FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - Non-stop flight stops for fuel, what is responsibility of airline to passengers?
Old Dec 2, 2011 | 3:44 pm
  #115  
Mike Jacoubowsky
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Redwood City, CA USA (SFO/SJC)
Programs: Various between 2p & 1K, currently Gold
Posts: 8,888
This is really all about weather delays?

Originally Posted by Cantheplanegofaster?
I think you (and others) need to reread the OP. The question was should airlines be on the hook for a planes inability to not make the scheduled distance do to wind. As a consumer, I say they owe the pax compensation.

Lastly, where in any post have I even hinted that fuel margins be ignored? Ans: I haven't.
The OP has a legit question that we've already proven to be disconnected from the issue of which plane is flying a given route. AD I believe made a passing remark about flying a 747 to be absolutely certain you could make it... while in fact the aircraft is not and never was the issue, it's the amount of fuel loaded onto the plane. Reading through this thread I'm not sure if you're still in the camp that UA is flying the wrong planes or just not loading enough fuel.
Originally Posted by fastair
While I respect your opinion, as a consumer, your rights fall under 2 categories. The law, and the contract of the ticket purchase. Neither of these say they owe compensation. Your opinion is more of what you would like, not what is owed. What is owed is transportation. The CoC clearly points out that ontime delivery is not guaranteed. We strive for it and hope to deliver it as safely and reliably as possible, but there is no punitive/compensitory damages covered by either any US reglations or the contract of your ticket that would suggest compensation is due. What is the contractual/regulatory basis for your feeling that one would be owed compensation?
There doesn't have to be a contractual or regulatory obligation for sound business decisions. But the quote
"The question was should airlines be on the hook for a planes inability to not make the scheduled distance do to wind. As a consumer, I say they owe the pax compensation."
is an interesting one, because it says that United should be responsible for weather delays. Because, after all, wind is simply weather, no different from a sudden thunderstrom that blossoms over ORD or DEN and messes things up everywhere down the line. An airline makes allowances where it can, but even those allowances results in delayed and even cancelled flights. Are all those passengers owed compensation?

Last edited by Mike Jacoubowsky; Dec 2, 2011 at 3:50 pm Reason: merge
Mike Jacoubowsky is offline