In December 2024, the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) proposed a regulation whereby airlines would be required to pay passengers cash compensation in the event that flights are delayed or canceled, just as we see in the European Union and United Kingdom.
Given how late in the Biden administration this was proposed, it couldn’t actually be made law before the leadership change, as there was first a public commenting period, which put us into the Trump administration. A couple of months ago, the Trump administration made it clear that it didn’t plan to move forward with this proposal, and that has now been finalized. I don’t think this outcome should come as much of a surprise.
In this post:
Biden’s proposal for up to $775 flight delay compensation
For some background, in December 2024, the DOT under the Biden administration announced its plan to protect passengers who are stranded by airline disruptions.
This involved airlines being required to pay passengers cash compensation, rebook them for free on the next available flight, and cover meals, overnight lodging, and related transportation expenses, when a disruption is airline caused, such as a mechanical issue or an IT airline system breakdown.
Here’s how former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg described this:
“Americans know the importance of a robust airline industry, which is why this country—and U.S. taxpayers — kept U.S. airlines afloat when the COVID pandemic threatened their very existence. Now that we are on the other side of the pandemic and air travel is breaking records, we must continue to advance passenger protections. This action we’re announcing is another step forward into a better era for commercial air travel—where the flying public is better protected and passengers aren’t expected to bear the cost of disruptions caused by airlines.”
Currently, airline passengers face many challenges in holding airlines to their promises, because there’s no legal obligation for airlines to notify passengers when they are entitled to services promised in the customer service plan, and their policies are generally vague on the details of delivery.
Passengers must also typically request these services at the airport in person, and frontline staff may not know if a flight disruption is caused by the airline, or may not have enough vouchers to provide upfront services to everyone. Airlines generally do not clearly disclose when, what, and how much they will reimburse passengers who pay out of pocket.
So the DOT’s rulemaking was aimed at addressing these gaps, and establishing baseline standards on what airlines are obligated to deliver to stranded passengers during disruptions. This would apply specifically to delays and cancelations that are due (in whole or in part) to any circumstance within the control of the airline.
For one, airlines would need to pay cash compensation to passengers when a trip is disrupted. The DOT considered a tiered approach. For example, for domestic flights, compensation could be $200-300 for delays of three to six hours, $375-525 for delays of six to nine hours, and $750-775 for delays of nine or more hours.
The DOT was also considering whether smaller airlines should pay less than larger airlines, and whether or not compensation should be required if a passenger is notified a week or two in advance of a cancelation or significant delay.
The DOT was also planning on requiring airlines to provide meals, overnight lodging, and transportation to and from the airport, for stranded passengers, and defining very clearly what would need to be included as part of each service.
This could also include requiring airlines to automatically pay a minimum reimbursement for each service an affected passenger is entitled to receive when airlines do not provide these services upfront, and passengers do not submit receipts for costs, up to a maximum reimbursement threshold per service.
Lastly, the DOT was considering requiring airlines to rebook passengers on the next available flight on any carrier that the airline has a commercial agreement with, in the event of delays or cancelations.
The Trump administration has dropped this proposal
In January 2025, we transitioned from the Biden administration to the Trump administration, and that also meant major changes at the DOT, as Sean Duffy took over as Transportation Secretary. Not surprisingly, the DOT under Duffy has formally dropped this proposed new regulation, describing the proposal as “unnecessary regulatory burdens.” Airline executives were vehemently opposed to this, and I guess they won out over consumers.
So at least under the current administration, cash compensation for delayed flights is off the table. I don’t think that’s a surprise. But keep in mind that this would’ve gone way beyond that, even covering things as basic as requiring airlines to rebook you on another airline if there’s a meltdown.
If anything, I just hope we don’t see existing regulations cut. We know that US airlines are lobbying to cut consumer protections, and are requesting to increasingly self-police, to “unleash American prosperity and the new ‘golden age’ of air travel in America.” Nothing says “golden age of air travel” quite like being stranded in Atlanta for a week the next time a carrier’s operation falls apart!
My take on stronger protections for consumers
As you’d expect, airline executives universally came out against this, arguing that this would raise the cost of flights, and be bad for the traveling public. I strongly disagree with that, and airlines in the US have gone far too long with minimal obligations to their customers, and a completely one-sided contract of carriage.
Just look at aviation in Europe, where similar regulations are in place. Can anyone point to how airfare has increased as a result of these obligations? Quite to the contrary, a bunch of ultra low cost carriers operate there quite successfully, and have very low ticket prices.
Studies have even shown that these regulations have caused a decrease in avoidable delays, both in terms of the number of delays, and the length of each delay. Part of the hope is that airlines would put more effort into minimizing disruptions, which could come in the form of not having an overly aggressive flight schedule, leading to situations where there aren’t enough staff and aircraft to operate flights.
Currently airlines have a strong incentive to create best case scenario schedules, and not plan for worst case scenario outcomes. After all, their obligations to passengers when things go wrong are minimal. They want to get as much revenue as they can upfront, with limited downside to them.
Furthermore, this would encourage airlines to negotiate proper contracts with employees. For example, remember several years back when American mechanics were (unofficially) delaying flights while contract negotiations were ongoing? Stuff like that would suddenly become much more costly for airlines.
Even beyond the cash compensation, I’m a huge fan of the concept of airlines having to rebook customers on other airlines in the case of substantial delays. It’s ridiculous how right now if you’re on a flight that’s canceled last minute due to something within a carrier’s control, they may very well tell you that their next available flight is in a couple of days, and your options are to either accept that, or to take a refund.
Like any of these schemes, the one challenge would’ve been holding airlines accountable as to what’s a controllable delay and what isn’t. Airlines love to blame weather and air traffic control for just about everything. Obviously a key part of any legislation is how consumers would be able to determine what the cause of a delay is.
Bottom line
The DOT under the Biden administration had proposed new regulations that would hold airlines accountable for delays within their control. In the event of significant disruptions, this would have included cash compensation, the requirement to book travelers on other airlines, and clear guidelines on reimbursement for expenses that are incurred.
As you’d expect, airline executives were strongly opposed to this. We had reason to believe that the Trump administration wouldn’t move forward with this proposal, and the proposal has now officially been scrapped.
I’m sad we won’t see these regulations go into effect. The value in regulations like these isn’t just the compensation as such, but instead, the incentive it gives airlines to operate reliably and not cut corners. Airline contracts of carriage are really one-sided, and this would’ve been beneficial for consumers.
What do you make of this proposed rulemaking being shot down?
The operating costs of us airlines are much higher than European airlines. The vast majority of people who work for foreign carriers in the US are contractors making near minimum wage. Also their employees in e ur ope make much less money than employees working for US carriers in the US. The margins are very thin .
Frontier uses contractors at its gates in the U. S. Too. And your understanding is zero
Thank you, AlanZ. It’s as if the airline lobby saw these posts about air passenger rights, and sent people to say ignorant and self-defeating things. Anyone who actually flies commercial these days knows how frustrating it is when an airline fails to deliver, not because of something outside their control, but because they didn’t schedule routine maintenance, or they didn’t hire enough staff, or any number of issues that they could solve, but chose not...
Thank you, AlanZ. It’s as if the airline lobby saw these posts about air passenger rights, and sent people to say ignorant and self-defeating things. Anyone who actually flies commercial these days knows how frustrating it is when an airline fails to deliver, not because of something outside their control, but because they didn’t schedule routine maintenance, or they didn’t hire enough staff, or any number of issues that they could solve, but chose not to, for business purposes, and instead of taking that burden themselves, they harm passengers instead, because they know we have limited recourse, in the USA, at least. Meanwhile, Europe, the United Kingdom, Canada, and a few others actually ‘get it,’ and have done something about it, like EU261. The truth is that our elected representatives are supposed to represent us, not industry, on this, but we don’t have lobbyists like the airlines do. Thank you for being on the side of the passengers. We deserve better.
I hope 1990 can find a safe space to mumble to himself “ We need air passenger rights legislation like EU/UK261 and Canada's APPR. When the airline is at fault, they should pay us ($200-600 is reasonable), in additional to rebooking or refunds, ….they should pay us….they should pay us”
Enjoy your free bus rides. LOL. Maybe you can get compensation when the bus is late too!
Find something you care about, and don’t let it go. If you actually fly commercial these days, you know what it’s like to be let down by the airlines. Air passenger rights legislation including baseline compensation for affected passengers is reasonable and helpful. Please continue to attack me personally if this keeps this issue alive. I can take it. I’m four numbers.
1990 - 28 of the 65 comments so far. Thank you for that.
This was my comment the other day that comments need to be reasonably limited. My analogy is that when one speaks at a public hearing, he/she is typically on the clock. This Blog needs a “clock” more than ever.
I am not merely trolling, sir or madam. I care about this issue, and think you should, too, especially if you actually fly commercial these days.
As for the blog, censoring others you may disagree with is not the solution, either. Engage or ignore. That is the way.
There is no stated limitation on quantity of comments. If Ben wants to set a rule on that, it would likely be counterproductive.
Who remembers Rule 240? Those were the halcyon days for sure. I know I benefitted from that passenger-friendly obligation many times.
Let them eat cake - even when they're stuck at an airport Hilton on their own dime!
Let them eat... Biscoff!
Yet another example of the supposed man of the people in the White House short-changing Americans (except his wealthy CEO robber baron chums), including his own voters, for the sake of personal interests.
Are people still shocked about the anger against CEOS and big businesses, these days?
Yes we feel so shortchanged by the average GDP increase in the EU vs the US over the last 15 years. Give me a break.
The economic woes of many were exacerbated by Covid shutdowns, while one side wanted to keep things open. Oh, not to mention if it wasn’t for Joe Manchin the inflation would have been fourfold.
Sel, D. I understand it’s easy to make this and any issue partisan, but, air passenger rights legislation should be non-partisan; it’s passengers vs. major corporations with outsized bargaining power. When they mess up, they should pay. Red, blue, left, right, a lot of folks fly commercial, and they know a voluntary $20 voucher from United that expires in 24 hours isn’t enough.
I have to laugh when I read how prices are not impacted in Europe by similar regulations to what was proposed by the last US administration. How exactly is that determined? With so much competition in Europe, surely prices would be lower if the EU passenger rights regulations didn’t exist.
I am opposed to such regulations. Let the market do its thing. If an airline does a poor job, they lose business to others.
Airlines aren't like restaurants. You can always go to BK or 10 other burger joints if you don't like your local McDonalds. Or you can eat at many other restaurants etc.
Most flight routes have limited options, even large airports. E.g. ATL-MCO is the busiest route in the US. Approximately 85% of flights are on Delta as per my check of flights today. I.e. Delta pretty much controls the market and their prices reflect that.
That is not quite true, as the U.S. market is not a free market, if it is, I would never fly the U.S. airlines even in the U.S. market domestically. They earn money as I do not have a choice. That means, they knew that I do not have a choice so they can continue providing poor service to the customers but still earn money.
I mean I flew from Scotland to the South of France for $31 return in 2023. That suggests regulation doesn't necessarily make fares more expensive, it could hardly be any cheaper. The taxi to the airport cost more.
Another dumb dumb for Trump. With so many ULCC's in Europe, prices are cheap.
Alan Z, it’s unfortunate that some are trying to make passenger-friendly rules (or lack thereof) into a partisan issue; like, it just isn’t. Republicans fly in the USA. They get screwed by the airlines all the time, too. It’s so sad to witness these fellow travelers deny themselves relief and protection (and compensation!) At least Malta and the EU has 261. Good on you, sir!
Ben, you’re absolutely right that it’s a “completely one-sided contract of carriage”… it’s an adhesion contract, take it or leave it, no negotiation, which is somewhat understandable, but then there should be baseline protections for if and when the airlines drop the ball. We are currently woefully unprotected as consumers here. Thank you for addressing this topic.
Not to mention, we all basically give the airlines a zero-interest loan, paying hundreds and thousands of dollars many months in advance only for them to cancel last-minute…
Yes 1990, this includes things like train tickets, concert tickets, Broadway tickets, and others. You pay ahead of time to reserve a piece of a finite space or secure a purchase of finite goods. Nobody forces you to do this. But I agree, it’s definitely a loan.
One time I was at the market and tried to reserve a turkey for thanksgiving dinner. The cashier asked me to prepay, so I accused her of usury, stormed out, and complained on a Facebook group about it.
Sel, D., nice strawmen. You should know that usury is the illegal action or practice of lending money at unreasonably high rates of interest. That is not the issue here. The supermarket (goods) and theater (service, but not transportation) are not appropriate analogies at all.
Trains are more appropriate, because when they were the most prevalent form of transportation between cities (back in the day), there was a similar lack of consumer protections, so...
Sel, D., nice strawmen. You should know that usury is the illegal action or practice of lending money at unreasonably high rates of interest. That is not the issue here. The supermarket (goods) and theater (service, but not transportation) are not appropriate analogies at all.
Trains are more appropriate, because when they were the most prevalent form of transportation between cities (back in the day), there was a similar lack of consumer protections, so the traveling public then were harmed by those powerful railroad companies, too, mostly due to the vast disparity in bargaining power, then. So, yeah, we’ve been through this before, historically, during the last Gilded Age-like periods (1890s, 1920s, etc.) Corporate greed and consolidation of power and media were real issues then, too. It may not happen soon, but, when we can, the people should demand better. Enough is enough.
Obviously none of you responding to this subject run a business. It's pretty basic, you increase the cost of doing business, that increases the cost of the product, FULL STOP. It's great to compare the USA to Europe but we have 4-5 times the flights per day (I am guessing) and anyone that has ever had a claim, has had to fight with the airline to get paid. Any regulations will increase your cost of traveling.
Running an airline is not like a small or even medium-sized business, at all. It’s already a highly regulated industry. Consumer friendly rules like EU261 have not bankrupted even ULCCs there (see Ryanair), and they still offer dirt cheap fares, often just €50 entry-level.
He probably hasn't flown much in the past or are ok with paying out of pocket for his expenses.
Ryanair carried almost 200 million passengers in 2024 and they only operate within Europe. Within Europe there are approximately 2.7 million passengers daily versus 2.9 million in the USA so it’s not 4-5 more considering Europe’s population is much greater and we also have a sophisticated and competitive rail network.
Hey Stan.
I moved to Europe and fly often. I filed an EU 261 two times. First time, Finnair deposited my EU261 money in my account in 5 days. LH strung me out. I had to wait two weeks. Next time, Stan, try knowing of what you speak.
This creates a conflict of interest for safety issues, I’d rather have them be more focused on safety then pressure to not have to pay out.
Why is giving mechanics more union power from illegally and dangerously tagging out planes a good reason to have this legislation? That’s a reason for them to be de-unionized if anything.
Not true at all. Safety remains a top priority in countries with and without such regulations.
Besides, airlines already carry an extensive array of insurance policies to protect themselves against financial losses related to maintenance, safety incidents, and staffing liabilities.
Also, bashing unions and workers on the basis of safety is patently false and disgusting.
“PAtEnTlY FaAALSE”
But also, Abdul-Majeed Marouf Ahmed Alani
Toxic Union entitlement, which yes, is disgusting.
Ben’s post was mostly about consumer protections (air passenger rights), but, I also care deeply about worker rights, so, yeah, unions (collective bargaining) is similarly a beneficial strategy for workers, who otherwise also have an extreme power disparity and disadvantage against these major companies; the way we balance this is through regulation that enables consumers and workers to have a baseline of protections against abuses and overreach by those larger entities. Clearly, you’ve either bought...
Ben’s post was mostly about consumer protections (air passenger rights), but, I also care deeply about worker rights, so, yeah, unions (collective bargaining) is similarly a beneficial strategy for workers, who otherwise also have an extreme power disparity and disadvantage against these major companies; the way we balance this is through regulation that enables consumers and workers to have a baseline of protections against abuses and overreach by those larger entities. Clearly, you’ve either bought into the anti-consumer, anti-worker, pro-business propaganda, or are an investor, are self-interested, and think exploiting people is okay so long as ‘you get yours.’ I don’t think that’s a great way to run a society. I think passengers and workers deserve better, and I’ve been fairly consistent about that here and elsewhere.
How is it that deregulation created an industry that is shielded by the Federal Government from nearly any responsibility to customers, exempt from most state law and common law responsibilities or remedies, and essentially treated as if it had sovereign immunity?
It's called lobbyists.
I wish we, the traveling public, had better ones to fight for our rights, too.
@Roberto
Please understand, @1990 is a lonely, friendless old hag. So she thinks every post is directed towards her and MUST be answered personally, whether or not she understands the topic. It's literally the ONLY form of interaction she gets. Sad - yes. Pathetic - most definitely. I propose she marries @TravelinPenis. This way they can annoy each other to death.
Feel free to attack me, personally, all you want; I do not care; as long as you remember 'air passenger rights legislation' when your next flight is significantly delayed or canceled; like, seriously, hate me all you guys want, and also, demand an EU-261 equivalent for you and your fellow passengers.
John and Roberto, besides, in less than 20 minutes it’s Citi Nights 6x points with the new Strata Elite; aren’t y’all goin’ out like I am for some delicious cuisine and beverages… Fridays and Saturdays starting 6PM EST. Live a little! (And get paid when your flight gets screwed!)
*deep sigh*
We get it 1990... You know everything. JFC. I never thought I'd say that I miss Tim Dunn. Methinks you should get checked out for NPD. I value free speech, but you're basically the travel blog commenter equivalent of the bible thumpers outside sporting events spewing scriptures... You say a lot of words, but nobody actually gives an AF about what you're saying. Read the room.
No, I do not, and I am learning things here. Like, Ivan, below, reminded us that even Mexico and Thailand have programs that compensate passengers when the airline is at fault.
Great! Here is your gold star for the month! Here's another fun fact: NPD stands for Narcissistic Personality Disorder, a mental health condition characterized by a grandiose sense of self-importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, and a lack of empathy for others. 2/2 on a Friday!
The focus is better treatment for passengers, which is why we all should want us to get compensated when the airline makes mistakes; that is an inherently empathetic position.
Look at you go! You're fighting for the rights of all of us in the comments sections of OMAAT & VFTW! I'll give you a third star if you go out and lobby for it and stay off the internet! It's called lobbyists, right?! I believe in you! *deep sigh* Methinks: like, seriously, hate me... Okay, I've run out of puns for tonight!
@Roberto - speak for yourself, please...I have found @1990's comments here to on-point. A little much? Perhaps in responding to nearly everyone, sure. But to make a false equivalence here - comparing him to bible thumpers - reflects more upon you than @1990.
I’m glad we’re all entitled to our own opinions! You had me at “a little much? Perhaps.” Have a great night everyone!
Thanks, Ralph. If folks fly even a few times a year, they can be impacted my serious delays and issues that the airlines really should be doing more for them... $20 digital voucher to be used within 24 hours from United just isn't the same as several hundred dollars cash. EU, Canada, etc. have the right idea; hopefully we'll follow, eventually.
The people on this board that will make this political are the same ones complaining what will happen if ULCCs go out of business. What do you think this would do to the already horrible finances of Spirit and Frontier?
Again, people expect Frontier fares and PanAm Clipper services.
No, George, EU/UK 261 and Canada's APPR work. We deserve a US-261, actual robust air passenger rights legislation, so that passengers get paid when the airline is at fault.
This isn't about LCC vs traditional carriers.
For their many flaws, Spirit in particular usually ranks among the top US airlines for both on time performance and completion factor. Because they are smaller, they tend to operate a more realistic flight schedule. There is no reason this would have a particularly outsized impact on them compared to another carrier.
Well said, Timtamtrak. Most of us here travel a lot; it's sad to witness folks like George give up on common sense regulations that would actually help us as passengers.
In my own experience, the major obstacle with "rebook on another carrier" is that there are a great many airports in the US which have only one carrier (because of an unintended consequence of how EAS is written). United once intended to leave me stranded in Chicago for 6 days - entirely at my expense - because that was their next available flight to a particular destination that had no other carriers and no alternate airports.
Bring back Rule 240! An airline with a delayed or canceled flight used to have to had to transfer passengers to another carrier if the second carrier could get passengers to the destination more quickly than the original airline.
‘used to have to had to’ oof. I just get so excited about air passenger rights…
As Ryan Gosling’s character from The Big Short said, ‘I’m jacked… jacked to the…’
just endlessly looting the treasury and the body politic for kickbacks to allies and coconspirators...
This is why you should ALWAYS fly with a European airline from the USA to Europe. EU/UK legislation covers European carriers in both directions but US carriers are only covered for flights LEAVING Europe.
Bingo! Unless and until we can actually pass legislation here (USA), which we can, but airline lobbyists resist it. It shouldn’t even be a partisan issue; literally, if you fly, as a passenger, you should want air passenger rights legislation that includes compensation like EU-261 but for the USA.
To add, if it’s a codeshare with an EU UK carrier EC/UK261 can still be enforced even if operated by a non EU/UK carrier.
So if your flying Honolulu Dallas London on American booked with a BA code and the first flight had a tech delay causing a missed connection and you arrive over 3 hrs later, comp is still due.
Award tickets are always booked on the operating carrier code, so you can...
To add, if it’s a codeshare with an EU UK carrier EC/UK261 can still be enforced even if operated by a non EU/UK carrier.
So if your flying Honolulu Dallas London on American booked with a BA code and the first flight had a tech delay causing a missed connection and you arrive over 3 hrs later, comp is still due.
Award tickets are always booked on the operating carrier code, so you can have a couple travelling, one on an award ticket for the above route booked under AA and the other booked under BA. One gets compensation and the other doesn’t.
Thank you, Icarus. I enjoy your creativity. It would be even better if we had a US version of those regulations. It would serve the traveling public here well.
US 261!
Woot! Someday, AlanZ!
Good luck to all of us in arguing with AI chatbots when saying things like "no, the delay/cancellation wasn't weather or ATC related, it was a maintenance problem."
"Hi! We have diligently reviewed our records and have confirmed that the delay was due to weather! We know that this may be disappointing to you, but sadly our decision on this matter is final. Thank you for your loyalty and for flying with us."
"But...
Good luck to all of us in arguing with AI chatbots when saying things like "no, the delay/cancellation wasn't weather or ATC related, it was a maintenance problem."
"Hi! We have diligently reviewed our records and have confirmed that the delay was due to weather! We know that this may be disappointing to you, but sadly our decision on this matter is final. Thank you for your loyalty and for flying with us."
"But literally we were delayed for three hours while maintenance crews fixed a light on the wing..."
"Hi! We have diligently reviewed our records and have confirmed that the delay was due to weather! We know that this may be disappointing to you, but sadly our decision on this matter is final. Thank you for your loyalty and for flying with us."
"The delay was not due to weather. It was due to maintenance! Here's a photo that I took of the maintenance people fixing the light on the wing...."
"Hi! We have diligently reviewed our records and have confirmed that the delay was due to weather! We know that this may be disappointing to you, but sadly our decision on this matter is final. Thank you for your loyalty and for flying with us."
Peter, I get it, that can be frustrating, and airlines, and their agents (AI or otherwise), do try to get out of paying; that's why we should implement even better protections in the USA so that folks get compensated for excessive delays and cancellations, regardless.
That's where Flightradar24 really comes into its own. Weather delays rarely affect just one departure.
This is why ExpertFlyer is so helpful. If a flight is delayed, you can view the notes on the flight through ExpertFlyer which states internal notes on why the flight is/was delayed/cancelled.
This helped me make sure I got my required compensation from AA recently on a 72-hour delay, all thanks to Canadian Travel Protections.
JB, that’s awesome and helpful!
It all sounds good, except when AI just denies your claim because it has been trained to be like a medical insurance company. Oh you have a valid claim? Nope, denied.
Even with the EU law, there are plenty of middlemen who exist for the sole purpose of trying to get the compensation that you fairly obviously are entitled to.
There's an opportunity here for an airline to win a loyalty battle -...
It all sounds good, except when AI just denies your claim because it has been trained to be like a medical insurance company. Oh you have a valid claim? Nope, denied.
Even with the EU law, there are plenty of middlemen who exist for the sole purpose of trying to get the compensation that you fairly obviously are entitled to.
There's an opportunity here for an airline to win a loyalty battle - promise that, for status members, claims for compensation owing to delay/cancellation will be promptly reviewed by AI within 24 hours (this will of course take seconds), and any denials by AI will be reviewed by a human within 48 hours.
Peter, I'm well aware of those 'middlemen,' but, even when using law firms and service providers like AirHelp, AirAdvisor, or Flightright (they take their ~25% cut), passengers still get paid; whereas, currently, in the USA, we got nothing. $450/600 is better than $0.
I respect your concern about AI being used by both sides, however, again, without the regulation to begin with, we are under-served in the USA to begin with. Best we got...
Peter, I'm well aware of those 'middlemen,' but, even when using law firms and service providers like AirHelp, AirAdvisor, or Flightright (they take their ~25% cut), passengers still get paid; whereas, currently, in the USA, we got nothing. $450/600 is better than $0.
I respect your concern about AI being used by both sides, however, again, without the regulation to begin with, we are under-served in the USA to begin with. Best we got these days are DOT complaint, small claims court, Montreal Convention (if international), and even then, for most delays, we don't get much (maybe a $20 voucher from United.) It's a pittance.
I once had an overnight delay when traveling back to NY from New Mexico and asked for compensation. The airline agent thought that it was an international flight (saw the word Mexico, obviously) and gave me Montreal Convention compensation. Does that count?
Yeah, it's not great, but this is not exactly the most pro-regulation country, and I highly doubt anything like this will pass anytime soon, regardless of which party is in power. And even...
I once had an overnight delay when traveling back to NY from New Mexico and asked for compensation. The airline agent thought that it was an international flight (saw the word Mexico, obviously) and gave me Montreal Convention compensation. Does that count?
Yeah, it's not great, but this is not exactly the most pro-regulation country, and I highly doubt anything like this will pass anytime soon, regardless of which party is in power. And even if it did, we know the playbook that all of these airlines will use to get out of paying most people. Not all regulation is good regulation, but you'd like to think some common sense stuff would apply across the board. If I was advocating for this, I'd start with the part of it where the delay/cancellation forces you to spend the night away from your primary residence, not just you get $X for Y hours of delay.
Anyway, nothing has changed - best practice is to book with a credit card that has trip delay/cancellation benefits.
As long as we are talking common sense stuff, how about family seating? The DOT consumer protection website still exists! You can look at the family seating dashboard, which still exists! Want to guess how many US airlines guarantee that young children are seated adjacent to an accompanying adult without charging any additional fee? According to the DOT, 5/10. (Delta and United are not on the nice list.). Yes, in life, in general, you pay for what you get, yada yada yada, but this one really isn't that hard, and is just common sense - who wants to sit next to someone else's 8 year old? Pretty sure it is in everyone's interest that the 8 year old sit next to their parent, including the airline's (and I suspect they will survive without the extra seat assignment fee, or they can build it into the child's fare!).
But don't worry, if you are stuck on the tarmac for over two hours, you are supposed to get a cup of water and an emergency snack. So there's that.
Montreal is not supposed to count for domestic.
Those credit card 'travel insurance' coverages are insufficient, sadly. Amex, for instance, often uses AIG, and their servicers regularly find caveats and exceptions to deny most claims. It's a lot of marketing and false promises.
Yes, DOT complaints are helpful for basic issues, but it takes time; for instance, if an airline forces a credit on you instead of a refund, they can assist; if the...
Montreal is not supposed to count for domestic.
Those credit card 'travel insurance' coverages are insufficient, sadly. Amex, for instance, often uses AIG, and their servicers regularly find caveats and exceptions to deny most claims. It's a lot of marketing and false promises.
Yes, DOT complaints are helpful for basic issues, but it takes time; for instance, if an airline forces a credit on you instead of a refund, they can assist; if the airline takes longer than 7 business days, they can assist. But, for the bigger disputes, no, we need better regulation. No rules are perfect, but having some as opposed to none, I'd prefer some, and to keep reforming, incrementally when needed. Can't give up on consumer protections.
I feel your cynicism sometimes, too; I've dealt with my fair share of disputes that resulted in credit card charge backs, too. It's tedious, we can feel powerless, and we do deserve better. Even if others mock me/us/this, I still enjoyed reading your thoughts. Thank you.
Duffy : "Sit this one out. I spent the whole Day cleaning up the mess of the last administration " huh, everything must be all fixed then.
Ah, so, you've heard of the 'Two Santas' Problem, haven't you? Since the 1970s, Republicans have implemented a cynical, two part strategy where they purposely create a debt crisis ('Republican Santa,' through tax cuts, for the wealthy, and spending, on defense, usually) and then weaponize it against their opponents when they're in power (Democrats, the Anti-Santa) through debt ceiling fights and calls for spending cuts (so Dems either have to raise taxes or cut spending...
Ah, so, you've heard of the 'Two Santas' Problem, haven't you? Since the 1970s, Republicans have implemented a cynical, two part strategy where they purposely create a debt crisis ('Republican Santa,' through tax cuts, for the wealthy, and spending, on defense, usually) and then weaponize it against their opponents when they're in power (Democrats, the Anti-Santa) through debt ceiling fights and calls for spending cuts (so Dems either have to raise taxes or cut spending on social programs). The result is the social safety net is depleted; wealth and income inequality is astounding; and nearly all of us are worse off (even their own constituents). Time to fight back.
Hoping that some day regular people realize that Donald Trump does not care about them. In his world, you're either morally compromised enough to win, or you're a looser.
I think 30% is his floor. It's a death-cult; they will never leave him. He could literally be on tape "blowing Bubba" and it wouldn't change their minds.
According to recent polls, Trump's approval rating is averaging low 40s nationally, with a corresponding disapproval in the high 50s. Lowest (30%) about Economy/Cost of Living and the Management of the Federal Government. Immigration/Border Security (40% to 45%).
It's likely to get far worse for him...
I think 30% is his floor. It's a death-cult; they will never leave him. He could literally be on tape "blowing Bubba" and it wouldn't change their minds.
According to recent polls, Trump's approval rating is averaging low 40s nationally, with a corresponding disapproval in the high 50s. Lowest (30%) about Economy/Cost of Living and the Management of the Federal Government. Immigration/Border Security (40% to 45%).
It's likely to get far worse for him as health insurance premiums dramatically increase, unless he can use his oligarch-backed, micro-targeted and also mass-media, propaganda network to scapegoat and distract his way out of that, say, with a new, unnecessary 'regime change' war (say, Venezuela), which ironically would justify Putin's illegal war of aggression, too. Of course.
@1990 - polls don't matter. He can't run again (unless he gets really creative with Vance as President, him as VP then have Vance resign - don't laugh it actually would work if all parties agreed to the plan). He is our President for 3+ years and is fully empowered to do what he feels is best for the country whether you and the rest of the liberals agree or not!
He’s not a king; Congress and the Courts are co-equal branches of government; midterms in 353 days, and a new Congress sworn in within 14 months, so, a bit less than the 3 years, you suggest.
22nd Amendment would prohibit Trump from running or acting as VP, so, unless you want to amend it again (difficult), or get 6-3 act in absurd partisan fashion, he cannot do that. Sowie, he can’t pull a Putin.
Because he couldn't figure out how to give the compensation to only white passengers.
*deep sigh*
I'd really hope that's not the case, but, with the recent 'mainstreaming' of certain figures on the right (Carlson-Fuentes-Vance-Heritage Foundation), I'm not so sure it isn't a motivation. Vile.
Yet there are plenty of women and Hispanics in the government. Calling everyone and everything racist is why the left do not win anything important.
Hank Tarn, oh, you're still upset about last Tuesday, huh? Yeah, typically. Btw, 2026 midterms are gonna be brutal for 'your team.' Probably shoulda done something about affordability, pal...
We need air passenger rights legislation like EU/UK261 and Canada's APPR. When the airline is at fault, they should pay us ($200-600 is reasonable), in additional to rebooking or refunds. It does not bankrupt the airlines or cost us more (see Ryanair, still dirt cheap fares); that's corporate astroturfing. Travel insurance is not enough (check the fine-print, often requires delays over 3-72 hours depending on policies, or 50% of trip); though, still good to have...
We need air passenger rights legislation like EU/UK261 and Canada's APPR. When the airline is at fault, they should pay us ($200-600 is reasonable), in additional to rebooking or refunds. It does not bankrupt the airlines or cost us more (see Ryanair, still dirt cheap fares); that's corporate astroturfing. Travel insurance is not enough (check the fine-print, often requires delays over 3-72 hours depending on policies, or 50% of trip); though, still good to have policies, generally.
We deserve better, friends. When the adults are back in-charge, let's get this done. Finally.
Even in Mexico and Thailand passengers receive compensation for flight delays.
Once again trump and the gop show that they are only concerned with the well being of billionaires and the suffering of the downtrodden.
Ivan, good reminders!
Mexico's Civil Aviation Law, Article 47, (Mexico 47!) and Thailand's Civil Aviation Board Notification No. 101 (Thailand 101!), seem to get the idea as well, even though the relative compensation may be less (in Mexico, for +4 hours delay, 25% of affected segment; and, for Thailand it's THB 1,500-4,500, $45-140), but it's still something! More than the USA!
But, hey, the average American will be distracted by getting a $2,000 check from Trump. He gives people just enough to hat they don’t care how badly they’re getting screwed.
Yet, he won't even actually send those out. All a con-job. All lies. Pathetic. Meanwhile, they distract us with scapegoats, distractions, etc. It's a reverse-Robin-Hood out there right now. America First as we send billions to Argentina...
I feel like customers would just end up paying for it anyway but at least if work trips are delayed I’d get paid.
They would not. See ULCC in Europe under EU261, still offering dirt-cheap $50 fares, even though, if the airline is at fault, the could owe $200+/passenger. This can be done, and it can work well for us passengers. It also creates the right incentives for airlines to operate more reliably.
Finally, a president for the people Now, instead of receiving compensation if something goes wrong, I can save $1 per flight for the rest of my life since the airlines will certainly pass the savings on to me and not their shareholders
Yup. Your cynicism is warranted. We really need to demand better. An EU261 equivalent would be a good start. Call it US-261; make my day.
The lobbyists (corporations) own the politicians.
Clearly, in this era of crony capitalism and the spoils system, it sure seems so, yet, it is still the people who have the actual power, lest we forget. When the adults are back in-charge, ideally, an actual progressive leadership, we must include air passenger rights legislation as part of our policy goals, and actually implement it. Long over-due.
@1990
The people had the power and used it to vote for this vile, senile, functionally illiterate buffon, I want to add pedophile as well...
And looked what the people did with the power...
justindev, and the people should learn that their votes have consequences, and therefore, not to take it for granted in the future; after last Tuesday's elections, at least some folks finally woke up. Recall, Winston Churchill (for better or worse) saying, "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing—after they've tried everything else." All we can do is try.