New aviation industry ombudsman & customer rights charter in Australia

[Saab34]

I am a firm believer, one who purchases a ticket from A to B, should arrive at B not a cent out of pocket, and not been given the ‘dump and run’ approach by the airline.

Really annoys me that someone buys a fare, then when they get to the arrival point they are thousands out of pocket.

If you are in the airlines hands, weather issues not, they need to wear any cost.

 

[SeaWolf]

To describe this new charter as the "bare minimum" is almost overstating what's in it. There's nothing new here, just a restatement of obligations that the airlines already have that they've been shirking.

We need proper reform and a proper customer compensation scheme like the USA, Canada, EU and UK all have. This reads like it was drafted Qantas PR.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

To describe this new charter as the "bare minimum" is almost overstating what's in it. There's nothing new here, just a restatement of obligations that the airlines already have that they've been shirking.

We need proper reform and a proper customer compensation scheme like the USA, Canada, EU and UK all have. This reads like it was drafted Qantas PR.

agree.

but apparently that’s *not* the aim of this charter. The aim of this is to sim0yminform 99% of the travelling public who have no idea that if their flight is cancelled or delayed, that the airline needs to rebook them, or give them a full refund.

The ACL is actually pretty strong in that regard, but I guess people just don’t know.

It doesn’t resolve the issue raised by saab34, that a walk-up fare in another carrier can be very expensive. But how many people - non business - actually do that?

Not even EU261 covers the full cost of a replacement last-minute ticket.

 

[MARTINE]

At last, a charter of rights for Australian airline passengers – but where's the compensation for delays? | Monique Ryan

Airlines would be less likely to cancel or delay a flight if they had to pay up to $100,000 in compensation

www.theguardian.com

 

[p--and--t]

At last, a charter of rights for Australian airline passengers – but where's the compensation for delays? | Monique Ryan

Airlines would be less likely to cancel or delay a flight if they had to pay up to $100,000 in compensation

www.theguardian.com

It's intriguing how various persons keeping railing the furphy initiated by REX directors about slots which has been to be proven bulldust.

 

[Saab34]

Rex handed back Sydney slots because they couldn’t fill the seats. You could say they had been wasted with Rex and might as well give them to VA or QF who will fill them.

 

[serfty]

Not even EU261 covers the full cost of a replacement last-minute ticket.

But it does force the operating airline to reroute in a comparable cabin at their cost and not necessarily on the same carrier (if the PAX does not opt for a refund).

 

[clifford]

But it does force the operating airline to reroute in a comparable cabin at their cost and not necessarily on the same carrier (if the PAX does not opt for a refund).

It doesn't "force" them as they are routinely not doing it.

 

[serfty]

It doesn't "force" them as they are routinely not doing it.

The regulation exists, and non compliance has its own ramifications.

 

[JackMiles]

Apologies if this has been covered up thread. I am coming here from the newsletter today and haven't read the first 5 pages of comments from last year. As to giving feedback; is anyone planning to (or has already) draw up a feedback document that others may sign on to? I would like to voice my displeasure at the shortcomings of this new Charter but (a) I bet my complaints overlap a great deal with many others' and (b) many on here are more knowledgeable and eloquent than me, so I feel like endorsing an erudite expert's response would perhaps be more effective than lodging my own.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Apologies if this has been covered up thread. I am coming here from the newsletter today and haven't read the first 5 pages of comments from last year. As to giving feedback; is anyone planning to (or has already) draw up a feedback document that others may sign on to? I would like to voice my displeasure at the shortcomings of this new Charter but (a) I bet my complaints overlap a great deal with many others' and (b) many on here are more knowledgeable and eloquent than me, so I feel like endorsing an erudite expert's response would perhaps be more effective than lodging my own.

That sounds like a good idea although I must question whether such concerns will be given the time of day by the powers that be. After all this isn’t the first submission made by AFF on the matter and yet they seem to be offering less than nothing when it comes to reform. Other countries and even Australia for international flights (vis-a-via the Montreal Convention) have laid the groundwork for what should be offered to customers facing flight disruptions:

• Being booked onto the next available flight including on competitors at no cost to the passenger (APPR, EU261 and Montreal Convention via Article 19)
• Food and accommodation should the reason for the delay be within the airlines control (APPR, Montreal Convention) or for any reason for delay (EU261)
• Cash compensation for delays within the control of the airline (EU261 and APPR) and lost wages (Montreal Convention)
• Cash compensation should a passenger be bumped off an oversold flight (APPR, EU261)

There’s really not much involved here. And if the Commonwealth are worried about the impact these regulations will have on smaller airlines serving regional communities like Rex, they could have carved outs specifically for them whereby they maybe don’t have to pay as much compensation or the rebooking requirement is as stringent (this is what Canada does under the APPR). And the loser of this charter is everyone. Qantas will continue to torch their money by running a poor operation, paying crew to twiddle their thumbs whilst an aircraft they’re leasing is sitting on the ground not generating revenue. Passengers will lose because they won’t get to their destination on time and will be left out of pocket for an issue the airline caused.

I think the only way serious action is taken is if a grass roots effort takes on this cause. It will mean testifying before committees and being vocal on the media. This was how Canada got its air passenger protection. And whilst it is by no means as good as EU261 it is leagues ahead of anything in Australia

 

[MEL_Traveller]

All good points KF88… but a couple of things to bear in mind. The responsible minister has admitted this is *not* intended to create new rights, or make the enforcement of existing rights any easier… this is simply an information exercise… informing pax of their existing rights.

Frequent flyers may be familiar with EU261, and rules in canada and the usa, but occasional flyers may not.

They don’t know their rights under consumer law when flying in the same way we all do - now - for purchasing products at a store.

If an airline says ‘flight times don’t form part of our contract with you’, people tend to believe that. They don’t know they have a right to refund, in the same way as if they buy a damaged or faulty product.

The other thing is the montreal convention. It simply isn’t accessible for people for the day to day situations they find themselves in for a delay or cancellation. That’s why the EU came up with EC261, replicated by UK261. It sets fixed penalties with very few exceptions.

The montreal convention - other than for bodily injury or death - has to be prosecuted through the courts. That comes with the uncertainty of outcome, and expense in terms of time and money.

MC99 cannot be relied on as a guarantee… which is why EC261 and other consumer laws around the world have been created.

 

[Mattg]

It turns out even Saudi Arabia has a more progressive aviation compensation scheme than Australia.

I flew out of Jeddah yesterday, and there were signs all over the airport informing passengers of their rights for cancellations, delays, downgrades, denied boarding, etc. with a QR code you could scan for more information.

Saudi Arabia: New airline compensation rules come into effect

Based on the new rules, in cases of damage, defect, or delay of baggage, a passenger can receive financial compensation of up to SAR6,568.

gulfbusiness.com

 

[SeaWolf]

Interview with minister about the proposed "minimum set of standard" for aviation. There's some discussion about a proper pay-on-delay scheme but the minister argues against it claiming that it would push up ticket prices. (Ignore the displayed headline, the interview is in the ABC's News Live Blog, which covers a whole range of topics over the course of the day).

Live: Hume in 'shock' after being named in threat to Price

The Liberal senator says she was left in shock after her name was invoked in a threat from a senior colleague to Jacinta Nampijinpa Price. Follow live.

www.abc.net.au

This seems to be the final round of consultation and is aimed at the general public. There's 48 days remaining to submit feedback and comments and you can do so on the Department of Infrastructure's website:

Aviation Consumer Protections – subordinate legislation (including the Aviation Consumer Protections Charter)

www.infrastructure.gov.au

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I still don’t understand the argument that a compensation scheme will push up airfares. That’s what competition is for. We have seen no increase in european airfares as a result of EU261.

I’m not sure we need compensation for the sake of it however. I think a short delay of a couple of hours probably doesn’t ned compensating. But once you reach the threshold where you need to consider an alternative carrier, that’s where walk-up fares can be prohibitive.

Or perhaps the law should require ‘rerouting at the earliest opportunity’, even if that is on another airline?

 

[CMA222]

I still don’t understand the argument that a compensation scheme will push up airfares. That’s what competition is for. We have seen no increase in european airfares as a result of EU261.

I’m not sure we need compensation for the sake of it however. I think a short delay of a couple of hours probably doesn’t ned compensating. But once you reach the threshold where you need to consider an alternative carrier, that’s where walk-up fares can be prohibitive.

Or perhaps the law should require ‘rerouting at the earliest opportunity’, even if that is on another airline?

With "Choice" advocating continuously for reforms that actually benefit the affected passengers and address the real issues (and being basically ignored) rather then the superficial "minimum standards" the airlines (read QF) are prepared to agree to, any consultation now is just a "tick the box" process so that the Government (while sitting in the Chairman's lounge) can say they consulted and listened, then dismissed anything that QF does not want.

QF operates under UK/EU261 and the equivalent in the USA, Canada and even the Philippines and they seem to cope without having an extra tax (higher fares) for alleged possible compensation. Competition means in those areas QF "sucks it up". In Oz the national carrier just treats its loyal customers with total contempt.

 

[CaptJCool]

Well QF made over $2 billion profit
Despite same job same pay adding $100 million to the wages bill

Any “compensatory” measures can be absorbed

 

[Mwenenzi]

I still don’t understand the argument that a compensation scheme will push up airfares. That’s what competition is for. We have seen no increase in european airfares as a result of EU261.

I’m not sure we need compensation for the sake of it however. I think a short delay of a couple of hours probably doesn’t ned compensating. But once you reach the threshold where you need to consider an alternative carrier, that’s where walk-up fares can be prohibitive.

Or perhaps the law should require ‘rerouting at the earliest opportunity’, even if that is on another airline?

EU261 delay compensation does not apply until 3 hrs. So a 2:59hr (arrival) delay has no compensation.
And nothing for extraordinary delay (like ATC as happens at SYD more than it should = AU fed govt control/problem)

Air Passengers Rights Regulation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

If EC261 and the UK, Canada equivalents consumer laws are so bad why is QF flying from EU, UK CA etc?
Reason: has negligible effect. And for flight to those countries does not apply.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

EU261 delay compensation does not apply until 3 hrs. So a 2:59hr (arrival) delay has no compensation.
And nothing for extraordinary delay (like ATC as happens at SYD more than it should = AU fed govt control/problem)

Air Passengers Rights Regulation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

If EC261 and the UK, Canada equivalents consumer laws are so bad why is QF flying from EU, UK CA etc?
Reason: has negligible effect. And for flight to those countries does not apply.

True. But i wonder if the point (time limits) is lost on the politicians? They think every flight that’s late is gonna get a payment?

I suppose most of them have no idea the costs of a walk-up ticket, or trying to reschedule plans when a flight is cancelled.

 

[FlyingKangaroo]

'Open to submissions.' Mmmhmm.

“Qantas said no to all the submissions and our hands are tied. No further questions; we'll be in the Chairman’s Lounge.”