Do passengers have a right to know why their flight has been cancelled?

[Mattg]

I was flying on QantasLink from Sydney to Canberra recently and my flight was cancelled at the last minute, with all passengers being re-booked onto the next flight around 30 minutes later. This was an inconvenience but not a big issue - I'm used to the odd flight cancellation from time to time. When I went to the service desk to get a new boarding pass, I asked the man if he knew why the flight had been cancelled, and he told me quite abruptly "We don't just give out reasons for cancellations."

In my experience an airline will usually inform its passengers why a flight has been cancelled, e.g. bad weather, a problem with the aircraft etc. so it surprised me somewhat that this particular Qantas staff member refused to inform me why I was being inconvenienced by them cancelling my flight.

What do others think? Was my question a reasonable one, or do airlines have a right to not disclose these kind of things?

(FWIW I am 90% certain that they cancelled the flight because they hadn't sold many seats on it. Even with all the passengers from the cancelled flight being put on the next service, the plane was still less than half full.)

 

[Himeno]

Yes, pax should be told why their flight was cancelled. The real reason why, not just something the agent made up. In some cases, knowing the actual reason is quite important (eg, EU261/2004).

 

[Hvr]

I don't see why they can't advise you of the reason for a cancellation but I am sure if there is then some of the air line personnel who post here will chime in.

As for cancelling a flight because of lack of sales I wonder if that really happens at the last minute given that a plane still has to get to a destination and be ready for its next flight.

 

[RooFlyer]

I think your question was quite reasonable, and the reply sounding very defensive. 'Gone tech', 'bad weather' all reasonable reasons and reasonably accepted. Not enough sales seems right, but as hvr says, they still they to re-position the aircraft .... EXCEPT if the plane hadn't arrived yet. Was it at the gate, or not yet arrived?

 

[ozbeachbabe]

That seems an unusual thing for an airline person to say because it's your flight that they have cancelled so you have every right to know.

I think it's worse if people aren't told because they will jump to conclusions themselves then tell a few people & suddenly some rumour becomes gospel.

Lying about the reason why is stupid because people aren't silly & they'll find out the truth anyway so better to hear it straight up from the airline. Not all passengers will be overjoyed as the famous saying by Abraham Lincoln goes "you can please some of the people some of the time......but you can't please all of the people all of the time".

Truth is stranger than fiction most of the time so quite often the legitimate reason is going to be far more interesting than any excuse someone thinks up.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

No reason why you shouldn't be told. You have a contract with the airline. They have broken that contract. You have the right to know why.

 

[Mattg]

I think your question was quite reasonable, and the reply sounding very defensive. 'Gone tech', 'bad weather' all reasonable reasons and reasonably accepted. Not enough sales seems right, but as hvr says, they still they to re-position the aircraft .... EXCEPT if the plane hadn't arrived yet. Was it at the gate, or not yet arrived?

The aircraft had already arrived and was sitting at the gate when they cancelled it. It was the last Dash 8 flight for the day to CBR (with the flight we were put onto being the final 737 flight for the day). The aircraft would have almost certainly had to position to CBR for overnight maintenance and to operate out of there the next morning and in fact, I am almost sure I saw the same aircraft (I made a note of the registration) in CBR when we finally arrived.

 

[Mattg]

That seems an unusual thing for an airline person to say because it's your flight that they have cancelled so you have every right to know.

I think it's worse if people aren't told because they will jump to conclusions themselves then tell a few people & suddenly some rumour becomes gospel.

Lying about the reason why is stupid because people aren't silly & they'll find out the truth anyway so better to hear it straight up from the airline. Not all passengers will be overjoyed as the famous saying by Abraham Lincoln goes "you can please some of the people some of the time......but you can't please all of the people all of the time".

Truth is stranger than fiction most of the time so quite often the legitimate reason is going to be far more interesting than any excuse someone thinks up.

You're exactly right, I would rather be told the reason for the cancellation, even if it is just because they didn't want to fly the plane half empty, rather than be left in the dark, and as you've explained about people jumping to conclusions (which I'll admit I did myself in this situation) it would seems it would be in the airline's interests too.

 

[basso]

It could also come down to how much the person answering the question know. In many cases . they could just say 'due to operational requirements', but then there would be the person that wants to drill down into the reasons why, and i've long suspected that a staf member may not know without looking into it in a bot of detail. I know some don't like being told a flight was delayed due to a late incoming aircraft. Problem is, that the delay may have happened four or five sectors previously. So I think. that people don't need a detailed answer, but the staff member probably should have offered a more conciliatory answer.

 

[Pleb Status]

Teams of lawyers from all airlines (and not pointing the finger just at QF here) have spent years trying to ensure that customers 'rights' are minimised where possible (and airlines would argue we still have too many 'rights'). I would like to see someone (with a lot of cash to burn) challenge the 'conditions of carriage' as I do not see how they can form a fair Contract.

On topic, most of the high frequency service cancellations (BNE/SYD/MEL triangle etc) are for low loads but they are not going to say that......

 

[Grooba]

On topic, most of the high frequency service cancellations (BNE/SYD/MEL triangle etc) are for low loads but they are not going to say that......

Exactly what I'd have thought. You'll be told when it suits the airline (ie: weather) but I can't possibly see them saying "Yea we cancelled VA123 because we didn't sell enough seats" even though it might be pretty clear this is the reason.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Teams of lawyers from all airlines (and not pointing the finger just at QF here) have spent years trying to ensure that customers 'rights' are minimised where possible (and airlines would argue we still have too many 'rights'). I would like to see someone (with a lot of cash to burn) challenge the 'conditions of carriage' as I do not see how they can form a fair Contract.

On topic, most of the high frequency service cancellations (BNE/SYD/MEL triangle etc) are for low loads but they are not going to say that......

The EU and DOT have tackled the conditions of carriage to some extent by introducing strict consumer laws... saves lengthy court battles and keeps airlines in check.

The problem I have qith Qantas lately is that they are making so many changes, for pure commercial gain, and seemingly try and hide behind their charter or terms and conditions to minimise their losses.

Let's look at America... if an airline cancels your flight there - or even if weather is to blame, they pretty much bust their gut to get you to your destination - on any airline available. My UA ticket was disrupted and they offered me a full revenue fare on AA or BA (transatlantic).

What does Qantas do? It tells you they will only accommodate you on the next Qantas service, or that you can get a full refund. The wording of their charter makes it sound like they (Qantas) are doing something really special by offering you a full refund. The airline has taken your money. They cancel a service for pure commercial gain. Keep your money. But won't part with that money to put you on another carrier. How does that work?

When in fact they are required by law to give you a refund, and they know perfectly well that a last minute cancellation and refund (6 weeks later or whatever it is) is of absolutely no use to someone stuck at HKG airport wanting a one-way home.

Their customer charter says they won't compensate for luggage, delayed by Qantas, unless it has been delayed by 24 hours. The airline representative doesn't want to discuss why there is such a policy. For an action caused by Qantas.

What we need in Australia is tougher consumer protection law. And Qantas is currently providing a lot of ammunition in support of that.

 

[N860CR]

The cancelation issue in Australia really needs to be looked into and regulated. I had an incident years ago where Qantas cancelled a flight and stranded me overnight and I had to pay to travel myself on VA. The response from customer care just said how "happy they were to see I was offered a refund". Just not good enough.

 

[Happy Dude]

If you intend to make a claim on travel insurance you will need to provide documentation from the airline stating the reason/s for the claim. For example, some TI policies exclude mechanical breakdown of aircraft from their liability (looking at you, 1cover).

So, yes, you have every right to know.

Bit surprised at the airline's response in the OP's example TBH.

 

[mannej]

If you intend to make a claim on travel insurance you will need to provide documentation from the airline stating the reason/s for the claim. For example, some TI policies exclude mechanical breakdown of aircraft from their liability (looking at you, 1cover)..

QBE were the same.

 

[Boris spatsky]

There are a plethora of reasons why a flight may be cancelled, and the specific issue may not necessarily filter down to the person at the coal face in the terminal. Therefore it makes sense that if they don't know details, they would say so. I think this is standard for most airlines. Speculation causes more issues than it is worth.

Ops issues can have a myriad of flow on effects - delays in the morning can lead to aircraft not being in the right place at the right time in the afternoon to operate a sector - it can be easier to cancel a sector to ensure that the subsequent sectors can all be flown and the aircraft can overnight where planned so that there is no flow on effect to the next day.

The only people with all the info is the ops controller who has visibility of the entire bigger picture. Pilots, FAs and ground staff generally only have a very localised picture if what is going on.

I do find it bemusing when passengers ask me how i am going to guarantee their connections at other ports. I generally only have the same info as they do...

 

[MEL_Traveller]

In Europe there is some system that records reasons for flight delays... companies specialising in claiming EU261 compensation have access to it and can process claims if the airline is not forthcoming.

I guess there is potential for something like that here in Australia if the need ever arises. although with the frequency of operations on many truck routes resulting delays are generally not too bad (unless you're on someone like tiger).

Small delays or cancellations might seem insignificant to airlines when it comes to informing or being civil to passengers (you know,the ones who keep you in business)... but can have significant impacts on passengers. Arriving an hour or two late can mean the difference between the last public transport for the night and having to catch a taxi, or extra hours on very expensive airport parking, or disrupting plans for people coming to pick you up. Or even something as simple as the difference between being on a meal and non-meal flight (and having to pay expensive airport prices for food).

It would be fantastic if you arrived at your gate and the airline said 'there is a delay, it's our fault, here's a voucher for some food and a phone card'.

 

[JohnK]

Passengers have every right to know why their flight has been cancelled or delayed.

I suspect airlines do cancel flights at the last minute due to poor loads.

 

[drron]

I don't believe the public has an absolute right to know the reasons for cancellations.However I do believe the airline would benefit by keeping the customers in the loop especially if the reasons for the cancellation(and/or delay) is not for reasons that are commercially sensitive or would impinge on some persons right to privacy.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I don't believe the public has an absolute right to know the reasons for cancellations.However I do believe the airline would benefit by keeping the customers in the loop especially if the reasons for the cancellation(and/or delay) is not for reasons that are commercially sensitive or would impinge on some persons right to privacy.

I'm struggling to think of a situation where either of those factors would come in to play.

If a 'commercially sensitive' reason is low loadings - the passenger has a right to know because they should be more likely to receive compensation than if it was because of weather or ATC.

Right to privacy? Not sure of an example of that?