A couple of points of disagreement:
Originally Posted by
Often1
It is rare for carriers to handle reroutes at the origin rather than at the point of the misconnect. This is not universal, but it is the norm and is simply because there is a better picture of what is available at the point in time when you arrive.
IME, it is neither rare nor unreasonable for a carrier to reroute passengers at the point of origin due to delays that will cause them to miss their connection. It's happened to me many times, the last one when I was booked SFO-DFW-GIG and AA rerouted me SFO-JFK-GIG. In many cases, it makes much more sense to investigate possible rerouting at the origin, because from the origin, different/better routings might be available. A bigger issue for the OP's itinerary is that JFK is not a hub for CX, so limited routes and personnel are available -- any new route will likely go via HKG, anyway.
Originally Posted by
QRC3288
This may not be applicable to you, but the greatest disservice the blogger community (OMAAT, Top Miles, Gary Left, etc) do for travelers is imply / outright say that award tickets are/should be the same as cash tickets in terms of treatment.
IMHO, once travel is booked, the method of payment (being it miles or money) should not affect the treatment of passengers during IRROPS such as this one. I'm not suggesting that this is necessarily always true, but I definitely agree with the bloggers in that it should be. If there is any disservice, it's that airlines might use this factor to prioritize passengers, as if those who pay cash are somehow more worthy than those who don't.
Finally, CX might not be legally liable to provide compensation in this particular situation, but given the length of the delay, it's unfortunate that the US doesn't yet mandate EU261-style compensation.