Senate Inquiry on Pay on delay

[openseat]

Mr Svesson of Qantas told the Senate that he had experienced the scheme as a consumer when living in Europe for three years, and said: “I have nothing good to say about it.”

What a joke and misinformation!

 

[SeatBackForward]

I have nothing good to say about it

He could've at least said it as "Qantas have nothing good to say about it". As a consumer, what would be bad about it? Sure if an airline bakes it into the price, all it takes is for one airline to figure out how to be more efficient and not have delays.

As it stands, the QF network is so tightly strung up that even one aircraft out of action causes the whole system to reverberate with delays.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Perhaps he has in mind all the airlines playing hardball and making it difficult for consumers to claim?

 

[Mattg]

Perhaps he has in mind all the airlines playing hardball and making it difficult for consumers to claim?

I have experienced this part of EU261. But overall, the scheme forces airlines to sell realistic schedules and try to recover faster from any delays. I've had far, far fewer delays and cancellations over many years of flying in Europe than I have in Australia.

 

[jase05]

All for some sort of compensation setup but I also have to be realistic in that the airlines will have to recover costs and these should and will be passed on to customers.

 

[CMA222]

All for some sort of compensation setup but I also have to be realistic in that the airlines will have to recover costs and these should and will be passed on to customers.

QF operate in or from locations that are already subject to UK/EU 261 and in countries such as Philippines and Canada that have compulsory requirements to protect pax when flights are delayed or cancelled. They do not make a big deal about their fares being inflated because of the compensation scheme operating in those countries nor do they promote the rights that pax have. They tolerate those compensation systems but want to stop their core market having the same or similar rights. The "Spirit of (corporate) Australia" - screw the customers and make them suffer when it suits QF to delay or cancel flights.

 

[jase05]

QF operate in or from locations that are already subject to UK/EU 261 and in countries such as Philippines and Canada that have compulsory requirements to protect pax when flights are delayed or cancelled. They do not make a big deal about their fares being inflated because of the compensation scheme operating in those countries nor do they promote the rights that pax have. They tolerate those compensation systems but want to stop their core market having the same or similar rights. The "Spirit of (corporate) Australia" - screw the customers and make them suffer when it suits QF to delay or cancel flights.

Companies exist to make money and I’d be absolutely certain that the money that QF is fined each year is 100% passed on to customers already as it should be

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Companies exist to make money and I’d be absolutely certain that the money that QF is fined each year is 100% passed on to customers already as it should be

Perhaps, but it’s about spreading the cost.

Travel insurance for an individual starts at minimum $20 or more for each flight. Airlines passing on the cost of a general compensation scheme might cost the individual passenger $1 per flight.

Competition keeps the airfares in check. Ryanair, Easyjet and Wizzair are all examples of this… their fares haven’t exploded because of EU261. The increase in cost is marginal when spread.