AC7E7

ridefar

You clearly know nothing about my flying and don't understand what trade-offs I may or may not be willing to make in my travel. Your response is both simplistic and unrealistic for me, and many many other frequent flyers.

Further... what makes you think the competition is any better? They are equally regulated/un-regulated. Your whole free market purist stance is literally unsupportable and silly in the context of airlines; but hey just let Boeing build planes that fall out of the sky... if people don't like it they can fly Airbus right? Or heck, somebody else will come along with $100 billion to start a new airline manufacturer and do it perfectly the first time with no experience! No worries, just scrap the regulation. It is just too big a barrier to free competition.

Maybe this conversation would be less "beyond you" if you were capable of bringing a little bit of nuance to the conversation instead of positioning everything as a binary choice? Just a thought...

AC7E7

Stranger

Thinking about this, and about all that "competition" and "market" BS/widhful thinking. I guess the point is, it's nothing like a market. There is some sort of elasticity curve on the demand side, and airlines SET prices with some/a good knowledge of that curve, to maximize whatever they want to maximize, cash flow or profit or whatever. Which has nothing to do with the classical free market pricing mechanism, and is largely unaffected by this kind of regulations, so that any extra cost ends up effectively having to be swallowed by the airlines. So obviously they are unhappy, possibly very unhappy. (Not that I care either way.)

Transpacificflyer

This isn't about a free market or additional regulations for the sake of regulations. I emphasize that we are at this point because of the airlines themselves. All that the legislation does is attach a cost to a small number of abusive practices common in Canada. It is quite simple now: The airlines can avoid these costs if they change their business model that allows for passengers to be trapped for 5 hours on a tarmac with no access to potable water, or that denies boarding to vulnerable passengers. If the costs are large enough, perhaps it will encourage the airlines to tighten their management processes and to have effective contingency plans in place, like other airlines. Keep in mind that Canada's airlines intentionally mistreated passengers. They chose not to invest in contingency plans. It was the airlines choice. Passengers had little if any recourse. Now the airlines are being told to deliver what has been purchased.
The penalties are noticeable to encourage compliance and to avoid the airlines carrying on with the current intentional abusive practices.

shadowspar

It won't, unless I'm misunderstanding something. The max compensation amount for a delay -- within the carrier's control, and not safety-related -- whether on the tarmac or not, is

• $400 for 3 hours
• $700 for 6 hours
• $1000 for 9 hours or more.

This is very much in line with the EC 261 compensation amounts. The delay timelines are significantly longer, but then again, Canada is significantly larger.

The larger compensation amounts only come into play for people who are IDBed. Those are $900, $1800, and $2400, for a delay of <6, 6-9, or >9 hours, respectively.

Here's the regulation itself: Canada Gazette, Part 2, Volume 153, Number 11: Air Passenger Protection Regulations

Fiordland

Imagine an airline like Flair or AirTransat where long delays are not uncommon. This is going to be very expensive for them. What it is going to do is bring the bottom of the market up. AC is not going to look that much more expensive. This is good for AC, but for the bottom feeders airlines.

RCyyz

Here's an article from the Globe & Mail (July 6, Report on Business, page B3). Apparently Canadian airlines - including AC - have gone to the Federal Court of Appeal in an attempt to quash the Canadian pax bill of rights. Per the article, "Air Canada and Porter Airlines Inc., along with 17 other applicants that include the International Air Transport Association (IATA) – which has some 290 member airlines – state in a court filing that required payments under the country’s new air-passenger bill of rights violates international standards and should be rendered invalid."

There are a couple of quotes attributed to John McKenna who I presume is the head of an airline lobbying group. One quote says that Mr. McKenna "called the compensation grid “very high” and the new rules “outrageous”."

Symmetre

The longest delay I've had this year was on AC. Same for last year too, now that I think about it.

respectable_man

Transpacificflyer

Yes indeed a lobbyist in his capacity as President of the Air Transport Association of Canada (ATAC). He has a long history in politics starting out in the Quebec provincial Liberal Bourassa era.
I read the quote you posted and had a bit of a chuckle when I noted that his education includes a Master's degrees in Soviet and East European Economic Studies from Carleton University. Perhaps he longs for the good old days of the Soviet Union when passengers did as they were told?

Fiordland

My longest delay has been Flair. Vancouver to Edmonton. (Don't ask why my co-worker booked us on this airline). Something about both WestJet and Air Canada being booked during the time window we wanted to fly.

The plane that operates Vancouver to Edmonton begins its day in Toronto and visits Winnipeg, Calgary before making its way to Vancouver. It left Toronto a few hours late and did not manage to make up time. Getting into Vancouver an hour or two late. They have some paper work problem, then after a bit more of delay, some passangers decide to get off the flight, so another delay as there luggage is pulled offer. We end up 4-5 late into Edmonton. My first and last experience with them.

Air Canada has problems, but nothing like these guys. Anything that forces them to become closer to AC is good for the travelling public and reputable airlines like AC in that makes its cheaper competition less cheap.

yyznomad

First Phase! T-15 mins!

RCyyz

Today CBC reports that the Attorney General of Canada is calling the court challenge to Canada's new Pax Bill of Rights ""ill-founded" and should be dismissed".

CBC goes on to report that "In a pair of court filings, lawyers for the federal government and the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA) say the government will fight air carriers' attempt to overturn rules that beef up compensation for travellers subjected to delayed flights and damaged luggage."

margarita girl

My niece was scheduled to fly on AC1942 yesterday. Flight was cancelled due to "crew constraints". AC offered her a hotel room and a $500 voucher. Is she entitled to more? (She is traveling alone with a 2 yr old baby, so this is a bit of a nightmare for her.)

As far as I can tell, the flight hasn't taken off yet. I think it's been renamed AC1992. The latest status update says departure of 14:19 today, but it's still showing as delayed.