Qantas Systematic Cancellation of Flights

[BD1959]

Unlike the ACCC thread which - initially anyway - looked at the ethos behind Qantas strategically cancelling flights weeks in advance but continued to sell seats on them, I'm hoping to provide a bit of a warning as well as discuss tactical examples of last minute cancellations and options available to us (customers) when this happens.

Twice recently, I've arrived into Sydney only to receive a text (sent overnight) advising me that my onward connection has been cancelled. These things happen, although I suspect that QF is being very aggressive with its flight rationalisation, to not only resolve crewing issues but also to maximise profits. Usually this is not such an issue - afterall QF has perhaps the best network coverage and frequency rate to recover - however the latest incident has really made me question the sanity of QF's (perceived) strategy.

Last Thursday, I arrived into Sydney to be met with the following two text messages:


Yes, that is correct. QF could not accommodate me on a SYD-MEL for a period of 7hrs after my booked flight. This as a WP on a full J fare. Little consequence to QF but of massive consequence to me was the fact that I'd already flown MAN-HEL (10hrs transit), HEL-SIN-SYD and wanted to get home ASAP.

I double-checked and triple-checked with the Check-In desk at SYD Transit - there were NO J seats available until the 463 (at that time) 8hrs later. I was faced with two options:

- I could bide my time in the Sydney J Lounge for an additional 7 hours and (if I understand correctly) apply for EU/UK261 compensation.
- I could voluntarily downgrade to Y and get on any number of flights.

The second option wasn't actually offered, it only came about because I had previously used this as a means to get from SYD to MEL in a similar situation the last time I came back via SYD. I offered this option back to the check-in guy and chose to fly down on the first flight that allowed me a aisle seat in Y - the 10:00am. This had the added benefit of allowing me a shower in the Domestic J Lounge. I was also offered a "voucher" which gave the details of the voluntary downgrade "to help with the fare difference recovery" - though I don't expect that will amount to much.

Now, my suspicion is that QF systematically fills all available J seats with upgrade requests 24-48hrs in the period prior to departure thereby blocking all mitigation for reparation on their (seemingly) regular cancellations. In my instance not even a fully J fare helped since, simply, there were no seats to rebook into.

So the point of this thread ...


What other options are available to passengers when this happens? Does EU261 really apply for the WHOLE of the outbound ticketed journey?

1. Are QF able/Do they look at the ability to travel via intermediary points on inbounds as they would if this was the first leg of an outbound? In this instance flights to Canberra were also cancelled so that ruled out using that route to get home early
2. Should QF look to use other carriers where the delay is so excessive?
3. Given QF's current propensity to cancel/rationalise flights should avoid SYD completely?
4. If EU/UK261 does apply (or if it only applied if the inbound was directly from the EU/UK) isn't QF under a legal obligation to inform passengers of their rights under EU/UK261?

And to those who think cancellations are rare, that I maybe should have just sat back and took the offered QF463 here is a follow-up text I received (despite having already arrived home.



Thoughts on this topic??

Regards,

BD

 

[Mwenenzi]

Was MAN-HEL-SIN-SYD-MEL all on 1 PNR (ticket)?
Ticket issued by AY, QF or ?

If 1 ticket EU261 applies as the flight departed EU (assuming EU261 applies to AY flights)
Late arrival and downgrade covered in EU261
QF (staff) may not have know you originated in EU.

 

[BD1959]

Was MAN-HEL-SIN-SYD-MEL all on 1 PNR (ticket)?
Ticket issued by AY, QF or ?

If 1 ticket EU261 applies as the flight departed EU (assuming EU261 applies to AY flights)
Late arrival and downgrade covered in EU261
QF (staff) may not have know you originated in EU.

Yes, all one PNR/ticket. Finnair (105-) issued - though I don't think that makes any difference?

I did offer that by going the downgrade path I was saving QF EU261 compensation; zero response/recognition from the far side of the desk. I would suggest this is a training issue rather than itinerary visibility - but, again, conjecture.

Regards,

BD

 

[kangarooflyer88]

If your trip originated in the EU or the UK, and the entire trip is on one itinerary (i.e. ticket) then Qantas and all carriers operating segments on the ticket are obligated to follow the rules set out by EU261/UK261. In particular, they must provide meals and accommodations (the latter for delays which require an overnight stay) and ground transportation to/from the hotel. In addition, they must provide compensation of 600 Euros (EU261) or 520 GBP ( UK261) should you arrive more than 4 hours after your scheduled arrival into your final destination. The party who pays that compensation would be the operating carrier one who caused the delay, which in this case was Qantas.

By the way, this is not hypothetical, this is exactly what I did when my flight from SIN to SYD was delayed by 14 hours by Qantas (the trip originating in Frankfurt). Once I got home I followed the usual process of filing EU261 through Qantas and a day later they agreed that they were on the hook for EU261 + hotels + transport.

 

[dajop]

Was MAN-HEL-SIN-SYD-MEL all on 1 PNR (ticket)?
Ticket issued by AY, QF or ?

If 1 ticket EU261 applies as the flight departed EU (assuming EU261 applies to AY flights)
Late arrival and downgrade covered in EU261
QF (staff) may not have know you originated in EU.

Downgrade compensation would be minimal though as it pro-rated by distance (75% of fare paid, for the distance of the downgraded flights vs whole itinerary IIRC). It works out be about 2.9% of one way flight or 1.45% of return flight.

 

[RooFlyer]

I note that in this exchange, they cancelled your flight and then said they'd look for a replacement. Unlike their ACCC defence, which said they delayed notifying customers of the flight cancellation because they wanted to have a replacement flight arranged first.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Yes, all one PNR/ticket. Finnair (105-) issued - though I don't think that makes any difference?

It does make a difference since it changes the terms of the contract. If you booked say Manchester to Sydney as one itinerary then Sydney to Melbourne as another, all UK261 would protect is Manchester to Sydney since that is the only itinerary starting from within Europe. In other words that your flight from Sydney to Melbourne got delayed is irrelevant since the UK itinerary covers just Manchester to Sydney.

I did offer that by going the downgrade path I was saving QF EU261 compensation; zero response/recognition from the far side of the desk. I would suggest this is a training issue rather than itinerary visibility - but, again, conjecture.

The agents don't care. After all, it's not coming out of their pay packet. If I was you (and I'm not you by the way), I would've taken that delayed flight and enjoyed the 520 GBP compensation, plus free meal at Sydney Airport for my trouble. Remember too, that what matters is when you arrive at your final destination versus the scheduled time. If it is greater than or equal to 4 hours later then UK261 compensation is owed.

-RooFlyer88

 

[dylarr]

Yes, that is correct. QF could not accommodate me on a SYD-MEL for a period of 7hrs after my booked flight. This as a WP on a full J fare. Little consequence to QF but of massive consequence to me was the fact that I'd already flown MAN-HEL (10hrs transit), HEL-SIN-SYD and wanted to get home ASAP.

Goes to show how BS the 100% of impacted domestic pax being accommodated prior to or within 1 hr of the original departure time claim is that Qantas was touting in their press release yesterday. I wonder what kind of statistical gymnastics and word smithing were used to come up with that claim.

 

[evanb]

I think some are missing context. EU261 applies to the routing, however the cause of the delay is also important. SYD (and MEL and sometimes PER) have been facing near catastrophic ATC limitations resulting in a reduction in the flow rate for at least part of the day nearly every day. The movement cap is 80 aircraft per hour, however during September, for example, actual movements were dismal, reaching an average high of only 65 during two one hour blocks, and being as low as an average of 40 in another block (excluding late night which are under scheduled).

The challenge is that the airlines need to "use" the slots by maintaining the schedule. They can only cancel the flights once they have the first draft of the daily ATFM plan which indicates the flow rate limitations. Proactively cancelling or not offering the flight will result in losing the slot back to the pool. This is causing untold chaos for airlines at the moment and why there is so much noise from the airlines regarding the slot management system and this is one of the main reasons. If affects airlines that operate domestically more than internationally (see here: Sydney single runway operation on 5 October 2023 - Analytic Flying), and routes operating non-protected slots. Invariably this will affect Qantas, Virgin and Jetstar the most.

While weather has been a little more active in recent weeks, it's also affected by ATC staffing issues. For example, today PER is limited by staffing, in addition to weather issues in SYD.

But here comes the crux: ATC delays are not covered by EU261. Given that you got the message the night before for a morning flight and that the new time was significantly later, it's almost certainly a cancellation caused by a flow rate limitation that they were notified of in the daily ATFM plan.

 

[BD1959]

It does make a difference since it changes the terms of the contract. If you booked say Manchester to Sydney as one itinerary then Sydney to Melbourne as another, all UK261 would protect is Manchester to Sydney since that is the only itinerary starting from within Europe. In other words that your flight from Sydney to Melbourne got delayed is irrelevant since the UK itinerary covers just Manchester to Sydney.

Why does it make a difference whether that contract is written by AY or QF (the question my response was to)? The key here is the *operating* airline out of the UK/EU.

The agents don't care. After all, it's not coming out of their pay packet. If I was you (and I'm not you by the way), I would've taken that delayed flight and enjoyed the 520 GBP compensation, plus free meal at Sydney Airport for my trouble. Remember too, that what matters is when you arrive at your final destination versus the scheduled time. If it is greater than or equal to 4 hours later then UK261 compensation is owed.

From a company perspective they *should* be made aware to care. Under EU261:
2. An operating air carrier denying boarding or cancelling aflight shall provide each passenger affected with a written notice setting out the rules for compensation and assistance inline with this Regulation. It shall also provide each passenger affected by a delay of at least two hours with an equivalent notice. The contact details of the national designated body referred to in Article 16 shall also be given to the passenger in written form.

Regards,

BD

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Why does it make a difference whether that contract is written by AY or QF (the question my response was to)? The key here is the *operating* airline out of the UK/EU.

Sorry I misread the reply, departing the EU it makes no difference. Coming to the EU/UK, it could potentially make a difference in the sense that if it was all AY flight numbers EU/UK261 comes into play even if QF were operating the impacted flight, since they were operating a flight on behalf of AY.

From a company perspective they *should* be made aware to care. Under EU261:
2. An operating air carrier denying boarding or cancelling aflight shall provide each passenger affected with a written notice setting out the rules for compensation and assistance inline with this Regulation. It shall also provide each passenger affected by a delay of at least two hours with an equivalent notice. The contact details of the national designated body referred to in Article 16 shall also be given to the passenger in written form.

They should make customers aware but it's unclear how that can be enforced, especially at airports outside of the EU where it is unclear whether EU261 would apply. To give you a simple example, would you consider an EU261 warning be necessary for a flight from Brisbane to Longreach? I think to most casual observers the answer here is no. But what if someone is booked Frankfurt to Longreach (via Helsinki, Singapore, Brisbane)? Of course the airline could potentially keep track of these things and inform impacted customers accordingly but that seems like wishful thinking coming from an airline that cannot figure out how to zero out flights they plan on not operating.

 

[Gold Member]

I think some are missing context. EU261 applies to the routing, however the cause of the delay is also important. SYD (and MEL and sometimes PER) have been facing near catastrophic ATC limitations resulting in a reduction in the flow rate for at least part of the day nearly every day. The movement cap is 80 aircraft per hour, however during September, for example, actual movements were dismal, reaching an average high of only 65 during two one hour blocks, and being as low as an average of 40 in another block (excluding late night which are under scheduled).

The challenge is that the airlines need to "use" the slots by maintaining the schedule. They can only cancel the flights once they have the first draft of the daily ATFM plan which indicates the flow rate limitations. Proactively cancelling or not offering the flight will result in losing the slot back to the pool. This is causing untold chaos for airlines at the moment and why there is so much noise from the airlines regarding the slot management system and this is one of the main reasons. If affects airlines that operate domestically more than internationally (see here: Sydney single runway operation on 5 October 2023 - Analytic Flying), and routes operating non-protected slots. Invariably this will affect Qantas, Virgin and Jetstar the most.

So Qantas game the landing slots in their favour to deter competition, and the Airports (ATC) send a few staff home in response to say two can play this game. Tit for tat with the Consumer ultimately suffering.

This behaviour is being allowed (supported and endorsed) by the Australian Government who sit by idly and refuse to establish anything resembling an Airline Ombudsman for fear of losing their precious Chairman’s Lounge status.

 

[RooFlyer]

Goes to show how BS the 100% of impacted domestic pax being accommodated prior to or within 1 hr of the original departure time claim is that Qantas was touting in their press release yesterday. I wonder what kind of statistical gymnastics and word smithing were used to come up with that claim.

The claim by Qantas only referred to:

For instance, in the examples of cancellations identified in the ACCC’s media release:

* 100 per cent of impacted domestic passengers were offered same-day flights departing prior to or within one hour after their scheduled departure time.
* Continues

There were 10 flights identified in the ACCC media release. In think the ACCC identified about 8,000 affected flights in total

 

[BD1959]

I think some are missing context. EU261 applies to the routing, however the cause of the delay is also important. SYD (and MEL and sometimes PER) have been facing near catastrophic ATC limitations resulting in a reduction in the flow rate for at least part of the day nearly every day. The movement cap is 80 aircraft per hour, however during September, for example, actual movements were dismal, reaching an average high of only 65 during two one hour blocks, and being as low as an average of 40 in another block (excluding late night which are under scheduled).

The challenge is that the airlines need to "use" the slots by maintaining the schedule. They can only cancel the flights once they have the first draft of the daily ATFM plan which indicates the flow rate limitations. Proactively cancelling or not offering the flight will result in losing the slot back to the pool. This is causing untold chaos for airlines at the moment and why there is so much noise from the airlines regarding the slot management system and this is one of the main reasons. If affects airlines that operate domestically more than internationally (see here: Sydney single runway operation on 5 October 2023 - Analytic Flying), and routes operating non-protected slots. Invariably this will affect Qantas, Virgin and Jetstar the most.

While weather has been a little more active in recent weeks, it's also affected by ATC staffing issues. For example, today PER is limited by staffing, in addition to weather issues in SYD.

But here comes the crux: ATC delays are not covered by EU261. Given that you got the message the night before for a morning flight and that the new time was significantly later, it's almost certainly a cancellation caused by a flow rate limitation that they were notified of in the daily ATFM plan.

I think we're starting to get bogged into the technicalities of EU261. Although my intent was to highlight that 261 may be relevant in some instances it was also the intent that this thread triggers a discussion on what we - as passengers - can request to overcome excessive delays.
But back to your point, isn't it a requirement under 261 to state *why* the delay has been incurred? Just as likely Qantas as Hudson herself admitted “There are still issues, and cancellations are higher than they should be” (Bloomberg, Sep 27).

Regards,

BD

 

[evanb]

So Qantas game the landing slots in their favour to deter competition, and the Airports send a few staff home in response to say two can play this game. Tit for tat with the Consumer ultimately suffering.

This behaviour is being allowed (supported and endorsed) by the Australian Government who sit by idly and refuse to establish anything resembling an Airline Ombudsman for fear of losing their precious Chairman’s Lounge status.

Nobody is gaming any landing slots. SYD has a fixed number of slots per hour dictated by legislation, limited to 80 movements per hour. Nearly all are allocated. In recent months, Air Services Australia has been unable to provide sufficient capacity for 80 movements per hour due to an interaction between weather and staffing issues. However, airlines only get notice of this the night before (when the draft ATFM is made available which indicates how many movements are available in each block).

The challenge for the airlines is that they must schedule their slots and various government institutions, including the ACCC and the Senate are making threats to the airlines that if they don't use their slots they'll loose them. The most significantly affected is actually Virgin due to their inability to upgauge aircraft size.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

But here comes the crux: ATC delays are not covered by EU261. Given that you got the message the night before for a morning flight and that the new time was significantly later, it's almost certainly a cancellation caused by a flow rate limitation that they were notified of in the daily ATFM plan.

It is up to the airline to make that defence when filing an EU261 claim. Then if Qantas denies the claim on such a basis the question becomes whether to pursue it further. Generally speaking EU261 compensation is collectable except in the most extraordinary of circumstances (indeed pilots have died just before their flight with courts in Europe determining that EU261 was still owed as crew illness was a foreseeable event). I would imagine that things like security or ATC delays are controllable ones caused by third parties, but which can be collected by passengers from the airline (who in turn recover such compensation from the parties who caused the disruption)

 

[evanb]

I think we're starting to get bogged into the technicalities of EU261. Although my intent was to highlight that 261 may be relevant in some instances it was also the intent that this thread triggers a discussion on what we - as passengers - can request to overcome excessive delays.
But back to your point, isn't it a requirement under 261 to state *why* the delay has been incurred? Just as likely Qantas as Hudson herself admitted “There are still issues, and cancellations are higher than they should be” (Bloomberg, Sep 27).

Not critiquing at all, but just highlighting what is causing a fair bit of cancellations at the moment, and partcularly the ones that come the night before. Qantas and Virgin are both pretty irate with the system at the moment, especially since Sydney Airport have been pinning it on them when they are highlight constrained.

See what Qantas have said on it: https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/qantas-responds/qantas-response-on-sydney-slots-debate/

And Virgin: Virgin isn’t gaming slots to block out rivals, says legal chief

 

[evanb]

It is up to the airline to make that defence when filing an EU261 claim. Then if Qantas denies the claim on such a basis the question becomes whether to pursue it further. Generally speaking EU261 compensation is collectable except in the most extraordinary of circumstances (indeed pilots have died just before their flight with courts in Europe determining that EU261 was still owed as crew illness was a foreseeable event). I would imagine that things like security or ATC delays are controllable ones caused by third parties, but which can be collected by passengers from the airline (who in turn recover such compensation from the parties who caused the disruption)

Indeed, but it's also subject to the local enforcement mechanism in each country. You can make the claim and Qantas can deny it stating ATC. You would then have to seek enforcement (in this case in the UK) through their enforcement mechanism. In Germany, for example, it's close to impossible for a foreigner to to get the local (state level) authorities to act on it. If you make a claim through the local enforcement authority then they will ask Qantas for an explanation and likely accept it.

But yes, ATC delays related to flow rate limitations would clearly be within the realm of "extraordinary circumstances". I've worked in this space and this was pretty normal - this is because it's rather easy for the airline to show since they will share a communication from the ATC ATFM which shows a flow rate limitation during the departure block. Generally, the airline will attach a copy of this to the notes in the GDS to document it specifically to avoid the EU261 penalty. LH even created an automated process A difference is if the ATC was caused by an airline error, e.g. missing CODT or missing a slot for an operational delay which led to further delays.

 

[RichardMEL]

1. Are QF able/Do they look at the ability to travel via intermediary points on inbounds as they would if this was the first leg of an outbound? In this instance flights to Canberra were also cancelled so that ruled out using that route to get home early

Yes. At least in my experience.

Last year I was on a reward J ticket flying LAX-SYD(F)-MEL(J). We were delayed out of LAX by a few hours, so I missed my SYD-MEL in the morning.

I was offered (via app) - SYD-MEL in Y I think an hour late (about the most reasonable connection) or a SYD-CBR-MEL in J that left I think 90min after the direct flight in Y.

At that point I just wanted to get home, so I took the Y flight (and was promptly plonked into like seat 5B or something - but I managed to move back to a preferred window in row 12 or something and got home in about the most reasonable time, but I could have taken the J connection if I wanted. tbh if it was revenue I may well have taken that option (for the SC you know lol) but it was reward, and the couple of extra SC from PC wouldn't have made any difference and I wanted to get home and J on such a flight is not a big deal after 13-14 hours in F.

So yeah, the algorithm does do it. No doubt my status also had a part in this. I didn't talk to any humans because I was happy enough with the option presented tbh.

 

[Ade]

Unlike the ACCC thread which - initially anyway - looked at the ethos behind Qantas strategically cancelling flights weeks in advance but continued to sell seats on them, I'm hoping to provide a bit of a warning as well as discuss tactical examples of last minute cancellations and options available to us (customers) when this happens.

Twice recently, I've arrived into Sydney only to receive a text (sent overnight) advising me that my onward connection has been cancelled. These things happen, although I suspect that QF is being very aggressive with its flight rationalisation, to not only resolve crewing issues but also to maximise profits. Usually this is not such an issue - afterall QF has perhaps the best network coverage and frequency rate to recover - however the latest incident has really made me question the sanity of QF's (perceived) strategy.

Last Thursday, I arrived into Sydney to be met with the following two text messages:

View attachment 352176
Yes, that is correct. QF could not accommodate me on a SYD-MEL for a period of 7hrs after my booked flight. This as a WP on a full J fare. Little consequence to QF but of massive consequence to me was the fact that I'd already flown MAN-HEL (10hrs transit), HEL-SIN-SYD and wanted to get home ASAP.

I double-checked and triple-checked with the Check-In desk at SYD Transit - there were NO J seats available until the 463 (at that time) 8hrs later. I was faced with two options:

- I could bide my time in the Sydney J Lounge for an additional 7 hours and (if I understand correctly) apply for EU/UK261 compensation.
- I could voluntarily downgrade to Y and get on any number of flights.

The second option wasn't actually offered, it only came about because I had previously used this as a means to get from SYD to MEL in a similar situation the last time I came back via SYD. I offered this option back to the check-in guy and chose to fly down on the first flight that allowed me a aisle seat in Y - the 10:00am. This had the added benefit of allowing me a shower in the Domestic J Lounge. I was also offered a "voucher" which gave the details of the voluntary downgrade "to help with the fare difference recovery" - though I don't expect that will amount to much.

Now, my suspicion is that QF systematically fills all available J seats with upgrade requests 24-48hrs in the period prior to departure thereby blocking all mitigation for reparation on their (seemingly) regular cancellations. In my instance not even a fully J fare helped since, simply, there were no seats to rebook into.

So the point of this thread ...


What other options are available to passengers when this happens? Does EU261 really apply for the WHOLE of the outbound ticketed journey?

1. Are QF able/Do they look at the ability to travel via intermediary points on inbounds as they would if this was the first leg of an outbound? In this instance flights to Canberra were also cancelled so that ruled out using that route to get home early
2. Should QF look to use other carriers where the delay is so excessive?
3. Given QF's current propensity to cancel/rationalise flights should avoid SYD completely?
4. If EU/UK261 does apply (or if it only applied if the inbound was directly from the EU/UK) isn't QF under a legal obligation to inform passengers of their rights under EU/UK261?

And to those who think cancellations are rare, that I maybe should have just sat back and took the offered QF463 here is a follow-up text I received (despite having already arrived home.


View attachment 352178
Thoughts on this topic??

Regards,

BD

The exact same thing happened to me arriving into SYD a couple of weeks back from TWB and onward to CBR. There were no flights departing SYD to CBR that night. So I was put into a hotel and flew out on the first one out. And even after QF ground staff at SYD sorted me out, I kept getting the ACTION messages all thru the night and even after I had disembarked at CBR the following morning.

This happened to me more than 3 times so far ... I have lost count, as long as QF can get me on to the next service out, within a reasonable time, I stop complaining. I mean, complaining ain't taking us any where with QF, so why bother. Some times, I have floated the idea of getting rebooked on to a VA or a ZL service, but QF staff often don't do that. I always fly Flex Y for work, so no cache as a J pax (not that @BD1959 had much luck with a Flex J fare, anyways, I feel sorry for you mate). WP here, but that doesn't seem to amount to much anyways.

I'm happy that I get put into a very nice hotel (Novotel, in the previous example) and a $30 meal voucher to cover food when delayed. I now think to myself that as long as I get to the destination with a reasonable time I'm fine. I also fly the night before if there is anything super early/urgent for the next day. I have started to schedule my days around the fact that my flights might (read: will) be delayed. Not that it helps, but lowers the expectations.