Flew AC 93 yesterday. The inbound (AC 92) was on time until it reached SCL, where it took a 3 hour delay. According to EZE agents, this was because of a crew-scheduling issue - the crew that flies SCL-EZE-SCL had not yet completed its legally mandated rest hours.
[slightly off-topic rant]
Of course AC knew about this at least 24 hours in advance, but did not post the delay until everyone was at the airport. We had to entertain a toddler at the pitiful UA lounge (no wi-fi) for three hours, when we could have stayed home.
[/slightly off-topic rant]
Back to our originally scheduled programming. This was clearly a controllable delay in my book. I was going to miss my connection to YVR at 8:30 am. An agent I spoke to told me that there was only space on the 9:30 pm to YVR, and that it would likely be gone by the time AC got to reschedule us. OK - a night in YYZ on AC's dime.
Once on the plane, there were at least three announcements emphasizing that this was a "weather-related" delay. Their logic: the crew was illegal because it had flown in on an unscheduled flight the day before, which had been programmed to compensate a cancelled one two days ago. That cancellation was because of weather issues. They made this quite clear.
I was gearing up for a fight. The inbound was on time all the way up to SCL, were it took the delay. Weather in SCL and EZE was fine, and there were no further delays coming into YYZ. Ground agents freely acknowledged that the issue was crew scheduling. Sure, at some point in the recent past there was going to be a chain of events leading to bad weather, but two days, three crews (92 EZE run, 93 to YYZ, 92 to SCL the next day), and three or four flights removed seemed like pushing it.
In the end it was all moot - flights to YVR were upgauged, space for us was found the same day, and new BPs with meal vouchers and the legend "DELAY - CONTROLLABLE" were waiting for us at YYZ. Eventually, someone decided that the delay was not weather-related after all, but for the duration of the flight, that had been the line pushed by the crew. Who makes these calls, and what are the criteria?
Flew AC 93 yesterday. The inbound (AC 92) was on time until it reached SCL, where it took a 3 hour delay. According to EZE agents, this was because of a crew-scheduling issue - the crew that flies SCL-EZE-SCL had not yet completed its legally mandated rest hours.
[slightly off-topic rant]
Of course AC knew about this at least 24 hours in advance, but did not post the delay until everyone was at the airport. We had to entertain a toddler at the pitiful UA lounge (no wi-fi) for three hours, when we could have stayed home.
[/slightly off-topic rant]
Back to our originally scheduled programming. This was clearly a controllable delay in my book. I was going to miss my connection to YVR at 8:30 am. An agent I spoke to told me that there was only space on the 9:30 pm to YVR, and that it would likely be gone by the time AC got to reschedule us. OK - a night in YYZ on AC's dime.
Once on the plane, there were at least three announcements emphasizing that this was a "weather-related" delay. Their logic: the crew was illegal because it had flown in on an unscheduled flight the day before, which had been programmed to compensate a cancelled one two days ago. That cancellation was because of weather issues. They made this quite clear.
I was gearing up for a fight. The inbound was on time all the way up to SCL, were it took the delay. Weather in SCL and EZE was fine, and there were no further delays coming into YYZ. Ground agents freely acknowledged that the issue was crew scheduling. Sure, at some point in the recent past there was going to be a chain of events leading to bad weather, but two days, three crews (92 EZE run, 93 to YYZ, 92 to SCL the next day), and three or four flights removed seemed like pushing it.
In the end it was all moot - flights to YVR were upgauged, space for us was found the same day, and new BPs with meal vouchers and the legend "DELAY - CONTROLLABLE" were waiting for us at YYZ. Eventually, someone decided that the delay was not weather-related after all, but for the duration of the flight, that had been the line pushed by the crew. Who makes these calls, and what are the criteria?
AC092 YYZ-SCL WXL
flight delayed awaiting first available IFS crew due YUL weather
The first delay, which might have been due to weather, was 30 minutes, made up in flight. The flight arrived in SCL roughly on time. The second delay, in SCL and with a locally positioned crew, was 3.5 hours. How do they get to blame that on the first (short, weather) delay, when the aircraft was where it needed to be, at the time it needed to be there?
Last edited by Mauricio23; Dec 29, 12 at 4:39 pm..
Interesting..... just looking at the logistics behind
AC shows on 27 Dec there were two flights departing AC92 with a delay of approx 45 mins...... Followed by AC2192 which left 11:13 (or approx 11.5 hour delay).
Flight Aware shows AC92 cancelled on 27 Dec, so I am guessing that the 11.5 hour delay has impacted their crewing for the next several days (until they get back to Toronto).
Legal crew rest can be anywhere between 10-24 hours depending on their collective agreements
I am assuming the following:
27 Dec AC92 YYZ-SCL got cancelled
27 Dec AC2192 departs YYZ 11:13 arrives SCL on 28th at 01:23
AC2192 becomes AC93 leaving 02:59 to Toronto on 28th
28 Dec AC92 YYZ-SCL had an on time departure
Looks like they combined 27/28's SCL-EZE-SCL, hence causing the 3 hr delay on the 28th.
Last edited by global_happy_traveller; Dec 29, 12 at 10:57 pm..
92 was cancelled Dec. 26.
This flight was operated as 2192 Dec. 27. 2192 arrived SCL 13.5 hours later than 92 was scheduled to arrive.
The OP's crew would normally had a 24 hour rest. This obviously couldn't be achieved. Hence the reason for the delay.
I believe Dec. 27 SCL-EZE-SCL segments were cancelled in order to get equipment back on schedule.
"Once on the plane, there were at least three announcements emphasizing that this was a "weather-related" delay. Their logic: the crew was illegal because it had flown in on an unscheduled flight the day before, which had been programmed to compensate a cancelled one two days ago. That cancellation was because of weather issues. They made this quite clear."
I don't dispute they were telling the truth. I have a problem with the labeling. When does a crew scheduling delay (airline's responsibility) become a weather delay (you are on your own)? By their logic, it looks like they could blame all delays for the next couple of months on this week's storm. I'm glad they backed off it, by the way. Meal vouchers came on handy.
For example, if the crew was going to be illegal, they could have flown a fresh one in the next day. Of course this would not have new a reasonable course of action for a 3 hour delay, but is it a weather issue? What if the delay had been 6 hours? 12?
You got the freshest crew available.
Where would a fresher crew have come from?
YYZ. No because there were no flights southbound for them to deadhead on.
GRU? No. GRU-YYZ would have been impacted.
SCL? No SCL-YYZ would have been impacted.
This is Canada, this is winter, this is what happens.
Lots of delays this week because of storms over eastern Canada.
Additional delays because of maintenance and medical diversions.
Thanks for the lecture about the Canadian winter - I would have never noticed that it snows in Canada were it not for your enlightening words. Now, since the airline itself is (eventually) calling this a controllable delay, your whole weather tirade is irrelevant. I'm still waiting for an answer to my question. How is the decision on how to label a delay made?
Last edited by Mauricio23; Dec 30, 12 at 1:14 am..
And since we are playing smartypants, one could note that when they flew 2192 on the 27th, they would have known that the crew for the 28th would be illegal well beyond the scheduled time. They could therefore have flown a deadheading crew on 2192 itself. This would have made no economic sense, of course, but is the reason that there was no fresh crew available weather or scheduling?
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (BlackBerry; U; BlackBerry 9780; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.8+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/6.0.0.448 Mobile Safari/534.8+)
I don't know who decides but it should NOT be the airline. The financial incentive to blame "weather" for any delay is just too great.
For me the best example of this was several flights on TAP (LHR-LIS) in the mid 2000's. Every flight arrived on time or early - not surprising as the weather throughout Europe at the time was excellent. Yet on every flight between touchdown and arrival at the gate a tape was played apologizing for the (non-existent) delay and stating that as the delay was beyond the airline's control no compensation was payable.
On the other hand US once had to overnight me in PHL in the middle of a massive snowstorm. I simply presumed it was a legitimate weather delay but US advised me it was due only to a cargo door that wouldn't latch. The got me a hotel and vouchers, and even covered a second day/night when I "volunteered" to stay another day (to do NYE in Times Square - though I bailed when I heard the number of people expected.)
And then there was the time I was downgraded from F to J on BA on LHR-YVR due to what was clearly and truly a weather related crew shortage.
The OP raises a great point which hasn't been answered yet. Alot of things depend on whether a delay is weather related or not; who makes the offical call? I would like to know this too.
Programs: AC Aeroplan/MX Frecuenta/Hyatt Platinum/Starwood Gold/Hilton Honors/Delta Sky Miles
Posts: 2,599
In post #6, GHT probably described fairly closely the events of the last couple of days. The average customer would not even begin to understand (nor be terribly interested) in crew legality and positioning and deadheading, etc.
Not to blame it on the weather, but certainly it created a snowball effect over the last week.
Our scheduling department has become very proactive over the last couple of years with anticipated snowstorm activity at YYZ - our major hub. Personnel from YUL where scheduling is based are sent in, and hotel rooms in proximity to YYZ airport are offered even to locally residing crews in order to mobilize them to work.
Mauricio - every effort is made to keep the operation moving, and if any of your suggestions were feasible or doable (such as deadheading a crew in) I have no doubt they would have been carried out.
