American Airlines Group

American Airlines scores among the top four companies in the sample for its scenario analysis. The company presents the results of its Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) analysis and scenario analysis in various ways. Firstly, a risk matrix presents the level of risk for chronic and acute risks over 12 strategic sites. Secondly, the company tabulates its carbon risk scenario analysis to express the annual financial impacts of rising energy costs. Finally, it presents its key transitional and physical risks disaggregated by risk type, discussing the potential financial impact, its mitigation strategy, and evaluated risk level for the short, medium and long terms.

Between 2017 and 2019, the company’s combined passenger and freight emissions intensity remained stable. In 2020, its emissions intensity increased by at least 20% due to the impacts of lower passenger numbers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The company is not on track to achieve the reduction in emissions intensity required by its 1.5°C pathway. To meet this pathway, the company is required to make substantial decreases in its emissions intensity, of around 4% annually between 2020 and 2025.

American Airlines has set a net zero by 2050 target, supported by its well-below 2°C SBTi-validated target to reduce its scope 1 and 3 emissions by 45% by 2035, compared to 2019; becoming one of two airlines to have a target validated by the SBTi. Despite this, it has not set sufficient intermediate targets. Setting regularly spaced intermediate targets will incentivise near-term actions on longer-term goals.

American Airlines also reported a historic target to reduce its Scope 1 emissions intensity by 9% by 2020 compared to 2014. The company did not achieve this reduction. This target could not be assessed as its target year was before the reporting year.

American Airlines does not have an engagement strategy with its transport service subcontractors and third-party carriers. As third-party carriers account for about 23% of the company’s total scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions (70.3% of its scope 3 emissions), this is a large proportion of the company’s total GHG emissions that are not directly covered by a strategy. Without a third-party carrier engagement strategy, reduction of the company’s scope 3 emissions will be limited.

American Airlines aims to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. In the short term, the company aims to reduce its scope 1 and 3 emissions by 45% by 2035. By 2030, the company aims to replace 10% of its jet fuel with SAF.

American Airlines aims to achieve its net-zero target through various measures, including fleet renewal (15%), next-generation aircraft (16%), SAF (40%) and offsets (15%). It also aims to collaborate with stakeholders such as the Federal Aviation Administration to improve operational efficiency.

From 2013 to 2021 American Airlines invested USD 24 billion in 600 more efficient aircraft. In 2020 the company agreed to purchase 9 million gallons of SAF from Neste and in 2021 10 million gallons from Prometheus Fuels. In late 2021 it agreed to purchase 112 million gallons of SAF from Aemetis.

American Airlines’ past emissions intensity performance does not align with the reduction required by its 1.5°C pathway. Between 2017 and 2019 the company’s emissions intensity remained stable before increasing significantly in 2020 due to the impact of COVID-19. Prior to 2017, the company does not disclose emissions intensity data.

American Airlines’ net-zero target is supported by the company’s SAF purchase agreements and engagement with stakeholders (e.g. Catalyst and ZeroAvia) to accelerate next-generation technology development. The company is also partnering with stakeholders to improve aviation’s operational efficiency.

No evidence was found of the company’s commitment to social dialogue or of the categories of stakeholders the company engages with on a just transition. Furthermore, no evidence was found to demonstrate the company’s ongoing social dialogue and meaningful engagement with affected stakeholders.

No evidence was found of the company undertaking low-carbon transition planning to mitigate the social impacts of the transition on workers, affected stakeholders and its business relationships. Additionally, no evidence was found to demonstrate the company’s engagement in social dialogue or engagement with stakeholders in its just transition planning.

No public commitment by the company was found stating its intention to create and support access to green and decent jobs as part of the low-carbon transition. Moreover, no evidence was found of the company’s action to promote these jobs in a way that ensures gender balance and inclusion of vulnerable groups. Additionally, no relevant disclosure was found of the company’s assessment of employment dislocation risks.

No public commitment by the company was found stating its intention to reskill and upskill workers displaced by the transition to a low-carbon economy. Additionally, no evidence was found that the company reskills and upskills workers in a way that ensures gender balance and inclusion of vulnerable groups.

No relevant disclosure was found to show if the company identifies impacts of the low-carbon transition on social protection for workers and affected stakeholders, nor how it contributes to social protection. Additionally, no evidence was found that the company expects its business relationships to contribute to the social protection of their workers and affected stakeholders.

No relevant disclosure was found to show how the company identifies any misalignment of its lobbying activities with policies and regulations that support the just transition, nor of the measures it takes to address misalignment. Furthermore, no evidence was found that the company lobbies for policies and regulations for green and decent job creation; retention, education and reskilling; and social protection for workers.

The company commits to respecting human rights. However, the company’s Human Rights Statement does not disclose a commitment to respect all of the ILO fundamental rights at work. Furthermore, the company can strengthen its disclosure on its human rights due diligence process and engagement with affected stakeholders. The company does, however, have a grievance mechanism available to workers and external stakeholders.

The company commits to respecting the health and safety of its workers and expects the same commitment of its business relationships. Additionally, the company discloses some information on collective bargaining and workforce diversity fundamentals, including the gender and ethnicity of its workforce by employee category. However, the company can strengthen its disclosure on these subjects, as well as on its living wage and working hours practices. Furthermore, no public commitment by the company to gender equality and women’s empowerment was found.

The company commits to protecting personal data. However, no evidence was found of a privacy statement regarding the collection, sharing and access to personal data of employees and customers. Additionally, no evidence was found of the company’s global tax strategy. While the company has a policy prohibiting bribery and corruption, it can increase disclosure on this subject. Furthermore, the company can increase disclosure on its lobbying and political engagement approach and practices.