
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

3 hours ago
Extreme traveling: How far are you willing to travel for the day?
More Americans are booking same-day flights around the country and ABC News' Will Ganss lets us know if it's worth it.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Mission trips are an evangelical rite of passage for US teens – but why?
As tourists head to airports this summer, American travelers are likely to see groups of young people in matching T-shirts awaiting flights to Latin America or further afield. Their T-shirts sport biblical verses or phrases like 'Here I am, send me' or 'Called to serve,' and the teens may gather for prayer before boarding. These young people are heading off to be short-term missionaries: an experience that has become a rite of passage in some corners of Protestant Christianity as overseas travel has become more affordable for Americans. According to some estimates, as many as 2 million youth and adults per year participated in Christian mission trips before the pandemic, including overseas trips and trips to poor communities at home. While it is difficult to confirm these numbers, mission trips are now especially commonplace within evangelical churches, with larger and more affluent churches offering multiple trips throughout the year. Some congregations plan their mission trips in-house. Others enlist the services of mission companies with names like World Race, He Said Go and World Gospel Mission. Typically, these companies combine humanitarian service, development projects and faith. They promise participants adventure, spiritual growth and an opportunity to serve as Jesus' hands and feet in the world. I have been studying short-term missionaries for the past six years. I have interviewed dozens of pastors, trip leaders and young missionaries, and I have had the opportunity to participate in a mission trip in Central America. Through this research, I have learned about why so many young Christians want to go on mission trips and have been struck by their desire to 'serve.' Yet, as a geographer, I am concerned by their lack of knowledge about the people and places they visit. The missionary impulse within Christianity comes from the Great Commission, a Gospel verse in which Jesus instructs his disciples 'to go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.' The spirit of evangelism thrived among European and American Christians in the 19th century, fueled by frontier expansion and colonization. Protestant missionaries spread throughout Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Pacific, seeking to win souls for Christ. Also important, in many of these men's and women's eyes, was something often referred to as the 'white man's burden': the imperialist idea that they had a duty to introduce Western civilization to supposedly 'backward' people. Missionaries had mixed success in converting so-called natives to Christianity. But they left lasting impacts through the many institutions they established around the world, including schools, universities and hospitals. Contemporary missionaries are the inheritors of these earlier waves. Yet they also have some distinctive characteristics. Historically, mission work was a lifelong calling and profession, one that often meant never coming home. Career missionaries continue to have a role in missions today, sometimes financially supported by denominational organizations like the Southern Baptist Convention's International Missions Board or by donations from individual churches. But the movement is now dominated by short-termers who are in the 'mission field' for a couple of weeks or months. Some trips go to destinations where Christians are a minority, such as the Middle East, India or Southeast Asia. More commonly, they take place in countries with a sizable Christian population and partner with local evangelical organizations and churches 'planted' by long-term missionaries. Trip organizers I interviewed emphasized that the mission teams are there to serve and to take direction from their local partners. Another distinctive feature of short-term missions is their approach to faith. Rather than push 'conversion' as a goal, today's mission leaders emphasize 'relationship building' in hopes that connections will gradually lead people closer to Christian beliefs. Trips are oriented not just around the spiritual transformation of the local community but also the spiritual transformation of missionaries themselves. Pastors and organizers say that trips are meant to teach young American Christians what it means to live as a disciple of Jesus, to share the gospel and to love people who are not like them. Organizers talk about young people learning to 'live missionally' and to see opportunities to build God's kingdom in their ordinary lives. Short-term missions, however, also appeal to young people's desire to see the world and to be adventurous. The language used to describe and promote trips is remarkably similar to secular overseas volunteering or 'voluntourism,' as well as gap-year programs before college. Both experiences are built around the idea of getting out of your comfort zone and experiencing cultural differences in the name of self-improvement, preparing for life in a globalized, diverse world. Another similarity is that both Christian and secular programs usually involve some kind of service project: building a house, digging a well or leading recreational activities for children. Such activities are meant to give young people confidence in their ability to 'make a difference' in the world, while developing resilience and gratitude. Not all evangelicals see the value of mission trips. Critics have argued that American short-term mission teams dump unwanted goods on host communities, are culturally insensitive and commonly assume that locals need American 'expertise.' Construction projects push out local workers and often result in shoddily built structures – suggesting the enormous sums of money spent on mission trips might be better spent if donated directly to local organizations. Books like 'When Helping Hurts,' by evangelical authors Brian Fikkert and Steve Corbett, aim to explain how leaders can make mission trips more effective, both in terms of alleviating poverty and in terms of evangelism. Warning against a 'white savior' attitude, they suggest that the purpose of short-term missions is to 'walk with the poor' and build lasting relationships that will lead people to Christ. In my research, I have met mission trip leaders who are trying to put these ideas into practice without harming the communities they visit. But troubling elements persist. Trip organizers want to open American Christians' eyes to realities of the world outside of their bubbles. Yet their messages tends to imply the effects of poverty can be overcome through personal faith in Christ. Short-term missionaries I interviewed did not blame people for being poor but were reluctant to describe the hardship they witnessed in terms of social injustice. The mission teams I studied learned almost nothing about the impacts of corruption, violence and social inequality on the communities they believed they were there to help. Trip leaders felt that such information would bore participants and detract from the spiritual aims of the trip. In effect, what mattered to the volunteers and organizers was simply that places were poor and foreign rather than the reasons poverty was so entrenched. Many of the short-term missionaries I interviewed described feeling changed by their trip and becoming more aware of their own privilege. But the focus on spiritual fulfillment means that these young people may be missing out on opportunities to deepen their understandings of the world and to build solidarity with the communities they visit. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Caroline R. Nagel, University of South Carolina Read more: When a child chooses a donor to sponsor them, it's a new twist on a surprisingly old model of international charity How Christian missionary media shaped the world Whether or not a man convicted of abusing African 'orphans' is exonerated, the missionary system that brought him to Kenya was always deeply flawed Caroline R. Nagel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.


USA Today
8 hours ago
- USA Today
Which country has the most visitors impacted by Trump's travel restrictions?
Which country has the most visitors impacted by Trump's travel restrictions? South Florida, home to large Venezuelan, Haitian and Cuban communities, will be hit hard by Trump's travel ban Show Caption Hide Caption President Trump bans travel from several countries around the world President Donald Trump signed a proclamation that bans travel from 12 countries and restricts seven others. Reaction to President Donald Trump's new travel bans was swift in South Florida, home to what are believed to be the largest Venezuelan, Haitian and Cuban communities in the United States. "I am deeply concerned by this decision which further divides us as Americans and harms hardworking families contributing to the essential fabric of our community," Miami-Dade Mayor Daniella Levine Cava said in a June 5 social media post. "The work of our federal government should be to protect our borders and pass comprehensive immigration reform, not tear down our communities." Trump's proclamation, signed on June 4, takes effect June 9. The administration cited security reasons for the bans on travelers from a dozen countries and restrictions on those from seven others. It prohibits entry into the U.S. of foreign nationals from Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. Travel restrictions, including suspensions, will be placed on those from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. Of the nearly 1.7 million visas issued to people from those countries between 2014 and 2023, almost half were from Venezuela. They reunited with family, shopped and visited Disney World and other theme parks and attractions, according to recent media and social media accounts. Venezuelans and Haitians speak out against the travel ban The proclamation suspends entry into the United States for Venezuelan nationals with temporary work, study and tourist visas. "Venezuela lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures," the proclamation said. It also mentioned the overstay rate on visas from the country is nearly 10%. A mother from Venezuela who moved to South Florida six years ago told CBS News she's unsure whether her adult son, who remains in the South American country, will be allowed to visit her. The announcement also prompted concern among bloggers who write about Disney parks in California and Florida, who questioned the impact the restrictions could have on the thousands who visit the parks each year from Venezuela. Members of South Florida's Haitian community also spoke out about the ban. More than 230,000 native Haitians live in the metropolitan area, roughly 4% of the region's population, according to the Migration Policy Institute. Marleine Bastien, who was born in Haiti and now serves on the Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners, said she's "deeply disheartened" by the ban. In a statement, she called it "cruel and xenophobic" and a "blatant attempt to scapegoat an already suffering people." "This unjust policy will sow chaos in our communities, separating families, and disrupting lives," said Bastien, founder of Family Action Network Movement, a South Florida-based organization. The decision is a "betrayal of the values America claims to uphold – compassion, justice, and opportunity for all," she said. Haitians averaged 24,337 non-immigrant visas for the U.S. over a decade and Cubans averaged 12,464. Travel from the countries plunged during the pandemic but had begun to increase again by 2023. Haitians received 10,515 non-immigrant visas that year and Cubans received 6,146. Trump's proclamation stated he had directed the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, and others to identify countries where the vetting and screening information is "so deficient as to warrant a full or partial suspension" of nationals of those countries into the U.S. and the group had found a number of countries deficient. Rubio, a South Florida native whose parents migrated from Cuba in 1956, shared on X a post from the White House, attributed to Trump: "We cannot have open migration from any country where we cannot safely and reliably vet and screen … That is why today I am signing a new executive order placing travel restrictions on countries including Yemen, Somalia, Haiti, Libya, and numerous others." USA TODAY looked at how many visas were distributed to foreign nationals from the countries in question over the past decade. A nonimmigrant visa is a temporary document, issued for tourism, temporary work, medical care, study or business. How many visitor's visas were issued? Combined, foreign nationals in the countries now facing travel bans accounted for fewer than 63,000 non-immigrant visas in 2023, the most recent year for which statistics are available. At least two dozen other countries not included in the ban each accounted for more visitor visas that year. While Venezuela leads all the 19 recently restricted countries in visitors to the U.S., Iranians received 17,634 non-immigrant visas in 2023, more than any of the dozen countries facing total travel bans. Myanmar, which U.S. documents recognize as Burma, received the next-most with 13,284. Here are the number of non-immigrant visas granted to nationalities of the other countries facing bans: Sudan, 4,506 Yemen, 4,204 Afghanistan, 2,665 Libya, 2,259 Congo Republic, 2,175 Chad, 2,090 Equatorial Guinea, 1,534 Eritrea, 931 Somalia, 463 Looking at the decade overall, Haitians topped the list, receiving the most non-immigrant visas among the banned countries at 243,369. Iran was second with 162,356 and Burma/Myanmar was third with 115,520. Among the countries facing travel restrictions rather than bans, foreign nationals from five of those – Sierra Leone, Togo, Laos, Turkmenistan and Burundi – received fewer than 8,500 non immigrant visas combined in 2023. Which country's residents received the most non-immigrant visas? Mexico led the world at 2.3 million non-immigrant visas in 2023. The figure also includes border crossing cards, laminated cards that allow Mexicans to cross the border between the nations for periods of less than 30 days. More than 1.3 million people planning to visit the U.S. from India received non-immigrant visas in 2023 and 1.06 million from Brazil. Other countries whose nationalities received the most visiting visas in 2023 include: Colombia, 476,293 China, 417,008 Argentina, 291,892 Ecuador, 274,799 Philippines, 285,860 Israel, 190,415 Vietnam, 133,781 Dominican Republic, 130,360 Turkey, 130,168 Nigeria, 113,695 Peru, 111,851 Dinah Voyles Pulver, a national correspondent for USA TODAY, writes about climate change, violent weather and other news. Reach her at dpulver@ or @dinahvp on Bluesky or X or dinahvp.77 on Signal.