Development Welcome to FT

In a single word: no.
With seperate tickets the airlines have no obligation. By defintion with seperate tickets you are not making a connection.
AA, and only AA, have a published policy with seperate OW flights to get you to the next desination.
No one has been able to prove such a policy exits for any other OW airlines.
If you cannot make the 2nd flight you are relying on the good will of the airline.

Why do you continue to claim this? There has been an email, from oneworld, posted on this forum, that connections across different oneworld member tickets would be subject to protection.

Where ???
Please provide verifiable evidence
Link to OW site?
Link to every OW airlines web site with this?

It may be that the policy exists across oneworld and I think it probably does.

However that doesn't mean the policy would actually be followed by the airline employees or at an outstation, by local contractors. (I appreciate this is not the case here.)

oneworld is a marketing organisation and the member airlines are free in practise if not in rule to ignore its policies (e.g., try to get into a BA lounge even as a BA Gold when you have an AA domestic flight). It may be that there is a policy agreed by all airlines for cross protection and I think there is some evidence this policy exists. But unless one can point an airline employee to a page on their own website or at least on the oneworld webpage the employee may well simply ignore the policy.

in my view to rely on this policy you need to be able to produce evidence of it.

This question has been asked before but those (2) who claim such policy exists have not provided credible verifiable evidence.

Many of us are waiting for this

Sorry for my confusion, so there is no actual evidence/official OneWorld policy regarding two separate tickets?

Nobody has yet been able to produce a published policy from OW on behalf of its member airlines.

On the other hand, many report here various no shows OW-OW and being told by the onward carrier that no such policy exists.

Even AA, which used to publish a policy for what it terms "disruptions" no longer publishes such a policy on its consumer-facing website.

Some have decided that post #1 of this thread is insufficient evidence of the existence of such a policy.

If it were printed on oneworld headed paper it might suffice, but a typical outstation manager trying to get rid of an irritating passenger would probably not accept FlyerTalk as good evidence.

Airline employees often do not know their own rules very well. If you don't have something official to point to, it might as well not exist.

Anyone concerned about this enough to bother themselves with ten minutes at a keyboard can easily produce a letter on "OneWorld stationary" personally addressed to them and signed by someone of Great Authority assuring them that the policy in question is in force for all OW airlines.

Dishonest/immoral? One might say 'quite appropriate' in the actuality of the situation, where any airline employee or contractor has pretty much absolute authority over the outcome of a traveler's day, despite having limited or faulty knowledge of whatever rules do exist.

Both and possibly also illegal.

Will this document suffice?

https://ssc.aa.com/prmportal_enu/Age...ng%20Index.pdf

Yes, but only when dealing with AA

Ok.

So going from AA ticket on AA to JL on a seperate JL ticket should be protected.

If vice versa is the case the same is not true?

The policy is AA will protect if AA is one/both flight(s) of the connection. AA->JL protected. JL->AA protected. AA->AA protected. JL->CX not protected (by AA).