Canada’s New Air Passenger Protections

Last December I wrote about how the Canadian Transportation Agency was working on putting a new passenger bill of rights into law. This is something I’m a fan of. It’s something that the US also desperately needs, given the complete lack of rights that passengers have in the event of cancelations and delays.

Canada’s new air passenger bill of rights

This has been debated extensively over the past several months, and today the final details of the new regulations have officially been announced. These new rights will be introduced in two phases, on July 15 and December 15, 2019.

As Canada’s Transport Minister, Marc Garneau, describes these changes:

“Our goal was to provide a world-leading approach to air passenger rights that would be predictable and fair for passengers while ensuring our air carriers remain strong and competitive.

After a long and thorough consultation process, I am proud to say these new regulations achieve that balance and will give air travellers the rights and treatment they pay for and deserve.”

These new regulations apply to all flights that are to, from, or within Canada, including those simply connecting there.

It’s also interesting to note that many of the compensation structures are different for “large airlines” and “small airlines,” with large airlines being those that have carried more than two million people in the past two years.

So, what should we expect from these new passenger rights? While you can check the full details here, I wanted to focus on the denied boarding compensation and delay compensation, since those are the most interesting to me:

Denied boarding compensation

Starting July 15, 2019, passengers will be entitled to the following compensation in the event of denied boarding:

  • $900, if the arrival of the passenger’s flight at the destination that is indicated on the original ticket is delayed by less than six hours
  • $1,800, if the arrival of the passenger’s flight at the destination that is indicated on the original ticket is delayed by six hours or more, but less than nine hours
  • $2,400, if the arrival of the passenger’s flight at the destination that is indicated on the original ticket is delayed by nine hours or more

Delay compensation

Starting December 15, 2019, passengers will be entitled to compensation if their flight is delayed.

In the case of large carriers, the following will apply:

  • $400, if the arrival of the passenger’s flight at the destination that is indicated on the original ticket is delayed by three hours or more, but less than six hours
  • $700, if the arrival of the passenger’s flight at the destination that is indicated on the original ticket is delayed by six hours or more, but less than nine hours
  • $1,000, if the arrival of the passenger’s flight at the destination that is indicated on the original ticket is delayed by nine hours or more

In the case of small carriers, the following will apply:

  • $125, if the arrival of the passenger’s flight at the destination that is indicated on the original ticket is delayed by three hours or more, but less than six hours
  • $250, if the arrival of the passenger’s flight at the destination that is indicated on the original ticket is delayed by six hours or more, but less than nine hours
  • $500, if the arrival of the passenger’s flight at the destination that is indicated on the original ticket is delayed by nine hours or more

While I think it’s fair that big carriers are on the hook for more than small carriers, frankly I’m surprised by just how big the difference is.

One significant difference between the Canadian rules and those you’d find in Europe (under EU261) is that airlines don’t have to pay delay compensation in the event of mechanical delays.

There’s a provision that compensation doesn’t have to be paid when it’s “required for safety purposes,” which includes “safety decisions made within the authority of the pilot of the aircraft or any decision made in accordance with a safety management system.”

In those situations airlines will have a duty of care, but won’t actually be required to provide compensation.

I see where they’re coming from, but I also have concerns about that. In the same way we often see airlines in the US blame “weather” as a scapegoat for a delay, I can also see an airline blaming maintenance.

For example, if a crew is missing for a flight, what’s to stop an airline from claiming there’s a maintenance issue to potentially get out of paying every passenger on the plane $1,000?

Bottom line

I commend Canada for introducing some proper rights for passengers, as that’s something we also desperately need in the US. The compensation amounts are significant, and I also respect their distinction between large and small carriers.

However, I do have concerns about accountability surrounding airlines not paying compensation in the event of mechanical problems, and how that will be enforced.

There’s a lot more to these regulations, so check out the full air passenger protection regulations for all the details.

What do you make of Canada’s new protections for passengers?

Conversations (35)
The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.
Comment as a member

Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.

Type your response here.

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Anyone can comment, and your email address will not be published. Register to save your unique username and earn special OMAAT reputation perks!

  1. Loading comments…
Recent Comments
The latest from the OMAAT community.

The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.

Johannes Guest

@James N you also asked, assumedly rhetorically: "Why would anyone, in regard to any issue, advocate for government involvement?" Government involvement in issues is directly relevant to the creation of procedures and laws.

0
‼ 0
Happypoppeye Guest

I don't like it. Why would an airline have to pay a set amount for a delay? Are there restrictions based on ticket price and why wouldn't these penalties be based on a percentage of ticket price (to a point). It's all about money ...and expect to see a few more issues mechanically now because it is all about money ...it's a small crack, don't worry about it. Putting a dollar value on safety procedures is never a good idea.

0
‼ 0
James N Guest

"Its not remotely a straw man." It's a textbook example of a straw man, also known as the "Fallacy of Extension". I offered the opinion that government shouldn't be dictating procedures and rules to private businesses and you made the leap to an absence of laws and anarchy. Nice work!

0
‼ 0
cargocult Guest

Recall that airline deregulation in the United States (enacted under the Carter administration, not Reagan) is largely responsible for the affordability of flights today. Airlines must be able to profit to stay in business and haul obese North American passengers. Do you expect them to fly indefinitely at a loss? That would be akin to slavery. Reparations for airlines, perhaps?

0
‼ 0
ChrisC Guest

@Erik - no because of the cancellation provision of the regulations (which aren't covered in this article) The idea behind regulations like this is to stop airlines just cancelling flights because of light loads. It can still do that but at an extra cost in having to pay compensation to the passengers affected and it will therefore factor this into the cost of the cancellation. And in the scheme of things it will likely be a relatively small % of flights that this will apply to - just as in the EU where it's something like <2% of flights As for comments on the compensation sometime being disproportionate to the fare paid their having fixed amounts means it is easier to understand on both sides and it treats all passengers the same as they are all equally delayed. And again an airline can avoid this by doing their utmost to not cancel flights in the first place or to reduce the length of the delays so as they don't qualify. Even the likes of Easyjet and Ryanair have stopped moaning about this aspect of EU261.

0
‼ 0

Save posts to read later

Saving posts is a member feature. Become an OMAAT member to build a reading list you can come back to from any device.

Become a member
Meet Ben Schlappig, OMAAT Founder
5,883,136 Miles Traveled

43,914,800 Words Written

47,187 Posts Published