BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

------------------------------------------------------)

)

APPLICATION OF THE, )

INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ) OBJECTIONS TO TENTATIVE 

ASSOCIATION FOR APPROVAL OF ) DECISION AND ORDER TO

AN AGREEMENT (RESOLUTION 787) ) SHOW CAUSE

OF THE PASSENGER SERVICES )

CONFERENCE ) OST-2013-0048

)

------------------------------------------------------)

Benjamin Edelman

169 Walnut St.

Brookline, MA 02445

ben@benedelman.org

http://www.benedelman.org/

June 6, 2014
Benjamin Edelman

Objections to Tentative Decision OST-2013-0048

2 of 8

1. I write to object to Order 2014-5-7 (Docket No. DOT-OST-2013-0048-

0415) to the extent that the DOT permits, or purports to permit, airlines to sell tickets 

other than in accordance with published tariffs.

I. The Longstanding Obligation to Have and Follow a Tariff

2. Applicable law plainly requires that air carriers and ticket agents only sell 

air travel at the price specified in the applicable tariff. See 49 USC § 41510. § 41510 

(a)(3) further grants the DOT authority to specify additional benefits that must be 

specified in tariffs. But § 41510 does not grant DOT the authority to waive the 

requirement that prices match what a tariff specifies.

3. Neither does subsequent regulation change the meaning of § 41510. At 

p.14, the DOT’s Order to Show Cause claims that § 41510 “presumed filing of ... tariffs 

with the Department ... as part of a comprehensive economic regulatory regime.” In fact

the plain language of § 41510 says no such thing. Rather, § 41510 lays out a first duty, to 

establish a tariff and to always charge the price specified in the tariff. The possible 

existence (no longer in effect) of a separate duty, to file that tariff with the Department, is 

logically distinct. To wit, carriers can be required—and have been required!—to have

tariffs and to charge the prices provided by tariff, despite the lack of any requirement to 

file such tariffs with the Department.

II. Benefits of a Tariff: Prior to Purchase

4. Tariffs provide important benefits to passengers. Specifically, tariffs 

enumerate the fares and benefits a carrier offers in order to allow passengers to identify 

their rights, pursuant to the tickets they might purchase or have purchased.
Benjamin Edelman

Objections to Tentative Decision OST-2013-0048

3 of 8

5. I have personally availed myself of important benefits that were possible 

only thanks to the existence and availability of the tariff. For one, I have learned that a 

lower price, especially for a complex trip, can often be obtained by first consulting the 

tariff and then constructing an itinerary to satisfy the routing and other rules of a desired 

fare. In talking with professional travel agents, I have learned that experts typically 

follow the same process. For example, during April 2014 I needed to travel from Paris to 

London to Boston. I observed that London to Boston nonstop travel was expensive, on 

the date and class of service I sought. By booking travel from Paris to London to Boston, 

with a several-day stopover in London, I was able to reduce the cost of my ticket by more 

than 30%. Looking in the listings of published fares, I was also able to check for other 

possible routings (e.g. Brussels-London-Boston), see the price of each fare (regardless of 

availability on any given flight), and plan accordingly. More generally, I often have the 

flexibility to adjust the sequence of my stops. I therefore consider a large number of 

combinations. Only thanks to the published fare database is it feasible for me to check 

numerous options and plan accordingly.

6. I have also benefited from consulting tariffs and fare rules to learn the 

applicability of seasonal fares. Sometimes, the seasonality of a fare is determined by the 

date of the outbound segment. By shifting my outbound segment just a few days, I can 

obtain a low-season fare for the entire trip. I am able to learn the season cutoffs and the 

fare’s season concept (pricing the entire journey based on the departure date, versus 

pricing each segment according to its date) only by reading fare rules. It would be 

exceptionally time-consuming to attempt to deduce these rules through experimentation 

in the fare quote system.
Benjamin Edelman

Objections to Tentative Decision OST-2013-0048

4 of 8

7. I have also benefited from consulting tariffs to select the specific fare that 

best suits my needs. For example, I sometimes choose a slightly more expensive fare in 

order to have a lower penalty in case of changes. Standard online fare search tools 

provide only “cheapest available” and “refundable” searches, whereas viewing the entire 

fare database lets me choose from all available fares. I also sometimes choose a slightly 

more expensive fare in order to obtain a frequent flier program bonus or to use an 

upgrade voucher valid only on certain fare classes. Most online fare search tools provide 

no mechanism to restrict a search in this way, or if they do, they provide quotes for 

individual fares rather than letting me see the full range of options on a single screen.

8. Furthermore, many allowable routings and applicable fares cannot be 

“autopriced.” Rather, these routings and fares must be constructed segment by segment 

and verified manually by an airline or travel agency “rate desk.” Without access to the 

tariff, I would have no way to know of the existence of these fares, or make use of them.

9. Sometimes space is not immediately available for a desired fare, but is 

available “on request” or can be confirmed by asking to be placed on a waiting list for a 

particular booking class on a particular flight. Without access to the tariff, I would have 

no way to know what the price would be for that space, if confirmed, or to know to 

request that space, since that fare does not show up in displays of flights and prices for 

which confirmation is immediately available.

III. Benefits of a Tariff: Changes after Purchase

10. Tariffs are also crucial to me when considering making changes to a 

ticket. Prospective purchasers of a ticket are typically provided with the rules of that 

ticket, including rules for changes. But these rules almost always include a provision that 
Benjamin Edelman

Objections to Tentative Decision OST-2013-0048

5 of 8

the fee for any change of itinerary includes the difference in the fare “applicable” to the 

new itinerary. The “applicable” fare for the new itinerary is determined by the published 

tariff, which effectively incorporates the entirety of the tariff (for all possible fares, for all 

possible changes) into the rules of every such fare. Only by reference to the tariff can the 

price of any change be determined. Only through access to the tariff can a consumer 

determine how much a particular change will cost. There are near-infinite possible 

changes and new itineraries, and it would be impractical to include in each offer a table 

of prices for every possible change. 

11. Tariff provisions have repeatedly proven valuable to me when attempting 

to change travel. Selected examples:

a. In winter 2012, I sought to change a restricted ticket to create an open jaw to a 

different city and to travel on a different day. Carrier staff initially rejected my 

request to make this change because they said the requested open jaw was 

impermissible under the rules of the fare that I had purchased and because they 

said the desired new fare required an advance purchase that was not satisfied at 

the time of initial ticket purchase. They proposed that I purchase a new ticket at 

many thousands of dollars of additional expense. By reading the tariff, I was 

able to determine that at least a portion of their arguments were incorrect. After I 

conveyed my reasoning to carrier staff, I was able to obtain the desired change 

for payment of the change fee and minimal incremental expense.

b. In summer 2013, I sought to change a flexible ticket in order to add additional 

stopovers and flight segments. Carrier staff initially rejected my request to make 

these changes, saying that my requested routing was contrary to the rules of the 
Benjamin Edelman

Objections to Tentative Decision OST-2013-0048

6 of 8

fare I had purchased. They proposed that I purchase a new ticket at many 

thousands of dollars of additional expense. By reading the tariff, I was able to 

identify relevant provisions for stopovers, online transfers, interline transfers, 

and routing, all of which allowed what I sought. After I conveyed these 

provisions to carrier staff, I was able to obtain the desired change at minimal 

incremental expense.

c. In 2013, I spoke at length with a passenger who had suffered a flight 

cancellation, and who sought an involuntary refund for the remainder of his 

ticket. Carrier staff argued that an involuntary refund was not available in this 

circumstance. By reading the tariff, I identified provisions indicating that carrier 

staff were incorrect. When the passenger brought these provisions to the 

carrier’s attention, the carrier provided the involuntary refund he sought.

12. Had it not been for the availability of tariff provisions, both in carriers’ 

General Tariffs and in fare-specific rules, I believe I would have been unsuccessful in 

obtaining the specified benefits. I would have incurred thousands of dollars in additional 

expense to travel on the same flights. When carrier staff told me that a desired routing or 

itinerary was not possible with the fare I had purchased, I would have been unable to 

oppose or disprove that claim. 

13. I credit that my reliance on tariff provisions may be somewhat unusual. 

But I am not alone. Other passengers have learned to read tariffs, aided in part through 

services such as ExpertFlyer which provides a full listing of fares including the rules for 

each. At online discussion forums (including the widely-read FlyerTalk), it has become 

common for passengers to discuss tariffs, fare rules, and their applicability in 
Benjamin Edelman

Objections to Tentative Decision OST-2013-0048

7 of 8

considerable detail.1 These concepts also permeate DOT proceedings. For example, the 

third-party complaints of Darren Martin (OST-2014-0029) and Robert Samstein (OST2014-0033) are in large part grounded in interpretation of tariff provisions. Were it not 

for the existence and availability of the tariff (albeit availability in part contested in those 

proceedings), these passengers would struggle to obtain the benefits they seek.

IV. Importance of a Tariff Under Personalized Pricing

14. The benefits of tariffs are likely to grow in light of the prospect of 

personalized pricing. As pricing becomes more complicated, via personalization, it will 

become increasingly difficult for passengers to determine whether they have in fact been 

charged the correct fare, not to mention the correct additional collection for any desired 

change. A tariff will help passengers verify carriers’ calculations and oppose any errors. 

Moreover, any invidious discrimination would ordinarily be difficult to detect as it could 

be written off to permissible factors or idiosyncratic coincidence. In contrast, continued 

use of a tariff would reveal the fares for each type of passenger and the circumstances in 

which each fare is available. This information would help the Department more easily 

check whether invidious discrimination is occurring.

15. In the absence of a published tariff, the price of any change would be as 

much as the airline decides to charge, at the time of the change. Indeed, IATA 

Resolution 787 specifically contemplates individualized change fee “offers” which, like 

the initial prices of tickets, could be based on any personal information which the airline 

has obtained from any source. Arbitrarily high new prices and arbitrarily high charges 

 1 See e.g. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/air-canada-aeroplan/13408-ac-hkg-int-air-tariff-not-valid-alltickets-lie-truth.html (passenger seeking an extended transit of <24 hours and relying on tariff provisions 

when airline ticketing staff tell him that he must take the first available connection), 

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/lufthansa-austrian-swiss-brussels-lot-other-partners-miles-more/793835-

end-end-fare-rules-question.html (passenger checking combination of various fare rules) and myriad others.
Benjamin Edelman

Objections to Tentative Decision OST-2013-0048

8 of 8

for changes differences, based on personal information about the traveler and her 

circumstances, are exactly the sort of exploitation of travelers that the tariff requirements 

in common carrier laws were adopted to prevent.

V. Requested Revision to DOT Approval of Resolution 787

16. I take no position on whether DOT should approve Resolution 787. But if 

the DOT does approve Resolution 787, I ask that DOT reaffirm carriers’ longstanding 

obligation to have tariffs and to charge only the fares provided by tariff. Such a 

requirement could be embodied in an addition to the Tentative Conditions on Approval:

Tariff

Approval of Resolution 787 does not in any way modify any obligation for 

any air carrier, foreign air carrier, or ticket agent to have a tariff, publish 

the tariff, or adhere to the tariff. 

Respectfully submitted,

/s/

Benjamin Edelman