Originally Posted by
zorn
So they can market and sell flights on routes they either don't operate or wouldn't be allowed to operate.
Well when I book a ticket with AC, on a flight that carries an AC flight number, I am entering into a contract with Air Canada. It really is irrelevant if they subcontract the 'work' to another carrier -- ultimately, it is Air Canada that bears the responsibility of fulfilling the contract.
Their business relationship with United, or anyone else for that matter, really, is secondary.
Now, if AC doesn't want the risk of United's non-performance, then AC should merely act as an agent for United, and sell UA coded flights on their website in conjunction with AC coded flights. Then, of course, a passenger on a UA coded flight sold by AC acting as an agent would be solely and exclusively bound by UA policies and tarrifs.
Now, what AC really needs to do is get off its butt and change the wording on the rules that pop up for the UA codeshares it sells on its website. If
No, AC needs to sit down with its subcontractor and hammer out a method by which they can provide service that is up to AC standards. Or else, come the time this policy is actually implemented, they're going to have many customers who are angry about having an extra $25 extorted from them when AC's baggage policies are quite clear on their website.
Or maybe AC is going down this same path as well...who knows?