BEFORE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WASHINGTON, DC 20590 

### "0 ! c /\ iQ:

### 3

## g

Petition for Rulemaking and Unfair-Practice Complaint of Donald L. Pevsner, Esq. Docket

## £;6

# r-**6J~**

## T-

## vO

### 11-() ()

## 7?

-------------------------------

PETITION FOR RULEMAKING AND UNFAIR-PRACTICE COMPLAINT OF DONALD L. PEVSNER, Esq.

Communications with respect to this document should be directed to:

April 15, 2011 DONALD L. PEVSNER Attorney-at-Law 2010 Valle Cay Drive Vilas, NC 28692 TEL.: (828)297-7823 FAX.: (828)297-7824 EMAIL: DonPevsner@aol.comBEFORE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WASHINGTON, DC 20590

Petition for Rulemaking and Unfair-Practice Complaintof : Donald L. Pevsner, Esq. Docket



## ----------------------

COMES NOW Donald L. Pevsner, Esq., pro bono publico, and files this Petition for Rulemaking and Unfair-Practice Complaint pursuantto 14 C.F.R. §302.16 (as to both air transportation and foreign air transportation) and §302.502 (as to foreign air transportation). The remedies requested
are as follows as to the subject-matter below: (1)The subjectofboth the Petition for Rulemaking and the Unfair-Practice Complaintelements ofthis document is the refusal ofboth air carriers and foreign air carriers, in both domestic air transportation and foreign air transportation, to permit passenger ticketing on a round-trip-only, excursion-fare basis (i.e., as strongly opposed to two rapacious "full-fare Economy" one-way tickets) when passenger travel is requested on different air carriers or foreign air carriers on the respective outbound and inbound sectors, when such differentcarriers are not members ofthe same "Big Three" airline Alliances ofOneWorld, SkyTeam and StarAlliance, or other, similar airline Alliance. (2)49 U.S.C. §41712 gives the Secretary ofTransportation authority to "•..investigate and decide whether an air carrier, foreign air carrier, or ticket agent has been or is engaged in an unfairor deceptive practiceor
an unfairmethod ofcompetition in air transportation or the saleofair transportation. Ifthe Secretary, after notice and an opportunity for a hearing, finds that an air carrier, foreign air carrier, or ticket agent is engaged in an unfairor deceptive practiceor unfairmethodofcompetition,-2-

the Secretary shall order [not "may orderII] the air carrier, foreign air carrier, or ticket agent to stop the practice or method. II [Emphasis Added] (3)49 U.S.C. §41501, applicable to foreign air transportation only, mandates that: IIEvery air carrierand foreign air carrier shall establish, comply with, and enforce-- (1)Reasonable prices, classifications, rules, and practices related to foreign air transportation. II (3)Your Petitioner and Complainant hereby requests the Department to: (a)Determine whether the air carrier and foreign air carrier practice set forth in Paragraph (1), above, is, as your Petitioner/Complainant now alleges, a prima facie unfair practice and/or an unfair method ofcompetition, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. §41712; and (b)As may be necessary in foreign air transportation only, mandate that thecarrier practice set forth in Paragraph (1), above, violates Paragraph (1) of49 U.S.C. §41501 per se. (c)Argument in supportofsuch prompt Departmental action is
as follows: (A)Prior to deregulation ofdomestic air transportation, it was standard airline-industry practice in both air transportation and foreign air transportation to permit, ifnot to actually encourage, the practices of interliningand fare combinability, with particularapplication to permitting a passenger to fly on different air carriers or foreign air carriers on the outbound and inbound sector(s) oftheir ticketed itineraries.

### -3-

This practice, in fact, persisted long after U.S. domestic airline deregulation, as an elemental componentofpassenger satisfaction. For, when a passenger cannot fly on differentcarriers when holding any excursion-fare ticket, other than members ofthe same airline Alliance, the result may be highly detrimental to him: (i)Take the case ofa passenger who wishes to fly from Chicago to Rome, Italy on a nonstop flight; then return nonstop from Zurich, Switzerland to Chicago as well. His paramount goal, ifhe is sane, is to avoid changing aircraft at a ghastly hub city en route either way, where delays and security headaches may ruin his trip. As ofthis date, only Alitalia operates nonstop flights from Chicago to Rome. Only Swiss International Airlines operates nonstop flights from Zurich back to Chicago. Swiss is a member ofthe Star Alliance, and Alitalia is a member ofSkyTeam. As such, and as both carriers are shortsightly determined to keep 100% of the ticket revenue within their own Alliances rather than to recognize the obvious fact of

### reciprocityas to other, similarly-inclined passengers, it is impossible to fly this "open-jaw" itinerary without being forced to endure a connection at an en route hub city in one direction. This onerous practice is therefore a prima facie violation ofthe precepts set forth in 49 U.S.C. §41501 and §41712, as it is arbitarily unfair and
an unfair method ofcompetition [§41712] and an unreasonable rule and practice related to foreign air transportation [§41501]. (ii)The same unreasonable status ofthis practice is at work with regard to purely-domestic air transportation. A further element, not as widely-present on routes in foreign air transportation but still an important factor, is the passenger1s inability to obtain departures atthe times ofhis,-4-

rather than one sole carrier's, choice in both directions on his itinerary. For example, Carrier A may have a nonstop flight at an acceptable time, butonly a one-stop flight or change-of-plane service in the other direction. The universal practiceofaircarriers and foreign aircarriers alike deprives the hapless passenger offreedom ofchoice, unless he wishes to pay five or ten times the applicable excursion fare by using two separate "full-Economy" or similar tickets on the two differentcarriers. (iii)Had the concept of "airlinealliances" been envisioned by my late, good friend, Dr. Alfred E. Kahn, it is probable that he would have raised an alarm on the damages that this later industry concept is continuing to inflict on millions ofairline passengers. It is also probable that the resultantoligipolization ofreasonable carrier selection on differing flight sectors would be highly offensiveand alarming to even rabid "free-marketeers", who haveobviouslynever thought aboutconfronting the net results ofthe dubious workings ofthe "freemarket" in this specific case. It is the purposeofyour Petitioner/Complainantto have the Department conduct
a probing investigation ofthe status quo as a result ofhis filing ofthe instant document, and to try to reconcile the resultant inconvenience to the mass traveling public with its duty to the pre-eminent doctrine of
consumer protection.

April 15, 2011 Donald L. Pevsner Attorney-at-Law [pro bono publico] 2010 Valle Cay Drive

-- Vilas, NC 28692 TEL.: (828)297-7823 FAX.: (828)297-7824 EMAIL: DonPevsner@aol.com

### -5-

VERIFICATION

Pursuantto Title 18 United States Code Section 1001, I, Donald L. Pevsner, in my individual capacity and as the authorized representativeof the pleader, have not in any manner knowingly or willfully falsified, concealed or failed to disclose any material fact or made any false, fictitious or fraudulent statementor knowingly used any documents which contain such statements in connection with the preparation, filing or prosecution ofthe pleading. understand that an individual who is found to have violated the provisions of 18 U.S.C. Section 10 1 shall be fined or imprisoned not more

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Donald L. Pevsner, Esq., do hereby certify that I have served the following respondents to this Petition for Rulemaking and Unfair-Practice Complaint by First Class Mail, on this fifteenth day ofApril, 2011: (1)Samuel Podberesky, Esq. USDOT Washington, DC 20590 (2)Douglas Lavin: Regional Vice President, North America International Air Transport Association 601 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW: North Building, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 (3)David Berg: General Counsel Air Transport Association 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW: Suite 1100 Washinaton

_DC 20004