Stranger

No.

I was saying I would support Canada adopting a similar compensation plan.

However until them, I object to people left and right asking for compensation that has no legal or contractual basis.

segacs

OP has a legal and contractual basis for compensation. And even if he didn't, why be mad at him for asking? Most businesses know that making it right with their customers is an important part of staying in business. AC seems to be one of the few that actually believes that going out of your way to piss people off is a winning business strategy.

Stranger

There is no contractual basis.

Legal, maybe in Turkey.

And no, I am not mad at him.

yulred

There's an interesting issue at play here. On the one hand, there is a belief that airlines price at what the market can bear. Thats a line of argument everyone here on FT is familiar with; it's the reason given for Canada's relatively higher airfares.

On the other hand, there is this notion that airlines can simply raise prices and pax will accept it.

There's an inherent tension between these two assumptions. If airlines increase prices, they will - by default - exceed what the market can beat. If the market can't bear them, the increased prices wont serve any purpose (other than academic).

The cost increase issue strikes me as hypothetical anyway, since I can't think of any concrete examples in competitive markets in which it's occurred.

segacs

There seems to be an underlying belief that the airlines can't offer reasonable service at competitive fares. But in fact, most issues, like OP's issue, have nothing to do with cost cutting and everything to do with poor communication, incompetence and shambles.

It wouldn't have cost the airline any more to handle OP's situation competently. Ultimately it may have even cost them less, if they had managed to get him on an alternate flight earlier, thus avoiding having to pay out two nights of hotel accommodations and extra compensation.

The AC apologists around here seem to react to every customer's horror story in the same way: "Well, you get what you pay for". Actually, if pax got what they paid for, they wouldn't be here complaining. That's kind of the point. AC's fares aren't any lower than competitive airlines that do offer competent service. And the airline is making record-high profits. This isn't about being unable to offer decent service at a decent price; this is about AC wanting to maximize profits for its shareholders at the customer's expense.

I'm absolutely baffled at the amount of disdain in this forum for passengers who get completely screwed by airlines through no fault of their own. If that's at all reflective of the prevailing attitude at AC, it would explain a LOT.

Stranger

You think getting a competent handler instead of subcontracting to TK would have been cheap? Think again.

Think again. You think competed local service is cheap? Think again.

Did you ever look at the gates AC uses at airports far away all over the worlds? What do you think they have in common? They are the worst ones. Far away, requiring long wlk, or otherwise undesireable.

Truth is, service has a price. Which, as low end fares are coming down big time, AC has decided they don't need to care about. For better or worse. Not saying I approve of it, or not. Just that it's the new reality.

quantumofforce

Regarding the "poor subcontractor service", how much did they lose on revenue by booking alternate flights for stranded pax, that were never communicated to those pax?

KenHamer

It has been repeatedly established that the low end of the market is so cost conscious that it's not possible to raise those fares.

Therefore the money will come from where it should -- from "premium" passengers.

AirPassRightsCA

OP, I have seen a number of sympathetic and hostile posts, but very few that would actually address your rights, which are governed by: (a) the Montreal Convention; (b) Air Canada's International tariff; and (c) the Turkish air passenger bill of rights.

Article 19 of the Montreal Convention states that:

This creates a presumption of liability for Air Canada for your expenses, including meals, accommodation, lost wages, etc. You may have to take Air Canada to court over this, though.

Air Canada's International Tariff Rule 80(C)(4), and in particular 80(C)(4)(f) are also relevant, because they set out the airline's obligations in such a situation. You can sue Air Canada in court also for breach of these obligations.

As it was correctly noted by others, you can pursue your rights against Air Canada based on the Turkish air passenger bill of rights. Sadly, Turkey is well ahead of Canada in this regard.

I would like to invite you to join the Facebook group on air passenger rights, and share your experience with us.

cur

well don't waste our time with an essay that's 95% fluff

do you want help and solutions or do you expect strangers to read you yell about something we already know

i do not believe that you were delayed 2 days without other reasonable options out of a mega hub like ist

unless you were just waiting in lineups hoping the situation would be fixed for you, which is not something that happens with north american carriers

Shanqx

IST isn't a safe place to be. I wonder what AC would do for SEs.

yyz_atc_qq

Are you still stuck?

djjaguar64

Money should be coming from AC not serving meals on Domestic and some Caribbean flights, that's quote a bit of savings.

cur

taxes and airport costs and labor costs have gone up while ticket prices have remained unchanged or decreased. you can't have big government and cheap consumer goods and services without innovation, which we all know canada is adverse to.

The Lev

OP was rebooked on the earliest reasonably available option - the reason he wasn't able to travel on that rebooked flight was likely as you suggest "sheer incompetence".