better4me

Donating Member
  • Content count

    742
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

better4me last won the day on July 29 2016

better4me had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

41 Excellent

About better4me

  • Rank
    4

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Recent Profile Visitors

2,187 profile views
  1. The biggest CTA decision on disabilities and accommodation for the semi-ambulatory has been "One Person, One Fare" ("OPOF"). In making its decision, the CTA weighed the opportunity costs of requiring airlines provide a seat for the travelers attendant. It was estimated that OPOF would require 80,000 free seats out of 10,000,000 pax. Note this includes OPOF instances where the person's disability is extreme obesity. The cost to the airline is not considered to be significant. The big obstacles preventing widespread miss-use of OPOF and similar programs are: (1) pax must be under physician care for the underlying problem, (2) doctor must sign off regarding the severity of the disability, (3) pax condition is reviewed by the medical desk, (4) Pax is still extremely uncomfortable and cumbersome to get the semi-ambulatory into, move around, and out of the aircraft (5) other travel obstacles make frequent travel by the semi ambulatory near impossible. One area that all airlines could improve on is communication, especially communicating the qualifications that entitle pax to utilize the accommodation. The present website resources would suggest that far more people could use accommodation than what the law actually requires. Plain language should give way to medical terminology. The passenger that qualifies for accommodation will know their condition inside and out, so a decent method to weed out the pretenders and layman is through using the proper terminology.
  2. To be clear, if the good Dr Lukacs only advises the complainants to file in Small Claims Court and only appears as a witness (provided the appropriate fees are paid and forms filed), then he is not practicing law. However, if he writes numerous Statements of Claim and gets intervenor status on too many lawsuits, then a claim of practicing law without a license can be made by the relevant Law Society. traditionally law societies only restrict the ability of an out of province lawyer from practicing in the subject province. That is why some lawyers are members of multiple provincial law societies. Again, out of court advise is okay. It is what happens inside court and on official documents that can get the good Dr in trouble. The intervenor status is what got Dr Lukacs in trouble with the CTA. The ruling was that Dr Lukacs could not make a complaint on behalf of another person. Nor could Dr Lukacs present written materials on behalf of another person (CTA hearings are all conducted through written submissions, there are no oral hearings at present).
  3. Check the third last paragraph from the bottom. Gabor Lukacs is helping out the home town cyclists. Lukacs is no longer telling people to complain to the CTA because the CTA has said Lukacs cannot be an intervenor or help the complainants in any official fashion. Also several recent CTA ruling have not gone his way. The new modis operandi is for Lukacs to encourage people to file in small claims court. I have been told by a few lawyers there will be a time very soon where Lukacs could be considered practicing law without an appropriate licence.
  4. If you buy the Ryanair plus product you get free checkin, bag drop, and BP. Check the type of fare you bought for its "benefits". On reviewing the other descriptions of the youtube, it was confirmed the pax did not board the BRU-SXF flight. It was not known whether the pax was flying Ryanair on the first leg of his self made connection, but it doubt it. The reason for my doubt is centered on how else would have the pax gotten to the gate and onto the first flight. It is reasonable to assume that he was connecting off another flight arriving from a schengen country.
  5. The Finance RP got a gig as CFO of Northview Apartment REIT. This was a normal job change as a result of deciding that the incubent CFO was not going to vacate the chair anytime soon. In the Finance/Accounting world, if you want to move from the right seat to the left; you switch employers.
  6. The altercation was not in the overly litigious Excited States of America, the FA will be okay and his actions were reasonable considering the pax shoved the cell phone in his face.
  7. The CBC article seems to suggest that WS LGW ops have been further cut back to improve ontime performance. If so, where are the dropped frequencies? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
  8. Check the attached image of Min Garneau's speaking notes. My understanding is that passengers will not be forced off an airplane so that another pax can be accommodated. In my mind this means that pax can arrive at the airport and be redirected to another flight if they lose musical chairs tail swap game (aircraft downguage). For me, this means that I will have to be super quick doing a transborder to domestic connection at YYZ T1. Under the old process it took me 30-35 minutes with Nexus card, no checked bag, and minimal line at Nexus pre-board security. So if my 1.5 hour connection was dealyed arrival by 30 minutes i could still make the connection. Now I will have to be at the gate prior to the start of Zone 1 boarding. Once boarding starts, there will be no more seat reassignments. There is not much different for AC, current process is to resolve over booking problems prior to commencement of boarding. In contrast there have been several instances on UA where boarding starts and the gate agents are still requesting volunteer(s). Further, I too have witnessed instance where a UAX crew has displaced pax all ready onboard. My understanding is that UAX carriers can have crew walk up to any airplane and immediately get seating privileges. This was the root cause of the Dr Dao UA3411 incident. The Minister also said that there will be a minimum amount of compensation for IDB. Current rules have a maximum amount. However, it appears from looking at the draft legislation that there will still be a maximum amount of compensation for cancelled flights. This forms the relevant range for IDB Compensation. At the minimum stated in the new Pax bill of rights and the maximum being the cancelled flight compensation. For clarity lets say IDB minimum is $800 and cancelled flight is $1400. If a pax on AC154, refused the $1400 amount, then cancel the flight and issue a new flight AC2154, hand the pax their $1400 cancelled flight compensation.
  9. Regarding the issue of who gets bumped, the last person to purchase a ticket or the passenger who paid the least. Here is my story. Late September 2015 and I was working as the CFO of a medical software company. I was selling a division that made 250k revenue per year for 750k profit. We hit a snag in closing the deal. To resolve I had to go to NYC during the United Nations General Assembly for a 2 hour meeting and to negotiate an escrow agreement. I had four days to get to NYC. Flights were booked and hotels were impossible to find. For this trip the airfare was $2,500 (paid J) and the hotel was over $700. Instead I worked out a deal to go YYC-IAH-RSW-EWR for $1,300 paid J. Overnight at the EWR Marriott for $300. The payback was I got to return EWR-IAH-DEN stop DEN-PDX-YYC and the President was okay with having his CFO on email (WIFI) for the three days. Truth is my budget was unlimited. My point, the selection of airline was not based on price but based on the airline that could get me to NYC guaranteed. I didn't fly the local YYC airline because there was chance that a cancelled nonstop would kill the whole corporate negotiations. So I fly the local ORD airline on a route that offered numerous (there are about 500 daily flights to EWR) reaccomodation options. I don't know if another person got IDB because of my last seat. Another point, the traveler who purchases the last seat might be worth more to society (in terms of economic output) than the person who is currently getting IDB.
  10. One place where the regulation environment is well understood is the Canadian Transportation Agency. I had the opportunity to attend a luncheon with the CEO of the CTA as the speaker. I came away with a much deeper appreciation for the work done by the CTA and Transport Canada. Some things are completely off the table, Tarmac delay program and EU flight Compensation Regulation 261/2004 are two such regulations that cannot be implemented in Canada. The CTA has seen what results when the Tarmac Delay program, the previously mentioned mass cancellation of flights. It was noted at the Luncheon the Tarmac Delay program was instituted in response to short term weather events (thunderstorms) that are moderately complex to recover from. The Tarmac Delay program also has an off ramp provision in that the FAA or NTSB does not have to impose a fine. So a thunderstorm will get a fine but an ice storm might not. With regard to EU 261/2004; the EU has a purpose built off ramp in the form of industrial action does not warrant compensation. The CTA postulated that weather issues are Canada's version of industrial action. Further, the air Industry in Europe can mitigate compensation losses by using the train system. A similar form of alternate transportation does not exist in Canada. Finally, Europe has much larger per capita number of hotel rooms that can be used to accommodate displaced passengers. What I have heard from the CTA, the incoming new regulations will enshrine the current tariff rules into a passengers bill of rights. So if current IDB compensation is a max $800 in both the WS and AC tariff, this will be the limit in the new Passengers Bill of Rights, alternately there might be a small bump in IDB compensation so that the Transport Minister can say the new regulations address current concerns. I will speculate that the current furor over UA3411 and the recent DL OGG situation (plus the CBC constant stories about rough winter air travel) have hindered the current timeline for Passenger Bill of Rights legislation. Garneau will not want to introduce the Bill of rights with a $1000 IDB limit when the CEO of UA is offering a limit of $10,000.
  11. I think in this instance the father understood the program and was trying to game the system. My opinion is formed by the calm disposition of the father. I think he expected trouble and was anticipating a great argument. I also think he learned from the Dr Dao incident and was convinced that no one was going to get him out of his seat. What the dad did not anticipate was that DL would cancel the whole flight. Once that threat was made, the family got off the airplane. DL has been handling unruly passengers with cancelling the whole flight on at least two other video'd instances since Dr Dao. I don't know why the crew went with the line of jail and split families rather than just saying "either you walk off the airplane or everyone walks off the flight" .
  12. On American Airlines name changes are not allowed. The ticket gets coverted to travel credit in the name of the ticket holder. I have gotten $1000 travel credit from a former employer when they let me go with future travel plans all ready booked. The employer tried to convert the ticket (paid by company credit card) into another employees name but no dice. So the travel credit became part of the golden parachute. Pretty much all car seats are approved for airplane use. the FA assertion that infant must be held was incorrect. I will give the FA some lieniency because she was debating/arguing with the pax for about 10 minutes, at that point most people are pretty much looking for any reason that will stick and get the other side to comply.
  13. This is what i have gleaned from the blogging sites: family booked four seats for five people on a round trip delta flight LAX-OGG.The infant was booked as a lap child for both segments of the journey. The outbound flight the family realized how awful the seating situation is with an infant and narrow body configuration. Nobody wanted a repeat of the travel experience. To fix the error in their ways, the family hatched the idea that the cheapest option was to have the 18 year old son fly the return portion of the trip on another airline. The infant would then take the seat of his older brother. The family kept the original seat assignments with four seats together 44c/d/e/f. Family gets onboard and then finds out the 18 year olds seat has been reassigned to another passenger. An arguement with the FA ensues and the family is told either get off the airplane or the whole flight is cancelled and everyone gets off the airplane.
  14. Are any of these 9 gates available to WS without displacing the incumbent airline? E.g. the gates at the C hammerhead are committed to BA, KL, AF, EK, EY, etc. Then there is TS which does the infill job on the gate plan.
  15. At first reading of the Ed Sims appointment noted above i thought that Bob Cummings got handed the bankers box on Friday. Fortunately this could be further from the truth. Cummings is going to lead the ULCC effort as noted below: http://westjet2.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1229