In theory, our Air Travelers Charter provides compensation for delayed, canceled or overbooked flights. In practice, however, this protection is “difficult to enforce,” even the federal agency that handles complaints admits. Changes will soon be made, but let’s not have too many illusions. Airlines would still have to find a way to escape.
So far, we cannot say that the Air Passenger Protection Regulations (RPPA) which came into force in 2019 has stood out for its remarkable effectiveness.
First of all, processing complaints takes an insane amount of time. Imagine, no less than 52,000 files are currently pending. If the employees maintain their rate of 2022, that is to say 217 files analyzed per week, it will take more than four and a half years to pass through the pile… which does not stop growing. The Canadian Transportation Agency (OTC) rather refers to a period of 18 months, but could not explain its calculation to me on Friday.
It therefore became imperative to review the review process to simplify it. This is precisely part of the changes announced last Wednesday. These are expected to come into force in 2024, following two consultation processes this year.
The CTA wants to resolve complaints in two stages and within two months. A 30-day period of mediation would be followed (if necessary) by a judgment within 30 days. If it works, that would be a noticeable improvement.
The other major irritant for travelers is the disarming ease with which an airline can dismiss a claim by interpreting the settlement to its advantage. All he has to do is mention a security concern or a situation beyond his control and that’s it, unless the traveler is determined enough to continue the process before the OTC.
But this eventuality should not make Sunwing, WestJet, Air Canada and the others shudder much. “Only 3% of people who receive a refusal go to the CTA,” said Jacob Charbonneau, co-founder and CEO of Late Flight, a company that helps travelers assert their rights.
According to current regulations1, only the inconvenience of a delay or cancellation occurring in circumstances “entirely attributable to the airline” gives the right to compensation. Going forward, the CTA wants travelers to be compensated for any flight disruptions, unless there are “exceptional circumstances”.
This new way of writing the regulations is supposed to “clarify, simplify and strengthen Canada’s air passenger protection regime”. But everything will rest on the definition of an “exceptional circumstance”, on what this expression encompasses. Do you see the catch?
The CTA has been careful to list in its consultation document a list of examples, among which are the usual “safety risks”, “weather conditions”, closure of airspace or airport, as well as a labor dispute.
All of this is discussed. Some, like Bloc Québécois MP Xavier Barsalou-Duval, believe that compensation should be more systematic2. “It must be clear: a canceled flight, well people are compensated. If I order a pizza and they don’t deliver it to me, whether it’s because of a snowstorm or whether it’s because the guy, he didn’t come in to work that morning, they are going to reimburse me for the pizza. »
It is important to find the right balance point. A company cannot be held responsible for everything, but passenger protection must be improved to gain credibility.
For the moment, the examples provided give carriers too much leeway, judges lawyer Sylvie De Bellefeuille, who is closely interested in this question at Option consommateurs. This is also the opinion of the director of the McGill aviation management program, John Gradek, for whom the most disappointing exception is this: “problems related to the operation of the airport”. For this expert, it is a “collect-all” that is much “too vague”.
With the new regulations, they are trying to minimize the excuses the airlines used to use. But they give them the possibility of inventing others.
John Gradek, Director of McGill’s Aviation Management Program
However, it would be simple to take over the full text of the European Charter for Consumer Protection, which has worked very well for 20 years…
Sylvie De Bellefeuille and Jacob Charbonneau also deplore the decline in transparency, because the decisions of the OTC will be confidential. A few main lines will however be published online to help passengers on the same problematic flight, we promise.
What is very interesting, however, is that each complaint received by the CTA will turn into an invoice for the airline. The amount has not yet been determined, but hope that it is high enough to put an end to the almost systematic refusals of compensation. This novelty alone could have a significant impact on consumer protection. Hat !
Another apparently interesting point: the burden of proof is reversed. It will be up to the carrier – and no longer its customer – to demonstrate what caused the disruption. It was time for this anomaly to be corrected. But Sylvie De Bellefeuille remains cautious. “My concern is that the carrier sends a 50-page mechanical report that no one will understand. How, then, to contest the argument provided?
As for the amounts provided for compensation, no increase is proposed.
Planned allowances (major airlines)
$400: three to six hours late
$700: six to nine hours late
$1,000: delay of nine hours or more
It is in use, once again, that we will see what works and what is wrong. To reduce the risk of worries upstream, we can always prefer carriers that stand out for their low complaint ratio.
