Brussels, 27/04/2011 (Agence Europe) - Airline associations (IATA, IACA, AAPA and ATA for international carriers, AEA and ERA for European airlines, and ELFAA for low-cost airlines) were recently very critical of any attempt to amend European rules governing the assignment of “slots”. Their action comes as the European Commission is preparing, for early summer, a new airport package which, in order to address airport congestion, may amend the legislation in force (Regulation 95/93 on common standards for allocation of slots at EU airports).
The regulation, which has been revised on several occasions, provides among other things for an airline to be entitled to keep slots from one season to the next on condition that these are used up to 80% - the 80/20 principle reintroduced in 2010 after temporary suspension following the economic and financial crisis that caused upheavals in air traffic (see EUROPE 9861). A Commission communication adopted in 2008 also recognises the existence of a “secondary market” not covered by the regulation, which allows airlines operating in particularly congested airports to exchange slots for payment or other compensation (see EUROPE 9654). Given the constant growth in air traffic, the 80/20 principle may, moreover, not meet the capacity needs of airports, some airline representatives fear, saying it would be better to re-examine the principles of slot allocation. Thresholds allowing for slots to be maintained could be reviewed downward (for example 70/30 rather than the current 80/20), which would free up more slots and force airlines to be more operational.
Although adoption of the package is to take place soon, the Commission has not yet unveiled its approach, which has caused concern among airlines in favour of maintaining status quo. They say there is no need or grounds for reviewing the existing rules. On the contrary, in a letter sent to the Commission last November and published by ELFAA on 20 April this year, the representatives of the seven associations say that the “introduction of new procedures would create the potential for yet additional significant disadvantages”. According to the carriers, the problem of airport saturation does not lie in the allocation of available capacity but rather in the failure on the part of governments or airport authorities to invest in essential aviation infrastructure. “Change to the regulation will not solve this lack of capacity”, they warn, going on to add that alternatives proposed have “no proven benefit for passengers”. (A.By./transl.jl)