Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
www.eraa.org
twitter.com/eraaorg
European Parliament Exchange of
Views on Air Passenger Rights
Simon McNamara
European Regions Airline Association
www.eraa.org
twitter.com/eraaorg
About ERA
• 51 airline members
• 1.6 million flights per year
• 70.6 million passengers per year
• 72 minute average sector time
• 72 seat average seating capacity
Focused on intra-European, short haul flights by
narrow body and regional aircraft
www.eraa.org
twitter.com/eraaorg
Aegean Airlines
Suckling Airways
Aer Arann
Air Alps Aviation
Air Contractors Ireland
Air Iceland
Airlinair Air Urga
Blue Islands
Blue 1
Binter Canarias
Belle Air
Aurigny Air Services
Air Nostrum Sky Work Airlines
Eastern Airways
Darwin Airlines
Danish Air Transport
CityJet
Cimber Carpatair
Brit Air
BMI Regional Malmo Aviation
Luxair
KLM Cityhopper
Golden Air
Eurolot Estonian Air
Sky Express
Sata Air Acores
Regional
PGA Portugalia
Olympic Air
Wideroe
West Air Sweden
Welcome Air
Amapola Flyg
Astra Airlines
Atlantic Airways
Avanti Air
Avion Express
Belavia
Denim Air ACMI
DOT
Farnair Switzerland
Mistral Air
Montenegro Airlines
Titan Airways
Trade Air
www.eraa.org
twitter.com/eraaorg
EU261 as it stands now
We welcome the opportunity to improve EU261 where:
• It provides greater clarity
• It improves the fair application of the Regulation
• It provides real additional rights
• It re-balances passenger rights with airline obligations
Some parts of the proposal by the Commission achieve this, others do not…
www.eraa.org
twitter.com/eraaorg
Pros and Cons…
This presentation will focus on three issues of
concern for ERA members:
Liability for compensation in the event of long
arrival (at final destination) delays in the case of
connecting flights (Article 6a)
Delay at final destination (Article 6, par. 2)
Diversions considered as cancellations
(Article 2l)
www.eraa.org
twitter.com/eraaorg
• The “Hub &
Spoke”
concept is
still a major
part of
connecting
Europe’s
regions with
the world
Connecting flights matter..
www.eraa.org
twitter.com/eraaorg
Missed connecting flights
Case study
Faroe Islands – Copenhagen – Tokyo
• First Leg: a regional airline
• Second Leg: a network airline
• A small delay (45 mins) on leg 1 causes a
missed connection in Copenhagen
• Copenhagen-Tokyo: passenger is re-routed on
the next day’s flight and reaches Tokyo with a
24hour delay
www.eraa.org
twitter.com/eraaorg
Missed connecting flights
(the situation today)
Faroe Islands – Copenhagen – Tokyo
Passenger is already protected by:
• 1999 Montreal Convention: recovery in case of damages to passengers and luggage caused by the delay in the air carriage
• Multilateral Interline Traffic Agreements (MITA): over 350 worldwide IATA and non-IATA airlines’ network covered:
First leg operator: responsible for re-routing, care/assistance at transit
• MITA: internationally well-established agreements; care and assistance is what disrupted passengers need
An unhappy passenger? YES An abandoned passenger? NO
www.eraa.org
twitter.com/eraaorg
Missed connecting flights
(proposed art.6a)
Faroe Islands – Copenhagen - Tokyo
Compensation due by first leg operator (regional):
• Disproportionate: based on “Faroe-Tokyo” distance
• Inconsistent: punitive although connecting delay is below the “long delay” threshold level normally triggering compensation
• Disincentive to interlining agreements (MITA):
Hub & Spoke principle damage European Regions potentially isolated from the hubs
and therefore from the world Multiple luggage check-ins and tickets An unhappy passenger? YES An abandoned passenger? YES
www.eraa.org
twitter.com/eraaorg
Delay at final destination
(art. 6, par. 2)
London‐Dubai‐Bangkok:
• First leg: an EU air carrier arrives on time
• Second leg: a non‐EU air carrier and arrives late
For compensation purposes, (long) delay is now considered at final destination
Who pays?
• Paradox 1: First carrier has to pay compensation although it provides a service with no delay? Unfair
• Paradox 2: Second carrier has to pay compensation although flight out of the scope of the Regulation? Unenforceable
www.eraa.org
twitter.com/eraaorg
Flight diversions as cancellation
(art. 2, letter l)
“…A flight where the aircraft took off but, for whatever reason, was subsequently forced to land at an airport other than the airport of destination or to return to the airport of departure, shall also be considered a cancelled flight”.
• Flight safety is and must always be the number one priority for air operators
• Airlines will always make prudent decisions to divert when necessary, always for flight safety reasons
• Does this amendment potentially pose a threat to safety by providing a disincentive to divert??
Passenger safety must always come first
www.eraa.org
twitter.com/eraaorg
• Article 6a (missed connecting flights): passengers’ protection (MITA) poorer; EU regions connectivity to the hubs reduced; inconvenience to passengers increased (multiple luggage
check-in, multiple tickets for one journey) Inconsistent with long-established airlines cooperation Inconvenience at airports: increased transit of passengers
• Article 6, par. 2 (long delay at final destination) May impose compensation despite punctuality;
May be unenforceable;
• Article 2l (flight diversions): No compromise on safety is acceptable
No challenge to a captain’s decision taken exclusively on safety grounds
Summary