I would have been eligible for so many refunds in the past if this rule had been in place earlier 🥲
I can’t count the number of times l have had to wait 30 effing days to get my refund for a cancelled work flight that I paid for and couldn’t get reimbursed for. Sometimes I needed it for bills, it sucked.
Welcome change indeed.
Sounds like your employer sucks ass.
Same, fucking delta offered my us $90 refund per ticket for a $400 flight that was cancelled…and then wanted us to rebook it for the next week…i just wanted my damn money back.
They’ll just put their prices up to cover this wont they?
They were going to do that anyways.
These are difficult times
Not unprecedented?
New Normal
Yes. It’s still the right thing to do.
Cheaper nonrefundable tickets should be banned also.Prices raised to match the service they should have been providing is reasonable. Cheap tickets were being subsidized by not giving refunds…
Prices raised across the board by a dollar or something? Good insurance policy for “refundable” fares.
(Obviously not in the “cancel for any reason” sense, that’s wayyy more.)
The complete rules are here: https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/refundsfinalruleapril2024
The meat of it is the table on pages 9-14 and mostly comprehensible.
Worth noting:
- A change to your flight number is always a “cancellation” and you may choose to accept a refund
- The expectation is most people would not, for the same reason most don’t cancel their refundable tickets - they want to go on the flight
- There are no carve outs for weather, etc.
- I am really glad to see this because airlines could claim “weather” for connecting flights, so any weather anywhere meant they could delay your flight
Yeah, the weather note is huge. Historically, airlines would just cite “weather” because there was a single cloud in the sky halfway to the destination. Because if a cancellation was weather related, they didn’t have to pay out.
I basically see this as the government going “look, we tried to be nice and give you some leeway. But you abused that by citing weather for every single cancellation. So now you’re on a tight leash and can’t even cite it when it’s valid.”
Oh man this is that high fucking quality type of discussion I’m here for, direct link, exact quote , clearly separated but very based opinion
Have an upvote king
Yes but other side of that coin:
This might cause airlines to push pilots to fly anyway when the weather is outright dangerous to fly. I’m waiting for the first news article about an airplane that took off straight into a thunderstorm, got caught in a down draft and crashed, killing everyone.
Don’t underestimate the inventive ways companies can cheat to save money
- A change to your flight number is always a “cancellation” and you may choose to accept a refund
How about a discount for crossing their fingers and loading us up on a Boeing?
If it’s Boeing, I ain’t goin’!
My problem is not the cash back for my ticket, it’s everything I lose when I rebook last second afterwards.
I rarely fly but last time I did, it was the most chaotic mess I’ve ever seen. None of the airline employees knew what was going on when they canceled my layover flight 5 minutes before boarding. The way it was handled was a joke and downright insulting.
I fly fairly often, and I feel the opposite. Airports are chaotic hell, yes, but there’s always someone who knows what’s going on. Usually the check-in desk is the place to ask. I mostly fly Korean Air and Air Canada, though.
Good. So that abolishes the stupid insurance upsell bullshit.
No, that doesn’t end until idiots stop agreeing to it when offered…which won’t happen any time soon.
But 168 of my fellow passengers have protected their flights today!
It probably would have been worth specifying this is for the USA, since not everyone lives in the USA.
Feels like the flight industry hasn’t recovered since COVID. This is a welcome change however
They haven’t lowered prices, that’s for sure.
Very interesting that it didn’t in the US, because it did in the EU.
They’ll just pass the savings on to you.
Even if demand was perfectly inelastic and the burden was paid entirely by the consumer… I’d still rather get what I paid for than leave it up to chance.
Does this rule set apply towards diversions? Because under the current rule set an airline can divert a plane to an airport several hours away from your intended destination and they only have to give you a connection at some point in time.
Yes it would apply:
Canceled or significantly changed flights: Passengers will be entitled to a refund if their flight is canceled or significantly changed, and they do not accept alternative transportation or travel credits offered. For the first time, the rule defines “significant change.” Significant changes to a flight include departure or arrival times that are more than 3 hours domestically and 6 hours internationally; departures or arrivals from a different airport; increases in the number of connections; instances where passengers are downgraded to a lower class of service; or connections at different airports or flights on different planes that are less accessible or accommodating to a person with a disability.
That’s amazing to hear! I’ve personally have been left stranded by American when they diverted our flight to a regional airport that was six hours and two mountain passes away from our intended destination due to a blizzard and we were only offered a flight that took off three days later. We weren’t offered any hotel or food vouchers and when I tried to get a refund American only offered $50 in miles because “some service was provided”…
That seems like it would fall under the delayed category.
On the plus side, the US is catching up to the rest of the world. But as happened in the EU when they did the same thing, prices did go up. Not only to cover these expenses, but limiting routes and canceling city pairs because the liability is too high.
For a real world example, one such city pair I fly between often is generally an hour or so delayed every time. The air space is near 100% capacity so you can’t just squeeze in an extra takeoff and landing. The winds are often hurricane level from many directions. Snow in May and June and August happens. Daily hail storms. Daily downpours and thunderstorms. This is normal for a mountainous town. There are 20 flights a day, but they are all whenever and all delayed. Sometimes when the weather clears in the afternoon, the 1pm, 2pm, and 3pm flights all leave at the same time because it’s a break.
This compensation rule makes that flight impossible. In the future my bet is there will be 3 scheduled flights a day when there won’t be weather issues as likely. Huge number of seats dropped. Ticket prices way up. This will happen everywhere just like it did in Europe.
Someone somewhere has to pay for your constant complaining. And it won’t be the airlines themselves. It will be you with ticket prices.
It would be good if we could find a way to distinguish between weather or airspace delays vs airline operation delays… Like we currently do with existing rules.
Do you have economic data to show that the EU rules caused, or likely caused, the price increases?
Yes you can find many articles about EU261.
But the airlines have adapted by now. Many of the short haul routes became unprofitable because 1 delay worth of compensation was almost 300% total profit for that flight. Meaning if you had 1 delay, you had to fly 3 more planes to just break even. Many routes were adjusted to trains and buses.
Also because of the timeline, when you fly a European carrier you’ll notice they just cancel the entire flight right before 24hrs notice period if they think there’ll be issues. Anyone who flies often knows flying through Europe with European carriers is a crapshoot for multiday delays. Flying through the US is a crapshoot for multi hour to multiday delays.
And yes I fly around the world 10x times in a slow year. I’m very much aware of how the routes, carriers, and laws work globally. It’s easy to see the differences after decades of being engulfed in it.
Any evidence that this actually happened in Europe?
They don’t have any because it’s not true
Yes you can looking many research articles and papers written about EU261
Google Scholared it. Nothing on the first page. Link or it didn’t happen.
Super super interesting. Read this anywhere I could check out or more general knowledge you’ve picked up?
Not quite sure what you’re asking but EU261 is the European regulation. You can find lots of articles about it and research papers. This has been around longer than some current pilots have been alive.
https://www.eraa.org/sites/default/files/era_eu261_study_brochure_final_version_26sep.pdf
One such example. Written by a airline group, so heavily biased. But if you take some time to google, you’ll see the data.
Maybe they should build some trains that don’t rely on good weather.
I agree. But usually you build the infrastructure replacement before exploding the current solution.
That would require planning ahead. We don’t think about the future.
I wonder if there’s not some caveat that either is in the rule or that can be added to select flights like this flight from the depths of frozen hell to which you’re referring. I fly out of Newark Airport, and shits generally just fine, but you can still see delays an cancellations due to weather. I’ve flown many times out of Denver and have had weather cancellations when there’s nothing but blue skies.
I think it’d be totally fair to be able to select routes, like this one, and add some sort of caveat saying hey, this route is notorious for being difficult, and so we don’t have airlines forcing flights up and down for the sake of avoiding having to refund people, and at the risk of personal safety, this route may have loosened conditions or whatever.
As for losing flights in general, I think it’s honestly for the best. Will flying get more expensive? Yep, and it sucks. Might it force the airline industry in general to adapt somehow? I certainly hope so. The standards for flying in the US have truly bottomed out.
And it’s a bit tangential, but if this forces some airlines into failure, I hope we just let them fail, no repeats on bailout bullshit.
As of now, there’s no exception for that except if it is an act of god type event like a named storm. Hurricane, no payout. Denver random Thursday blizzard? Payout.
The US has no high speed rail, flying is the only way around.
