{"id":266298,"date":"2018-06-12T10:31:03","date_gmt":"2018-06-12T14:31:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/issues\/bringing-clarity-to-passenger-compensation-rules\/"},"modified":"2025-10-07T22:07:18","modified_gmt":"2025-10-08T02:07:18","slug":"bringing-clarity-to-passenger-compensation-rules","status":"publish","type":"issues","link":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2018\/06\/bringing-clarity-to-passenger-compensation-rules\/","title":{"rendered":"Bringing clarity to passenger compensation rules"},"content":{"rendered":"

The last time Ottawa decided to make some noise about air passenger rights, in 2000, they brought an ex-NHL referee to a news conference. Bruce Hood, the newly minted air complaints commissioner, pulled out a whistle and blew it<\/a>. Literally.<\/p>\n

If you\u2019re looking for the highlight of Ottawa\u2019s past work to improve the passenger experience, that would be about it. \u00a0Hood packed up his whistle<\/a> and left town within two years, and the initiative fizzled out a few years later<\/a>.<\/p>\n

So, when the Liberal government announced consultations on improving passenger rights<\/a> in 2016, the history on the file was not encouraging. There had been talk of an airline bill of rights for decades in Ottawa, countless private member\u2019s bills that have gone nowhere<\/a>, and many consultations. But they have always foundered, as a succession of governments decided for a couple of reasons to leave the airlines alone.<\/p>\n

Finally, last month, Parliament passed the Transportation Modernization Act<\/a><\/em>, <\/em>which mandates the Canadian Transportation Agency to develop regulations for airlines\u2019 obligations to air passengers. Those CTA consultations<\/a> have just begun, and the process will bear close watching.<\/p>\n

Governments have long been leery of slapping excess regulation on a business that frequently seems to be flirting with the line between profit and loss. One just has to recall the litany of bankruptcies among US, European and Asian carriers. Most countries, Canada included, have also believed in the importance of maintaining at least one flag carrier, an airline to represent the country in other markets.<\/p>\n

The resulting policy stance has meant the Canadian mainline carriers \u2013 the ones that serve all the less profitable routes that connect the country \u2013 are treated a little like the banks. That means either being expected to maintain a strong network, even during adverse economic conditions, or being protected to the point where competition on price and service suffers.<\/p>\n

But it must be said that airlines do a good job, most of the time. There are very few businesses that have as many direct dealings with customers \u2013 each one a potential opportunity to fumble a reservation, lose a bag, oversell a flight or spill a drink. Given the multiple possibilities of screwing up, it\u2019s a miracle \u2500 and a tribute to good systems \u2500 that most of us get where we\u2019re going when we fly, most of the time.<\/p>\n

And yet, bad things do happen. And when they do, it\u2019s been quite unclear what the average person\u2019s rights are or how to claim them. Under the existing rules, airlines have to file tariffs with the government \u2013 legal documents that describe their services, with some sections that deal with passenger compensation rules. However, the airlines are under no obligation to make these documents readily available to passengers and no outside body got to sit in judgment of their overall fairness.<\/p>\n

When we at the CAA went hunting for one airline\u2019s tariff last year, we eventually found it, buried many layers down on their website, under an obscure heading. It was a PDF of what looked to be a photocopy of a legal document many, many pages long.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

When we at the CAA went hunting for one airline\u2019s tariff, we eventually found it in 2016, buried many layers down on their website, under an obscure heading. It was a PDF of what looked to be a photocopy of a legal document. It was many, many pages long, blurry and in small type. Good luck retrieving that quickly at the airport counter after a cancelled flight. How is a traveller supposed to know if what they\u2019re being offered by the agent at the counter is fair, or if there is room to bargain?<\/p>\n

The provisions included in the<\/a> new Act are a good start at addressing this imbalance between passengers and airlines. Bumping, lengthy tarmac waits, flight delays and cancellations will all be covered. The Act, however, leaves it to the Canadian Transportation Agency through its consultations to fill in the all-important details like how much compensation should be disbursed and under exactly what conditions.<\/p>\n

Here are some of the things the CAA will be advocating for:<\/p>\n