FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - AC Comments on Proposed Transportation Modernization Act (Passenger Bill of Rights)

Jul 10, 2018, 7:51 am

#92

yulred

Join Date: Aug 2010

Posts: 3,130

Quote:

Originally Posted by skybluesea

1. State intervention never comes for free, and ultimately consumers pay for what folks pretend will cost nothing
2. The terms of trade are abundantly clear, yet when folks buy AC product and don’t do their homework first on what they are buying that becomes suppliers fault, according to your logic
3. Having worked in 3 levels of govt in Canada, agree tiny minuscule squeaky wheels get the grease - and politics all about exploiting the lowest common denominator for gains in the polls
4. Having been the author of laws enacted at both provincial & municipal levels, never ever was it acceptable to put policy recommendations for public debate and approval WITHOUT including implementation tools, including for those of you who live in B.C. where I authored road safety laws, regs, and budgets to effectively implement.

the federal govt is acting with complete irresponsiblility when enacting law and telling all of us in the flying public, trust us eventually we will figure out how to legally determine whether flight crews are under the influence of the active ingredients in Cannibis

What's your point? That companies should be able to take money to provide a service AND have the right to delay provision of that service with minimal compensation because they permit themselves to do so in a contract that, when challenged, did/does not pass regulatory muster?
If the terms are communicated clearly, why are you advocating state intervention to make airlines communicate more clearly. You proposed that. Not me. I've simply asked why it's necessary.
The "COMPUTER/CONTRACT SAYS NO" philosophy you're advocating rarely goes down well with the public. They understand that rules can and should change if necessary. It may well be the case that airlines have ticked off one political staffer too many, but the kicker here is that passenger rights will be viewed positively by the public. It certainly raises questions about whether the public perceive airlines as acting in good faith. Which is what this airline hack should have focused on.
I don't have enough faith in the CTA to participate in this process, so I really don't know what they're up to.But then again, even a 0.0001 improvement is greater than 0. They might unintentionally make things better for consumers.
I'm under the impression that there are different groups within government departments that work on separate issues simultaneously. Does your experience in three levels of governments indicate otherwise? It's a minor point anyway - all we have to do is ask the Dutch. KL doesn't seem to be particularly unsafe - no AC style hard landings or SFO incidents anyway. What policies have they or their government adopted. If you're going to resort to deflecting, consider finding a better example.

Reply