pc28����

But passengers’ rights advocates, airlines, and industry analysts all slammed the tweak to the APPR, which was unveiled by the Canadian Transportation Agency in June. Among the complaints? The change could lead to higher travel costs and fewer routes; it’s nothing more than window-dressing from a government desperate to be seen as helping consumers amidst travel chaos; it’s actually making it harder for passengers to get refunds than it already was.

“It’s incredibly disappointing,” said Gabor Lukacs, founder and president of Air Passenger Rights, a consumer advocacy group for airline passengers. Lukacs argued that passengers already had a right to refunds, even if it wasn’t enshrined in the APPR.

“What the government is doing is regifting passengers a watered-down version of rights they already enjoy. This will make it more difficult for passengers to get refunds if they’re offered alternate transportation within 48 hours,” Lukacs said. “The airlines will try to argue that … if it’s Friday and they offer you a ticket for Sunday, then they can just keep your money if you choose not to fly.”

In a press release, federal transport minister Omar Alghabra said the change to the APPR closes a “gap” in passenger rights which was revealed by the global COVID-19 pandemic.

“Our government is working with air industry partners to help ease airport congestion to keep travellers moving, and we will continue to protect the interests of passengers when travel doesn’t go according to plan,” Alghabra said.

Longtime air industry observer Fred Lazar, a professor at York University’s Schulich School of Business, called the change “remarkably stupid,” and predicted it will lead to higher prices for airplane tickets, and reduced options for people flying from smaller cities and towns.

“They’re not just going to eat the cost. They’ll pass it on. They could do a deal with insurers and then build the cost of the premium into their ticket prices. And then come winter time, we’ll start to see surcharges for certain destinations where weather is consistently an issue,” said Lazar, adding that some airlines might decide certain routes are no longer worth the risk of having to issue a flight full of refunds.

“Planes are 90 per cent full these days. So good luck rebooking 200 or 300 people within 48 hours. Some routes just aren’t going to be worth the risk of having to pay out. And it’s going to be smaller cities that probably get their flights cut first,” said Lazar.

The change to APPR, Lazar suggested, is more about political optics than anything else.

“This is nothing more than the government saying ‘we have to do something,’ and then not actually thinking it through,” Lazar said.

Airlines, meanwhile, say the change is unfair, that they’re being singled out as the cause of travel disruptions they don’t have any control over at all.

“There are a whole lot of disruptions that have nothing to do with the airlines, but it’s the airlines that are being told ‘you are the only ones responsible,’” said an exasperated Jeff Morrison, president of the National Airlines Council of Canada (NACC), and industry association.

“I think it’s government responding to public demands for something to be done and for someone to be held accountable. And so they did what they have always done, which is to essentially point the fingers at the airlines. And … that’s an overly-simplistic view of air travel,” said Morrison.

WestJet spokesperson Andrew Gibbons said other organizations deserve to share in the blame for travel chaos.

“While we accept our responsibilities to our guests and for commercial decisions we take, the traveller experience of the last few months has demonstrated that service failures are complicated, can be caused by many parties, and all providers of services to our guests should have the same scrutiny and responsibility under regulations that WestJet does,” Gibbons said.

A spokesperson for Air Canada referred a request for comment to the NACC.