airline passenger rights around the world

[CoyoteChris]

I was curious to hear from people who have flown on non-US airlines about their passenger rights.
It seems that in the US or the EU, if you are involuntarily bumped, you are owed some amount of
financial compensation (hard cash) ranging from $250-$650 plus room and board.

In the US, Airlines attempt to save money by offering "vouchers" that expire in 365 days to get you to give up your seat, so are basically
worthless unless you fly often. In days of yore, I remember flight attendents with a fist full of $100 bills basically doing a reverse auction
on the seats to get you to give up your seat voluntarily...a meathod I would much prefer over the existing meathods.

The airline excuse for overbooking is that some people just dont show up. So what? They paid for their seat....they can not show up if they like....

I have no illusion that US citizens, for instance, would make a stink to their representitives to get the law changed...and change the ticket contract to say
that a seat purchased in advance is subject to contract law, and baring an act of God, there would be meaningful financial penalties for not fullfilling said contract.

I just dont want to get dragged of the plane again!

 

[andromache]

I think some sort of financial recompense is required per US law when there is overbooking (I don't have a citation for that and I'm too tired to find one, sorry). And I think financial recompense is often offered in those cases (and I think was offered in the case this topic is obviously referring to). But no one volunteered to take the money in exchange for their seat, so people were chosen at random, and in one case, violently and grossly forced out. When obviously, every man has their price. If an airline overbooks and needs to buy some seats back, then they just need to offer passengers more money in exchange.

 

[CoyoteChris]

I think some sort of financial recompense is required per US law when there is overbooking (I don't have a citation for that and I'm too tired to find one, sorry). And I think financial recompense is often offered in those cases (and I think was offered in the case this topic is obviously referring to). But no one volunteered to take the money in exchange for their seat, so people were chosen at random, and in one case, violently and grossly forced out. When obviously, every man has their price. If an airline overbooks and needs to buy some seats back, then they just need to offer passengers more money in exchange.

I agree. The way to handle this if to offer real money till enough seat are available....airlines have gotten into trouble by trying to pass off vouchers for real money, which by law can go up to about $1100 in the US. The airlines admitted that there was nothing "random" about who gets bumped. First class? No way. Frequent flyer? Nope. Check in late, pay a small price for your ticket, travel alone, and you are more likely.

FWIW, a local guy on TV tonight said he took a $300 voucher but when he called to try and use it, the price of the ticket he wanted had doubled from advertised. Cant say that's true or not, but many flyers just dont fly much and wouldnt use an $800 one year only voucher. I still think if an airline official would get on the plane and say, "OK, you get a nice hotel and free food and a guarenteed flight first class or coach on any airline the next day. I have a one hundred dollar bill....ok, two....three....four...
$500 in cash....ok $800 cash money on the barrel head....) they would have obtained the four seats and avoided a one billion dollar drop in their stock and millions lost in PR.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

I agree with the concept of "real" money for being bumped but I also think flying isn't a right and they have the right to bump anyone they see fit. If getting a crew of four people to another destination can then get another 75 to another destination and the airline makes that decision then I think it's within their right. It may disrupt a few folks but it may benefit many more when these decisions are made. They should be required to pay "bumped customers" for first class seats and provide a place to stay overnight until a flight is found for the passenger unless they bump them 24 hours in advance in accordance with their own cancellation process.

Honestly....It's a marketing opportunity for other airlines to capitalize on and offer to not bump customers and guarantee seats vs those airlines who may. I'm not sure if the guy resisting even considered the benefit he would have provided to the people in the other destination that needed the crew to fly another plane. That's why I like the concept of real money and the airline should be willing/required to compensate the passenger for the seat and the inconvenience. I'm afraid though I think we take advantage of our freedom sometimes and this might be an example of that to the extreme.

I say this with all sincerity....if I saw a fellow passenger resisting the way the guy in the video did I'm pretty confident I would have gotten up and volunteered to leave the plane. My life is flexible enough that I could always wait another day or so to fly out. I'm surprised no one else was in a similar place.

 

[andromache]

I agree. The way to handle this if to offer real money till enough seat are available....airlines have gotten into trouble by trying to pass off vouchers for real money, which by law can go up to about $1100 in the US. The airlines admitted that there was nothing "random" about who gets bumped. First class? No way. Frequent flyer? Nope. Check in late, pay a small price for your ticket, travel alone, and you are more likely.

FWIW, a local guy on TV tonight said he took a $300 voucher but when he called to try and use it, the price of the ticket he wanted had doubled from advertised. Cant say that's true or not, but many flyers just dont fly much and wouldnt use an $800 one year only voucher. I still think if an airline official would get on the plane and say, "OK, you get a nice hotel and free food and a guarenteed flight first class or coach on any airline the next day. I have a one hundred dollar bill....ok, two....three....four...
$500 in cash....ok $800 cash money on the barrel head....) they would have obtained the four seats and avoided a one billion dollar drop in their stock and millions lost in PR.

Exactly. Offer some cash and people would be fighting each other to get off the plane. I know I would for a nice hotel stay and some extra cash. Buy the seat back from the customer at the cost it's worth at that moment - which might be more than you sold it for, but it's your fault for selling too many seats.

But airlines have gotten used to being able to do whatever they want to their customers, and this time it went too far. Flying is not a right, but you can only treat customers like garbage to a certain extent. They'll do anything to save a dollar and those savings are not passed onto customers.

(Out of curiosity, I went onto Expedia to pretend to book a flight yesterday to see if United's prices had happened to go down in comparison to other airlines. No such luck.)

 

[puremagic]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YGc4zOqozo

 

[apgold]

For the amount of money they dangle in front of passengers to defer their flight, United could've hired a nice limo or small private plane to transport their extra crew.

I hope this incident revives the idea of an airline passenger bill of rights or legislative changes to the way airlines treat customers.

 

[OniBan]

I agree with the concept of "real" money for being bumped but I also think flying isn't a right and they have the right to bump anyone they see fit. If getting a crew of four people to another destination can then get another 75 to another destination and the airline makes that decision then I think it's within their right. It may disrupt a few folks but it may benefit many more when these decisions are made. They should be required to pay "bumped customers" for first class seats and provide a place to stay overnight until a flight is found for the passenger unless they bump them 24 hours in advance in accordance with their own cancellation process.

Honestly....It's a marketing opportunity for other airlines to capitalize on and offer to not bump customers and guarantee seats vs those airlines who may. I'm not sure if the guy resisting even considered the benefit he would have provided to the people in the other destination that needed the crew to fly another plane. That's why I like the concept of real money and the airline should be willing/required to compensate the passenger for the seat and the inconvenience. I'm afraid though I think we take advantage of our freedom sometimes and this might be an example of that to the extreme.

I say this with all sincerity....if I saw a fellow passenger resisting the way the guy in the video did I'm pretty confident I would have gotten up and volunteered to leave the plane. My life is flexible enough that I could always wait another day or so to fly out. I'm surprised no one else was in a similar place.

flying isn't a right, but i think if you've bought a ticket for a specific time and date, isn't it a right to be accommodated for what you've paid for? After all you're not paying for a flexi-ticket where you can change the time/ date anytime you want, surely there's reasons why you pick a particular itinerary to stick by. It's only fair the airline fulfill their end of the bargain.
If i HAVE to be at a place at a very particular time and date, e.g very important business meeting or familial matter, like visiting a loved one who is at death's bed, bought the ticket specifying that particular time and date, and BE bumped off, I would be so so pissed. They can compensate me with money, but they can't compensate the TIME that was lost.

and the fact that no one voluntarily WANT to be bumped off despite compensation that United offered that day goes to show people just want to get their ticket and stick to it.
I know overbooking is $$$$ for the airline (and it IS business after all) but kinda reeks of greed to me

The airline practice in Malaysia - so far I have never been bumped off - both on regular national carrier AND budget airlines. I don't think they do overbooking (though they may be inspired to do it now!) What they do is start an 'open tickets' counter before every flight. Any passengers who wish to go to certain destination( but couldn't get on due to no ticket availability) will register to this counter. They will then wait if there is any seats available on any flights that day (seats may open up if there's no-shows). And then they'll pay for their tickets before boarding.
This way you don't push people out of planes, but fit in any other passengers that couldn't get tickets earlier, while NOT lose money on empty seats. (anyways, they earn double this way because people who don't show up already paid for their tickets anyway).

 

[Tonichelle]

United is notorious for not honoring their bump vouchers. That right there may be why people weren't willing to take the "offer".

 

[Tulipstar]

I agree with the concept of "real" money for being bumped but I also think flying isn't a right and they have the right to bump anyone they see fit.

You have a right to services that you have already paid for.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

You have a right to services that you have already paid for.

I think maybe it's fair to say you expect to make your flight and arrive on time most of the time but weather happens or technical malfunctions can occur. Maybe not even in the region you're flying out of and circumstances may arise in one state that cause delays in another. We should be prepared to accept such anomalies and consider it when traveling. IMO it's our personal responsibility to consider when traveling. I still think the guy who threw this tantrum is a case of people taking advantage of freedoms we have in this country.

Just to be honest here......I really can't believe that there wasn't someone on the flight who could have offered up a seat simply because it was the right thing to do or that the guys life would fall apart if he arrived 6hrs later or even the next day. I for instance would have stood up and offered my seat to the psycho being dragged out and gave him a piece of my mind in the process.

 

[solani]

I took the financial compensation (and got on a flight a day later) two times in the EU. 500€ plus a nice hotel room. I had nothing better to do and the flight was only about 12 hours later each time so it wasn't a big deal and easy money. I was young and free. They politely asked me at the check-in both times and I agreed, got a ticket for my new flight and a voucher for the hotel room plus vouchers for the taxi to the hotel and back to the airport.
I get why airlines are overbooking flights. Flight tickets would be more expensive if they didn't. But people who are willing to take a later flight need to be compensated for their inconveniences. And if no one is willing to do it for 500€ or 500$ they need to offer more. I'm sure they would have found somebody on that United flight if they told them they'd get 1000$ or more. Dragging someone of the plane really is the worst option imaginable.

 

[andromache]

I think maybe it's fair to say you expect to make your flight and arrive on time most of the time but weather happens or technical malfunctions can occur. Maybe not even in the region you're flying out of and circumstances may arise in one state that cause delays in another. We should be prepared to accept such anomalies and consider it when traveling. IMO it's our personal responsibility to consider when traveling. I still think the guy who threw this tantrum is a case of people taking advantage of freedoms we have in this country.

Just to be honest here......I really can't believe that there wasn't someone on the flight who could have offered up a seat simply because it was the right thing to do or that the guys life would fall apart if he arrived 6hrs later or even the next day. I for instance would have stood up and offered my seat to the psycho being dragged out and gave him a piece of my mind in the process.

I assumed his was a case of passive resistance - did he really throw a tantrum? Btw, he was a doctor. He had important reasons to make the flight.

Also, there's a distinct difference between weather/technical problems and the airline bumping a few select passengers for their own convenience. The airline has control over the second one. Time is money, and if the airline wishes to buy someone's time by reneging on services promised, then they better be prepared to offer something besides a voucher, most of which are more trouble than they are worth, depending on the airline (http://www.chicagotribune.com/lifes...chers-useless-travel-0418-20170411-story.html).

There are two general groups of people who fly: people who travel for work all the time and are used to the uncertainties of air travel (and who may not be paying for the air travel themselves), and people who do not fly often and are flying for a special occasion and may have inconvenient time constraints and for whom airfare may have been a big expense. Because airlines only care about $$$$, they aren't going to bump the frequent flyers/first class flyers who are unlikely to suffer a major inconvenience. Unless they decide to bump a first-class frequent flyer for someone with more $$$$ and miles (http://www.latimes.com/business/laz...ed-low-priority-passenger-20170412-story.html).

Useful article: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/04/united-video-scandal-law/522552/

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

Oh don't get me wrong here. I think the airline should pay out a substantial amount. I still think the guy was out of line and someone on the plane could have given up a seat. We're talking a 1hr flight or 4 1/2 drive.

 

[ice coverage]

... We're talking a 1hr flight or 4 1/2 drive.

Which is one of the reasons why United should NOT have used physical force to remove a passenger from the flight.

It is United that should have used the (viable, but less preferable to anyone) alternative of ground transportation -- for its crew members to get to the destination.

United (at its own expense) simply would have had to make arrangements for a driver and vehicle to transport the crew members. Should have been a no-brainer.

United has been in damage-control mode (including apologizing to the passenger), so obviously United (in hindsight) believes that what it did was wrong.

 

[NanaPat]

I think the bumping problem could be solved by a simple change in regulations. Clearly the limit on compensation airlines are required to pay is way too low. If it were higher, they would increase the amount they offer to passengers to voluntarily de-plane, and wouldn't have to resort to their "random" selection of passengers. What if the limit were raised to, say, $5000? I'll bet if they'd kept raising the offer on that short flight, they'd have had some true volunteers with an offer far below that level.

The argument for the practice of overbooking is an economic one: it helps keep fares low (and executive bonuses high, though the airlines don't like to talk about that part). But that economic argument works only because some people who are kicked off flights are subsidizing the whole system by incurring inconvenience, lost wages, lost vacation time, health issues, etc, and not being compensated adequately. If the airlines were required to compensate them adequately, overbooking would be less of a problem. And how do you decide what is adequate compensation? It's the level that gets people to truly volunteer!

 

[Amei]

I was listening to the news about this - United actually has 1 of the lowest rates of bumping customers off flights.

As far as this case goes: From what I have read the passenger was not removed (thus knocked out) by employees of United, but Chicago airport security ---- Which I wonder if it wasn't United employees that removed the passenger, then his lawsuit shouldn't be against United but the Chicago airport.

 

[CoyoteChris]

I was listening to the news about this - United actually has 1 of the lowest rates of bumping customers off flights.

As far as this case goes: From what I have read the passenger was not removed (thus knocked out) by employees of United, but Chicago airport security ---- Which I wonder if it wasn't United employees that removed the passenger, then his lawsuit shouldn't be against United but the Chicago airport.

Rest assured that they both will be named in the suit....which IMHO will be settled out of court to end the publicity nightmare.....I doubt if the sum will be named, but I would think 10 million....

 

[CoyoteChris]

For the amount of money they dangle in front of passengers to defer their flight, United could've hired a nice limo or small private plane to transport their extra crew.

I hope this incident revives the idea of an airline passenger bill of rights or legislative changes to the way airlines treat customers.

Unfortunately they dont dangle any money, and that is why everyone on that plane declined "vouchers" for from $800 to $1000, depending on who you want to believe. Many dont fly that often to be able to take advantage of "vouchers" that only last 365 days (wink wink nod nod,,,). I am still looking for someone to prove to me that seat prices are or are not increased for those trying to use vouchers. But no matter. Even if someone tried to use a voucher for a seat, what is the airline really out? That is very hard to say. I say this whole thing could be fixed in many ways. One is offer cash, check or credit card credit based on what 4 customers would be willing to recieve for their seat that day, and do it in the boarding gate area. Another way would be to make the vouchers good for three years, for instance...one year is just a way to make sure you dont use it....and also can be used for hotels, for instance, booked through United. Airline profits are obscene. Time to hammer them.
Chris who isnt going to get dragged off of a cruise ship in May.

 

[CoyoteChris]

flying isn't a right, but i think if you've bought a ticket for a specific time and date, isn't it a right to be accommodated for what you've paid for? .

Not in the US. When you buy a ticket in the US, you are agreeing to a contract that says you can be bumped at their pleasure, for which there is a schedule of cash payout. United has
lots of lawyers and they are going to need them. If this case goes to trial, (and I dont think it will) it will be very interesting, as United holds the legal high ground as far as being able to order the PAX off the
plane. I wouldnt want to be the Chicago LEO that used excessive force. If this had been taken care of in boarding area, it would have been a whole different story. But trying to get a limp
Pax out of a seat and off a plane without injury may not be easy. HOWEVER, if the PAX fought being removed, then the LEOs and United lawyers can use that to their advantage in court.
This will never go to court as United is bleeding money and will continue to do so unless they start handing out $100 bills like candy, then everyone will fly United and Pray they get bumped!

You come to law school with a mind full of mush, and you leave thinking like a lawyer.