As long as they were smiling...


It's all part of the new customer service initiative.

What do you have to lose if you call again? :)

I actually hope that when I speak to someone today that they say no again. I will then cancel all of my travel that is booked and will argue with them about using the SKCH to justify cancelling unilaterally tickets without penalty and that they should have to "accept it or cancel without penalty". Hello SKYTEAM!

yyz_atc_qq, sorry to hear about your problems with AC. It's incredible that they are saying no back-tracking even through the circumstances were created by AC.

You should actually file a complaint with the European governing body for transportation -- you have the print out of your new schedule. With the European body I believe you will be entitled to greater compensation since there is a Passengers Bill of Rights. It is clear that CIC*77 as well as the new ACpedia reference indicates you can choose any airline to fly home with if AC insists you cannot fly through FRA to connect with AC.

I see that you are a SE and they are still screwing around with you -- no surprise as this happened to me as well. You situation reminds me of the letter to the editor Montie Brewer wrote outlining events that can disrupt an air journey. (my bolding)

When you call AC you should read the above quote and ask if Montie was just giving AC double-talk (TM).

If anything, this experience has shown you, a SE, what AC thinks of your loyalty.

btw...I reread CIC*77 and there is nothing else I can provide to give you better leverage. At this point, AC is not honouring their own rule.

Let us know what happens.
Cheers

Would you have a link to this letter or possibly the full text?

I am going to put it with my travel documents - may just come in handy one day...

Apparantly a manager will be calling me to discuss this file although AC res will not tell me who the person is that will call, nor will they tell me when the call will be made.

More the fool to me for having 9 outstanding itineraries.

DUPE post

As requested...here is the link.

http://www2.canada.com/montrealgazet...3-afc44d7eb430

Cheers

Thanks - much appreciated!

Maybe you should see that the letter is referring to the On My way program and the letter is referring to day of departure delays? So I don't see how you can use the above article and claim that this is double talk. I am not specifically referring to yyz_atc_qq's case as I don't know the details but it appears to be an advance schedule change, so how can you use an article that is referring to day of departure delays and say it's double talk? Let's be fair maybe?

Are you then implying disruption to air travel, within AC's control, is not the responsiblity of the airline because it did not happen on day of travel?

I am specifically referring to yyz_atc_qq's situation.

AC had a sked change. The new timing does not work for him. He was protected on a AC flight via FRA. Someone at AC then changes his reservation and places him back on a flight that does not work for him and places a note no backtracking allowed and does not tell him. Tell him / do one thing and when he's off the phone change the reservation?

Yes rules exist (i.e. no backtracking) but circumstances changed by AC. Just as yyz_atc_qq stated, perhaps he should mention to AC that something changed on his side and therefore he would like a full refund for one of his 9 future PNRs. Would AC oblige?

If AC insists that he does not backtrack, then AC should follow it's own rules in CIC*77 and put him, as he has suggested, on AF via CDG -- clearly AC will be more happy this way.

This is a change initiated by the AC not the pax. Clearly he has obligations back in YYZ mid-afternoon. I too would be anxious wondering if, a committment I made for work, based AC's committment to me, was still unresolved.

This person is a SE -- does his loyalty to AC not mean anything anymore? Where is the customer service for him? Clearly CIC*77 exists and yet the SE desk told him accept the change (i.e. the unacceptable flight that arrvies into YYZ at 15h15) or we'll give you a refund.

Regards

Do not put words in my mouth? I did not imply ANYTHING as I very clearly stated in my previous post. The article you posted specificially referred to day of departure events, not advance schedule changes, yet you're trying to use that and accuse AC of double talk (which is clearly not the intention of that letter).
and FYI - CIC does not exist anymore so perhaps need to stop referring to that outdated information here?

As I said, I do not know the complete details of yyz_atc_qq's situation so I have not made a single comment so far as he stated a manager would call him back to discuss.

I wholly agree with everything you've said. My case ended in my favor but only by the grace of god. If the agent on the phone on Feb 16th hadn't said yes it can be done, they weren't willing to budge. SE status means nothing. I will remember this incident for a very very long time. Oh and when I asked about canceling my flights without penalty due to a SKCH on my part they said no, that's not how it works.

Remember that everyone... next time you stop to think about whether you should book on AC because of your status... Loyalty means nothing!

Agree with Andrew
 

I am going to have to agree with Andrew on this one... He specifically says he is not referring to the discussion at hand, yet at taking the quote in context, in its entirety, not just one paragraph.

We may not always like what he has to say in terms of Air Canada policy, but he is a great resource who trys to help people out as much as possible. I think once again he was trying to help out, lets not forget that, and remember that in most instances he is just the messenger.

Saying that, I would also agree with yyz_atc_qq that perhaps his situation wasn't dealt with in the most expedient and customer focused manner. AC has a lot of problems in this regard, but there are also a lot of stories that go the other way. With the number of people flying on any given day and the number of people potentially effected when things go wrong, there is no way that every effected customer will be happy with the resolution, as well as the process. There are just too many people involved.

AC has a lot of things it could work on, but not everyone there is out to ensure our luggage gets lost, our upgrades get down-gauged and our rolls are crusty!

Flame away! :D

I agree the letter is related to OMW. I was just surprised that you would want to distinguish a difference between events, i.e. day of, or in the future, that are within AC’s control that impact travel. For me, and I suspect 95% of AC travelers, any disruption to travel that is within AC’s control, whether it is today, tomorrow or sometime in the future would be the AC responsibilities. This is why CIC*77 exists. A contract exists between the pax and carrier – offer and acceptance. I can’t imagine what executive would stand up and state otherwise.

However, OMW is applicable to future travel too. When OMW came out a couple of SEs and Es who ask me for travel advice wanted to know a couple things about OMW, including where they sit in the priority list. When I called AC I got double-talk about where on the priority list (i.e. SE are most valued customers however OMW customers have purchased an additional benefit when I pointed out she did not answer the question the phone went silent – alas we can talk about that the OMW thread). When asked if someone bought a ticket in April for travel at Christmas and something happens to the Christmas flight does the pax have to wait until day of? The response was no because they have purchased OMW. I did not ask, but my thoughts were what about CIC*77?).


You are correct in your statement.

May I respectfully ask that you review your post earlier in this thread. On page 1, your post #6 on 05SEP. My posts to you in this thread, #9 (06SEP) and post #10 (27SEP), asking if you could provide some details to help other FTers being impacted by sked changes/cancellations, that went unanswered. I then posted something on 14FEB (post #11) as a direct response to your post #6.

It so happened a SE (yyz_atc_qq) needed help and asked in the latter half of February if anyone had the new reference because, although he has been told as a SE he is valued customer, no one was helping him out.


yyz_atc_qq, I’m glad that you were able to re-accomodated as stated in AC’s own rules. I was going to suggest to you, head to the MLL earlier one day and give them the PNR. The Lounge attendants are suppose to assist with ticketing and let them work it out while you remain in the lounge. Albeit, ticketing that is for current day and IROPs take priority, however when it is quiet they are to help with ticketing and issue tickets.

This manager exemplifies what Ken Haamer has been saying in many of his posts. Management (in this case the manager) not taking ownership. The only reason you were given desired routing is because the res agent on 16FEB said you could based on CIC*77. I have no doubt that is what is going to be written in the PNR – not that the manager made any decision but the agent on 16FEB said it could be done just in case someone questions why, it’s not going to sit with this manager and therefore he won’t get in trouble.

The troubling item here is what happened to the rule? Why did AC not honour their own rule? Surely this is an example of AC double-talk – the rule exists for you to be protected on other routings or other carriers and the manager is saying ‘No”)

You only realized this now?! ;)

In all seriousness, it shows what AC really thinks of its loyal customers as a result of the airline’s own actions.

In a separate thread about SE 2009/10 benefits, where Clipper801 was very astute and noticed that under “normal operations” SE and E have priority standby and I agree with Clipper801 interpretations that once a year OMW now pax bumps SE and Es.

It is not in IROPs situation that ones loyalty should be taken into consideration?


No flaming here. This is a forum to ask questions, share experiences and ask questions to help us all. And from our experiences, collectively we know what to expect, or in this case, what we are entitled to when an airline disrupts an air journey as a result of an event within the airline’s control.

Cheers