Booze at altitude: The messy truth about drinking on planes
Booze at altitude: The messy truth about drinking on planes
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Shoes off, reclined seats tops pet peeves when traveling by plane
Among the top pet peeves among Americans traveling on planes are passengers reclining their seats, according to a survey by The Vacationer website.
Ariana Triggs, USA TODAY
A passenger's excessive alcohol consumption on a flight raises questions about the responsibility of airlines to limit service.
While some support drink limits on flights, the issue is complex due to alcohol's revenue contribution and passenger/airport bar sales.
Although a federal law exists against serving intoxicated passengers, enforcement seems inconsistent.
Jodi Smith lost count of the number of rum and Cokes her seatmate ordered on a recent flight from Boston to Los Angeles. Was it five? Or six?
"He was a nervous flier," Smith remembered. "Old enough to order alcohol, but too young to make good decisions."
After the third drink, the passenger started slurring his words, so Smith made eye contact with the flight attendant who had been mixing the Cuba Libres. She gave her the look of, "Can you do something about this?"
"She just shrugged," Smith said.
Check out Elliott Confidential, the newsletter the travel industry doesn't want you to read. Each issue is filled with breaking news, deep insights, and exclusive strategies for becoming a better traveler. But don't tell anyone!
The flight didn't end well. For the sake of our family audience, let's just say it involved a lot of noise, agony and the discharge of bodily fluids.
Smith, an etiquette expert, still has one question about the incident.
"In most states, bartenders are legally obligated not to overserve," she said. "Why doesn't this also apply to those serving drinks in the air?"
Are you the world's worst hotel guest? Here's how to tell (and redeem yourself)
Everyone's talking about alcohol on planes
She's not the only one asking. Ryanair CEO Michael O'Leary recently blamed most of the air rage incidents in Europe on overconsumption and suggested a two-drink limit at airport bars. Since then, there have been a string of embarrassing incidents involving alcohol on planes, including inebriated passengers, crewmembers, and even pilots. So as this summer rolls around, it's not so much a question of whether drink limits are a good idea – it's more an issue of what limits make sense.
A new survey by Global Rescue found that some travelers support limits on alcohol. About 1 in 5 passengers say airlines shouldn't serve more than one drink every 30 minutes, while 17% favored a limit of one an hour. A majority say serving alcohol should be left to the discretion of the crewmember or bartender.
Dan Richards, Global Rescue's CEO, said there was one takeaway, no matter how travelers voted.
"While travelers should always be responsible for their consumption, airports and airlines also have a duty to ensure the safety of all passengers," he told me.
The problem is surprisingly complicated
Imposing a drink limit sounds like an easy solution. While we're at it, maybe there should even be a federal law that would limit alcohol consumption on domestic flights.
But this issue is surprisingly complex. For starters, alcohol is by far the biggest source of onboard revenue, so cutting off passengers would make a dent in the airline industry's profits. (During the pandemic, some airlines stopped serving alcohol amid an epidemic of in-flight violence, but they quickly resumed beverage service in an effort to reclaim lost revenue.)
It's common knowledge that limiting alcohol can improve the quality of the flight. Recent research by the University of Texas found that consuming alcohol was a "significant contributor" to passenger misconduct. And German researchers also discovered that drinking on planes can harm your health. But the problem is, neither passengers nor airlines want limits.
There's yet another layer of complexity. Many passengers board their flights already intoxicated because they've been hanging out at the airport bar. And those watering holes in the terminal selling overpriced cocktails would, of course, go out of business without nervous fliers who order a few drinks before their flights. So you can't just limit or ban drinking on a plane. You have to apply sensible rules to airports as well.
And if you were cheering for a new drink limit rule, consider this: there already is a federal law that limits alcohol consumption on planes. It forbids airlines from serving anyone who appears to be intoxicated or who has a deadly or dangerous weapon accessible to him, among other things.
So why did Smith's seatmate get so many rum and cokes? Perhaps the flight attendant had to make her sales quota.
Should you drink on a plane?
The decision about whether to drink or not on a plane is a personal one. Here are a few things to consider:
Don't forget – you're on a plane. I know, it sounds obvious, but most people don't think about the effects of being in a pressurized cabin. "Unfortunately, sometimes the effects of alcohol don't show until the plane is in the air or the passenger has their next drink," said Beth Blair, a former flight attendant. She remembers serving a passenger a Bloody Mary – only one! – and the next thing she knew, he was knocking on the door of the flight deck, demanding to speak to the captain. "The FAA and FBI met our flight," she recalls. "There were severe consequences."
I know, it sounds obvious, but most people don't think about the effects of being in a pressurized cabin. "Unfortunately, sometimes the effects of alcohol don't show until the plane is in the air or the passenger has their next drink," said Beth Blair, a former flight attendant. She remembers serving a passenger a Bloody Mary – only one! – and the next thing she knew, he was knocking on the door of the flight deck, demanding to speak to the captain. "The FAA and FBI met our flight," she recalls. "There were severe consequences." If you drink, do it in moderation. That's the consensus of the behavioral experts I talked to for this story. "If we get the little bottle of wine or beer in economy class with our meal, that should be enough," said etiquette expert Adeodata Czink. "No more alcohol than that. This way we would have our wine and there would be much less intoxication."
That's the consensus of the behavioral experts I talked to for this story. "If we get the little bottle of wine or beer in economy class with our meal, that should be enough," said etiquette expert Adeodata Czink. "No more alcohol than that. This way we would have our wine and there would be much less intoxication." You're really better off avoiding alcohol on flights. That's especially true if you take any prescription medications. "The vast majority of medical emergencies our team have been asked to intervene in with other passengers have involved alcohol," said Bob Bacheler, managing director of Flying Angels, a medical transportation service. "It's usually a combination of alcohol and sedatives. I can't stress how dangerous the combination of sedatives, alcohol and decreased cabin pressure is."
Ultimately, the choice is yours, of course. But ask yourself: Do you want to end up getting hauled off the plane in handcuffs, like the guy on Blair's flight? Maybe you can wait until you land to have that drink.
So, how do you fix this problem?
I've been writing about problem passengers since the 90s, and in almost all cases, alcohol is involved. Airlines have had plenty of warnings, from the drunken passenger who defecated on a meal cart to the epidemic of air rage during the pandemic.
Take away the alcohol, and you remove some of the fuel that powers these outbursts of antisocial behavior.
I've also seen the destruction alcohol can wreak on the ground. I've watched relationships get ripped apart, and I've lost friends to alcohol. And by "lose," I mean they are dead. It affected me so profoundly that I stopped drinking a decade ago.
The debate over alcohol consumption on flights is more nuanced than it might initially seem. While limiting or banning alcohol could improve passenger behavior and reduce incidents of air rage, it's not a decision airlines can make lightly. After all, alcohol sales contribute significantly to their bottom line, and many passengers look forward to that glass of wine or cocktail during their flight.
But the consequences of excessive drinking onboard – from unruly behavior to safety risks – can far outweigh the temporary pleasure of a drink.
Abstaining from alcohol while in the air is a simple and responsible choice. After all, a few hours without a drink isn't too much to ask. And for airlines, perhaps it's time to prioritize passengers over profit and consider following the lead of carriers in the Middle East who have adopted a dry policy altogether.
Maybe the real question isn't whether alcohol should be limited on flights, but whether the convenience of a drink is worth the potential risks it brings to the flight experience. As for Jodi Smith's seatmate, the rum-and-coke binge wasn't just a bad decision – it was a reminder that when alcohol is involved, it's not just the passengers who are at risk, but everyone onboard.
So, the next time you're flying, ask yourself: Is it really worth it?
Christopher Elliott is an author, consumer advocate, and journalist. He founded Elliott Advocacy, a nonprofit organization that helps solve consumer problems. He publishes Elliott Confidential, a travel newsletter, and the Elliott Report, a news site about customer service. If you need help with a consumer problem, you can reach him here or email him at chris@elliott.org.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
US boosts emergency Mideast evacuations and travel warnings after Trump orders strikes in Iran
The notice made no mention of any potential evacuation flights or other assistance for private Americans wanting to leave Lebanon but said those who want to should try to use existing commercial services to depart. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up At the same time, the department issued warnings to U.S. citizens in Saudi Arabia and Turkey to take extra security precautions given the uncertainty. Advertisement 'Given reports of regional hostilities, the U.S. Mission to Saudi Arabia has advised its personnel to exercise increased caution and limit non-essential travel to any military installations in the region,' the department said in its notice for Saudi Arabia. In Turkey, the department said U.S. personnel 'have been cautioned to maintain a low profile and instructed to avoid personal travel to the U.S. Consulate Adana consular district,' which includes the NATO airbase at Incirlik. 'Negative sentiment toward U.S. foreign policy may prompt actions against U.S. or Western interests in Turkey,' the statement said. Advertisement Late Saturday, the department said it was stepping up evacuation flights for American citizens from Israel to Europe and continuing to draw down its staff at diplomatic missions in Iraq. But even before the U.S. airstrikes on Iran were made public by President Donald Trump on Saturday evening in Washington, the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem had announced the start of evacuation flights for private Americans from Israel. Sixty-seven American citizens left Israel on two government flights bound for Athens, Greece on Saturday and four more evacuation flights to Athens were planned for Sunday, according to internal State Department document seen by The Associated Press. A nongovernment charter flight is scheduled to depart Israel for Rome on Monday. In addition to the flights, a cruise ship carrying more than 1,000 American citizens, including several hundred Jewish youngsters who had been visiting Israel on an organized tour, arrived in Cyprus, according to the document. It also said the evacuation of non-essential personnel at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad and consulate in Erbil is continuing. Those staffers had been ordered to leave even before Israel began its military operation in Iran more than a week ago. 'As part of our ongoing effort to streamline operations, additional personnel departed Iraq on June 21 and 22,' the department said. 'These departures represent a continuation of the process started on June 12.' As of Saturday, more than 7,900 Americans had asked for assistance in leaving Israel and more than 1,000 had sought help in leaving Iran, where the U.S. has no diplomatic presence, the document said. There are roughly 700,000 Americans, many of them dual U.S.-Israeli citizens, in Israel and many thousands of Americans, most of them dual in Iran. It was not clear how many Americans had successfully made it out of Iran through overland routes, although the document said more than 200 had entered neighboring Azerbaijan as of Saturday since the conflict began. Advertisement After the U.S. strikes in Iran, security officers at all U.S. embassies and consulates have been instructed to conduct reviews of their post's security posture and report back to the State Department by late Sunday.
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Passengers slam poor airline treatment as summer travel woes mount: ‘I paid for this flight'
An individual has taken to social media to rant that he or she is 'tired of airlines acting like they're doing you a favor for putting you on a flight you paid for' just as the busiest summer travel season gets underway — sparking a heated discussion online among other travelers. 'I book a flight weeks in advance and find out I've been put on standby when I get to the airport,' wrote the person in a Reddit post, which elicited more than 5,000 reactions. Advertisement 'I then get told, 'Oh, you're lucky we got you the last seats available.'' The person added on the Reddit travel thread, 'Lucky? I paid for this flight weeks in advance.' The Redditor went on to say, addressing an unnamed airline in the post, 'You oversold the flight and are now scrambling people around and are acting like you're doing me [a] favor for getting me a seat on the flight I originally booked and paid for.' One individual responded to the post, 'They will cancel or change the flight at a moment's notice, but if you change it, it's a problem and costs more.' Advertisement That reply alone attracted some 3,000 reactions. The vast majority of commenters agreed with the original post and expressed similar levels of outrage. 'They rarely admit fault and if you make a mistake, it usually costs you,' said another person. 'It would be fair if they took responsibility, especially for overbooking.' An individual has taken to social media to rant that he or she is 'tired of airlines acting like they're doing you a favor for putting you on a flight you paid for.' Getty Images Advertisement Wrote yet another person in part, 'While I understand the concept of positive positioning for customer service, it's insulting for them to use the word 'lucky' here. You paid for your ticket. You did your part. They created a problem and they had to solve it.' Said another commenter, 'If you fly first class, they actually treat you like a person once you get on the plane.' Others online shared different perspectives — with some expressing confusion about the situation described. Advertisement 'Did you make sure to check in 24 hours in advance?' wrote one person. 'Some airlines will release your seat to standby if [you're] not checked in by the last hour or so.' Others also said they've never been bumped and asked the original poster for more details. 'I have never experienced that,' wrote one person. 'I don't take that many domestic flights, but I do travel quite a lot internationally. I [have] never been bumped or had my ticket canceled.' Said another person, 'This has never happened to me. Ever.' Wrote someone else, 'Did you buy a basic fare with no assigned seat? I'm confused as to how they could move you to standby.' With July 4th just up ahead, Americans are predicted to set a travel record this year to celebrate during the nation's 249th birthday. AAA released its 'Independence Day Travel Forecast' report, finding that 72.2 million people will travel at least 50 miles from home this July 4th, Fox News Digital previously reported. The forecast looks not just at the Fourth of July but at holiday travel spanning from Saturday, June 28 to Sunday, July 6. Advertisement Others also said they've never been bumped and asked the original poster for more details. Witoon – The 2025 report is predicting an increase of 1.7 million travelers compared to last year, while determining there will be seven million more travelers compared to 2019. Over 60 million Americans are set to drive to their destination, which is a 2.2% increase from 2024. Advertisement Of the millions predicted to travel, 8% or 5.84 million Americans will be flying to their destinations. About 4.78 million travelers will be taking other forms of transportation such as cruises or trains.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
NPS could impose surcharge on some national park visitors in 2026: budget proposal
(NEXSTAR) — After the busiest year on record, and an already busy start to the year for at least one park, the National Park Service budget could be reduced by more than $1 billion next year. A new surcharge imposed on some visitors may, however, help bring in more than $90 million, according to the Department of the Interior's budget proposal for fiscal year 2026. 'I think we're way undercharging, as a nation, for international visitors,' Secretary Doug Burgum said during a House Committee on Natural Resources oversight hearing earlier this month. Currently, only 106 of the 475 sites that are managed by the National Park Service charge an entrance fee. The most expensive among them — like Yellowstone, Yosemite, and Zion — charge $35 per private vehicle. Few charge on a per-person basis (for those entering on foot or by bicycle), but the highest fee there is $20, found at the same three parks. If you'd prefer an annual membership, which is not available at all of the fee-charging parks, the most you'll pay is $70. Some parks also require reservations to get in or visit certain features within the parks. International visitors do not currently pay more to visit the national parks than U.S. residents. During the hearing, Burgum pointed to other international venues where Americans and other non-resident tourists are charged more than locals, like the Galapagos Islands. There, according to the Galapagos Observatory, non-Ecuadorian adults must pay a $200 entrance fee, in cash, to the Galapagos National Park. The entrance fee for children is $100. Meanwhile, Ecuadorian citizens over the age of 12 pay $30 while the fee for younger citizens is $12. Citizens also have discounted or free admission to popular tourist attractions around the world. College-aged residents of the European Union have free access to several museums within member countries, including the Louvre and The Orsay Museum in Paris. Tourists pay over 20 times more to visit the Taj Mahal than local residents do. It's not uncharacteristic for venues and tourist attractions in the U.S. to charge out-of-towners more than locals, either. Hawaii will begin charging a 'Green Fee' tourist tax next year in order to generate funds for mitigating future environmental challenges the state expects to face. Chicago's Field Museum offers discounted admission to city residents, for example. Residents of the state of New York are able to pay whatever they prefer to visit The Metropolitan Museum of Art, though they are required to pay at least one penny per ticket. Even Disney World and Disneyland offer deals for those who live near their parks. 'There could be a billion-dollar revenue opportunity without discouraging visitors,' Burgum said during the committee hearing. He did not expand on how the extra fee could bring in more than $90 million. An analysis by SFGate, using an estimate that 14.6 million international visitors went to U.S. national parks last year, determined that if the parks saw the same number of visitors in 2026, the necessary surcharge to reach the aforementioned budget goal would be about $6 a person. The Interior Department did not immediately respond to Nexstar's request for additional information on the proposed surcharge. Meanwhile, the budget proposal is requesting $2 billion for the national parks, down more than $1 billion from the current budget. It would be the largest cut in NPS history, according to the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA). 'It's nothing less than an all-out assault on America's national parks,' Theresa Pierno, president and CEO of the NPCA, said.
