Newsstand - How to: Dispute An Airline's So-Called "Weather Delay"

Have not seen this posted yet . . . conceptually interesting, but practically a little far-fetched . . . good read nonetheless.

Article link: http://consumerist.com/345695/dispute-an-airlines-so+called-weather-delay

Interview Link: http://www.elliott.org/blog/forensic-meteorologist-i-believe-bad-weather-is-being-used-as-an-excuse/

And here I thought all you need is an iPhone to prove the airline wrong.

:D

And here I thought all you need is an iPhone to prove the airline wrong.

:D

Actually, in the interview the iphone is mentioned as a tool to argue your case . . .

This has got me curious...

Let's say you're on a flight from ORD-DCA. Let's say your a/c is arriving from DEN-ORD. And finally, let's say there is a snowstorm in DEN preventing the a/c from taking off.

Is your ORD-DCA flight delayed because of "weather" therefore triggering one set of rules. OR... would this be considered a delay for equipment/mechanical issue (the "mechanical" issue being a lack of a/c) therefore triggering a lot more rights for the traveler?

I mean, technically there are no weather problems for ORD-DCA, so looked at in isolation, there is no argument that weather is causing the ORD-DCA delay. The delay is that you don't have a/c, an equipment issue. Of course, the why of not having a/c is because of weather somewhere else.

I feel like anytime I have a late arriving plane because of weather, it is treated like a weather delay. but is that fair? My flight has no weather delay. Why should I be held responsible for the weather in DEN when my ORD-DCA flight is fine?

If you think this does still constitutes a weather delay, would your answer change if you remove it once more? What if you're DCA-JFK is delayed because your a/c is from the ORD-DCA which is delayed because of the DEN-ORD?

And finally, if there is an a/c making several trips DEN-ORD back and forth, and the first of the morning is delayed because of weather creating a domino effect the rest of the day... is your late PM flight delayed due to "weather"??

If the weather was good at the location where it is bad would your flight have been delayed? If the answer is 'no' then it's a weather delay.

If you think this does still constitutes a weather delay, would your answer change if you remove it once more? What if you're DCA-JFK is delayed because your a/c is from the ORD-DCA which is delayed because of the DEN-ORD?

Of course that's a weather delay. Let's continue

What if the pilot was delayed getting to work because he/she got stuck in weather-related car traffic in another city? Say the pilot was coming in SEA-DEN to meet the DEN-ORD flight that becomes your ORD-DCA flight.

What if the pilot got into a car accident because of the weather? What if some of the crew got sick because they were outside in the cold?

What if a ramp worker crashed into an aircraft because he/she got hit by a s nowball and was distracted?

Logically those are all "weather related".

If the weather was good at the location where it is bad would your flight have been delayed? If the answer is 'no' then it's a weather delay.

I don't think so. If the airline had more planes, weather elsewhere wouldn't matter. If the airline allowed more time for turn-around, the weather elsewhere wouldn't matter (as much). Not having extra planes and scheduling tight turns is airlines' way of saving money.

So when that causes a plane from one nice weather place to another to be delayed, it's not because of weather, it's because they were scheduled too thin.

That's the point that some of that extra money has to go to compensate the passengers who lost time because of airlines' business decisions.

Yes BUT... If every airline had spare aircraft standing by (all the time and everywhere the way some folks seem to expect), and every airline built extensive leeway into all their schedules..

..then we'd all be whining about the fares!

Sure... tight equipment utilisation is about "money".. but some of that money you are talking about is tied up in cheap airfares! fares available through efficient useage of resources.

You can't have it both ways. If fares are going to be attractively priced then it isn't possible to pay for extra capacity that will only be required "if and when"... What "margin" do the airlines operate on anyway?

If such extra capacity WAS financially viable.. if it was more economical to pay for it all the time to offset compensation paid for mech/etc delays.. they would all do so!

Yes BUT... If every airline had spare aircraft standing by (all the time and everywhere the way some folks seem to expect), and every airline built extensive leeway into all their schedules..
..then we'd all be whining about the fares!
...
If such extra capacity WAS financially viable.. if it was more economical to pay for it all the time to offset compensation paid for mech/etc delays.. they would all do so!

Of course, you're right. My point was that you can't say "it's the weather" once the weather issue is removed from the immediate route. You can say that there shouldn't be comp when there are delays because there are dirt cheap fares instead and you can take the money you saved and comp yourself :)

Personally, I never *expect* comp, even on MX delays, because I think it's all part of flying (and as a 1K and PLT I feel I get taken care of usually as far as rebookings) and taken to an extreme if the airline always bought brand new planes and had multiple spares there wouldn't be MX delays either! :) :) :)

I remember when at least half of my delays were MX and we were given vouchers and hotels...now mysteriously ALL delays are weather absolving the airline of paying for my bed for the night...waiting a few hours to be re-booked is one thing but when you are out several hundred for a hotel/taxi/food etc it is very wrong.

It is disgusting that they get away with this....and should be prosecuted as the fraud that is it when they are lying to avoid paying.

And here I thought all you need is an iPhone to prove the airline wrong.

:D

I came here to post this :)

I don't think so. If the airline had more planes, weather elsewhere wouldn't matter.

Of course. Why not have a spare for every flight? Then you wouldn't have maintenance delays either.

Airlines do have spare airplanes but when a hub gets hit by bad weather any spares are quickly used up.

www.unitedcargo.com

The airplane scheduled to fly your route from C to D maybe be coming from A through B then on to C. Weather can affect the airplane at any point.

It comes down to a simple question:

Absent the weather affecting the airplane scheduled to fly your route would the airplane be in place to make that flight. If the answer is yes then the delay would be weather related. If the answer is no then the delay is not weather related.

Seems simple to me. But then I have been called simple before.

:D

The airplane scheduled to fly your route from C to D maybe be coming from A through B then on to C. Weather can affect the airplane at any point.

It comes down to a simple question:

Absent the weather affecting the airplane scheduled to fly your route would the airplane be in place to make that flight. If the answer is yes then the delay would be weather related. If the answer is no then the delay is not weather related.

Seems simple to me. But then I have been called simple before.

:D
If I have a delay - not so bad. It those end-of-the-day cancellations that the airlines pull on us most of the time.