Classedout

I'm writing as I have read through extensively on the forum and fairly consistently it's reported that cabin crew strikes are included together with airport or air traffic control strikes as being "extraordinary".

BA regularly has cabin crew strikes which are planned well in advance. The CAA also guides that staff striking at the airline can't be extraordinary.

corporate-wage-slave

Welcome to Flyertalk Classedout, and it's particularly good to see you here in the BA forum. I hope that we will see plenty more of you here, it's a good place to be informed and entertained.

The main EC261 thread, available via the Forum Dashboard, has some posts about this in recent months. There is some evidence that the CAA doesn't regard these as extraordinary, moreover there was an implied similar reading from BA when trying to get the CAA's permission to use Qatar's aircraft on BA replacement services. I'm fairly sure that (a) disagrees with this analysis when it comes to EC261 and less sure that (b) it doesn't want to find out for sure in court. I think we can say it is open to argument, and that a district judge in a court may go one way or the other, assuming it got that far.

In other words, until we get some more evidence, it looks like open to conjecture whether this Mixed Fleet strike was extraordinary circumstances or not.

1010101

Nothing is likely to change until someone with deep enough pockets challenges the definition of extraordinary in a court.

Having said that, the strikes are becoming so frequent across Europe its hard to class them as such anymore.

Often1

This has little to do with the definition of "extraordinary" any more than the failure of a part which has been properly installed, maintained, inspected and within life span is "not extraordinary".

It has everything to do with the impact of labor on daily life in the EU. It goes without saying that any strike is resolveable by management action. It is simply a question of meeting the demands of the strikers. But, that is not a level playing field which anyone wants to create (other than the stikers!).

For fairly obvious reasons, carriers will fight this tooth and nail, not only because of the EC 261/2004 compensation costs, but because of labor costs which underlie the entire strike issue in the first place.

Ultimately, passengers need to be concerned because both tilting the playing field as to a carrier's second largest expense item as well as increasing EC 261/2004 costs will certainly impact ticket prices and not in a theoretical or minimal way.

Classedout

I would be interested in hearing from people interested in class action. BA are of the view that a strike - of their own cabin crew staff - they knew about weeks, possibly months in advance was extraordinary and unexpected and are refusing EU261 compensation. They seem to be fighting this, with at least a handful of people I know of who are with MCOL at the moment on this point. Please share your experience on the July 2017 cancellations.

CKBA

My wife and I were affected by the July strike actions - ARN-LHR-BWI. I submitted the EC261 compensation claim, which was not unsurprisingly rejected forthwith - however, I did so just so that if anything happened later I had a record of submission/rejection.

Although a bit annoying, we did get an extra day in Stockholm for free (BA paying for hotel/expenses). However, personally I don't believe that they can claim 'extraordinary circumstances' - not least since not every flight was cancelled; management made decisions as to which flights to cancel, and therefore which passengers to inconvenience. (And it would seem that certain routes were more prone than others).

Tobias-UK

Airlines will rely on Recital 14 of EC261/2004:

"(14) As under the Montreal Convention, obligations on operating air carriers should be limited or excluded in cases where an event has been caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. Such circumstances may, in particular, occur in cases of political instability, meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned, security risks, unexpected flight safety shortcomings and strikes that affect the operation of an operating air carrier."

The language is broad and the wording a little ambiguous (legally speaking). There is certainly an arguable case that an airline should not be permitted to rely on the 'extraordinary circumstance' defence when the strike in question involves its own workforce.

Often1

That is true every day and not just for strikes. Weather, air traffic control and other matters routinely determined to be an "extraordinary circumstance" may well mean that only a limited number of aircraft may operate. The carrier determines which flights get the aircraft and which are cancelled.

I simply don't see how one gets around the Montreal Comvention language embedded as it is in EC 261/2004. It seems clear, unambiguous and designed to be just that.

Tobias-UK

Maybe to you, but not to me. As with many aspects of EC261 this matter needs clarification.

corporate-wage-slave

I have found, over quite a period, that people can be remarkably coy about this process, and that is absolutely nothing to do with any Non Disclosure issue - contrary to the incorrect message often put out on this forum and elsewhere, these are quite rare with BA. If going the arbitration route within MCOL there is a sub-stage which has a court-led confidentiality clause in it but there is no secrecy on the final outcome, that's in the public domain. No, the reason seems to be that once the outcome is clear the passengers tend to want to move on quickly and not bring too much extra discomfort to the airline.

It is very frustrating for me, since I shove out any amount of advice in this area, and in many cases (not all) I never hear back as to the viability of this advice.

On this issue, CKBA did the right thing, I actually thing this area may well slide against BA's position over time, and so to have a decline "on the record" is a good idea. I would encourage others to do this, and indeed if people want to share their MCOL experiences via PM, please do so.

710 77345

Every offer I've received from BA in the MCOL arbitration scheme has come clearly with a BA-led insistence that their offer remains confidential, and that I withdraw my court claim against them. I think that BA NDAs are very common indeed when it comes to any settlement offer, stopping people from sharing their successes and encouraging others.

There is normally a time between when you receive an offer, and when BA say that it comes with an NDA - this gap is very useful to keep people informed as to what has been offered

stifle

It is also worth noting that even if an MCOL case makes it to a final decision by county court, county courts don’t set binding precedents. It would need to go one level up (High Court/Court of Appeal, not sure what the pathway is) before a ruling would set a precedent for future cases.

In my personal and non-legal view, a strike affecting the operation of an aircraft is:

• At a main base outside France, an extraordinary circumstance which could have been prevented with reasonable precautions (wet lease, standby crew, etc.)
• At an outstation outside France, an extraordinary circumstance that could not have been so prevented
• In France, not an extraordinary circumstance at all.

Tim_T

I’m currently progressing a claim. It’s worth noting that for cancellations, EC261 is a little more specific -

3. An operating air carrier shall not be obliged to pay compensation in accordance with Article 7, if it can prove that the cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken.

note the “all reasonable measures”. The BA strikes totalled over 50days in 2017, and they wet leased plans to cover. Did they do enough is the question?

bjorns

It is a long established principal in western law, that strikes, as well as war, natural catastrophes are what constitutes 'force majeure', for which companies are not liable.

Duty of care. is a different matter.

Porky Speedpig

The EU has always guided that strikes are "extraordinary" - I (informed) guess that otherwise would have seen AF and LH out of business many moons ago OR the airlines would always be forced to accept potentially ludicrous demands from unions.