Question: Did Air Canada tell you that they cover only up to CAD$100 for hotel?
Nov 27, 2015, 8:48 pm
#46
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Halifax, NS, Canada
Posts: 44
Clarification: I am talking about situations where, for some reason, passengers did not get vouchers, but rather had to find accommodation on their own.
In terms of finding bargains: it is much more difficult to a cheap hotel room for tonight than for next week or next month.
Finally, the government rates are for government employees travelling within Canada. Rates for other countries vary from country to country. It all depends on the circumstances. A meal near the airport may be twice or three times as expensive as in downtown. But a stranded passenger who has to catch a flight the next morning does not have a choice.
In terms of finding bargains: it is much more difficult to a cheap hotel room for tonight than for next week or next month.
Finally, the government rates are for government employees travelling within Canada. Rates for other countries vary from country to country. It all depends on the circumstances. A meal near the airport may be twice or three times as expensive as in downtown. But a stranded passenger who has to catch a flight the next morning does not have a choice.
AC could probably be a bit more consistent. Vouchers seem to be more common, but the $100 limit has come up here before. It's not clear what the rules are for J pax, status and Y class.
Ben L's resolution of the issue in the other thread is indicative of a problem at some level. If AC has addressed it, they should reflect it.
I personally have doubts about how much traction the Montreal Convention argument will get. Frankly, I don't see any regulator in Canada being consumer friendly (Competition Bureau notwithstanding). Going for a high sealing might not be the best approach for things like hotels and food (although it's useful to cover other unforeseen costs).
The Government's guidelines, on the other hand, are, at the very least, reasonable. I think that would be a better approach - raise it in a balanced way.
Simple search reveals:
16.55 for breakfast
16.80 for lunch
44.40 for dinner
As for hotel rooms, an airline employee is just as capable of using Expedia as a pax. Base it on that, if nothing else.
The insurance argument is a bit weak. It simply adds to the cost of the ticket because the airline isn't holding up its end of the deal. We're reminded constantly that pax have to take responsibility when they're in control of a situation. By the same token, so should airlines.
Ben L's resolution of the issue in the other thread is indicative of a problem at some level. If AC has addressed it, they should reflect it.
I personally have doubts about how much traction the Montreal Convention argument will get. Frankly, I don't see any regulator in Canada being consumer friendly (Competition Bureau notwithstanding). Going for a high sealing might not be the best approach for things like hotels and food (although it's useful to cover other unforeseen costs).
The Government's guidelines, on the other hand, are, at the very least, reasonable. I think that would be a better approach - raise it in a balanced way.
Simple search reveals:
16.55 for breakfast
16.80 for lunch
44.40 for dinner
As for hotel rooms, an airline employee is just as capable of using Expedia as a pax. Base it on that, if nothing else.
The insurance argument is a bit weak. It simply adds to the cost of the ticket because the airline isn't holding up its end of the deal. We're reminded constantly that pax have to take responsibility when they're in control of a situation. By the same token, so should airlines.
Nov 27, 2015, 9:34 pm
#47
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MLL / AC Cafe
Programs: It's hard to get status when the website won't let me book flights.
Posts: 5,706
Clarification: I am talking about situations where, for some reason, passengers did not get vouchers, but rather had to find accommodation on their own.
In terms of finding bargains: it is much more difficult to a cheap hotel room for tonight than for next week or next month.
Finally, the government rates are for government employees travelling within Canada. Rates for other countries vary from country to country. It all depends on the circumstances. A meal near the airport may be twice or three times as expensive as in downtown. But a stranded passenger who has to catch a flight the next morning does not have a choice.
In terms of finding bargains: it is much more difficult to a cheap hotel room for tonight than for next week or next month.
Finally, the government rates are for government employees travelling within Canada. Rates for other countries vary from country to country. It all depends on the circumstances. A meal near the airport may be twice or three times as expensive as in downtown. But a stranded passenger who has to catch a flight the next morning does not have a choice.
Also looks like most people are very happy with how AC has handled the situation.
If you keep poking around and pressing I am sure you can eventually find someone who an AC employee made a mistake for.
But it seems pretty clear the current policies and way AC handles is 99% of the time has been compleatly ok.
Nov 27, 2015, 9:41 pm
#48
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Halifax, NS, Canada
Posts: 44
Perhaps they treated frequent fliers differently. This forum can be a source of potential source of documents, but the 20 or 30 people who responded so far to the post is not representative.
As I said, I am not looking for people who were given vouchers, but rather for passengers who had to find accommodation on their own, and then Air Canada refused to pay it fully.
As I said, I am not looking for people who were given vouchers, but rather for passengers who had to find accommodation on their own, and then Air Canada refused to pay it fully.
Nov 27, 2015, 9:59 pm
#49
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: YOW
Programs: AC SE, FOTSG Platinum
Posts: 5,726
Nov 27, 2015, 11:59 pm
#50
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Halifax, NS, Canada
Posts: 44
Apparently, others did have issues:
And this is not the only case.
Nov 28, 2015, 1:44 am
#51
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Canada
Programs: Aeroplan E50/MM, HH gold, Nat Exec Elite, Kimpton Karma
Posts: 2,354
I recall one other experience. Inbound did not arrive, can't remember issue. Forced overnight in Hartford. Voucher provided and we were sent to a Fairfield near the airport. It was terrible. Not very clean and non existant soundproofing. Needless to say, sleep difficult. On a points tx so wondered if that made a difference. Hotel arranged by AC.
Nov 28, 2015, 7:57 am
#52
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: YVR
Programs: OZ Diamond, Jiffypark Manhattan Gold
Posts: 4,485
Does this have to do with the overnight layover program, or IRROPS or both? It wouldn't surprise me if the overnight (more than 6 hours?) layover thing had this attached to it.
In IRROPS cases I've never been handed money/gc just a voucher. My buddy got a VDB in YYC last week and got put up at the Delta hotel. Not that Delta's are the nicest places on the planet, but they're for sure over $100. Now obvs AC isn't paying the rack rate either, but as long as I'm not stuck in a hole during IRROPS I don't really mind. I'd rather they sort it out with a voucher rather than hand me $100 and say you deal with it.
In IRROPS cases I've never been handed money/gc just a voucher. My buddy got a VDB in YYC last week and got put up at the Delta hotel. Not that Delta's are the nicest places on the planet, but they're for sure over $100. Now obvs AC isn't paying the rack rate either, but as long as I'm not stuck in a hole during IRROPS I don't really mind. I'd rather they sort it out with a voucher rather than hand me $100 and say you deal with it.
Nov 28, 2015, 8:10 am
#53
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sudbury-North Shore-Manitoulin
Programs: AP SPG HH
Posts: 631
I am booked with the overnight layover plan. AC (via ACV) has negotiated with at least two hotels at Pearson, Holiday Inn and Four points, Mississauga. Both rates online are slightly over $100. Both hotels are not without their issues going by Tripadvisor. One under construction the other with very poor service. After choosing the hotel I was issued a voucher. I would have thought AC would have negotiated with hotels that can offer a better experience or hotels with a higher rate (ie higher standard hopefully) since they would have worked out a contract price.
Nov 28, 2015, 9:22 am
#54
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: West
Posts: 3,357
I think the topic is very interesting. I have no personal experiences other than a cancellation at the origin which was handled very badly by AC. It took forever to get a taxi voucher and no one would issue the official statement as to the cancellation that any claims under the personal insurance would required. I see the majority here have some bad feeling towards the OP, yet I do not see any bad intentions in that OP. Its probably the wrong forum crowd to have an intelligent discussion, OP would have a better input by the thousands of stranded pax one sees on the news so often. I wonder how many would respond that they have been looked after fairly.
AC by far is better equipped to arrange a proper transit stay that is reasonable limiting the stress pax undergo when planes don't take off on time. Not all passengers are seasoned frequent fliers and/or professional flyers and take advantage of their status and/or smarts at the expense of less traveled crowd. Conventions are signed to mitigate different treatments afforded passengers and apply to all. Same as any other laws and regulations.
AC by far is better equipped to arrange a proper transit stay that is reasonable limiting the stress pax undergo when planes don't take off on time. Not all passengers are seasoned frequent fliers and/or professional flyers and take advantage of their status and/or smarts at the expense of less traveled crowd. Conventions are signed to mitigate different treatments afforded passengers and apply to all. Same as any other laws and regulations.
Last edited by 1Newflyer; Nov 28, 2015 at 11:04 am
Nov 28, 2015, 9:25 am
#55
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: St. John's NL
Programs: WestJet Gold; E35K/*Silver
Posts: 561
Just as a side note; the way AC treats elites in IRROPS and the way it treats everyone else can be very different.
Given that almost everyone on this board is an elite flyer, we should be cautious in assuming everything is always handled as we have experienced.
Given that almost everyone on this board is an elite flyer, we should be cautious in assuming everything is always handled as we have experienced.
Nov 28, 2015, 8:38 pm
#56
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: YUL
Programs: AC SE (*A Gold), Bonvoy Platinum Elite, Hilton Gold, Amex Platinum / AP Reserve, NEXUS, Global Entry
Posts: 5,691
As we're constantly reminded, FTers in particular are not representative of the general flying public. You might want to try a different approach for your canvasing exercise. Maybe an ad at YYZ or in the En Route magazine would yield better results.
Nov 29, 2015, 11:03 am
#58
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, BA Gold, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,323
AC could probably be a bit more consistent. Vouchers seem to be more common, but the $100 limit has come up here before. It's not clear what the rules are for J pax, status and Y class.
Ben L's resolution of the issue in the other thread is indicative of a problem at some level. If AC has addressed it, they should reflect it.
I personally have doubts about how much traction the Montreal Convention argument will get. Frankly, I don't see any regulator in Canada being consumer friendly (Competition Bureau notwithstanding). Going for a high sealing might not be the best approach for things like hotels and food (although it's useful to cover other unforeseen costs).
The Government's guidelines, on the other hand, are, at the very least, reasonable. I think that would be a better approach - raise it in a balanced way.
Simple search reveals:
16.55 for breakfast
16.80 for lunch
44.40 for dinner
As for hotel rooms, an airline employee is just as capable of using Expedia as a pax. Base it on that, if nothing else.
The insurance argument is a bit weak. It simply adds to the cost of the ticket because the airline isn't holding up its end of the deal. We're reminded constantly that pax have to take responsibility when they're in control of a situation. By the same token, so should airlines.
Ben L's resolution of the issue in the other thread is indicative of a problem at some level. If AC has addressed it, they should reflect it.
I personally have doubts about how much traction the Montreal Convention argument will get. Frankly, I don't see any regulator in Canada being consumer friendly (Competition Bureau notwithstanding). Going for a high sealing might not be the best approach for things like hotels and food (although it's useful to cover other unforeseen costs).
The Government's guidelines, on the other hand, are, at the very least, reasonable. I think that would be a better approach - raise it in a balanced way.
Simple search reveals:
16.55 for breakfast
16.80 for lunch
44.40 for dinner
As for hotel rooms, an airline employee is just as capable of using Expedia as a pax. Base it on that, if nothing else.
The insurance argument is a bit weak. It simply adds to the cost of the ticket because the airline isn't holding up its end of the deal. We're reminded constantly that pax have to take responsibility when they're in control of a situation. By the same token, so should airlines.
Or in other words, I think the lunch number is low, and the dinner number is high.
If AC has negotiated a $60/night rate at a reasonable hotel, and you go book a $300/night room on your own, why do you think they should be responsible for the difference?
Nov 29, 2015, 11:26 am
#59
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: YVR
Programs: AC*SE MM, Marriott Titanium, National Executive
Posts: 1,586
I don't understand those numbers. What I eat for lunch and dinner are roughly the same. The only difference is the amount of alcohol consumed. And I have no expectation that AC would pay for my booze.
Or in other words, I think the lunch number is low, and the dinner number is high.
If AC has negotiated a $60/night rate at a reasonable hotel, and you go book a $300/night room on your own, why do you think they should be responsible for the difference?
Or in other words, I think the lunch number is low, and the dinner number is high.
If AC has negotiated a $60/night rate at a reasonable hotel, and you go book a $300/night room on your own, why do you think they should be responsible for the difference?
Why should I loose the night credit because they negotiated a cheaper rate somewhere else?
Nov 29, 2015, 7:15 pm
#60
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: YXY
Posts: 3,506