adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Business

Air Canada denies certain compensations claims, calls staff shortages a 'safety-related issue' – CBC.ca

Published

 on


Less than four hours before departure, Ryan Farrell was surprised to learn his flight from Yellowknife to Calgary had been cancelled.

Air Canada cited “crew constraints” and rebooked him on a plane leaving 48 hours after the June 17 flight’s original takeoff time.

Farrell was even more surprised six weeks later, when he learned his request for compensation had been denied on the basis of the staff shortage.

300x250x1

“Since your Air Canada flight was delayed/cancelled due to crew constraints resulting from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our operations, the compensation you are requesting does not apply because the delay/cancellation was caused by a safety-related issue,” reads the email from customer relations dated July 29.

  • What do you think about this story? Do you have a question, experience or story tip to share? Send them in an email to ask@cbc.ca or join us in the comments now.

The rejection “feels like a slap in the face,” Farrell said.

“If they don’t have replacement crew to substitute in, then the flight [was] cancelled because they failed to assemble a crew, not because any other factor would have made it inherently unsafe to run the flight,” he said in an email.

“I think the airlines are trying to exploit a general emotional connection that people make between ‘COVID-19’ and ‘safety,’ when in reality if you put their logic to the test it doesn’t stand up.”

WATCH | Airlines avoiding compensating passengers: 

Frustration as airlines deny compensation for travel disruptions

23 days ago

Duration 2:05

Passengers are frustrated as airlines blame travel disruptions on factors beyond their control, denying compensation in the process.

Not a unique problem

Air Canada’s response to Farrell’s complaint was not an outlier. In a Dec. 29 memo, the company instructed employees to classify flight cancellations caused by staff shortages as a “safety” problem, which would exclude travellers from compensation under federal regulations. That policy remains in place.

Canada’s passenger rights charter, the Air Passenger Protection Regulations (APPR), mandates airlines to pay up to $1,000 in compensation for cancellations or significant delays that stem from reasons within the carrier’s control when the notification comes 14 days or less before departure. However, airlines do not have to pay if the change was required for safety purposes.

The Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA), a quasi-judicial federal body, says treating staff shortages as a safety matter violates federal rules.

“If a crew shortage is due to the actions or inactions of the carrier, the disruption will be considered within the carrier’s control for the purposes of the APPR. Therefore, a disruption caused by a crew shortage should not be considered ‘required for safety purposes’ when it is the carrier who caused the safety issue as a result of its own actions,” the agency said in an email.

That stance reinforces a decision made July 8 — three weeks before Farrell learned he’d been denied compensation — when the CTA used nearly identical language in a dispute over a flight at a different air carrier. The regulatory panel’s ruling in that case emphasized airlines’ obligations around advance planning “to ensure that the carrier has enough staff available to operate the services it offers for sale.”

WATCH | Dubious honour for Canada’s largest airport: 

Toronto’s Pearson ranked worst airport in the world for delays

9 days ago

Duration 2:00

Toronto’s Pearson International Airport was ranked the world’s worst airport for flight delays. Amid travel chaos, travellers continue to share complaints on social media while tourism groups fear this publicity may affect travel to Canada.

Air Canada exploiting policy, advocate says

In the December memo, which was issued at the height of the Omicron wave of COVID-19, Air Canada said: “Effective immediately, flight cancellations due to crew are considered as Within Carrier Control — For Safety.”

“Customers impacted by these flight cancellations will still be eligible for the standard of treatments such as hotel accommodations, meals etc. but will no longer be eligible for APPR claims/monetary compensation.”

The staff directive said the stance would be “temporary.” But Air Canada acknowledged in an email on July 25 that the policy “remains in place given the continued exceptional circumstances brought on by COVID variants.”

Gabor Lukacs, president of the Air Passenger Rights advocacy group, said Air Canada is “unlawfully” exploiting the passenger rights charter to avoid paying compensation and called on the transport regulator for stronger enforcement.

“They are misclassifying things that are clearly not a safety issue,” he said of Canada’s largest airline, calling the policy “egregious.”

Consumers can dispute an airline’s denial of a claim via a complaint to the CTA. However, the agency’s backlog topped 15,300 air travel complaints as of May.

Air Canada trying to deter compensation claims: lawyer

Lukacs also noted that European Union regulations do not exclude safety reasons from situations requiring compensation in the event of cancellations or delays. Payouts are precluded only as a result of “extraordinary circumstances,” such as weather or political instability.

“This document, along with the previous declarations and behaviour since the beginning of the pandemic, shows that Air Canada’s priority is clearly to try to limit the costs of the flight cancellations instead of providing good service to its clients,” Sylvie De Bellefeuille, a lawyer with Quebec-based advocacy group Option consommateurs, said after reviewing a copy of the directive.

She said Air Canada aims to deter passengers from requesting compensation in the first place. “This tactic does not, in our opinion, demonstrate that the company cares about its customers.”

Air Canada disagrees with that characterization.

“Air Canada had and continues to have more employees proportionate to its flying schedule when compared prior to the pandemic,” the company said in an emailed statement, indicating it had done everything it could to prepare for operational hiccups.

“Air Canada follows all public health directives as part of its safety culture, and during the Omicron wave last winter that affected some crew availability, we revised our policy to better assist customers in their travels with enhanced levels of customer care for flight cancellations related to crew contending with COVID.”

John Gradek, head of McGill University’s aviation management program, said the transportation agency is partly responsible for the “debacle” because it established looser rules than those in Europe and the United States.

“Carriers have been making strong efforts to point fingers and claim delays are outside of their control to reduce liability,” he said in an email.

LISTEN | No relief for frustrated travellers: 

The Current28:53Travellers continue to battle wait times and cancellations at airports, but experts say there won’t be relief anytime soon

Travellers continue to battle long wait times, delays and flight cancellations as they try to travel by plane this summer. Those challenges prompted Air Canada to cancel flights throughout the summer. For Jenn MacDougall, that meant she had to sleep on the floor of the airport. Now she tells guest host Rosemary Barton that she’s calling for action; travel expert Scott Keyes discusses how people can be best prepared; and Monette Pasher, president of the Canadian Airports Council, says global travel likely won’t get better anytime soon.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Tesla Promises Cheap EVs by 2025 | OilPrice.com – OilPrice.com

Published

 on



Tesla Promises Cheap EVs by 2025 | OilPrice.com



300x250x1


Charles Kennedy

Charles Kennedy

Charles is a writer for Oilprice.com

More Info

Related News

Tesla

Tesla has promised to start selling cheaper models next year, days after a Reuters report revealed that the company had shelved its plans for an all-new Tesla that would cost only $25,000.

The news that Tesla was scrapping the Model 2 came amid a drop in sales and profits, and a decision to slash a tenth of the company’s global workforce. Reuters also noted increased competition from Chinese EV makers.

Tesla’s deliveries slumped in the first quarter for the first annual drop since the start of the pandemic in 2020, missing analyst forecasts by a mile in a sign that even price cuts haven’t been able to stave off an increasingly heated competition on the EV market.

Profits dropped by 50%, disappointing investors and leading to a slump in the company’s share prices, which made any good news urgently needed. Tesla delivered: it said it would bring forward the date for the release of new, lower-cost models. These would be produced on its existing platform and rolled out in the second half of 2025, per the BBC.

Reuters cited the company as warning that this change of plans could “result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected,” however. This suggests the price tag of the new models is unlikely to be as small as the $25,000 promised for the Model 2.

The decision is based on a substantially reduced risk appetite in Tesla’s management, likely affected by the recent financial results and the intensifying competition with Chinese EV makers. Shelving the Model 2 and opting instead for cars to be produced on existing manufacturing lines is the safer move in these “uncertain times”, per the company.

Tesla is also cutting prices, as many other EV makers are doing amid a palpable decline in sales in key markets such as Europe, where the phaseout of subsidies has hit demand for EVs seriously. The cut is of about $2,000 on all models that Tesla currently sells.

By Charles Kennedy for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:

Join the discussion | Back to homepage

Related posts

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Why the Bank of Canada decided to hold interest rates in April – Financial Post

Published

 on


Article content

Divisions within the Bank of Canada over the timing of a much-anticipated cut to its key overnight interest rate stem from concerns of some members of the central bank’s governing council that progress on taming inflation could stall in the face of stronger domestic demand — or even pick up again in the event of “new surprises.”

“Some members emphasized that, with the economy performing well, the risk had diminished that restrictive monetary policy would slow the economy more than necessary to return inflation to target,” according to a summary of deliberations for the April 10 rate decision that were published Wednesday. “They felt more reassurance was needed to reduce the risk that the downward progress on core inflation would stall, and to avoid jeopardizing the progress made thus far.”

Article content

300x250x1

Others argued that there were additional risks from keeping monetary policy too tight in light of progress already made to tame inflation, which had come down “significantly” across most goods and services.

Some pointed out that the distribution of inflation rates across components of the consumer price index had approached normal, despite outsized price increases and decreases in certain components.

“Coupled with indicators that the economy was in excess supply and with a base case projection showing the output gap starting to close only next year, they felt there was a risk of keeping monetary policy more restrictive than needed.”

In the end, though, the central bankers agreed to hold the rate at five per cent because inflation remained too high and there were still upside risks to the outlook, albeit “less acute” than in the past couple of years.

Despite the “diversity of views” about when conditions will warrant cutting the interest rate, central bank officials agreed that monetary policy easing would probably be gradual, given risks to the outlook and the slow path for returning inflation to target, according to the summary of deliberations.

Article content

They considered a number of potential risks to the outlook for economic growth and inflation, including housing and immigration, according to summary of deliberations.

The central bankers discussed the risk that housing market activity could accelerate and further boost shelter prices and acknowledged that easing monetary policy could increase the likelihood of this risk materializing. They concluded that their focus on measures such as CPI-trim, which strips out extreme movements in price changes, allowed them to effectively look through mortgage interest costs while capturing other shelter prices such as rent that are more reflective of supply and demand in housing.

Recommended from Editorial

  1. Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem during a news conference in Ottawa.

    BoC ‘committed to finishing the job’ on inflation:‘ Macklem

  2. Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem at a press conference in Ottawa.

    Time for Macklem to turn before it’s too late

  3. Canada's inflation rate picked up slightly in March, but the consumer price index (CPI) release suggested that core inflation continued to slow.

    ‘Welcome news’ on inflation raises odds of rate cut

They also agreed to keep a close eye on immigration in the coming quarters due to uncertainty around recent announcements by the federal government.

“The projection incorporated continued strong population growth in the first half of 2024 followed by much softer growth, in line with the federal government’s target for reducing the share of non-permanent residents,” the summary said. “But details of how these plans will be implemented had not been announced. Governing council recognized that there was some uncertainty about future population growth and agreed it would be important to update the population forecast each quarter.”

• Email: bshecter@nationalpost.com

Bookmark our website and support our journalism: Don’t miss the business news you need to know — add financialpost.com to your bookmarks and sign up for our newsletters here.

Share this article in your social network

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Meta shares sink after it reveals spending plans – BBC.com

Published

 on


Woman looks at phone in front of Facebook image - stock shot.

Shares in US tech giant Meta have sunk in US after-hours trading despite better-than-expected earnings.

The Facebook and Instagram owner said expenses would be higher this year as it spends heavily on artificial intelligence (AI).

Its shares fell more than 15% after it said it expected to spend billions of dollars more than it had previously predicted in 2024.

300x250x1

Meta has been updating its ad-buying products with AI tools to boost earnings growth.

It has also been introducing more AI features on its social media platforms such as chat assistants.

The firm said it now expected to spend between $35bn and $40bn, (£28bn-32bn) in 2024, up from an earlier prediction of $30-$37bn.

Its shares fell despite it beating expectations on its earnings.

First quarter revenue rose 27% to $36.46bn, while analysts had expected earnings of $36.16bn.

Sophie Lund-Yates, lead equity analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown, said its spending plans were “aggressive”.

She said Meta’s “substantial investment” in AI has helped it get people to spend time on its platforms, so advertisers are willing to spend more money “in a time when digital advertising uncertainty remains rife”.

More than 50 countries are due to have elections this year, she said, “which hugely increases uncertainty” and can spook advertisers.

She added that Meta’s “fortunes are probably also being bolstered by TikTok’s uncertain future in the US”.

Meta’s rival has said it will fight an “unconstitutional” law that could result in TikTok being sold or banned in the US.

President Biden has signed into law a bill which gives the social media platform’s Chinese owner, ByteDance, nine months to sell off the app or it will be blocked in the US.

Ms Lund-Yates said that “looking further ahead, the biggest risk [for Meta] remains regulatory”.

Last year, Meta was fined €1.2bn (£1bn) by Ireland’s data authorities for mishandling people’s data when transferring it between Europe and the US.

And in February of this year, Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg faced blistering criticism from US lawmakers and was pushed to apologise to families of victims of child sexual exploitation.

Ms Lund-Yates added that the firm has “more than enough resources to throw at legal challenges, but that doesn’t rule out the risks of ups and downs in market sentiment”.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending