Tobacco Documents Online

. C HORACE R.KORNEGAY 18751 $TREET, NORTNwEST ' WASHINGTON, D. C. 20006 (2O2) -5)-.6JO November Mr. Frank Borman President, Chairman, and Chief Executive Officer Eastern Airlines, Inc. Miami International Airport Miami, Florida 33148 Dear Mr. Borman: . 1979 Recent experiences I have had aboard Eastern Airlines flights have convinced me that your company is pursuing a policy of discrimination against passengers who smoke. I am writing to you in the hope that you will reverse that policy and direct your employees to treat smoking and non- smoking passengers with equal courtesy and consideration. On October 11, 1979, I went to the Eastern Airlines ticket counter at Washington National Airport to check in for Flight 209, on which I held a "Y" class reservation. I requested the agent to give me a seat as far forward as possible in the "smoking" section. The airplane was a DC-9, in which the last row is situated between the two jet engines on the sides of the fuselage. I have a hearing impairment in my left ear and find it extremely difficult to carry on a conversation when seated near jet engines. The ticket agent informed me, however, that the only remaining seat in the "smoking" section was in the last row. When I asked what seats were available in the "no smoking" section, the agent replied "most any seat you would like." I asked him whether he could move the "no smoking" sign forward to give the smoking passengers more room. He said he could not do that because it was against "government policy." I told the agent that I worked for The Tobacco Institute, was familiar with Civil Aeronautics Board smoking rules, and knew that no such government policy existed. When the agent persisted in his position, I asked him to show me a written statement of the government policy to which he referred. The agent said he did not have it with him, but would send it to me. I thanked him, and he seated me in the "no smoking" section.

Mr. Frank Borman Page Two About ten minutes later, the agent paged me and, when I returned to the counter, informed me that he now had a seat for me in the first row of the "smoking" section. He said he owed me an apology, because he had checked with an official of Eastern Airlines who had informed him that the practice of refusing to expand the "smoking" section was not required by the government but was a matter of company policy. I asked the agent whether the company management had instructed its personnel to tell passengers that the number of "smoking" and "no smoking" seats was determined by government policy, and he replied "yes." After the plane took off, I made a careful count of the seats in the "Y" class cabin. The "smoking" section consisted of six rows, containing a total of 30 seats, all of which were occupied. The "no smoking" section consisted of 15 rows, containing a total of 74 seats. Almost one-half, in fact 35 of the seats in the "no smoking" section were unoccupied, and several entire rows were empty. My experience on this flight was not unique. I have often been placed in a crowded "smoking" section aboard Eastern Airlines flights when there were many empty seats in the "no smoking section, and so have my friends and associates who smoke. The only thing that was unusual about this instance was the forthrightness of your ticket agent, who candidly admitted that the smoking passengers were treated this way because of a company policy that is not required by any government regulation. I believe that your policy discriminates against passengers who smoke and denies them the adequate service and reasonable treatment to which they are entitled.by law. I have seriously considered filing a formal complaint against Eastern Airlines with the Civil Aeronautics Board. But because I believe that the government already has become too involved in the question of smoking aboard aircraft, I have decided instead to bring the matter directly to your attention. No CAB regulation requires Eastern, or any other airline, to set aside a fixed number of seats or a percentage of the total seats for nonsmokers. Neither do the terms of the consent order you recently signed with the Board require, or justify, the kind of discrimination that I and other smoking passengers have experienced on Eastern. ,

J / 0 1 • .. Mr. Frank Borman Page Three Statistical studies concerning the number of smokers and nonsmokers on an "average" flight cannot justify the policy Eastern has adopted. It is the airline's responsibility to consider the comfort and convenience of the passengers on an actual flight. Other airlines have found it feasible to adopt flexible seating policies by which the "smoking" and "no smoking" sections are adjusted to accommodate the passengers on each flight, and I believe this is the absolute minimum to which smoking passengers are entitled. Some carriers have successfully adopted the more equitable practice of seating smoking and nonsmoking passengers across the aisle from one another, which insures that all passengers will have an opportunity to sit in the parts of the cabin they prefer. As you may know, The Tobacco Institute submitted a petition to the CAB in 1977, signed by approximately 130,000 airline passengers, which called for longitudinal seating arrange- ments of this kind. I urge you to take prompt action to correct the discriminatory policy that Eastern Airlines has applied to its smoking pas- sengers. I hope you will give serious consideration to a longitudinal seating arrangement. At a minimum, I hope you will adopt a flexible seating policy and instruct your employees to give equal consideration to the comfort and convenience of smoking and nonsmoking passengers. I would appre- ciate being informed promptly of the action you decide to take on this matter. Horace R. Kornegay ~

t C `\