Flight disruptions from shutdown worsen; Delta, United offer extra pay to crew flights
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/10/government-shutdown-flight-delays-cancellations.html
AIRLINES Private-jet demand is on the rise amid government shutdown, says Flexjet CEO PUBLISHED MON, NOV 10 20259:12 AM ESTUPDATED 25 MIN AGO thumbnail Leslie Josephs @LESLIEJOSEPHS
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/10/private-jet-demand-government-shutdown.html
-=-=-=
Can Donald Trump do what Ronald Reagan did to solve issue with airlines during government shutdown?"
ChatGPT said:
That’s a really sharp question — and it touches on a few important legal and historical differences. Let’s unpack it carefully.
1. What Reagan did
In 1981, President Ronald Reagan fired over 11,000 air traffic controllers who went on strike with the union PATCO. He did this because:
-
Federal law (the Taft–Hartley Act and 5 U.S.C. §7311) prohibits federal employees from striking.
-
Reagan gave them 48 hours to return to work; when they didn’t, he terminated their employment and banned them from federal service (a ban later lifted under Clinton).
So Reagan acted under existing law against striking federal workers — not during a government shutdown, but during an illegal strike.
2. How a government shutdown is different
A shutdown happens when Congress fails to pass funding, not when workers strike. During a shutdown:
-
Federal employees aren’t allowed to work (except “essential” workers) because there’s no legal authority to pay them.
-
They’re furloughed or required to work unpaid until funding is restored.
-
The Antideficiency Act bars agencies from spending money Congress hasn’t appropriated.
So, unlike Reagan’s situation, employees aren’t refusing to work — the government is legally barred from employing or paying them. That means Trump (or any president) can’t fire workers for not working during a shutdown, because they’re being told by law not to work.
3. What Trump could do
If Trump were president during a shutdown, his options would be more limited:
-
He could declare some additional employees “essential” to keep certain operations running (like air traffic control).
-
He could redirect or repurpose existing funds — but only within strict legal limits.
-
He could negotiate with Congress or use political pressure to end the shutdown.
But he couldn’t use Reagan’s 1981 approach, because that was a response to an illegal strike, not a lack of congressional funding.
In short:
No — Donald Trump (or any president) couldn’t “do what Reagan did” during a shutdown, because Reagan’s solution addressed an illegal strike, while a shutdown is a funding issue controlled by Congress. The law that stopped Reagan’s air traffic controllers doesn’t apply to shutdowns.
Would you like me to explain how a president might legally keep air traffic running during a shutdown (for instance, by reclassifying or reprioritizing essential workers)?
You said:
So explain how the shutdown affects airlines different than when it happened during Reagan presidency?
ChatGPT said:
Excellent follow-up — and an important distinction.
Let’s break this down step-by-step:
1. Reagan’s 1981 situation (PATCO strike)
-
What happened:
The Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO) went on strike for better pay, shorter hours, and improved working conditions.
-
Why it happened:
Controllers voluntarily stopped working, violating federal law, because federal workers are forbidden to strike (5 U.S.C. § 7311).
-
Reagan’s response:
He ordered them back to work, and when they refused, he fired over 11,000 controllers and banned them from federal service.
-
Impact on airlines:
-
About half of the nation’s air traffic control system was suddenly understaffed.
-
The FAA reduced the number of flights allowed to maintain safety.
-
Airlines saw fewer flights, delays, and temporary service disruptions, but operations continued using supervisors, military controllers, and replacements.
-
Within months, air travel stabilized.
→ Summary: Airlines were affected by a labor shortage caused by a strike, not a lack of funding.
2. A modern government shutdown
→ Summary: Airlines are affected by disruptions due to unpaid or furloughed federal workers, not by an illegal strike or mass firing.
3. The core difference
| Aspect | Reagan’s 1981 Crisis | Government Shutdown |
|---|
| Cause | Illegal strike by air traffic controllers | No funding from Congress |
| Legal Authority | Workers broke the law; Reagan fired them | Law forbids paying workers without funding |
| Workers’ Status | Striking voluntarily | Forced furlough or unpaid work |
| President’s Options | Fire, replace, or negotiate | Classify as “essential,” pressure Congress |
| Airline Impact | Sudden but fixable staffing shortage | Ongoing disruptions, slower operations |
In short:
-
Under Reagan, the problem was workers refusing to work — so he used executive authority to replace them.
-
During a shutdown, the problem is workers can’t be paid — and only Congress can fix that by restoring funding.
-
Airlines keep flying during a shutdown, but face delays, morale issues, and operational bottlenecks, not the outright collapse risk seen in 1981.
Would you like me to show how a long shutdown (say, over 3 weeks) might start to impact air travel safety or scheduling based on recent examples like 2019?
