to interrupt flights. Those are stunning statements to me.

No matter what this disconnect results from, it is a policy that should change for the benefit of the lives involved, and I'm glad to see that the situation is at least being questioned by the Post in public view. There are more than a few pilots unhappy with the current standard in place, and my guess is just about every passenger moving through Lambert the day this happened feels pretty strongly about the situation as well.

 

[Mike Smith]

But Mike, aren't airports somewhat beholden to their airline "clients?"

Up to a point, depends on the airport. Southwest bought AirTran primarily because it desperately wanted access to ATL where there were not enough gates. Other airports are much more beholden to the airlines than Hartsfield. Regardless, the airport director, staff, and board are government employees and Lambert is a governmental entity.

These government agencies... operate completely based on fiduciary concerns and their ability to self-sustain through budget. The entire federal and state governmental system is run as a business.

...the reasoning behind the airport failing to take action had to do with doubts concerning the storm, and the decision not to interrupt flights. Those are stunning statements to me.

...it is a policy that should change for the benefit of the lives involved, and I'm glad to see that the situation is at least being questioned by the Post in public view. There are more than a few pilots unhappy with the current standard in place, and my guess is just about every passenger moving through Lambert the day this happened feels pretty strongly about the situation as well.

Mike, I completely agree with the second part of your posting but don't understand why you want to let government off the hook. The Missouri Highway Patrol is a governmental agency, period. You are a resident of Missouri -- you and the other voters can "throw the bums out" any time you wish if you don't like the way the state is being run.

I'm reluctant to say the following (because I fear it will be seen as self-serving) but I wish to illustrate that things are not as simple as government = good, business = bad.

Who first wrote about this issue and brought it to the public's attention? Yours truly in my book Warnings. It is right on pages 175-177. In an television interview on February 18, 2011, I brought it up again and called for changes. I also wrote an article that was published in a magazine read by many in the aviation industry. What am I? A businessperson. I don't get a government salary for this. I do it because it is the right thing to do.

The FAA (government), many airports (government), and airlines (business) continue to tolerate this dangerous policy that will cost lives if it is not changed. The former two categories are supposed to work "in the public interest." They seem happy with the status quo. Lets put the blame for this incident where it belongs.

I have the same fear that it will take a major disaster to get it changed. My goal in pursuing this issue is that enough people cause enough pressure to get it changed before a disaster occurs. That is going to take some of you writing letters and applying political pressure. I'm only one person and there is only so much I can do.