Airline ticket contracts are long, complicated and hard to read, government says

Every time airline passengers buy tickets, they’re agreeing to a lengthy contract that outlines the services the airline will provide and, just as important, the rights passengers have should something go wrong.

Southwest Airlines’ runs 41 pages. American Airlines’ contains 27 sections, covering such things as baggage, delays and refunds.

But how easy is it, really, for the average traveler to navigate this complex bit of airline bureaucracy?

Not very, according to a recent government study, which described the legally binding contracts, which vary by airline, as “generally lengthy and difficult to understand.”

In a survey of 11 domestic airlines, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that the contracts of carriage ranged from 17 to 74 pages, with the average running 20,000 words. Understanding what’s in the document requires a reading ability similar to that of a college graduate, the office found using an analysis that considers word and sentence length.

“They can really be summed up in one or two sentences,” said Paul Hudson, president of the nonprofit advocacy group Flyer’s Rights and member of the FAA’s Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee. The airlines “can do whatever they want whenever they want. They’ll try to do what their ticket says, but don’t hold them to anything.”

This state of affairs won’t come as any surprise to passengers caught up in the fine print in a dispute with an airline. The contracts cover nearly every contingency, with airlines carefully laying out what they are and are not responsible for.

The issue came under increased scrutiny earlier this year, when a viral video captured David Dao being dragged off a United Airlines flight by police after refusing to give up his seat. The airline had attempted to bump Dao from a full flight — something it’s allowed to do under the contracts of carriage — but having already taken his seat, Dao refused. That led to a confrontation with law enforcement United’s CEO would later describe as a “horrific event” — one he promised would never happen again.

Airlines are not out of place in modern world, where nearly every service or product comes with lengthy terms of service or consent forms outlining such things as how data will be collected and how a complaint or legal dispute would be handled.

Omri Ben-Shahar, a law professor at the University of Chicago, said these types of agreements are a common way for corporations to manage risk, and they’ve grown increasingly complex over time as technology and companies become more sophisticated.

“The disputes arise and next time around the business knows, just to be on the safe side, we have to add a paragraph” to the contract, said BenShahar, author of “More Than You Wanted To Know: The Failure Of Mandated Disclosure.”

“I don’t know in the history of trade that there was a business that said, ‘Now we can delete a paragraph,’” he said.

After the Dao incident, United and other airlines changed their policies, and pledged not to remove passengers from a plane once they’ve been seated — except in cases where safety or security is a concern — and increases in how much compensation could be offered to volunteers, up to a maximum of $10,000 in some cases.

Airlines have made other efforts to improve the readability of their contracts of carriage, including a partnership between the Department of Transportation and industry group Airlines for America to define frequently used terms, which the DOT posts online with links to consumer protection regulations.

“U.S. airlines recognize that the onus is on us to foster a customercentric environment, and we take this commitment seriously,” Airlines for America said in a statement.

But Hudson, the consumer advocate, said the contracts leave much to be desired in terms of transparency and passenger protections.

Fliers’ Rights has petitioned the Department of Transportation to consider a rule that would require increased disclosure and clearer language about passengers’ rights to compensation when flights involving international segments are delayed, Hudson said. Such rights typically aren’t spelled out explicitly in contracts of carriage, instead obscured behind references to the Montreal Convention, a 1999 treaty regulating certain aspects of international air travel.

Hudson said airlines also have broad leeway to define terms like “force majeure,” a common clause written into the contracts that limits liability should a carrier cancel, delay or otherwise alter a flight or reservation in a number of situations, like bad weather, civil unrest, work stoppages and “any other condition” beyond the airline’s control.

Simplifying airline contracts of carriage or writing them in plainer language could make them more accessible, but the result for most passengers will likely be the same.

“People don’t read. There’s just not enough time in the day to read all the contracts and disclosures we get,” Ben-Shahar said. “To the extent there are things that are important in the fine print, people generally know that airlines can deny them boarding.”