pdxdtm

I've started looking for laws in Hong Kong now... since that is where my travel originates. I'm hoping maybe they've some semblence of a hold over from their colonial days and might have more protection. Apparently the country where travel commences controls here. Thank god they do their laws in english

The CX CoC is quite passenger friendly:

10.2.2 Except as otherwise provided by the Warsaw Convention or the Montreal Convention or applicable law, if we cancel a flight, fail to operate a flight reasonably according to the schedule, fail to stop at your destination or Stopover destination, or cause you to miss a connecting flight on which you hold a confirmed reservation, we shall, at your option, either:

10.2.2.1 carry you at the earliest opportunity on another of our scheduled services on which space is available without additional charges and; where necessary, extend the validity of your Ticket; or

10.2.2.2 within a reasonable period of time re-route you to the destination shown on your Ticket by our own services or those of another Carrier, or by other mutually agreed means and class of transportation without additional charge. If the fare, and charges for the revised routing are lower than what you have paid, we shall refund the difference;

10.2.2.3 or make a refund in accordance with the provisions of Article 11;

luckypierre

Read this thread at a late stage...I thought the Micronesia routes were one of CO's hidden jewels from a profitability standpoint due to the constant flow of government related workers to various islands in the Western Pacific and the relative lack of competition. I read upthread that Delta? has managed to replace UA on some of the GSA related contracts. Is that correct-Air Mike/CO Mike is no longer a desirable subsidiary of the integrated airline?

I know from paying closer attention to labor related issues with the current airline that the labor groups have been all but forgotten.

hauteboy

Ugh.. was wondering why I couldn't see ICN flight in December.... trying to get to GUM cheaply in early Dec for a few days. Cabotage rules kinda suck.

mh3265a

GUM *was* the crown jewel BUT the GSA contracts and plane switch killed them on Guam. The lost a lot of HVFs and general supporters. To be fair, UA is still a good community partner but it's not enough to make up for the mistakes at the beginning of the transition.

I could see UA pulling back at GUM and not calling it a hub and just focusing on certain Japan cities, the island hopper and HNL service.

transportprof

GUM, meet CLE

spin88

I looked, and Delta now runs (all on 757-200s):

GUM-NRT x3
GUM-NGO x1
GUM-KIX x1
SPN-NRT x2

I don't recall these flights being around when I was flying NW (before going back to UA) were they added to compete with UA post 2011? Or have they always been around? Just curious, its a part of the network I don't know, and have always assumed that UA had no real competitors ex-US micronisia hence them slashing the product.

And I assume that the HVF traffic from UA's flight to HNL now goes to NRT and then on to the US on DL from there?

belfordrocks

Definitely around back in the Northwest days - I know the 747-200's were used on some of these routes at one stage years before the DL merger

shttrdrvr

Just remember, its not your fault.

Exleftseat

All these flights were in operation with NW. There as also a KIX-SPN route started in summer of 2008 but that got cancelled sometime in 2009. NRT- SPN, NGO- SPN/, NGO-GUM, KIX -GUM were operated by 757, shortly before the merger I think SPN got a 747. The good old days flying the red tail

garykung

For the record, UA does have an active ATI with OZ.

DOT Docket: DOT-OST-2003-14202 (Approved on May 18, 2003)

Why not spinning off the entire pmCO instead?

There is no local player per se. UA is the only player. Even DL did not fly GUM to any U.S. states.

warakorn

Its not at UA's discretion if the flight departs from an EU airport.
EC261/2004 overwrites the United CoC.

ozflier

They do, but service and food is just abysmal compared to QF and NZ

pdxdtm

Rule 24

2) Non-U.S.A. Origin Flights - Where the UA flight originates outside the U.S.A., the following provisions apply to a Passenger who has a Ticket and a confirmed reservation on a flight:
a) If local or international laws regulate Change in Schedule, Force Majeure or Schedule Irregularity events, then the procedures in Rule 24 will not be applied.
b) If no local law otherwise regulates Change in Schedule, Force Majeure or Schedule Irregularity events, then the procedures in Rule 24 will be applied.

garykung

Sorry, but you are in a wrong direction.

Consumer protection of air travel in Hong Kong is practically none. Otherwise, dismayed passengers will not occupy aircrafts for compensation. Sorry to say - CAD is on the side of CX, not even the industry.

If you want to know how the colonial influence impacts Hong Kong, see EC 261/2004 (even the U.K. does not have prior comprehensive protection).

Actually no - it will be either the country of registration of local law, whichever is the stricter.

So to be fair - would you mind telling me what is the penalty, in the case of CX fails to comply its CoC?

MatthewLAX

Depends on the crew, though -- I've flown all three and have had some tremendous UA crews and so-so Qantas crews (and to your point, a couple really, really bad UA crews). I try not to make generalizations anymore.