Sign in to follow this  
Malcolm

New passenger bill of rights

Recommended Posts

'Bill all about passenger rights but hidden in the bill is this:

Quote

The legislation increases the cap on foreign ownership of airlines to 49 per cent from 25 per cent. Garneau already made exceptions to this rule for some new, ultra-low-cost airlines trying to establish in Canada and the legislation will change it for all airlines, except for specialty air services such as fire fighting and heli-logging.

Under the new rules, single investors will not be allowed to hold more than 25 per cent of voting interests in a single carrier and no combination of international carriers can own more than 25 per cent, either alone or as part of an affiliation.

 

New passenger bill of rights spells out passenger compensation rules

CTV News Channel: New rules for air travel
 
Marc Garneau has laid out new guideline for air travel including compensation and disruptions. Erin Paul reports.
Transport Minister Marc Garneau discusses the government’s strategy for ensuring rights for airline passengers.

The Canadian Press
Published Tuesday, May 16, 2017 10:33AM EDT
Last Updated Tuesday, May 16, 2017 11:46AM EDT

OTTAWA -- Airlines won't be allowed to bump passengers from a flight against their will under a new passenger bill of rights introduced today by Transportation Minister Marc Garneau.

That change is part of a package of amendments to the Canada Transportation Act which also introduces new foreign ownership limits for airlines, requires railways to install voice and video recorders in locomotives and improves transparency and efficiency in the freight rail industry.

Garneau promised the bill of rights last month in the wake of widespread alarm after a United Airlines passenger was seriously injured when he was dragged from a plane in Chicago.

Photos

 
Marc Garneau airline bill of rights

Transport Minister Marc Garneau speaks during a press conference in Ottawa, Tuesday, May 16, 2017.

The minister earlier told airlines operating in Canada such an incident is not to happen here, but he says his goal with the new legislation is to spell out clearly that a passenger who has purchased a ticket cannot be barred from a plane just because the airline sold too many seats.

"We have all heard recent news reports of shoddy treatment of air passengers," Garneau said at a news conference. "Such incidents will not be tolerated in Canada. When Canadians buy an airline ticket, they expect the airline to keep its part of the deal."

He said there will be minimum levels of compensation for people who voluntarily agree to be bumped from a flight and if airlines can't get a volunteer, they will have to decide if they want to up the ante to persuade someone to get off.

The bill will apply to airlines flying within, into or out of Canada.

Garneau said the existing rules for compensating passengers who agree to give up a seat or whose luggage gets lost or damaged are "opaque" to the average flyer and the new rules will make things more clear and let passengers know where to go to seek compensation.

The bill will enable the government to force airlines to create clear standards of treatment and compensation for circumstances such as voluntarily giving up a seat, lost or damaged luggage, delays while sitting on the tarmac and other non-weather related issues. Parents will not be forced to pay a fee in order to sit next to their children and even musical instruments will get better treatment under new standards for transporting them by air.

Most of the details will be established through regulation after the bill is passed.

The Canadian Transportation Agency will set minimum compensation and timelines. Passengers also will not have to seek out redress themselves, with the onus on airlines to keep records of those affected by an incident and follow up with those passengers accordingly.

Garneau said he is considering what further penalties would apply if airlines do not live up to the new requirements.

He wants the new legislation in place in 2018.

Gabor Lukacs, an air passenger rights advocate, is skeptical that the transportation agency is equipped to handle any more duties as it relates to airlines. A note posted on his Facebook page says the agency received more than 500 complaints a year from airline passengers over the last three years, but the agency's enforcement actions dropped in that time.

In 2013-14 the agency acted in 230 cases, but in 2015-16 it was only 64.

Lukacs said passengers are better off taking complaints to small claims court.

Garneau said new support will be provided to help the agency handle the increased workload.

The legislation increases the cap on foreign ownership of airlines to 49 per cent from 25 per cent. Garneau already made exceptions to this rule for some new, ultra-low-cost airlines trying to establish in Canada and the legislation will change it for all airlines, except for specialty air services such as fire fighting and heli-logging.

Under the new rules, single investors will not be allowed to hold more than 25 per cent of voting interests in a single carrier and no combination of international carriers can own more than 25 per cent, either alone or as part of an affiliation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another interesting statement but what if no one wants to give up their seat, will the flight be cancelled or ? :box:

Quote

The minister earlier told airlines operating in Canada such an incident is not to happen here, but he says his goal with the new legislation is to spell out clearly that a passenger who has purchased a ticket cannot be barred from a plane just because the airline sold too many seats.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

Another interesting statement but what if no one wants to give us their seat, will the flight be cancelled or ? :box:

Nope. Just a redefinition of the term "aisle seat"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch the flight cancellations skyrocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this is very interesting but the change to 49% foreign ownership is the biggest part of it.  I suggest buying as much AC and WS as you can afford - SHARE PRICES ARE GOING UP!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So 110 people show up for a 100 seat flight.  We cannot seat everyone but we "HAVE" to.  So we cancel the flight, rebook 100 passengers on the same plane with a new flight number and re-accommodate the 10 spares on the next available flight.  OTP goes into the toilet and the issue gats even worse.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, boestar said:

So 110 people show up for a 100 seat flight.  We cannot seat everyone but we "HAVE" to.  So we cancel the flight, rebook 100 passengers on the same plane with a new flight number and re-accommodate the 10 spares on the next available flight.  OTP goes into the toilet and the issue gats even worse.

 

...and the passengers are happy 'cause they got a "Bill of Rights" - thank you Gabor Lukacs!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely agree Boestar.  We are at a point where trying to do the right thing is giving way to SJW cameras and the easiest solution for the airlines finding themselves oversold (for whatever reason) if volunteers won't play along, is for the airlines to cancel the flight.  Everyone is then rebooked according to standby priority and a situation where one or two persons get accommodated with in an hour or two, instead the bottom standby priority will now take days to get to their destination.

Such progress.

 I can even see the situation where an airline will cancel the flight if no one volunteers, then removes and rebooks under a new flight number.  Everyone gets reboarded by priority and the low man on the list is left to a later flight, since he should have been the one removed anyway.

Or perhaps just do away with overbooking entirely.  You don't show up, your fare is forfeit.  Just like a hockey game.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plane gets downsized (=overbooked) or Weather and longer alternate requires additional fuel resulting in flight being overbooked etc etc etc.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, acsidestick said:

Or perhaps just do away with overbooking entirely.  You don't show up, your fare is forfeit.  Just like a hockey game.

You want to see people lose their minds - just bring in this policy.  As it is with the 45 minute check in policy now there are half a dozen stories I've heard about passengers who claimed they missed making the check in because some random airline employee sent them to the wrong line or the line was too long and not staffed properly or the check in agent was slow on purpose to make the person late!

Edited by seeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wolfhunter said:

In the absence of common sense,  courtesy, decency, and respect we are reduced to regulation.

I just made that up... cool eh? 

 

In the famous words or probably everyone's grandfather "play stupid games, win stupid prizes"

Nobody is going to be terribly well served by this, but I am going to find it an endless source of amusement regardless.

Regulation by administrative rule making is just about as close as you can get to being ruled by the angry mob in Canada and the US.

The question the airline executives now need to ask themselves is whether squandering light-touch regulation was worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went to check in for a flight a few weeks ago.  Went to the kiosk and entered my info to be met with " You flight has been Delayed or cancelled".  Nice..

The flight was replaced with a new flight number, original tail and original passengers.  The only thing different was the flight number.  I have no idea why this change was made.  This would be pretty startling to a regular passenger who didn't know the options.  I would expect to see a lot more of this

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

irony2.jpg.2fc1beaf6a9f79ea7c3c5cbb11f6fa4d.jpgIt will of course be found to be the fault of the airline. 

Air Canada plane diverted after passenger allegedly tries to open door

The Canadian Press
Published Wednesday, May 17, 2017 9:02AM EDT

ORLANDO, Fla. -- An Air Canada flight from Jamaica to Toronto was diverted to Orlando, Fla., after authorities say a passenger became aggressive, attacked the crew with coffee pots and tried to open a cabin door.

A federal criminal complaint says crew members and other passengers secured Brandon Michael Courneyea using zip ties.

Orlando television station WFTV reports the FBI was contacted around 7:30 p.m. on Monday.

Investigators said Courneyea yelled at passengers for "looking at him."

They allege he then grabbed a coffee pot from the galley and swung it at crew members before saying it would "only take one guy to take the plane down.

He allegedly lunged for a rear door and began pulling the lever.

Federal agents arrested Courneyea, who faces several charges. It's not clear whether he has a lawyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, acsidestick said:

Completely agree Boestar.  We are at a point where trying to do the right thing is giving way to SJW cameras and the easiest solution for the airlines finding themselves oversold (for whatever reason) if volunteers won't play along, is for the airlines to cancel the flight.  Everyone is then rebooked according to standby priority and a situation where one or two persons get accommodated with in an hour or two, instead the bottom standby priority will now take days to get to their destination.

Such progress.

 I can even see the situation where an airline will cancel the flight if no one volunteers, then removes and rebooks under a new flight number.  Everyone gets reboarded by priority and the low man on the list is left to a later flight, since he should have been the one removed anyway.

Or perhaps just do away with overbooking entirely.  You don't show up, your fare is forfeit.  Just like a hockey game.

 

 

The compensation covers cancelled flights as well so this wont be an "out" for the airlines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But on what terms and what compensation.  A cancelled flight replaced with a different flight at the same schedule should not require any compensation at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2017 at 11:02 AM, Malcolm said:

Another interesting statement but what if no one wants to give up their seat, will the flight be cancelled or ? :box:

 

Check the attached image of Min Garneau's speaking notes.591cb6c8bdd54_PaxBillofRights.thumb.jpg.eafadf7fcdca3e3b8fccb6c3b5967564.jpg

 

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.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the more I read and hear about this the more I side with the pax. Looks like WJ adds are zeroing the reticle as well:

 

So, you charge a premium to pick the seat, then you charge other people the same premium to pick the same seat, then you suggest they are the idiots because they cry foul, then you wonder why your a$$ is getting regulated. Soon you’ll be wondering why there’s a real pilot shortage (not the pretend one you planned to use for regulatory concessions)… but that’s another thread and we will be talking about it PDQ. When we do, be sure to point out that it’s me that doesn’t understand the problem…

Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2017 at 11:13 PM, Super 80 said:

That commercial is excruciating to watch, even in a restaurant with the audio muted.

You know that WestJet doesn't ovebook, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maverick said:

You know that WestJet doesn't ovebook, right?

This gets into semantics for me.  They don't oversell, but they have certainly overbooked in the past and will continue to do so in the future.  The usual stuff.  Need to get crew members on a full flight so they can get to another city to save a flight, weight and balance, tail swap to a lower gauge aircraft.  It's not a regular every day occurrence, but it does happen.  In 5 years at the airport I had to voluntarily deny boarding to 50-60 Guests for those reasons.  Small in comparison to what I had to deal with on any given long weekend when I worked at AC when flights would be oversold by 17 with the next "available" flight in 5 days, but I do find the claim that WestJet doesn't overbook stretching it a bit.  

The biggest problem we had when WestJet was "overbooked" was that no one could find the process in the General Reference (GR).  Partly again because of semantics.  WestJet refused to call it overbooking.  They referred to it as "booked beyond capacity" and the search engine wasn't smart enough to pull it up when a panic stricken agent who had to pull a few Guests off an overbooked flight typed "overbooked flight" in the search function.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this