Gulliver | Get your knees-up

Congress is trying to set a minimum distance between airline seats

That is likely to harm rather than help passengers

By A.W. | WASHINGTON, DC

CONGRESS may soon pass legislation compelling airlines in America to keep a minimum seat pitch, as the distance between rows of seats is known. The reauthorisation bill for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), a regulator, must be passed by September 30th. The House of Representatives passed it on September 26th and the chairman of the Senate committee in charge of the bill expects it to pass the Senate quickly. “Relief could soon be on the way for weary airline passengers facing smaller and smaller seats,” declared one senator.

But will it? There is good reason to believe that the bill will backfire and hurt the flyers it is meant to protect. If it sets seat pitch above the smallest levels employed by some airlines, passengers across the industry could end up paying more to fly. Gary Leff, a travel writer, makes this point persuasively on his blog, View From the Wing. Right now, the smallest seat pitch on American carriers is 28 inches (70cm) on ultra-low-cost airlines such as Spirit and Frontier. Travellers choosing to fly with these airlines know they are in for a cramped experience. But they fly with them anyway because of the low prices on offer. Meanwhile, legacy airlines such as American, Delta and United have been forced to reduce some of their own fares to remain competitive with these no-frills rivals.

Seat-pitch regulation would change the equation. If the FAA mandates 29 or 30 inches between rows, low-cost airlines would have to spend money moving seats around and would sell fewer tickets on each flight. The costs of all of this would be passed on to flyers in the form of higher fares. Legacy carriers would be the biggest winners. With less pressure to maintain low fares in order to compete with the likes of Spirit and Frontier, they could raise their prices as well. In other words, it is likely that travellers on all airline types would face higher fares, even if they do not always get to enjoy more legroom.

And what if the FAA sets a lower minimum? At best, this would do nothing in the short term. But at worst, it could actually hurt flyers, too. Christopher Elliott, the founder of Elliott.org, a consumer group, told MarketWatch, a news website, that he expects the FAA to put the minimum seat pitch at 28 inches. That is a reasonable bet, given the money that some airlines would have to spend on replacing seats if a higher number is chosen. The likelihood of the FAA being challenged in court as a result of such a ruling is high. Mr Elliott argues that airlines would see such a change as permission to set their seat pitches at 28 inches—less than the 30 to 32 inches that can be found on most major American airlines. So there is a chance that some airline rows could actually shrink as a result of legislation aimed at ensuring more legroom.

A better course would be to allow the market to continue to determine airline seating arrangements. Flyers have indicated that they are happy with tighter seats, so long as they cost less. It is hard to see what Congress hopes to achieve by overruling them.

Discover more

How much will Hong Kong's protests damage visitor numbers?

Tourism is a surprisingly resilient industry—but only if governments want it to be

Why Hong Kong’s airport was a good target for protesters

The streets of 19th-century Paris and the postmodern architecture of Hong Kong’s main terminal have much in common


Why trains are not always as green as they seem

The “flight-shame” movement encourages travellers to go by train instead of plane. But not all rail lines are environmentally friendly