Millions of passengers fly through friendly skies daily, which puts airport infrastructure under intense scrutiny. The federal government allowed the FAA to give public agencies that control a commercial service airport the power to charge the airlines a fee, known as the passenger facility charge which would be used to maintain the standards of the airport infrastructure (Imes, 1995). Airport infrastructure requires constant upkeep and updating to keep up with the FAA inspections and the large number of traveling passengers. The airports want PFCs to increase to receive more money to carry out the necessary upgrades and improvements to the airport infrastructure. On the other hand, airlines do not want the PFCs to increase because it would mean a reduction in their revenues, which would increase ticket prices, resulting in a decrease in the volume of passengers traveling.
Problem
The airlines face a double problem with an increase in the PFCs, possible loss of passengers, and a loss of revenue. Airlines generate their revenues from the large volume of passengers that them (Rodriguez, 2017). They feel that the PFCs they are currently paying are sufficient for airports to meet the requirements of the 21 st -century aviation demand, which the airports want to increase. On the other hand, the airports feel that without increased funding, they will not meet the requirements of the standards set by the FAA, which could threaten passenger safety.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Significance of The Problem
Should the airlines increase their ticket prices, they would struggle to sell the tickets to passengers who may not afford the increased prices. This would mean that there would be fewer flights from the airlines, which would lead to a loss in revenue. Airlines' revenue loss would reduce salaries, job layoffs, and fewer maintenance staff (Rodriguez, 2017).
Development of Alternative Action
Alternative action I : The federal government could step in to provide the airports with grants which will enable them to meet the standards of the FAA. In return, there would be no need for airlines to increase ticket prices.
Advantage
This action will enable airports to receive proper funding to comply with the FAA regulations, which will enhance passenger safety at airports. There will be no job cuts at airlines, thereby maintaining a stable economy.
Disadvantage
Federal grants still require funding, which will most likely come in the form of increased taxes. Increased taxes mean reduced income for potential airline passengers; hence they may never fly at all.
Alternative action II : Airports can lease the unused portions to farmers to grow crops, generating extra income for the airports.
Advantage
The airports will gain additional revenue, which they can use to upgrade airport infrastructure and comply with FAA regulations. Also, the airports save on paying workers to tend to the unused portions of the airport.
Disadvantage
The pollution coming from the airport could affect the farmers' crops, making them unsafe. Additionally, should the crops grow tall, they could interfere with aircraft operations within the airport.
Recommendations
I would recommend the federal government provide the airports with loans instead of grants to fund the infrastructure upgrades. Furthermore, the airports can lease portions of the airports to the farmers, but they should set stipulations such as the farmers should not plant crops that grow more than three feet tall and are non-consumable, for example, cotton. This would be beneficial for both parties, and they would put the land to good use.
References
Ines, S. (1995). Airline Passenger Facility Charges: What Do They Mean for an Ailing Industry. Journal of Air Law and Commerce , 60 (4), 1038-1089.
Rodriguez, F. (2017). Op-Ed: Should Passenger Facility Charges Be Increased? Airways Magazine. Retrieved 28 May 2021, from https://airwaysmag.com/airports/op-ed-should-passenger-facility-charges-be-increased/ .
