Unruly passenger incidents alarmingly rising

In 2020, the rate of incidents doubled, and that trend is continuing in 2021. In an informal survey of IATA's Cabin Operations Safety Technical Group, one member airline reported over 1,000 incidents of non-compliance in a single week. Another calculated a 55 per cent increase in unruly passenger incidents based on the numbers carried. Incidents have even resulted in diversions, including a flight from Paris to Delhi.

In the United States, the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) had more than 4,600 incident reports between January and early October 2021, of which 72 per cent related to a refusal to comply with the federal mandate to wear a mask. Some 849 of these reports have been investigated versus a yearly average of 142 over the last decade.

Tim Colehan, IATA's Assistant Director, Government and Industry Affairs, notes that a complex set of new health rules means some increase in non-compliance was inevitable. But this can't explain it entirely. He points out that at the time of booking, passengers agree to the terms and conditions. There is messaging at check-in, at the gate, and announcements are usually made on the aircraft. Other factors are clearly at play in the increase in unruly passenger cases.

"One explanation for the hike in incidents is that the context has changed," says Colehan. "Not wearing a mask is arguably no different to not wearing a seatbelt or not putting your laptop away. They involve a failure to follow instructions. But because of the pandemic and the public health implications, not wearing a mask makes it much more personal and has caused confrontation between passengers. It has also led to governments, such as the United States to take a zero-tolerance approach and to encourage incident reporting by crew."

In the United States, although there is a zero-tolerance policy and FAA fines have topped $1 million since the beginning of 2021, differences between federal and state laws complicate prosecution procedures. Interfering with cabin crew is a federal crime so needs to be dealt with by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), whereas flights involving unruly incidents are typically dealt with by local law enforcement upon landing.

There are similar legal issues in the international arena. The 1963 Tokyo Convention attempted to alleviate any confusion by insisting the right to prosecute resided with the state in which the aircraft was registered. But this can cause problems on landing in a foreign country. Local authorities sometimes consider that they do not have jurisdiction when the aircraft is registered in another state, or the operator holds a foreign certificate (AOC). Unruly passengers may therefore be free to continue their journey without any sanction for their misbehaviour.

With the jurisdiction established, it is vital that countries take steps to enforce the law. "Airlines want their customers to have an enjoyable journey, but we need to make it clear to the small minority of unruly passengers that compliance with crew instructions is mandatory under civil aviation law," insists Colehan.

IATA is calling for governments to review their current enforcement mechanisms to ensure they can deal with all types of unruly and disruptive behaviour. Wider use of civil and administrative penalties as set out in an ICAO manual (Document 10117) would create an efficient and effective deterrent. This could be fines that are handed out on arrival by police much like the system in place for speeding offenses in vehicles.

"Criminal prosecution remains an option for more serious incidents with large fines or prison sentences," says Colehan. "These offences must be enforced vigorously, and the consequences of such behaviour publicized," says Colehan. No-fly lists is a more complicated solution. Delta Air Lines hit the headlines by calling for US carriers to share no-fly lists amid a surge in unruly events. The airline reports 1,600 people on its own no-fly list.