<B> EC Backing Bumped Flyers</B>
<I>Europe, U.K. Consider Passenger Rights Legislation</I>
By Amon Cohen
The battle to improve the rights of air passengers is intensifying not only in the United States but also across the Atlantic. The European Commission is set to introduce legislation to help "bumped" passengers and is considering additional measures dealing with everything from the conditions of carriage on an air ticket to air cabin quality.
Britain's Office of Fair Trading also has the bit between its teeth. It has identified 30 unfair elements in the standard IATA conditions of contract and warned that it will take legal action unless the association makes the conditions more consumer-friendly. The U.K. & Ireland Institute of Travel Management has played a major role in lobbying for the changes. Non-transferable ticketing, rescheduling of flights without compensation and restrictions on liability for goods damaged in flight are among the major grievances.
Partly as a result of the pressure from the OFT, IATA members will consider revising its recommended conditions of carriage on Oct. 12 at a passenger services conference. However, travel managers should not hold their breath. An internal IATA source said any amendments would "probably not be very dramatic." Nothing more is likely to emerge than a recommendation that elements of the conditions of carriage, which have an important impact on the passenger, should be highlighted when printed on tickets. "I would be surprised if IATA agreed to major changes," said a seasoned IATA watcher. "OFT will be forced to launch injunctions."
There are several points of contention raised by OFT that affect corporate travel managers. One is the inability to transfer tickets to other passengers, a practice Andrew Solum, partner of London-based Travel Industry Associates, feels is long overdue for reform.
"Airlines say a ticket cannot be transferred for security reasons, but as long as the passenger has their name on their bag and boards the flight, where is the problem?" Solum asked. "Royalty and film stars can travel under assumed names, so it does not make any sense." Solum also is pleased to see OFT take action on flight rescheduling.
"The airlines seem to rely on a clause under which they are committed to use 'best efforts' only to stick to published schedules and which says that the airline is not contractually bound to fly at the times shown in its timetables," said the U.K. director general of fair trading John Bridgeman. "Frankly, best efforts are not good enough. Consumers are entitled to expect the services they have paid for."
"It is outrageous that the times put on a suggested ticket are only a suggested time," Solum said. "If a movie broke down while you were watching it at the cinema, would you say 'oh, that's okay, I'll come back tomorrow'?"
OFT is taking firm action after being encouraged to do so by the European Commission, which originally decided action was better at member-state level than by the European Union as a single bloc. However, the commission seems to have had a change of heart. Some legislation already has been drafted and is awaiting ratification, while is more likely following a major consultative exercise to be unveiled in the next few weeks.
The impending legislation has been held up by the centuries-old argument between Spain and the United Kingdom over who owns Gibraltar, a rock off the southern Spanish coast that is inhabited by a colony of apes and also by a colony of humans who remain loyal to the British flag. Spain refuses to sign unless the airport on Gibraltar is excluded from the legislation.
Assuming this obstacle to pan-European harmony can be removed, the legislation will force airlines to display prominent notices at all EU airports explaining the compensation to which passengers are entitled if they are denied boarding. Since 1991, passengers flying in the EU have been entitled to an immediate cash payment of 150 euros (US$144) for flights up to 2,175 miles (less 50 percent if the resulting delay is less than two hours), and double that amount for flights more than 2,175 miles. The legislation also will mandate the same payments for flight cancellations unless the circumstances are beyond the airline's control, such as poor weather.
However, the commission feels the balance of rights between passenger and airline needs even more adjustment. "We believe there may well be a case for taking further action and we have prepared consultative documents asking what we should do next, be it regulations, recommendations or whatever," said the source at the commission.
Following assorted corruption scandals, the commission has appointed a new set of commissioners and the consultative exercise merely is awaiting the green light from incoming transport commissioner Loyola de Palacio before being distributed. All interested parties, including travel managers, are welcome to comment. The main area of investigation will be a thorough appraisal of the contract between airline and passenger, but other areas being probed include disclosure of information, passenger comfort and health, air cabin quality and dealing with air rage.
Meanwhile, the commission soon also is likely to legislate to prevent airlines from banning back-to-backs and other forms of creative ticketing.
Although the commission officially has an open mind on passenger rights, it is clear that additional legislation is likely to be forthcoming. "The passenger has very few possibilities to act against an airline," said the commission source. "Their conditions of carriage are normally worse than the small print on other contracts and passengers are not usually made aware of them." However, it is unlikely that any legislative action would go unchallenged by IATA. "Lawyers have looked at our conditions of carriage and found them not to be anti-consumer," a spokesman said.