A Major Update Could Be Coming to Select Airlines

Flying can be stressful, especially if you’ve got a long day of travel, but that doesn’t mean it’s ever acceptable to be rude to other passengers on board or flight attendants.

Despite that, we know a lot of us have seen situations play out that make us nervous — you’re on a flight, or boarding a flight, and watching as someone makes this tense or difficult for others on board. This is never good, but especially if you’re already airborne and there’s little to be done? That can be extra nerve-racking. However, a new proposal could impose even stricter punishments for unruly passengers in the UK.

According to Fox News, a new proposal states that unruly, abusive, and disruptive passengers could soon find themselves banned from numerous carriers in the U.K. This would allow airlines in the United Kingdom to share information with one another about these problematic passengers, leading to a potential ban on more than one airline.

As it currently stands, if travelers are banned on one airline, they can just book with another, potentially causing similar issues. Later this month, government officials are expected to meet with airlines to discuss how a national database of disruptive passengers could operate, and what it may look like. The proposal comes after multiple airlines have been dealing with aggressive, intoxicated, or otherwise unruly passengers during the busy travel season.

The proposed national database would be run by both the government and the airlines involved. There are many passengers who aren’t big fans of this idea, with Gary Leff, a Texas-based travel industry expert and author of the blog “View From the Wing,” mentioning that many times, the result of such behavior is due to mental health struggles or substance abuse, and a ban list may not deter their behavior much, nor does it encourage getting help, especially if they then lose the right to travel on most airlines. He also pointed out that different airlines may have various criteria for what would get someone on a banned list, and expressed concern over how simple misunderstandings could escalate more than needed.