A family walks through the airport in Halifax.Andrew Vaughan/The Canadian Press
Airports in Canada’s Atlantic provinces say tougher new rules that make it easier to hold airlines financially responsible for flight disruptions will drive up ticket prices and spur carriers to cut flights to a region already hit by dwindling air service.
The Atlantic Canada Airports Association made the warning in a submission to the Canadian Transportation Agency, which has been gathering opinions as it drafts changes to the Air Passenger Protection Regulations.
The government in June streamlined the rules on how and when airlines are to compensate and treat passengers when flights are delayed or cancelled. When those rules come into effect (at the time of publication, no date had been set), passengers will be entitled to compensation when a flight is disrupted, unless the airline can show “exceptional circumstances.” They are also eligible for refunds, food or hotel stays, depending on the circumstances.
Then-transport minister Omar Alghabra left it to the CTA to define these exceptional circumstances, and enact other rules.
Under the current rules, customers are owed compensation of as much as $1,000 only when the disruption falls within the airline’s control. This excludes labour disruptions, weather and safety reasons, the latter of which critics say airlines overuse to dodge responsibility.
The CTA’s consultation period on the changes is over, and the submissions are posted on its website.
The Atlantic airports group, which represents hubs in Halifax, St. John’s and 11 other cities, said in its submission that airlines forced to pay more in compensation to passengers will raise prices and cut service in areas where flight frequency is already low. “For passengers, increased costs limit accessibility to air travel, potentially hindering tourism, family visits, and business trips,” writes Nadia MacDonald, executive director of the group, adding that today there are only 112 routes serving Atlantic Canada, compared to 129 pre-pandemic.
The current passenger rights system was enacted in 2019, shortly before the pandemic halted most air travel. The upheaval revealed the weaknesses in the regulations. Customers found themselves unable to obtain refunds for cancelled flights, and still face lengthy delays in receiving a decision in complaints made to the CTA, a quasi-judicial body that adjudicates disputes. The backlog of passenger complaints exceeds 50,000.
The changes to the rules, contained in the Canada Transportation Act, include using mediators to resolve disputes, a more streamlined process that would include publishing details of decisions. This would presumably allow others to seek redress.
The Canadian Automobile Association, which operates a large travel agency and has pushed for improved passenger treatment, said in its submission safety is paramount. But there is no evidence safety has been compromised in other countries that have no such exception for avoiding compensating passengers, the CAA said.
“The average passenger in this country does not have the protections that come with premium status or full fare tickets. The APPR needs to help these passengers most of all and today, it is missing the mark,” its submission said.
The CTA has proposed defining the “exceptional circumstances” exempt from compensation to include: war, bad weather, aircraft manufacturing defects that affect safety, airport operations problems, labour disruptions and air traffic management restrictions. Events that would require compensation include staff shortages, “any situation the airline knew about, or should have known about, when it sold the ticket to the passenger,” and any action, or failure to act, that results in a travel disruption, by the airline or its contractors.
The airline industry is seeking to quash all the passenger rights rules before the Supreme Court of Canada. The recent submissions from airlines to the CTA are opposed to the changes.
Air Canada AC-T, in its submission, is seeking a longer list of circumstances exempt from compensation, and fewer cases in which payment is owed. “The most troubling aspect of the proposed list is related to safety,” its submission says. “The deliberate exclusion of mechanical or technical malfunctions (or concerns regarding the same) from the list of proposed exceptions departs from the original fair and balanced intention of the APPR…. The vast majority of mechanical issues or concerns are not controllable and are unforeseeable circumstances.”
WestJet Airlines’ submission said the amendments would punish airlines for making safety-related decisions. “Moreover, the proposed amendments would be the most punitive air passenger compensation regime globally and would increase the cost of travel in Canada and inevitably lead to a reduction in regional connectivity and service to underserved markets.”
The Calgary-based airline highlighted several disruptions to Canadian airline travel since 2022, when a rebound in travellers overwhelmed short-staffed airlines, airports, contactors and government agencies. These disruptions include air traffic controller delays, Rogers Communications’ service outage and delays caused by a shortages of security screeners.
WestJet’s submission noted none of the companies or agencies involved are responsible for compensating passengers. “Air carriers cannot continue to be the only entity responsible for passenger rights – we do not act alone in the travel supply-chain. Accountability must be shared amongst airports, third parties, and government agencies.”
Editor’s note: A previous version of this article stated incorrectly that new rules will come into effect Sept 30. In fact, no date had been set at the time of publication. This version has been corrected.
Eric Atkins