LondonElite

I agree with you, but even bad news usually comes out dressed up like a little princess. We call these enhancements. Jaded people like ourselves call it for what it is. I think my bigger issue is that even 90 minutes seems like an unacceptably long time to be held against my will. That's what government should be looking into.

InTheAirGuy

But all of these people work at the airport. They will know more than anyone else.

MasterGeek

This surreptitious change should be communicated to CBC. On my way to email CBC journalists..

Bohemian1

WIth On-Time Performance numbers like theirs, I can see why Air Canada is going to 'enhance' their performance against their own tariff by moving the goal posts.

Apparently the government is trying to do the same for all airlines.

tcook052

EXCLUSIVE: Air Canada can now keep you grounded on a plane for 4 hours

EXCLUSIVE: Air Canada can now keep you grounded on a plane for 4 hours

Geoflying

Took the papers long enough to twig on to this. Come to Flyertalk for all the news about flying

Symmetre

AC will never give up striving to find new ways to inconvenience and annoy paying customers. Why people continue to fly with them is beyond me.

vernonc

For comparison purposes, this is UA's tarmac delay policy posted on their website. Seems similar to AC for most things though 4hr is for International flights.
https://www.united.com/ual/en/us/fly/tarmac-delay.html

global happy traveller

remember these plans are developed for all conditions..... may be a one-off flight or a massive storm and red alert where multiple flights are stuck somewhere on the tarmac until its safe and there's time to clear people out.

one thing i like is the more assertive language when FAs have to provide on-board service during delays.

DrunkCargo

"unless the pilot-in-command determines that safety or security considerations preclude such service"

Which is essentially what happens now. Rolling delays, they're told 15m before T/O, so not enough time to perform service... 14m later, whoops, now 15m more.... Or even better than that, let's just give the crew in the back a break and say "not safe". Better safe than sorry right? How would the pax know? They don't have to see the same pax again, but they do have to see the cabin crew often...

global happy traveller

My issue is the current statement says "the Carrier will offer drinks and snacks if it is safe, practical and timely to do so" which means its up to the SD/FA to decide.
Whereas, the new language is unless the pilot in command says its unsafe, there's no reason as to why SD/FA cannot deliver onboard service during a delay.

But rolling delays, yes they are PITA and often the level of uncertainty comes through a chain of command (i.e. ground control --> pilot --> SD/FA).

Your right - There's always a likelihood a pilot can say "lets give the FAs a break by saying it isnt safe yet" but at least now there is a person responsible and accountable for making that decision should a complaint and investigation occurs. The way I read the current language is we'll talk to everyone and see what happened and lets try to correct it the next time.