Despite thousands of canceled flights and delayed arrivals, customers are struggling to make successful complaints and navigate the ins and outs of complex regulations amid a surge in summer travel. The country’s largest carrier informed some passengers that their flight to Lisbon would be delayed due to “bad weather”, 12 days before its scheduled departure from Montreal on July 17. Another traveler recently received a $60 “eCoupon” due to a multi-day baggage delay rather than the prompt baggage refund to which he is entitled under both federal rules and Air Canada’s passenger-carrier contract. “It would be great if I could get that money back instead of a voucher. Especially since I’m still without my bag and layovers,” said Air Canada Rouge passenger Leanna Durdle. On Tuesday, the airline canceled a flight from Nashville to Toronto citing a “technical issue.” However, data on tracking service Flightradar24 shows the same plane scheduled to fly to Nashville for the trip instead took off for Boston an hour after the original departure time, despite the reported mechanical problem. Liam Walshe, a paralegal who advocates for consumer protection, described the reasons given as “questionable” and “suspicious”. Technical or mechanical malfunctions do not qualify for the carrier’s audit and therefore exempt it from the obligation to compensate customers, he noted. “I was quite shocked at what I was seeing,” he said. “How could they say it’s for maintenance and then an hour later the plane flies to Boston? Why not slightly delay the Nashville flight?” Walshe said that overall, the myriad cases of “technical” or “maintenance” issues along with travel vouchers instead of compensation create the appearance that the airline is trying to avoid “paying up”. The story continues “People have filed claims and been denied,” he said. “You’ll see all kinds of people saying there are inconsistent reasons.” Air Canada said in an email that the explanation for the weather on the Lisbon flight was “an erroneous notification” that has since been revised. “Air Canada fully appreciates the frustration and inconvenience the schedule changes are causing customers and is making every effort to mitigate these unfortunate situations,” the airline said in a statement. It notes that travelers can request a refund to the original payment method at any time and says it will pay additional compensation where required under the passenger rights charter. The airline has struggled to cope with a tidal wave of travelers amid staff shortages in recent months, with positions ranging from pilots to baggage handlers as well as security and customs agents remaining vacant. The result was long waiting times at the airport, constant delays and mazes of delayed baggage, along with increasing complaints and claims for compensation. The airline said its payroll is at 93% of 2019 levels, despite cutting more than 15% of summer departures. Announced last week, the move cuts the flight schedule to well below 80 percent of pre-pandemic levels, at which it has been operating since late spring. Meanwhile, the federal government says nearly 1,200 screening officers have been hired since April — though not all are licensed to work the scanners — and more than 700 student border guards have taken positions at checkpoints. But travel turmoil continues, with Air Canada racking up a higher share of flight delays – about two-thirds – than any other major airline worldwide for four straight days since Saturday. Other carriers and airports are also experiencing excessive delays, from London Heathrow to Guangzhou, China. Gabor Lukacs, president of the air passenger rights advocacy group, says travelers’ frustration highlights the complexities — and loopholes — of Canada’s three-year-old Passenger Protection Regulations (APPR). For example, travelers have no ready way to disprove an airline’s claim that a delay is due to mechanical problems and that no cash is owed. “These are not easy-to-understand, easy-to-enforce rights. It’s a fraud,” Lukacs said, pointing to a Nova Scotia small claims court ruling from July 2021. “When consumer protection is the intended effect of a regulatory regime, it should be presumed that the regime will be in plain language, be understandable, and support a simple claims process,” the decision states. “The APPR, which was intended to achieve enhanced passenger rights, achieves none of these. The language is complex and legal, requiring detailed or specific knowledge to invoke the claims system and the process for seeking compensation, once invoked, it does not lend itself to a quick resolution”. Under the regulations, passengers are owed alternative travel arrangements or a refund — the traveler’s choice — if they are notified more than two weeks in advance that their flight has been canceled or delayed by three hours or more for reasons beyond the carrier’s control. If the trip was canceled within 14 days or less, passengers owe $1,000 for a cancellation or delay of nine hours or more, and between $400 and $700 for delays of three to nine hours. Regardless of how long the notice is, a passenger who chooses to decline a rebooking should receive $400 in compensation in addition to a refund. The airline must seek to rebook passengers on a flight on its network that departs within nine hours of the original departure time. If it can’t, it must offer to book them on another airline “as soon as possible,” free of charge, according to the passenger rights charter. This report by The Canadian Press was first published on July 7, 2022. Companies in this story: (TSX:AC) Christopher Reynolds, The Canadian Press
