I mentioned earlier that U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy attended the signing ceremony for the historic Boeing – Alaska Airlines aircraft order and Alaska’s 787 livery reveal. After the ceremony, I had a chance to briefly speak with Duffy.
My Chat With Sean Duffy In Seattle
Duffy spoke for about five minutes during the ceremony, praising Alaska Airlines and Boeing, but mostly praising President Donald Trump for working on bringing back manufacturing to the USA. Duffy also called Trump “Boeing’s greatest salesman,” which is admittedly at least partially true, considering how Trump’s transactional relationships with foreign leaders often come with pressure to buy Boeing aircraft.
Duffy has repeatedly affirmed his mission to upgrade the air traffic control system in the USA, but has also embarked on other ventures like encouraging passengers to dress up to fly and pushing airports to offer healthier foods.
After the event, I had a chance to meet him.
So what do you do in a situation like this?
Confront him over gutting consumer protections his predecessor introduced? Plead with him to tell his boss to leave Denmark alone? Or seek to create a baseline of commonality that can be used to probe differences later?
I ran into him after the event and had only a split second to think. Do I not say anything at all? Do I just shake his hand? Or was there something meaningful I could say that would not be viewed as argumentative, especially considering that he was surrounded by an entourage of Secret Service, Boeing staff, and assistants?
Instead, I said, “Mr. Secretary, thank you for your work on air traffic control modernization. Keep it up.”
He stopped to shake my hand and thanked me.
I added, “I’m with you 100% on healthy eating…it’s something our country desperately needs to focus on.”
He nodded in agreement. I added, “And good job beating RFK Jr. in the push-up contests at DCA!”
He laughed and nudged me, saying, “Well, he did more than me, but mine were real push-ups!”
And with that, the conversation was over.
Wasted breath?
Perhaps…but I hope not.
I wasn’t trying to brown-nose him (especially after criticizing him for brown-nosing President Trump). But I do appreciate the work he has begun on ATC modernization, and I also agree with him 100% on the need for Americans to eat healthier, including when they travel.
In the broader sense, I can’t figure this administration out. It goes by “Republican,” but yesterday Trump was talking about capping profits and limiting CEO pay at defense firms and then prohibiting hedge funds from buying homes so that the middle class is not squeezed as much. Tariffs themselves and his other economic populism, coupled with dramatic threats against all enemies, real and perceived, are not traditional GOP positions or practices.
Thus, I can’t rule out that Duffy would not be open to European-style compensation for airline delays and cancellations. I also can’t rule out that the Trump administration would side with United versus United flight attendants if contract negotiations reached a true impasse and cabin crew sought permission to strike.
I’d like to have a much longer conversation with Duffy about all of these things…hopefully this brief encounter will not be our only meeting. But this was not the time.
CONCLUSION
I had an unexpected chance to speak to Secretary Duffy and had to decide what to say in a split second. My conversation did not cover the topics I really wanted to discuss, but I felt it was better to be pragmatic in my first conversation because there are indeed areas of agreement. We’ll see what comes from this, if anything.
“Confront him over gutting consumer protections his predecessor introduced” I wish, but it would’ve been a waste. Gonna have to elect servant leaders who actually care about the public, not merely their own self-interest or special interests. The airline lobby (AFA) fought hard against those new rules, especially the EU-261-like compensation. If you’ve ever been excessively delayed by an airline, you’d know how much air passenger rights legislation would help. Thanks for trying, Matt. Sometimes it’s not the destination; it’s the journey. Wild ride.
“I do appreciate the work he has begun on ATC modernization, and I also agree with him 100% on the need for Americans to eat healthier, including when they travel.”
Next up, my review of an Alaska Airlines hamburger!
Well, OK…
It’s interesting (and I guess encouraging) to see you, a recovering Republican, recognizing the, um, let’s just say lack of intellectual consistency you see throughout the current administration. The fact is, leadership positions are filled by completely unqualified and unethical sycophants, who are not prepared for their jobs, as their only qualification is unfailing loyalty to the mob boss (and looking good on TV). So their job performance is abysmal. While this does not make most Republicans uncomfortable, it’s good to see it has at least caused you to start to question things. Keep at it.
Duffy admitted that RFK Jr cheats, and is dishonest. On things large and trivial alike. Like all this administration’s leads do.
While the notion of “modernizing” ATC sounds laudable, many of those pushing for it are completely ignorant of many hard facts that will continue to get in the way. ATC “modernizaton” under this gang is going to be a complete disaster, both figuratively and literally (because it’s hard, and this administration doesn’t do hard work…they cheat and lie, see RFK’s “push ups”).
OK, so how was your burger…?
It’s a guilty pleasure, or something like that. Too often, I find myself eating ‘junk food’ because it’s so cheap and accessible, so I try to eat healthy. But, eating healthy doesn’t mean you can’t splurge on a burger every once in a while.
Remember that small talk is often better than nothing and a cultural element. Being skilled at small talk might open up bigger avenues to the main point. Better luck next time with Secretary Duffy!
You handled it like a professional, nothing positive would have come from antagonizing questions. Or worse, an outright insult of him or this administrations policies you disagree with. Bravo to you for choosing the path you did.
I agree. Far too many people would view this as an opportunity for some gotcha moment and just look the fool.
And yet… some celebrate those that shout…
“You lie!” – Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) at Pres. Obama during joint session of Congress in 2009. (His constituents would later chant ‘you lie!’ back at him in townhalls.)
“Liar!” ( – Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) at Pres. Biden during a State of the Union in 2023, and again in 2024. (She just resigned from Congress on January 5, 2026, following her public rift with Pres. Trump.)
Ok, both sides… “No mandate! (to cut Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security) Rep. Al Green (D-TX) shouted at Pres. Trump during a State of the Union in 2025. (He was removed from the chambers.)
So, did any of these really help? Maybe. Perhaps, it raised those politicians status among their supporters. Like, did they get more campaign contributions, or air-time on Fox, etc.? Feels like crocodile tears to claim decorum over all else, when, sometimes, you do need to speak-up, ideally, respectfully, and most certainly, non-violently.
I disagree. It was an opportunity to ask him a real question, and not the softball questions he gets from the conservative media. These people are ruling by intimidation, and leveraging off of the fear people like yourself have of them. The way to disarm the bully is to not buy into their bullying.
I would have asked him why he was withholding federal DOT funding to local governments that do not comply with the Trump administration’s illegal immigration policies? Would he have supported Pete Buttigieg withholding DOT funding to local governments that did not follow Biden’s more liberal policies? After the collision of an aircraft and a US army helicopter why did he claim it was related to the diversity of aircraft controllers? What evidence had he seen to make such a statement?
Not challenging these crooks and enablers is what is enabling them and normalizing their criminal behavior. They do not want to be challenged because they know what they are doing is illegal and not what the morons who voted for them voted for.
And you believe the response would be anything more that him think “just another liberal jerk” and forgetting the interaction soon after? Matthew complimented a man while getting in the importance of ATC upgrades. I suspect that is more likely to affect future behavior. But, hey, it’s not like I’ve spent a lot of time around people Trump would appoint.
My Uncle reminded me I would catch more flies with honey than vinegar. ( nice way to curb contrariness ) Sometimes you have to run with this, even though you don’t want to catch flies at all. It is always the next communication that could change everything. Good job Matthew.
I’m reluctant to take the ‘honey’ method for all situations. Sometimes, you really do need to stand-up, speak-out, fight-back, but this clearly wasn’t the place. Matt was a guest. He would risk access to future industry events, if he made a scene, (verbally) attacked the keynote speaker, etc. Agreed, he handled himself appropriately. Wild how there’s still decency out there, it’s just not always reciprocated…
If there is one terrible cabinet member, it is RFK, Jr. Too bad the worse person is a Democrat. Could have selected many other Democrats instead of RFK if the goal was to show bipartisanship.
Bobby became an Independent after loosing his primary
derek, other than hating your perceived partisan enemies, what do you actually want/hope for?
Like, I’m assuming affordable housing, healthcare, infrastructure, education, jobs, general stability, a lack of corruption, etc. is all too ‘boring,’ right?
Is this the Derek against covid? I cannot keep up the derricks when I’m this sick with the flipping flu.
It is a little confusing. There’s one that capitalizes the ‘D’ and this one that doesn’t (who I think is the right-winger who hates Canada.)
Paging Derek and derek!
I agree. Far too many people would view this as an opportunity for some gotcha moment and just look the fool.
Matthew, despite this administration’s use of RINO for others, they are the RINOs. Trump, and those complementing his new clothes, are populists. I strongly believe if Trump had seen an easier path to power as packaging himself as a Lierberman/Manchin Democrat, he would have. He has no real core political beliefs other than using politics is a way to get what he wants. What is Trump’s abortion stance? He took credit for the three justices he appointed voting with the majority. But, during the 2024 campaign, wouldn’t address whether he’d sign a federal ban. The desire? Get credit with the anti-abortion side without angering the half+ that would vote to keep abortion legal. What is stance on the uber-high federal debt? He can’t come down hard on it, as he really doesn’t want to cut off the flow of federal dollars to buy friends. I hate populists. They’re the guys out leading the lynching mob.
You did sound fairly sycophantic.
I’d really like watch you in the same situation.
I wouldn’t out myself in a situation where I need to meet a fascist clown.
‘This comes to mind’ likes ‘to watch’… we don’t wanna ‘yuck your yum,’ sir. You do you.
‘This comes to mind’ likes ‘to watch’… we don’t wanna ‘yuck your yum,’ sir. You do you.
I would tell him to keep his disgusting paws off public transit funding and congestion pricing.
I would also telling him that figuring out how to get 9 kids to extracurriculars does not qualify you for this job.
I’m confused (a not uncommon state for me). I post that Trump, who I disliked prior to his entry into politics, is a populist, a stance I hate. So, you’re mad because I don’t like or respect Trump? I get it. Reasonable people I’ve known for years have drunk the Flavor Aid. We just never discuss politicscagain.
While I don’t completely agree with your course of action, given the suddenness of the contact I think you did okay. I would have gone into destroying consumer protections but that’s just me.
Same. It’s a non-partisan issue. Republicans and Democrats and non-partisans alike each get screwed by airlines with excessive delays and cancellations, and have limited to no recourse. Call it a ‘Trump Prize’ instead of EU-261, but, for real, affected passengers deserve better protections and actual compensation for excessive delays.
Matthew, the biden era proposed regulation for compensation for delayed flights was a proposed regulation that never became actual law. It is very unlikely it would have not been contested by airlines and most likely would have been deemed illegal consider how much money was at stake. In theory, using the significant impact test, items like that are supposed to be legislated. So, I don’t think the next DOT cancelling the proposed rule really changes anything as it would need to be legislated via congress anyways.
Are there any actual regulations that are not currently being litigated with a significant chance of being deemed illegal that the current DOT has cancelled? I’m asking this as a genuine question.
I am well aware. I’m also not convinced that only Congress can legislate EU-261 style compensation. Furthermore, the point was that PB was pushing carriers to be more generous without the force of regulation (see e.g., Delta refunds after CrowdStrike) and SD does not seem to be concerned about it.
I’d love to see DOT try harder than merely passing the buck to Congress; though, Congress can and should also act. There’s no reason an EU-261 style legislation could not be a bi-partisan win for everyone (except maybe the greedy airline lobby A4A that merely wants to continue supporting its client companies while screwing us passengers.)
Matthew, Congress should be able to pass a law for specific flight compensations if there is the votes, but I doubt that it is likely. Some things like PBM reform have significant bipartisan support are still held up since they like to keep it in their back pocket for horse trading.
Have we had a Delta mass cancellation scenario in the current administration? The current administartion doesn’t seem to be bothered by using the bully pulpit, see threats of tarrifs on druge to get lower drug prices. I wouldn’t be shocked if they forced the hand of an airline if something really bad happened. These type of governmental threats are sort of extra legal, but have become part of the system as the USG has increased in power since the Teddy Roosevelt era. Jamie Dimon had an interesting story of Holder threatening Chase after the financial crisis when they bailed out Washington Mutual at the request of the previous administration which had bought a company that did bad mortgages. I think Chase ended up paying $6 billion or so.
“if there is the votes”… Honestly, how much do you think consumers, in the aggregate, have to ‘bribe’ (sorry, ‘lobby,’ sorry again, provide ‘gratuities’ to, only after the fact, of course, see Snyder v. United States, 603 US 1, 2024) politicians to get them to choose the traveling public, over major corporations?
problem is for the former administration is that the economic changes that they proposed including compensation for irregular operations did cross the line in terms of what was allowable under the Airline Deregulation Act.
They were ok w/ having the airlines put in writing and on the DOT’s website the promises they made for how they care for customers – amenities including food vouchers and hotels – on a voluntary basis.
Telling airlines that they had to refund parts of what consumers bought is not compatible with deregulation and the courts would have sided with the airlines – just as they have with other economic issues this administration has tried to do. We may get another case today with a ruling on tariffs.
and as much as some people love to compare the US to Europe, US airlines operate more reliably and have larger networks and are, in general, more profitable than European legacies.
Honestly, though, if you had just a passing glimpse to get a soundbite from Duffy, passenger compensation is way too complex to expect a decent answer.
Yikes, Tim, I know that you shill for Delta, but, c’mon, you must fly occasionally, and have experienced controllable delays that ruin your trip. You really think European, British, and Canadian carriers and airspace is that different? No, they can handle EU-261/APPR style legislation, the airlines still do well, and passengers are taken care of. We deserve better.
I am much more pragmatic than you, 1990. Not shilling for anyone.
and as Cranky has noted, AA is fixing its DFW hub because they realize it doesn’t work and it costs them profits and revenue.
It does far more to fix what causes IROPS than to legislate compensation that isn’t compatible with law.
and, yes, DL figured out how to run a better operation than its big 4 competitors sooner – but WN learned alot from its Christmas disaster several years ago and UA has copied many of DL’s scheduling strategies. The big 4 – which control 80% of traffic in the US – have learned from their mistakes and are improving their reliability which accomplishes far more than legislating fixes to deal w/ the aftermath rather than to fix the operation to prevent or minimize operational problems. The government can’t fix airline operations – other than ATC – but airlines can and are fixing their operations.
and, I presume you realize that European airspace is a consortium of a bunch of fiefdoms and far less coordinated than the US single airspace system and likely not even comparable to ATC cooperation that the US and Canada have.
The key distinction is ‘controllable’ delays and cancellations. If a staffing, maintenance, or other issue is under the airlines control, they should compensate passengers (that’s the EU/UK/Canada, etc. model). We’re not talking ATC, weather, etc. issues out of their control.
Such air passenger rights legislation does not bankrupt airlines, or add costs to tickets (see Ryanair, profitable in Europe, still offering dirt cheap fares); personal travel insurance is not an alternative (but I highly recommend everyone get policies anyway).
I do very much admire that Delta elected to reimburse some passengers for alternative transportation affected by the Crowdstrike outage; however, that is also a separate matter.
DOT and Congress can both act on this simultaneously; they are each choosing not to. It’s not about faux-legal prohibitions against such rules. That’s an anti-consumer cop-out.
The point is what the previous administration was trying to do with a forced compensation was very likely to be deemed illegal. It doesn’t have anything to do with Delta, and I’m personally not a huge Delta fan. I like Alaska miles.
People in the federal government, such as those in the previous DOT, know that they can engage and work on rules that are likely illegal since there is no threat of criminial or civil penalties and the government doesn’t generally have to compensate the companies that sue the government in course once the government loses. It’s a strategy to bring the issue into the public discourse.
“bring the issue into the public discourse” as I try to do here and elsewhere, every chance I get. US-261. Someday.
Actually most European airlines are much more profitable running their operations. The U.S. big three (and actually just DL and UA) are extremely profitable due to their credit card issuance. Without such, they lag behind their European peers.
and yet, Marc, credit card revenue IS part of the US formula. Trying to pretend that US airlines haven’t succeeded is deconstructing reality.
European legacies also have obtained far more protectionist policies at their hubs; let us know how many Ryanair flights you can find at LHR while there isn’t a US airport – including the congested Northeast airports – where LCCs and ULCCs have obtained fairly significant market share.
None of which changes that US airlines are more reliable than their European counterparts. It is actually Ryanair that manages to operate more reliably than just about any large airline in the world – and part of their formula is to use small, uncongested airports where they can get in and out quickly – even if that is the only choice they have to grow since they have a pretty small presence in most of the Euro legacy hubs.
Ryanair is the perfect example of a profitable European airline that operates under EU-261 rules and still offers dirt cheap fares. There’s no reason why the US shouldn’t have a similar compensation scheme, other than that the airline lobby has effectively bribed administrations and representatives to not do so. We, passengers, pay the price for airlines’ failures. It’s sad.
So Matthew, have you ever asked DOT’s public information office for a sit-down formal interview with Duffy? If not, why not? Seems pretty basic.
Time isn’t right, yet.
1990.
instead of sounding like a politician that makes promises that might or might not be possible, how about you tell us how many inconvenienced passengers in the US DON’T get compensation that you think your proposal would fix?
As much as you incessantly push for ideas, stuff happens where there are real needs.
I argue that
1. there are a whole lot less passengers that don’t receive ANY COMPENSATION or AMENITIES in IROPS than you think
2. in the scope of all the things in America that matter, pushing the X% (which I think is far below 20%) of IROP passengers that can’t work things out w/ an airline is pretty small.
I love your passion but problems get fixed because they are real and can be demonstrated to be fixed by real solutions.