How an EU261 law might work in Australia - case study of QF1974 on 28 August '24

[openseat]

This flight is due to depart at 11:25 from ADL to CBR. As the morning rolled along I recevied a number of updates of pushing back the flight departure, first to 11:40, then 12:50 (advised at 11:45); then 13:25 (also advised at 11:45); then 13:40 (also advised at 11:45); then two more updates of the 13:40 departure. Our actual departure was at 13:44 and arrival into Canberra at 15:27 (thanks to a tail wind), though we ended up waiting for 10 mins for a gate, arriving at the gate at 15:40.

As a "group 1" under EU261, flight passengers would be entitled to a meal voucher as well as a reason for the delay. While passengers were told of a "technical difficulty" at the gate at 11:15, there was no further update until a change in gate and the boarding of a new aircraft at around 12:45. It was possible at about 13:00 to get a refund from the app, but the paucity of flights between ADL and CBR made this unrealistic. Speaking with other passengers, there was no offer of any food vouchers.

EU261 also provides for compensation for delays over €250 (AUD407) if the passenger's actual arrival time exceeds the scheduled arrival of their originally booked flights, by two hours for type 1 flights.

I think this later compensation charge would have provided the impetus for Qantas to move us to a different plane sooner than the two hour delay.

And isn't that the point of a compensation scheme like EU261 - it provides a positive incentive for airlines to solve problems.

 

[RooFlyer]

And isn't that the point of a compensation scheme like EU261 - it provides a positive incentive for airlines to solve problems.

Exactly - it should be regarded as a carrot for the investment by airlines to improve their reliability, not always a stick to belt them when something happens.

 

[moa999]

Albeit it can also be a negative.. rather than one flight being delayed, you might end up with multiple flights being delayed as aircraft are switched continuously to minimise payments, crew possibly out of position which could even have multi-day impacts.

And ultimately average fares will increase to fund any ultimate payments.

 

[muppet]

…
And ultimately average fares will increase to fund any ultimate payments.

I dunno … QF pretty much controls the market. If it could charge more it would right now, it wouldn’t wait until its costs increased.

 

[Cloud9]

The real issue here, IMHO, is that we have no politicians with any proper backbone, nor decent ethics, in this country at any scale that would be willing to push any proper legislation in the interests of the consumer through.

(As an attempt at defence against mods/reports complaining about this being political) Please note: this is an extremely general comment which aligns to no single side of the aisle - or the crossbench - it is a simple reflection on the fact that over many years, this country has failed to bring in any proper, definitive, sensible legislation in defence of the rights and compensation for its air travellers.

 

[Kerrodt]

Albeit it can also be a negative.. rather than one flight being delayed, you might end up with multiple flights being delayed as aircraft are switched continuously to minimise payments, crew possibly out of position which could even have multi-day impacts.

And ultimately average fares will increase to fund any ultimate payments.

Where is the hard evidence from the EU that supports the claims you make here?

I’m not sure the claim that you make in your first paragraph actually plays out to any large degree that would be subject to a valid claim.

EasyJet still seem to be going ok selling airfares for GBP20. So all price points are accessible in the market despite EU261.

 

[CaptJCool]

 

[torks]

Where is the hard evidence from the EU that supports the claims you make here?

I’m not sure the claim that you make in your first paragraph actually plays out to any large degree that would be subject to a valid claim.

EasyJet still seem to be going ok selling airfares for GBP20. So all price points are accessible in the market despite EU261.

A seat for £20 which comes with a bag to go under the seat in front. If you want a bag to go in the overhead bins another £20, a checked bag you ask, that'll be £30.
The cheap airfare grabs the headline, but it's the add ons which drive the price up.

 

[Mattg]

And ultimately average fares will increase to fund any ultimate payments.

...ultimate payments which go directly back to the customers who have been inconvenienced the most by the airlines.

I think of EU261 as a bit like a compulsory insurance policy. In any case, airlines only need to pay out if they significantly inconvenience passengers for reasons within their control. Perhaps with a bit of a financial incentive, they would inconvenience fewer passengers. Which is exactly what we've seen in Europe.

 

[Mwenenzi]

Albeit it can also be a negative.. rather than one flight being delayed, you might end up with multiple flights being delayed as aircraft are switched continuously to minimise payments, crew possibly out of position which could even have multi-day impacts.

And ultimately average fares will increase to fund any ultimate payments.

Where is the hard evidence from the EU that supports the claims you make here?

I’m not sure the claim that you make in your first paragraph actually plays out to any large degree that would be subject to a valid claim.

EasyJet still seem to be going ok selling airfares for GBP20. So all price points are accessible in the market despite EU261.

On FT are reports of EU LCC point to point airlines having multiple rolling delays. Very different with through ticketing airlines, that can feed passengers to mid-long haul fights. Passenger delays (compensation, reimbursement & duty of care) costs would soon add up.
EU to AU is small. Many EU flights are short distance compared to AU

AU weather is tame compared to USA and EU. We get little delays due to weather. Weather delays far more common in USA. Very extreme weather is EU261 extraordinary event, but normal bad weather is not.

From flights I look at, few AU flights would trigger EC261 due to delay (distance ~ time)

Air Passengers Rights Regulation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Flight types
The requirements for an entitlement to compensation and the specific amount owed depend on the length of a flight, whereas the relevant distance is determined according to the great circle method. The Regulation differentiates between three types of flights:

1. Flights of less than 1,500 km (930 mi) in distance;
2. Flights within the EU of greater than 1,500 km (930 mi) in distance, or any other flight of greater than 1,500 km (930 mi) but less than 3,500 km (2,200 mi) in distance;
3. Flights not within the EU of greater than 3,500 km (2,200 mi) in distance.

Note: In the rest of this article, types 1, 2 and 3 are used to refer to the above thresholds.

Delays
Passengers are entitled to refreshments and communication if the expected delay of the arrival exceeds:[11][12]

• two hours, in the case of a type 1 flight,
• three hours, in the case of a type 2 flight, or
• four hours, in the case of a type 3 flight.

<snip>

 

[p--and--t]

It's all very well to talk about the golden triangle and even transcon and for the major / established players.

How would a start-up up cope with only 2 flights per day on a route and on disruption end up having to shove there miniscle market share back to the majors ultimately bankrupting them.

Not sure how any of these schemes would work for sectors where there are 3 flights per week to some obscure outback place and there is only one operator who has a plane stuck somewhere.

 

[Mwenenzi]

It's all very well to talk about the golden triangle and even transcon and for the major / established players.

How would a start-up up cope with only 2 flights per day on a route and on disruption end up having to shove there miniscle market share back to the majors ultimately bankrupting them.

Not sure how any of these schemes would work for sectors where there are 3 flights per week to some obscure outback place and there is only one operator who has a plane stuck somewhere.

Limit AU EC261 regulation to aircraft over X seats and/or multi engine aircraft. Then small (remote outback) operators would be exempt. That would capture some outback routes.
For routes where a few flights a week those pax should not be abandoned: AU EC261 to apply
Compared to EU AU does have some very thin low frequency routes, due to population density. And some small airlines, some operating single engine aircraft.

However sadly the govt has decided no EU261 type legislation for Australia.

 

[Kerrodt]

It's all very well to talk about the golden triangle and even transcon and for the major / established players.

How would a start-up up cope with only 2 flights per day on a route and on disruption end up having to shove there miniscle market share back to the majors ultimately bankrupting them.

Not sure how any of these schemes would work for sectors where there are 3 flights per week to some obscure outback place and there is only one operator who has a plane stuck somewhere.

So (a) what should happen, and (b) what does happen to the passengers now in the situation I have highlighted above? Just leave the passengers to sleep in the terminal for a few days?

Yes it would make it a lot tougher for a startup, but again, what do you want to happen to the passengers in the current market situation when this happens today?

There can easily be carve outs built into the model to provide fair exceptions in situations where access/services to remote areas are concerned.

This entire passengers rights model works in other markets and works well. People who say it can’t/won’t/shouldn’t work in the Australian market are delulu.

 

[p--and--t]

So (a) what should happen, and (b) what does happen to the passengers now in the situation I have highlighted above? Just leave the passengers to sleep in the terminal for a few days?

Yes it would make it a lot tougher for a startup, but again, what do you want to happen to the passengers in the current market situation when this happens today?

There can easily be carve outs built into the model to provide fair exceptions in situations where access/services to remote areas are concerned.

This entire passengers rights model works in other markets and works well. People who say it can’t/won’t/shouldn’t work in the Australian market are delulu.

Not saying we can't make it work, but for some routes a compensation payment for a 3hrs delay would a severe penalty on a small operator. Whatever scheme that is introduced (and we need one) would be significantly different to EU261. For the AU environment there would need to be a lot of carve-outs, tailoring and would not look like EU261

 

[jb747]

As a "group 1" under EU261, flight passengers would be entitled to a meal voucher as well as a reason for the delay. While passengers were told of a "technical difficulty" at the gate at 11:15, there was no further update until a change in gate and the boarding of a new aircraft at around 12:45.

And how many would actually have any understanding at all of these "reasons".

 

[Mattg]

Not saying we can't make it work, but for some routes a compensation payment for a 3hrs delay would a severe penalty on a small operator. Whatever scheme that is introduced (and we need one) would be significantly different to EU261. For the AU environment there would need to be a lot of carve-outs, tailoring and would not look like EU261

The Canadian scheme mandates smaller compensation amounts for smaller carriers.