Didn't good ol' Rupert many months ago tell us that AC doesn't look at what the US airlines are doing? That was his rationale for some of the DUMB changes AC has taken over the last year.

Why the sudden change?

Posted by stargold here:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum5/HTML/006584.html

Keep this CIC handy in case you're hassled about the new policy applying to V or higher.

Huh?

This policy does apply to V class and higher, including H, most B, some M and even many C class fares.

Which makes me wonder if they aren't an effort to get those vast hordes of business travellers who've recently discovered they can use leisure fares, as long as they are a little bit flexible, back to buying refundable (a.k.a. almost full fare) tickets. If that's the plan, it's doomed to failure. Business travellers have discovered the airlines' dirty little secret, and to mix metaphors, they'll never get that genie back in the bottle.

It also occurs to me that there's no real cost to AC in a no show, because they regularly sell the same seat to more than one customer -- it's called overbooking, and as we all know it happens all the time. So unlike WestJet, which guarantees your seat will be there because they don't oversell, if you don't show up for an AC flight it will never be the case that someone else is denied a seat. They'll just pick someone from the sea of faces called the standby passengers, and fill your seat. So all they can be thinking, or even hoping, is that people will miss their flight, for any reason, so they'll be forced to buy another AC ticket. More than anything else, and more than any other new or changed policy, this is a money grab, pure and simple.

And speaking of business, these new ticket policies remind me of the junk that North American automakers used to foist on the public (and some would say still do.) You know, the cars the imploded 2 weeks and 1000km after the warranty expired. "Planned obsolescence" is what it was called. It's the same concept and philosophy -- you try to sell more of the same by making the original "fail".

And that's what these tickets should be called: "Planned Obsolescence Tickets."

{Edited to change non-refundable to refundable, a major screw up on my part. But it was late, OK? I was tired.}

[This message has been edited by Ken hAAmer (edited 09-09-2002).]

Doesn't this imply that you can't even do a same day standby unless you make arrangements to do so before your original ticketed/reserved departure? And given that you can only make same day standby arrangements at the airport, doesn't that mean you have to be at the airport before your originally ticketed/reserved time? And if that's the case, what's the point?

It sounds like they've effectively outlawed standing by for a later flight on everything except Y and M (and the occaisional B) fares.

And compounding the problems are the fact that many times the only legal connection is real, real tight, particularly if you're connecting in YYZ and going to the US. There are lots of city pairs where you either have a 50 minute connection, or 6 hour and 10 minute connection, which of course is a stopover, and will invariably result in a much more expensive ticket.

Two points here:

1.What if you don't exactly know when you need to change your return on say an H class ticket.Do you have to pick a day,pay the change fee and do it again if your guess is wrong.

2.As ken hammer said earlier same day standby would appear to be good only if you leave on an earlier flt.

This is more AC dishonesty with their customer base.why can't they do as WS does and guarantee the seat and allow you to cancel and hold the credit less the fee change until you're ready to fly.

Sounds like we need to come up with some creative accounting of our own.

For every service AC refuses to give or doesn't give, I propose we send AC a bill:

surly agents -- free one-way ticket
cancelled flight -- free round-trip ticket
inedible food -- free upgrade from any fare

I am sure you get the point--all in fun--but with a serious side. Let's make a list, standardize it and send it to Air Canada Customer Solutions with cc to R. Milton and the Globe and Mail and National Post.

Kind of a passenger's BILL of rights http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

New slogan,

"Air Canada is going to POT"

Thenk yew. Thenk yew.

andrew

Let's call it the "Passengers' Right to Bill"

andrew

I just bought a domestic H class ticket and the agent did not mention the new conditions nor is it on my E ticket.My return is after Oct.1/02

I think one could make a case here if caught in a bind that AC did not disclose the change to the PAX.

The only notation on the ticket is "AC only/nonref/chgfee"

[This message has been edited by parnel (edited 09-09-2002).]

Love it "Passengers Right to Bill"
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Given that AC seems have made no mention of this change at all, as per parnel's expericence, what does it say about the probability of R Duchesne's 'promise' of timely announcements about next year's Aeroplan cutbacks.

Volumes, I'd say.

Just read the news release on errorplan.com.

Fuming mad!

Why does AC have to 'copy' all the dumb, stupid, customer unfriendly initiatives of the failing mainline U.S. carriers? The revenue gain here cannot be that great -- especially in relation to the customer hostility and frustration.

As it was, change fees on the non-refundable tickets if they were modestly priced made the tickets not-so-modestly priced. And for the not-so-modestly priced tickets, they are overpriced in the first place -- why make frustrated customers paying top dollar pay even more?

Where is the thought, the market research, adn the creativity here? Why this knee jerk insensitive approach -- and why the secrecy about the change?

Bad move, AC, Bad move!

west Jet only charges $20 per change but you cannot be a no show or you lose the ticket also.

Let's try out the new complaints commissioner-who has the address?

[This message has been edited by parnel (edited 09-10-2002).]

There's a certain deja vu aspect to this, don't you think? This was >exactly< the way they approached the AP changes last year. It's gratifying to see that errorplan is awakening from it's summer slumber to take this issue on. It doesn't seem that AC learns anything at all from its mistakes. What do their communications people do with their lives? Don't they know it's important to be honest about bad news as well as good?

[This message has been edited by Academic (edited 09-10-2002).]