Wpgjetse

Actual, I don't really care. I have had my few battles with AC, but the end of the day, AC has been very good to me.

Wpgjetse

With hotels, It's called walking and it happens all the time.

eigenvector

You ever heard of a hotel that walked a prepaid reservation, didn't provide alternate accommodation for the night, kept the money and offered a stay the next day?

Wpgjetse

I know hotels walk prepaid res and provide alternate accommodation well below the level of the hotel booked. It would be like AC providing bus service for oversold flight between Vancouver - Calgary.

shaner82

But it wasn't shut down for weather. If that happened, it would be on her, but that didn't happen. Maybe it wasn't smart, but people who don't travel regularly don't know this stuff.

She paid for a ticket to get from Toronto to Miami. Air Canada didn't come through on their end and it appears didn't even try to offer compensation for others to volunteer. What other industry can get away with not holding up their end of a business transaction?

28isGreat

It may be prudent to go the day before, but that's due to things (especially weather, especially in winter) that are less than 100% within the airline's control.

Going the day before because the airline might IDB you is absurd.

This is all so ridiculous (on airlines' part). Stop screwing around with pathetic VDB offers. Give cash/cheque if you can't get enough volunteers, no more time-limited vouchers. Raise the price. There's no excuse for IDB in a non-Wx, non-Mx case.

The tips given here about how to avoid getting IDB'd are nice, and good things for individuals to use, but ultimately someone on that flight was going to get IDB'd. Hot tips from FT don't solve the root problem.

longtimeflyin

The warnings are already on all fares - it's just in the fine print. Should we put the warnings in size 19 font? Would people read it then?

Should we really live in a society where McDonalds and other vendors have to make common sense...known? While I would agree that many airline policies are not known to the flying public, at what point is it the passenger's responsibility to understand what they are paying?

I recently had to deep dive into the various insurance policies that I have, and at one point I managed to teach the insurer a thing or two after understanding the nuances of the policies. Why do I do this? In order to me to minimize risk should I need insurance.

My adjuster recently shared this with me. Why is it everyone cheaps out on liability insurance and then cries foul when they need it?

This same logic can be applied here. Yes, airline rules are difficult to understand and most passengers will cry to the CBC if they are wronged. Does that then mean customers can remain naive and cry foul when they are erred? Sure - that's what they are doing today.

Is that right? Well as per my post earlier today - it depends on your viewpoint on this manner about whose responsibility/fault it is.

These threads on FlyerTalk generally have the same theme, although it is nice to see various viewpoints not seen before as each thread like this pops up on the Air Canada forum.

Fiordland

We are not talking about the case where the airline has to cancel a flight because of mechanical problems, a snow storm or a missed connection. We are talking about the case where they sell more seats than they have with the hope that some people are not going to show up.

As for hotels walking guests, yes they sometimes do that and I it equally wrong. A reason to never ever book into that hotel again.

SamuelS

Not to be pernickety, or go too far OT, but a "good" insurance policy absolutely would cover her costs to get her to a remote place in Ecuador IF the reason was weather, or mechanical delay.

As an example, my company contracts with Manulife. The packages are not cheap, but when it comes to insurance, there is definitely something to "you get what you pay for".

The insurance polices we use would cover all prepaid travel arrangements (irrespective of whether her AC flight was booked with Nat Geo, or independently) and under Missed Connection benefits, would have NO CAP on the cost to catch up with the itinerary (even if that cost $10k).

Likewise, if it were no longer practical to continue with the trip (for instance, would miss more than 30% of the total trip because of lack of flights etc) then the policy would cover a full refund of the unused travel arrangements in addition to a repatriation back home and all costs incurred therein.

However, for Involuntary Denied Boarding, the limitation is only $1,000 in additional costs as the assumption is that the airline will be in some way responsible for rebooking/reprotection.

I will say this thread prompted me to look at some fine print with both AC's passenger tariff on file with the CTA, as well as the IDB clauses in our insurance, and I actually did learn a few things from this discussion myself - which is always good

SamuelS

I actually have zero problem with airlines, cruise lines or hotels overbooking in principal, IF (emphasis) they have a very robust way to handle situations where not every customer with a seat/cabin/room can be accommodated.

I get it... this is AC, not WS, not DL, etc. But I go back to DL as an example.

Did DL score a bit of PR when taking advantage of UA's recent "drag-gate" when they announced they would go right up to $9,950 USD per passenger which could be offered by frontline staff to entice volunteers in an oversell situation? Sure, and it made for some nice news coverage for DL.

Fact remains though, that every DL GA can now offer up to $2500 per passenger without any supervisory or management intervention needed, with Red Coats and Supervisory staff able to go up to $9,950 per passenger. And this is not just restrictive vouchers, this can be delivered in the form of Amex gift cards which even the most occasional of flyers could be motivated to accept.

Is DL perfect? Of course not. Do I have issues on DL from time to time. Sure.

However I am fortunate to fly mostly transborder for my travel, and where I can choose from US or Canadian carriers... and I have a very high confidence level in DL doing the right thing "vast majority of the time" when things go wrong, compared to my experiences with AC.

Corporate policies like the recent increase to VDB amounts from DL, along with empowerment of frontline staff - go a huuuuuge way to avoiding the situations as reported in this thread.

DL has effectively said that they are aiming for virtually zero IDB as a result of the new policies. One can only hope that AC takes note of what some of the "other guys" are doing... @:-)

longtimeflyin

Do you happen to know that DL overbooks more than UA and most likely changed their policy as a result of trying to get ahead of the bad press?

SamuelS

Yes, DL does. But DL has also been ahead of the game with getting more volunteers than other carriers for a few years now, the latest issue with UA not withstanding.

"In 2014, about 96 of every 100,000 Delta fliers had to take a later flight because the plane was overbooked. This compared to 95 at United and 50 at American. But only three of every 100,000 Delta passengers were bumped involuntarily. United had to bump 11 and American, five. Multiplied out, Delta was able to get thousands more of its passengers to agree to stay behind and bumped thousands fewer passengers involuntarily versus United and American."

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-s...oking-flights/

Transpacificflyer

Once again I see the weak excuses offered for Air Canada that rely on a blaming of the consumer. However, it is reassuring to read the intelligent thoughtful comments from a diverse group of people who are obviously honest in their own personal dealings and who have an understanding of the concept of integrity and fair dealing. The manner in which the airline continues to manage these incidents speaks to a culture of contempt for the air passenger and an assumption of being beyond the reach of the injured party(s).
Eloquently summarized for some of us. I don't have time to go early either, and even then when I do, I can miss my flights, On my last TPAC where I undertook a layover just to add a cushion, AC still managed to screw up my onward connections because the flight I arrived early for was delayed 5+ hours departing because of scheduling. I missed my connection.

I really do admire your common sense and understanding of right and wrong. It is a characteristic of good leadership. There will be some who will ridicule you, who will say that you will never make money with honest principles like yours. They will toss out the infantile "snowflake" label, to diminish the significance of the issue, and to denigrate the victim.

Don't listen to them. You are right and there are more people who want to be treated in the honest and fair manner that you espouse, than who want to play "The Art of the Deal" and to get screwed over. Honesty in business dealings continues to be the best policy. Companies and people who play games, merit the clients they get and the costs that accompany such client profiles. You are right.

^ Transparency is something the airline resists with a passion.
And yes, the AC response to this type of event as well as to IRROPS is downright awful. If the airline cannot behave in a reasonable manner, then the public deserves to be protected from the egregious acts of the airline through regulatory methods.

I have the feeling that the strongest defenders of the AC position have personal and/or business practices not too different from AC. Hence, the identification with the process and the passionate defense of the practice by some.

You are a tough ride ^, but so very right. It's ok. The airline industry has created the environment where the minister of transport is being forced to intervene and AC is about to get a bit of a shock.

Eugeniusz Bodo

Call me any names you want but I don't consider cruise passengers to be sophisticated travellers. It doesn't mean that the system or FT audience should blame them for not knowing any better. The industry professionals, in this situation Lindblad Expeditions take big share of responsibility here.

Allan38103

Well, this is actually reinforcement for the conclusion that we do NOT need outside interference to achieve the greater good.

The airline that is viewed as handling boarding situations better - voluntary or involuntary DB - will gain a perceived market advantage over one that doesn't. NOTE TO DELTA TICKET BUYERS. The company with a perceived market advantage will be more profitable (even if only a little bit) than one that doesn't. Advantage, Delta. And a more profitable company is more attractive to its owners. NOTE TO SHAREHOLDERS.

The beauty of this is that it's better all around - airline, stockholders, and mostly for passengers. The only potential losers are those perceived as inferior competitors NOTE TO UNITED, and maybe those who actually profit by government intrusion.