I have an ongoing project this year tracking incidents of airlines mishandling mobility devices, although it turns out saying it that way might be a little bit misleading.
It’s true that Department of Transportation data for mobility device damage in air travel is reported by airline, but it’s not exactly fair to produce a ranking of the “best” and “worst” carriers for disabled travelers.
The data that’s available can tell us a lot. For example, we know for sure that mobility devices are reported damaged by their users on about 1.5% of flights taken, translating to 11,389 incidents in 2022. And yes, those incidents were all pegged to specific airlines, but those numbers alone don’t tell the whole story, not least because not all travelers whose devices are damaged file a complaint.
To understand the limitation of the available data, I sat down (virtually) with my colleague Jayme Fraser, a data reporter for USA TODAY who has spent considerable time looking into mobility device incidents in air travel over the years.
She guided me through the limitations of the numbers that DOT publishes and explained why it matters to think about the nuance they leave out.
Here follows a transcript of our conversation, edited for length and clarity.
Zach Wichter: What can the current data tell us about mobility device incidents in the US?
Jayme Fraser: As a data journalist, part of my interest is in information that can contextualize lived experience. Like a lot of datasets, this information collected by the Feds can tell you some things and there are other things it cannot tell you just because of the way it’s collected.
There’s a wide range of incidents that could get counted in this database.
When you look at it as a percentage, it doesn’t seem like that much: 2% of mobility aids experience a mishandling, but if you consider that this is the object that enables someone to live in our world and have access to their life, that’s a huge risk.
The other thing that’s not clear from the statistics is the risk of an overall trip. If it takes you two flights to get to your destination and two flights to get home, you have to add those percentages up per flight. If it’s a 2% risk per flight, it’s an 8% risk for your overall trip that something’s going to go wrong. That’s almost a 1 in 10 chance.
What you cannot see is how these incidents vary based on location or time of day, so you might have a 2% overall incident rate but the majority of those could be happening at one particular airport because of one particular company contracting with the airline. We don’t have a way to assess the true risk based on location of where we’re flying.
Because there is frequent turnover, particularly among wheelchair attendants, people don’t necessarily have a lot of experience or a lot of knowledge about what the law requires.
ZW: It seems like many advocates have identified training as a major issue. How does that get addressed?
JF: Groups like the Open Doors Organization have partnered with airlines to improve the quality of training that’s provided and to make sure that wheelchair attendants and baggage handlers are aware of some technicalities around how to properly do transfers and to safely handle power chairs to minimize the risk of damage, but that doesn’t address the turnover itself and the learned experience you get by doing it multiple times.
Some of these positions used to be direct employees of the airlines and over the decades it has shifted to contract work. That changes the responsiveness and control an airline has over what happens, when they’re not your employee but a contractor’s employee.
ZW: Why is it so complicated to assess this airline by airline?
JF: This data doesn’t make clear which contractor at which airport has a better track record than another. Because a lot of these positions have high turnover, it can even be difficult for the airlines to keep track of.
That can vary a lot location to location. And the data presented is not by location, is not by contractor, doesn’t tell you what type of incident was involved. You can’t say whether one airport presents a particular risk. You can’t say whether one airline is causing more catastrophic damage than another because that information isn’t there.
Last week’s Cruising Altitude:Can you get compensation if your flight is delayed? Not always.
ZW: Anything else you’d like to add?
JF: In a big-picture sense, I would add that human brains are not wired to assess risk very well, and so that complicates making decisions as a consumer. I do think that some information is better than no information when it comes to performance and compliance with federal civil rights laws.
Note: Cruising Altitude will be off for the next few weeks while I’m on vacation. But please use the form below or email me directly if you have any travel stories you’d like to share while I’m gone. Be safe and kind out there!
Zach Wichter is a travel reporter for USA TODAY based in New York. You can reach him at zwichter@usatoday.com
