You are free to growl about the cabin

By Gene Sloan, USA TODAY

Frequent flier Diana Maglott of Dallas has just about had it with the food on American Airlines. Or, more precisely, the lack of it.

"American Airlines is trying to starve me," gripes the 42-year-old executive, who flies the company's jets so often they're like a second home.

Maglott has come to rely on American's in-flight meals to carry her through grueling days crisscrossing the nation selling services to hospitals. But since the struggling carrier began slashing food service post-Sept. 11, she finds herself going long stretches without a bite.

"If I take the first flight out, I have to be at the airport at 5:30, before local eateries open," she notes, and tight connections leave little time to grab grub between flights.

After arriving at her destination, she's usually off to a meeting, and "at night, it's the same thing. I have to race to get the rental car back and make my flight. Some airports have good food courts, but the lines are getting longer and often there's no time to wait. I hate it. I need to eat!"

For years, bashing airline food has been a favorite pastime of frequent fliers. There's even a Web site, www.airline meals.net, devoted to the topic. But after years of ridiculing just about everything placed in front of them, travelers are discovering that there is, indeed, something worse than a poor in-flight meal: no meal at all.

"Passengers might complain about the food on airplanes, but they do like having it there," admits David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association.

For the harried traveler the airline meal "is like a safety net," he says. Sure, it isn't gourmet. But at least it's something.

Alas, that safety net is disappearing. And fast.

Call it the airline diet. Like American, which has eliminated meals in coach on flights lasting less than four hours, most major airlines have cut back drastically on the amount of food they dish out to customers. At least one airline, America West, did away with meals entirely after Sept. 11 before restoring them on some flights.

The airlines, of course, are looking for every way to save money. With bookings and fares down sharply, several airlines already have filed or warned that they may soon file for bankruptcy. During the first six months of this year, American alone lost more than $5 million a day.

Still, understanding the logic of a balance sheet doesn't make the situation any easier for fliers who have come to count on getting fed, says Stempler. "Passengers are only unhappy with airline service when the performance isn't commensurate with the expectation."

Indeed. A survey of the USA TODAY Vacationers Panel found many members who were angry with airlines not because meals had disappeared, but because the airlines hadn't given them more notice through advertising or on their tickets.

"Shock" is how Alison Torres of San Diego describes her reaction to discovering (only after boarding) that there wouldn't be a single bite to eat on her recent eight-hour America West trip from Newark to San Diego (with a connection in Las Vegas). "Considering they want us at the airport two hours early, and that means leaving home at 5 a.m., I sure would have liked to know about (the lack of food) before I boarded so I could have been prepared."

Some of the most rankled passengers are those who shell out extra cash or coveted award miles to upgrade to first class, only to find the food little better.

Flying first class on a recent US Airways flight from Philadelphia to Atlanta "was a waste of upgrades," says homemaker Carol Nickel of Reading, Pa. "The only thing they served were some sorry snacks in a basket."

The meal-cutting trend, of course, isn't new. Cost-conscious carriers have been cutting back in fits and starts for years, and statistics from the U.S. Department of Transportation show that overall spending on food dropped considerably through the '90s. In 1992, airlines spent $6.11 per passenger. The number for 2001: $4.37.

Still, airlines have never before slashed so much, so fast. And never before has it been so confusing for fliers. Making the situation particularly maddening is the fact that airline meal policies have bounced around in recent months like a plane flying through a thunderstorm. Every few weeks, another airline makes another change in when it will and won't serve a meal. United, US Airways and Delta each have had at least three different policies over the past year.

Moreover, after all the changes, policies vary widely from airline to airline. Some airlines have eliminated almost all meals in coach while others have maintained meals on all but the shortest flights. Some carriers have established nationwide meal policies that apply to all domestic flights, while others have different policies for competitive routes and routes through important hub airports.

The situation is so up-in-the-air that Delta flier Jon Sinton of Atlanta has taken to always picking up a few carry-on snacks in airport concourses, even if he thinks he'll be fed in flight. "I never count on meal service anymore."

One airline, however, is bucking the trend: Continental. Just days after the attacks, the airline's chief executive, Gordon Bethune, decided to maintain spending on meals, blankets, videos and other passenger extras that other airlines were eliminating, even as it cut back flights and laid off thousands of workers.

Now, with so many of its competitors cutting back, the airline sees food as a way to set itself apart. Continental food honcho Sandra Pineau says Continental recently committed an additional $4 million-a-year to upgrade its offerings on trans-Atlantic flights. Changes include the addition of a mid-flight serving of ice cream and a hot sandwich instead of a cold sandwich with the pre-landing service on flights from Europe. (Although Continental announced Tuesday that it would start charging low-fare fliers for services that were previously free, food and drink are not likely to be affected.)

Ranting and raving about quality aside, passengers do like their meals, says Pineau. The proof, it turns out, is in the (lack of) pudding and other food items reaching the garbage at the end of the flight. "The majority of food we serve is eaten."

Still, not all passengers are hoping that meal service makes a comeback. The meals of old were so inedible that serving them was "plain goofy," says frequent flier Ron Turner. "If airlines can keep prices down by not serving food on flights less than four hours, I'm all for it."

One airline, of course, has been tapping such sentiments for years. Southwest built its reputation on keeping airfares down by serving peanuts instead of full meals, as well as other measures.

The issue is simple, says Turner. "If we need to eat, let's bring a snack from home, or stop in one of the sandwich shops that are at all major airports."

USA TODAY Vacationers Panel member and writer Joanne Lichten, author of How to Stay Healthy & Fit on the Road (Nutrifit Publishing, $9.95), says there's another reason why the meal cutbacks on airplanes are probably not all that bad for Americans: We could all gain to lose a few pounds.

"With 61% of adults at least somewhat overweight, do we really need a big meal?"