WestJet and Swoop News

[Guest]

WestJet adds Boston to Calgary hub

Provided by WESTJET, an Alberta Partnership/CNW

New seasonal non-stop service gives Western Canadians 19 U.S. destinations out of Calgary

CALGARY, Dec. 12, 2019 /CNW/ – WestJet guests will get the chance to pack more business and leisure into their travel itineraries with new seasonal daily non-stop service between the airline’s home in Calgary and Boston, Mass., starting May 14, 2020.

Boston, Massachusetts, USA city skyline on the river. (CNW Group/WESTJET, an Alberta Partnership) Boston skyline from waterfront. (CNW Group/WESTJET, an Alberta Partnership)

“Fantastic routes need fantastic schedules and WestJet is offering guests convenient flight times between our extensive hub out of Calgary and the capital of Massachusetts,” said Arved von zur Muehlen, WestJet Chief Commercial Officer. “While other carriers may fly the route, WestJet continues to build our schedule for the region’s business and leisure travellers. It’s never been easier to explore and do business in Calgary, Boston and beyond.”

As the airline that Calgarians choose most, WestJet continues to invest in the city with the most departures, destinations and seats. In May 2020, WestJet will offer 19 U.S. destinations into and out of YYC including Atlanta,  Portland, Austin, Los Angeles, Houston, Phoenix, Palm Springs and more. For more information visit westjet.com.

Route	Frequency	Departing	Arriving	Effective
Calgary-Boston	Daily	9:45 a.m.	4:15 p.m.	May 14, 2020
Boston-Calgary	Daily	5 p.m.	8:15 p.m.	May 14, 2020

Share this:

[Guest]

Swoop Continues North American Expansion with Release of 2020 Summer Schedule

Provided by Swoop/CNW

The ultra-low fare airline adds increased service and three new destinations to its network

CALGARY, Dec. 13, 2019 /CNW/ – Today, Swoop, Canada’s ultra-low-fare airline and subsidiary of WestJet Airlines Ltd., released its 2020 summer schedule, announcing increased service and three new destinations. Starting in April 2020, Swoop’s newest routes will take travellers to two new domestic destinations including Victoria, Kamloops, and one U.S. destination, San Diego.

With summer being a busy travel season for Canadians, Swoop is also increasing its weekly frequency service between many markets including Hamilton to Winnipeg, Edmonton to Abbotsford, and Abbotsford to Winnipeg.

“In only 18 months, Swoop has experienced significant growth, and we are excited to continue this momentum with the release of our 2020 summer schedule,” said Steven Greenway, President, Swoop. “By introducing Swoop to more markets, we are achieving our mission of providing Canadians with accessible summer travel opportunities throughout North America.”

Highlights of Swoop’s 2020 summer schedule includes service between:

• Edmonton-Kamloops up to four times weekly
• Winnipeg-London up to four times weekly
• Winnipeg-Victoria up to five times weekly
• Edmonton-San Diego up to three times weekly
• Edmonton-Abbotsford from 16 times weekly, to 24 times weekly
• Hamilton-Winnipeg, from six times weekly, to 10 times weekly
• Abbotsford to Winnipeg, from four times weekly, to daily

Since its June 2018 launch, Swoop’s summer network has grown to serve 14 domestic, 10 transborder and four international markets, rapidly expanding the airline’s network across North America. Fulfilling a need in the Canadian marketplace, Swoop continues to make a positive impact on the aviation industry, becoming Canada’s leading domestic, transborder and international ultra-low-cost carrier, with the new schedule set to increase Swoop’s frequency to 328 ultra-low fare weekly flights.

“We are very pleased to welcome Swoop to Victoria International Airport with new service to Winnipeg,” said Geoff Dickson, President and CEO, Victoria Airport Authority.  “We are one of the lowest cost airports in Canada and that makes us a natural fit with the low-cost business model of Swoop. We look forward to a growing partnership and welcome the new destination and travel options for our local community and visitors to our region.” 

“We’re glad to see Swoop’s growth plan includes increased service for Edmonton International Airport,” said Tom Ruth, President and CEO, Edmonton International Airport. “We look forward to more flights both for the Edmonton Metro Region and for other communities to come here and experience our great area.”

“Winnipeg Richardson International Airport travellers will have more options this summer thanks to two new direct routes from Swoop,” said Barry Rempel, President and CEO, Winnipeg Airports Authority. “We are pleased to grow our partnership with Swoop as they continue to expand our community’s connectivity, giving travellers new places to discover and bringing more people to Winnipeg to explore everything our city has to offer.”

“Expanding flight services and destinations continues to be a priority for us at San Diego International Airport,” said Kim Becker, President and CEO, San Diego County Regional Airport Authority. “We are proud and excited to welcome Swoop with service to Edmonton as our newest travel destination, bringing even more offerings to our passengers in San Diego and Canada.”

“We are very pleased to welcome Swoop to Kamloops Airport this coming summer season,” said Ed Ratuski, Managing Director, Kamloops Airport. “The return of service between Kamloops and Edmonton will be welcomed by our community and offer great opportunities for adventures on both ends of the route.”

Swoop’s unbundled model ensures fares remain ultra-low, with a base fare that starts with just the seat, giving travellers the power to add the things they want, and nothing they don’t.

Flights are now available for booking through until October 24, 2020. To learn more about Swoop’s destinations, schedule and ultra-low-cost model visit FlySwoop.com or connect with Swoop on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram.

Share this:

[MD2]

Management has also won a major Pilot Transfer Agreement which will ensure contained labour costs and sufficient supply of pilots through Encore which likely will set-up a cadet program. In spite of strong headwinds over the recent months, WestJet management has done really well to pacify labour unrest and navigate through some turbulent air. This bodes well for Onex and its stakeholders to contain cost, making further acquisition and consolidation possible, while executing its master plan.  Reading the WestJet CBA, it's not difficult to envision this plan over the next 3 to 5 years. Look out Air Canada for Onex Airlines!!

[FA@AC]

2 hours ago, MD2 said:

This bodes well for Onex and its stakeholders to contain cost, making further acquisition and consolidation possible

Hoping for an acquisition of Porter, are we? 

[MD2]

Porter is not for sale, and of course you're looking in the wrong places.

[Gooseberry]

4 hours ago, MD2 said:

Management has also won a major Pilot Transfer Agreement which will ensure contained labour costs and sufficient supply of pilots through Encore which likely will set-up a cadet program. In spite of strong headwinds over the recent months, WestJet management has done really well to pacify labour unrest and navigate through some turbulent air. This bodes well for Onex and its stakeholders to contain cost, making further acquisition and consolidation possible, while executing its master plan.  Reading the WestJet CBA, it's not difficult to envision this plan over the next 3 to 5 years. Look out Air Canada for Onex Airlines!!

Man you are so consumed with your hatred of all things Air Canada.  You may want to get a life outside of Air Canada bashing before it gives you an ulcer.  The reality is that Air Canada is doing pretty well and so is Westjet.  There is no reason to believe that won't continue.  

 

There are many great people at AC and many great people at WJ but your hatred for AC doesn't allow you to see that.  I bet 99% of the employees at both companies can't give a rat's ass about what the other corporation is doing.  

 

I am curious though, if WJ is as great as you make it out to be, why is AC hiring so many pilots from WJ and encore?

 

 

[MD2]

17 hours ago, Gooseberry said:

Man you are so consumed with your hatred of all things Air Canada.  You may want to get a life outside of Air Canada bashing before it gives you an ulcer.  The reality is that Air Canada is doing pretty well and so is Westjet.  There is no reason to believe that won't continue.  

 

There are many great people at AC and many great people at WJ but your hatred for AC doesn't allow you to see that.  I bet 99% of the employees at both companies can't give a rat's ass about what the other corporation is doing.  

 

I am curious though, if WJ is as great as you make it out to be, why is AC hiring so many pilots from WJ and encore?

 

 

Wow ace, you got all that from "Look out Air Canada for Onex airlines!"??  What snowflake! You do work for Air Canada!

For the record, I never said (at least in this post) that Air Canada was good or bad, or anything about its recruitment efforts.

But since you mentioned it, you are right, Air Canada has had an easy time recruiting pilots from Encore among other places, even WestJet if I understand correctly. This agreement may slow recruitment from Encore, although there probably be less interest in WestJet mainline, which may balance it out, so who knows. In general, even without guaranteed flow and top-up pay at its regionals, Air Canada seems to be the preferred route for most.

As for the airline itself though, where things had been stagnant recently, with the sale complete and this issue clarified, there will be news of expansion at WestJet/Onex soon. Already there is an appetite to expand out East. And there will be more WBs coming that will put pressure on your network. And with their J.V with Delta almost complete, there will be more trans border flights on city pairs that are currently only served by AC. I understand they put a provision for 50 small jets in their scope, which was smart on their part. I believe that's where they will be deployed and likely get a good rate on it using the competition between Encore and possibly Georgian. So this will be an interesting year with more competition for AC. 

[Guest]

curious re the "Pilot Transfer Agreement" are the details public?  If so I would love to see them, just curiosity on my part as I have no axe to grind.  Thanks 

[MD2]

I believe it is public knowledge for those who know how to search for information in the union contracts and such.

From what I understand, it guarantees 60% of hiring at WestJet (and Swoop?) will come from Encore up to 90 max per annum without interview. The corporation can freeze flow if Encore is understaffed, but they have committed to meet those numbers. After flow, they will also top up their pay for 24 months at a rate of $2000 per month. So overall, not a bad deal if one is a young aspiring pilot, get through Encore interview and just sit there until your number comes up. It is ahead of Air Canada flow in some aspects, no interview, two top-up pay and the flow itself, although to be fair AC has flow too but not sure what the numbers and ratio is.

Likely this will all but stop attrition at Encore, although likely will expedite it at mainline with a lot of unhappy pilots that just got pushed down about 500 numbers! So interesting dichotomy at play for Onex. The surprising factor is that ALPA, the airline of date of hire for seniority, has gone along with this and in essence disenfranchised its own members for members of another (albeit ALPA) shop. A lot will depend on the rate of expansion with Onex. If it can expedite meaningful expansion with WBs, it may quell the unrest, otherwise with stagnant numbers, likely there will be larger attrition at mainline. Even though Onex also has the scope to add 50 regional jets, they will be at the lower end of pay and either at Encore, or likely at Georgian and will not attract mainline pilots.

One would have thought that WestJet would have been better off to leave the mainline alone and try to appease Encore by introducing the RJs there at rates slightly rates to stop attrition, but this is the route they have chosen and will be interesting to see how it plays out for them. As for Air Canada, I think due to its momentum, higher retirement numbers, and higher hiring forecast which allow for faster upgrades, it still has the upper hand in recruitment with little market pressure to increase its payroll, even entry levels. 

  

 

[conehead]

What is the relationship between Georgian and Westjet?

[Kip Powick]

4 minutes ago, conehead said:

What is the relationship between Georgian and Westjet?

Hopefully cordial, but they do not codeshare.

Air Georgian is a Tier III codeshare with AC

[Guest]

Air Canada Express

Air Georgian is a proud member of the Air Canada Express family, operating 62,000 regional flights per year on behalf of Air Canada through a capacity purchase agreement. With bases in Calgary and Toronto, we carry over 1.5 million passengers a year to 31 regional domestic and transborder destinations. Many of our passengers connect to other destinations worldwide on Air Canada or other Star Alliance airlines.

Air Canada manages all flight bookings for Air Georgian flights. To book a flight, check the status of a flight, or check-in to your flight online visit the Air Canada website.

[Canoehead]

1 hour ago, Marshall said:

Air Canada Express

Air Georgian is a proud member of the Air Canada Express family, operating 62,000 regional flights per year on behalf of Air Canada through a capacity purchase agreement.

Not for much longer.  The CRJs are returning to Jazz and/or the lessor, and the GGN pilots (pre FEB 2019) are in the midst of transferring to Jazz or going to AC and elsewhere.  Scuttlebutt was that GGN and WJA were in talks for an eastern CPA (like WJA has with Pacific Costal in the west).

https://nationalpost.com/news/regional-airline-loses-1-5m-passenger-contract-with-air-canada-but-denies-safety-concerns-a-factor

[conehead]

3 hours ago, Canoehead said:

Not for much longer.  The CRJs are returning to Jazz and/or the lessor, and the GGN pilots (pre FEB 2019) are in the midst of transferring to Jazz or going to AC and elsewhere.  Scuttlebutt was that GGN and WJA were in talks for an eastern CPA (like WJA has with Pacific Costal in the west).

https://nationalpost.com/news/regional-airline-loses-1-5m-passenger-contract-with-air-canada-but-denies-safety-concerns-a-factor

This is what I was wondering, if GGN and WJA had reached some sort of agreement....

[Guest]

N.L. community brings Christmas dinner to grounded WestJet passengers

Brooklyn NeustaeterCTVNews.ca Overnight Producer

@bneustaeter Contact

Published Friday, December 27, 2019 10:48AM EST

The community of Deer Lake, N.L. came together to feed approximately 80 WestJet passengers who were stranded in the town on Christmas Day. (Facebook/Brian Snow)

SHARE

4K

 

TORONTO -- A small community in Newfoundland came together to feed approximately 80 WestJet passengers who were stranded in Deer Lake on Christmas Day due to bad weather.

The WestJet flight to St. John's from Toronto was diverted to the small town located over 600 kilometres from Newfoundland and Labrador's capital early Wednesday morning because of high winds.

While some of the passengers were able to get on another flight that morning, approximately 80 others were stranded at the town's Holiday Inn Express until later that night.

Related Stories

• Woman in wheelchair robbed of iPhone she was trying to sell for Christmas money
• Bill Gates sends 81-pound Secret Santa gift to lucky Reddit user
• Sixty-nine Canadians giving up holidays to help with Australian wildfires

Major Jeff Howard with the Deer Lake Salvation Army said they heard about the situation from a local resident who is a friend of one of the passengers.

In a telephone interview with CTVNews.ca, Howard said the Salvation Army's community services co-ordinator Brian Snow made a callout on social media to organize efforts to feed the passengers.

With it being Christmas Day, all restaurants and shops in the town were closed. The hotel the passengers were staying at also did not have a restaurant.

"There are 75 to 80 passengers who have been stranded at the hotel who has had nothing to eat since last night," wrote Snow in a Facebook post. "Since nothing is open and there is no restaurant at the Holiday Inn, we need sandwiches, leftover turkey and food items to help these passengers… Let's show the true Christmas spirit."

Howard said the community’s response was "unexpected."

He said that within an hour there was enough volunteers and food to create a potluck in the hotel lobby. He said residents brought sandwiches, cookies, plates full of their own turkey dinners and more.

"The fact that is was Christmas Day was probably motivating for some people," said Howard. "There was so much food I think the passengers even took some for the plane."

A few community members also provided rides back to the airport after the meal. The passengers were able to depart for St. John's by approximately 9 p.m. local time.

While Howard said he was surprised by the outpouring of support from the community, he admits that it isn't out of the ordinary for the region.

"This is Newfoundland; this is part of our culture here," he said. "It's a small community but we often come together when others are in need."

In a Facebook post, Snow later dubbed the day "Come From Away - Christmas Day!"

The situation is reminiscent of when Gander, N.L. residents opened their homes to stranded airline passengers following the Sept. 11 attacks in the U.S. The event served as the inspiration for the Tony Award-winning musical Come From Away.

[Guest]

 

 

Determination No. A-2019-241

December 19, 2019

 

DETERMINATION by the Canadian Transportation Agency (Agency) – Inquiry into WestJet’s international scheduled tariff provisions related to schedule delays, schedule irregularities, and denied boarding.

 

Case number: 

19-04733

 

SUMMARY

[1] On August 16, 2019, the Agency initiated, on its own motion, an inquiry into whether certain terms and conditions of WestJet’s International/Transborder Passenger Rules and Fares Tariff No. WS-1, NTA(A) No. 518 (Tariff) are just and reasonable, taking into consideration the requirement for air carriers to apply the minimum obligations set out in the Air Passenger Protection Regulations, SOR/2019-150 (APPR).

[2] During the course of the Agency’s analysis, it became evident that WestJet’s Tariff was unclear. This lack of clarity precludes the Agency from making a final assessment regarding the reasonableness of the terms and conditions themselves.

[3] Accordingly, the Agency finds that the Tariff does not meet the requirement set out in the Air Transportation Regulations, SOR 88/58, as amended (ATR), providing that the terms and conditions be clearly stated. The Agency orders WestJet to provide a proposed revised tariff containing terms and conditions that clearly articulate the specific obligations that WestJet undertakes toward its passengers, which must meet or exceed the minimal requirements of the APPR that apply to WestJet as a large carrier. WestJet must provide the proposed tariff to the Agency by March 18, 2020. If WestJet’s proposed tariff language is clear, the Agency will proceed to assess its reasonableness.

BACKGROUND

[4] On July 15, 2019, the first set of APPR provisions came into effect, requiring air carriers to meet new obligations toward their passengers in the areas of communications, denied boarding, tarmac delay, lost and damaged baggage, and the transportation of musical instruments. On December 15, 2019, additional provisions setting out air carriers’ obligations in respect of flight delays and cancellations and the seating of children came into effect. All APPR provisions are now in force.

[5] Shortly after the coming into force of the first round of APPR requirements, the Agency received a complaint by two passengers who alleged that on July 22, 2019, they were denied boarding by WestJet and were not provided with the treatment and compensation to which they are entitled to under the APPR.

[6] The passengers stated that between the time they checked in online and the time they reached the boarding gate, WestJet had changed their reservation. According to the passengers, they were removed from their originally scheduled flight and placed on a later flight as a result of WestJet’s decision to operate their original flight with a smaller aircraft.

[7] Under the APPR, passengers who are denied boarding are entitled to compensation if boarding is denied for reasons within the control of the carrier and is not required for safety.

[8] It was reported in the media, and alleged by the passengers, that WestJet categorized these circumstances as a “flight delay” rather than a “denial of boarding” and, in doing so, made reference to the provisions in its Tariff related to schedule delays and schedule irregularities.

[9] The passengers’ account raised the possibility that the terms and conditions of WestJet’s Tariff related to schedule delays and schedule irregularities were being interpreted and applied in a manner that was inconsistent with the denied boarding requirements of the APPR.

[10] On August 16, 2019, the Agency issued Decision No. LET-A-56-2019 (Direction) in which it initiated, on its own motion, an inquiry into whether the terms and conditions of WestJet’s Tariff are just and reasonable, taking into consideration the requirement for air carriers to apply the minimum obligations set out in the APPR. The Agency directed WestJet to provide a written submission addressing this matter and, specifically, explaining the types of circumstances to which WestJet believes that the provisions of its Tariff related to schedule changes and schedule irregularities do and do not apply, and the types of circumstances to which the APPR’s provisions related to denied boarding do and do not apply.

[11] WestJet filed its submission on August 30, 2019, responding to the Agency’s Direction.

PRELIMINARY MATTER

[12] In its submission, WestJet posed a number of hypothetical questions to the Agency related to the interpretation and application of the APPR. The Agency finds that these matters are outside the scope of this inquiry. The Agency has published a number of guides that provide information to the public and the air industry about the APPR’s requirements and application. The Agency has also responded to, and will continue to respond to, specific questions about the requirements of the APPR as part of its ongoing dialogue with stakeholders. WestJet can use these sources of information to obtain any required clarification about its obligations under the APPR.

THE LAW

[13] The obligations prescribed by the APPR are deemed, under subsection 86.11(4) of the Canada Transportation Act, S.C., 1996, c. 10, as amended (CTA), to form part of an air carrier’s tariff to the extent that a carrier’s tariff does not provide more advantageous terms and conditions of carriage.

[14] As set out in sections 110 and 111 of the ATR, air carriers are required to abide by the terms and conditions set out in their tariffs, and those terms and conditions must be just and reasonable.

[15] Pursuant to subsection 111(1) of the ATR:

All tolls and terms and conditions of carriage, including free and reduced rate transportation, that are established by an air carrier shall be just and reasonable and shall, under substantially similar circumstances and conditions and with respect to all traffic of the same description, be applied equally to all that traffic.

[16] Pursuant to section 122 of the ATR, a tariff for international carriage must contain certain information, including:

a. the terms and conditions governing the tariff generally, stated in such a way that is clear as to how the terms and conditions apply to the tolls named in the tariff;

…

c. the terms and conditions of carriage, clearly stating the air carrier’s policy in respect of at least the following matters, namely,

…

v. failure to operate the service or failure to operate the air service according to schedule,

vi. flight delay,

vii. flight cancellation,

viii. delay on the tarmac

ix. denial of boarding,

x. the rerouting of passengers,

…

xxi. any other terms and conditions deemed under subsection 86.11(4) of the Act to be included in the tariff, and

….

[17] Pursuant to section 26 of the CTA:

The Agency may require a person to do or refrain from doing any thing that the person is or may be required to do or is prohibited from doing under any Act of Parliament that is administered in whole or in part by the Agency.

POSITION OF WESTJET

[18] In its submission, WestJet acknowledges that the two passengers who filed a complaint with the Agency were indeed denied boarding within the meaning of the APPR, and not simply delayed as originally communicated to them. WestJet indicates that it will be contacting the passengers to explain the situation and provide the compensation for denied boarding required under the APPR.

[19] In respect of its Tariff, WestJet notes that on July 3, 2019, following the coming into force of the APPR, it provided the Agency with an amendment to its Tariff that included the following text:

The obligations of the carrier under the Air Passenger Protections Regulations (APPR) form part of the tariff and supersede any incompatible or inconsistent term and condition of carriage set out in the tariff to the extent of such inconsistency or incompatibility, but do not relieve the carrier from applying terms and conditions of carriage that are more favourable to the passenger than the obligations set out in the APPR.

[20] WestJet maintains that its Tariff properly captures the provisions of the APPR, and, as such, is just and reasonable and in accordance with section 111 of the ATR. WestJet also undertakes to revise and file updated tariffs once the Agency issues sample tariff provisions.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

[21] The regulatory framework applicable to international air services imposes a number of requirements on air carriers when they establish their terms and conditions of carriage. One of the purposes of these requirements is to provide protections to passengers. For example, a tariff must, at a minimum, include terms and conditions relating to the matters specified in section 122 of the ATR, and those terms and conditions must be clear, consistent with the APPR, reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory.

[22] Based on the language used in the ATR and the APPR, and in accordance with the principles developed in previous Agency decisions, deciding if these requirements have been met requires answers to the following questions:

• Does the tariff contain terms and conditions relating to all matters listed under section 122 of the ATR?
• Are the terms and conditions clear; that is, would a reasonable person conclude that the rights and obligations of both the carrier and passengers are stated in such a way as to exclude any reasonable doubt, ambiguity, or uncertain meaning?
• Do the obligations of the carrier to its passengers under its tariff meet or exceed the requirements of APPR that are applicable to that carrier?
• Are the terms and conditions reasonable; that is, do they strike a balance between the rights of passengers to be subject to reasonable terms and conditions of carriage and the particular carrier’s statutory, commercial, and operational obligations?

[23] If, after examining the first two questions, the Agency finds that certain terms and conditions are missing or unclear, it may be difficult or impossible to know with a reasonable level of certainty the specific obligations that the carrier has assumed toward its passengers. In such a case, the Agency will not be able to assess WestJet’s Tariff’s consistency with the APPR or its reasonableness until the issues of incompleteness and/or lack of clarity are addressed.

[24] In this case, WestJet has argued that its Tariff is just and reasonable because it includes an incorporation by reference statement indicating that the APPR provisions form part of its Tariff and supersede any incompatible or inconsistent term or condition of carriage.

[25] The Agency finds that such incorporation by reference is not, in and of itself, adequate to provide passengers with clarity on their entitlements in situations covered by the APPR, notably because some of WestJet’s Tariff language continues to reflect policies that applied prior to the coming into effect of the APPR and that are inconsistent with the minimum obligations of the APPR.

[26] When examining WestJet’s Tariff, it is impossible to determine with confidence whether a certain situation, such as the one encountered by the two passengers who filed the complaint, will be considered as a denial of boarding or a schedule change. A reasonable person reading WestJet’s Tariff would not be able to conclude that the rights and obligations of both the carrier and passengers are stated in such a way as to exclude any reasonable doubt, ambiguity, or uncertain meaning. The fact that WestJet’s own employees erroneously interpreted the two passengers’ situation as a schedule irregularity instead of a denial of boarding supports the conclusion that WestJet’s Tariff language is insufficiently clear.

[27] WestJet’s Tariff defines the term “schedule irregularity” in two different ways:

[28] Rule 1 defines a schedule irregularity as:

a.  Delays in the scheduled departure or arrival of the carrier’s flight resulting in the passenger missing his/her onward connecting flights or any other delay or interruption in the scheduled operation of the carrier’s flight, or;

b.  Cancellation of flight, or omission of a scheduled stop, or

c.  Substitution of aircraft or of a different class of service, or;

d.  Schedule changes which require rerouting of a passenger at departure time of his or her original flight

[29] Rule 75(b)(1) defines a schedule irregularity as:

1. Delays in the scheduled departure or arrival of the carrier’s flight;
2. Cancellation of flight, or omission of a scheduled stop, or;
3. Change of schedule itinerary which require rerouting of a guest at departure time of his or her original flight. Exception: Schedule irregularity does not include force majeure events.
4. The carrier will not guarantee and will not be held liable for cancellations or changes to times that appear on the passenger’s tickets due to force majeure. However, in the case of international transportation, a passenger may invoke the provisions of the convention regarding liability in the case of passenger delay. (see rule 55.)
5. In the case of schedule irregularities, the carrier will give priority for assistance to any person with a disability and unaccompanied minors.
6. The carrier whose flight experiences a schedule irregularity will make onward arrangements for the passenger.

[30] These two definitions are inconsistent and could be a source of confusion for passengers and for WestJet staff charged with meeting the carrier’s obligations to its passengers.

[31] Moreover, the inclusion of “substitution of an aircraft” in Rule 1(c) could create overlap between this definition of “schedule irregularity” and the definition of “denied boarding” in subsection 1(3) of the APPR. In the case of an aircraft substitution, passengers reading WestJet’s Tariff would be left to wonder whether their situation is a schedule irregularity governed by Rule 75 or a denied boarding under Rule 100, and what treatment and compensation they are entitled to receive.

[32] Furthermore, Rules 75, 100, and 110 of WestJet’s Tariff describe its policies in respect of schedule irregularities, benefits that a passenger may be entitled to under the carrier’s “Traveller’s Right Provisions,” and denied boarding. Some of the content of these Rules is inconsistent with the provisions found in the APPR that apply to flight delays and cancellations, tarmac delays, and denied boarding. For example, Rule 110 – Denied Boarding Compensation does not reference the different categories of flight disruption and different carrier obligations, which are set out in sections 10, 11, and 12 of the APPR. Similarly, the rerouting options found in Rule 110(A)(1) to (4) do not reflect the minimum obligations as set out in sections 17 (Alternative travel arrangements – within carrier’s control) and 18 (Alternative travel arrangements – outside carrier’s control) of the APPR.

[33] Finally, WestJet has failed to reflect the minimum amount of compensation for inconvenience that it owes passengers in instances of denied boarding within the carrier’s control, and the manner in which that compensation will be paid, as set out in section 20 of the APPR. At the time of the flights related to the complaint, the APPR provisions with respect to denied boarding were in effect, yet WestJet’s Tariff continued to contain provisions that more closely reflected denied boarding requirements in the United States of America and did not meet the APPR’s minimum requirements.

CONCLUSION

[34] In light of the foregoing, the Agency finds that WestJet’s Tariff does not meet the requirements of completeness and clarity, as described in the first two of the four questions listed near the beginning of this section. These issues must be addressed before the Agency can complete its analysis of the third and fourth questions, which deal with consistency with the APPR and reasonableness.

ORDER

[35] The Agency orders WestJet to provide the Agency, by March 18, 2020, with a proposed revised tariff that addresses the issues of completeness and clarity identified above, and that fully reflects the APPR and, in WestJet’s view, meets the standard of reasonableness. In undertaking these revisions, WestJet may draw upon the language of the Agency’s sample tariff, which will be published in early 2020.

[36] The Agency will complete its assessment of WestJet’s Tariff upon receipt of the proposed language.

 

Member(s)

[Guest]

HERE WE GO AGAIN?

Airline passengers furious after diverted Halifax-Hamilton flight strands them in Montreal

BY DAN SPECTOR GLOBAL NEWS

Posted December 30, 2019 4:33 pm

Updated December 30, 2019 4:55 pm

 

 WATCH: A Hamilton-bound flight from Halifax was rerouted to Montreal as a cocktail of winter weather pelted Quebec and Ontario. As Global’s Dan Spector reports, the situation went from bad to worse as passengers tried to get to their final destinations and many are now seeking compensation.

Dozens of flights at Montreal-Trudeau International Airport have been delayed or cancelled because of the weather, but one group of passengers was particularly angry.

Their Swoop flight was from Halifax to Hamilton, but they ended up having a long, anxiety-filled surprise visit to Montreal.

“It’s very frustrating. It’s a feeling of being abandoned and like they didn’t really care,” said Linda Withers, who was on the plane.

The flight left Halifax just after midnight Atlantic time, destined for Hamilton, before bad weather forced a diversion to Montreal. The plane landed at Trudeau airport just after 2:30 a.m.

“Basically, they gave us a number to call but it didn’t open till 8 o’clock Mountain Time when we were getting off the plan at around 3:00 a.m.,” Withers recounted.

The passengers say they were left guessing just how they’d get to Hamilton.

At about 5:30 a.m., Swoop sent an email to the passengers, saying transportation was scheduled for them at 7:00 a.m. Then, at 6:30 a.m, another email came in saying two buses would arrive to pick them up at 9:30 a.m. to drive them to Hamilton, but there wasn’t going to be enough room for everyone.

“They did the women-and-children-first thing; there was a pregnant lady who got on, which I totally agree with,” said Brad Durant, another passenger who had been visiting the Maritimes for the holidays.

Seeing she likely wouldn’t get on the buses, Withers decided to book another flight to London, Ontario.

“It got cancelled. So, my luggage is somewhere here in this airport and it’s probably going to go to London,” she told Global News.

Many of the passengers stood in the same airport hallway for hours while waiting, and some said airport staff were not welcoming to them.

“People were snapping,” said Durant. “There was a woman and a man at the information booth and they were mad that we were standing around, which was kind of insulting because at the point that happened we were there for about six hours.”

“They probably saw us as a bunch of squatters.”

 

A spokesperson for the airport said passengers were given water bottles by airport staff.

Finally, two more buses left for Hamilton around 12:30 p.m, 10 hours after the flight landed in Montreal.

“Now we have this seven-hour drive to go on and it’s very unpleasant,” said Durant, just before the bus left.

The passengers are demanding a refund.

In a statement, Swoop cited the bad weather and said “travelers were re-accommodated in accordance with our flight interruption policy,” and apologized for the frustration and inconvenience.

Withers says she may cancel her New Year’s Eve plans.

“I was supposed to go to Niagara Falls for the Bryan Adams concert,” she said. “I don’t know if I feel up to that right about now.”

4:02Swoop Airline cancels flight, makes passengers wait 11 days for return trip

 Swoop Airline cancels flight, makes passengers wait 11 days for return trip

 

[Tango Foxtrot]

WestJet left them stranded.

Everyone knows Poop is Westjet with two  Os.

 Quit pretending. 

[boestar]

What am I missing here?  The flight diverted to "YUL due to weather at the destination.  I get that.  Why not just have the passengers informed that the flight will continue when the conditions improve and make arrangements as such.  Freezing rain in eastern and central Ontario is no laughing matter.  there is no way in hell I would take a bus down that stretch of the 401 in freezing rain.  How does this equate to 11 days wait?

These LCC guys need to learn how to handle IROPS.  The response is pathetic.

Weather is the one thing that is beyond airline control and does not demand compensation.  However the handling of the situation by the airline should get something for the passengers.

 

[wizard]

3 hours ago, boestar said:

What am I missing here?  The flight diverted to "YUL due to weather at the destination.  I get that.  Why not just have the passengers informed that the flight will continue when the conditions improve and make arrangements as such.  Freezing rain in eastern and central Ontario is no laughing matter.  there is no way in hell I would take a bus down that stretch of the 401 in freezing rain.  How does this equate to 11 days wait?

These LCC guys need to learn how to handle IROPS.  The response is pathetic.

Weather is the one thing that is beyond airline control and does not demand compensation.  However the handling of the situation by the airline should get something for the passengers.

 

 

Edited December 31, 2019 by wizard
Update

[wizard]

ATC delays are also beyond airline control.

[boestar]

either way.  poorly handled or there is more to the story

 

[conehead]

16 hours ago, wizard said:

ATC delays are also beyond airline control.

And mechanical faults are also beyond airline control.

[thor]

AMEX platinum is the way to go. Well worth the $699 should one decide to be a ULCC user!

[boestar]

16 hours ago, conehead said:

And mechanical faults are also beyond airline control.

nope mechanical faults rest on the airline.  Thats why we fight them