-
https://www.britishairways.com/travel-partner-connect/disruptions
Allowing Malaysian Airlines direct as well as connections off of BA to SIN/HKG/BKK
Also one added fo CX but only economy and with a slew of blackout dates.
Only a week late.
BA management really failed on this one in not having this in place before cancelling flights and leaving call centre agents and passengers high and dry.
From what I understand they’re not allowed to contact other airlines in advance due to anti-competition concerns/rules.
What I don’t understand is why they don’t clearly communicate to agents / customers the situation and then contact everyone again once the guidelines are in place
Now many passengers have accepted sub optimal rerouting and won’t be able to get onto the direct flights
…why they don’t clearly communicate to agents / customers the situation and then contact everyone again once the guidelines are in place
Now many passengers have accepted sub optimal rerouting and won’t be able to get onto the direct flights
Exactly.
What I don’t understand is why they don’t clearly communicate to agents / customers the situation and then contact everyone again once the guidelines are in place
This.
It isn’t the first time we’ve encountered nonsense or potentially illegal responses from BA.
No repercussions for them whatsoever.
Toothless regulator etcI’m sure JDB and his fans will disagree as is the norm.
The CAA does very little because it doesn’t have the statutory authority to act.
If it tried to punish an airline for breaching the regulation it would soon be up in court for acting ultra vires.
The CAA does very little because it doesn’t have the statutory authority to act.
If it tried to punish an airline for breaching the regulation it would soon be up in court for acting ultra vires.
Th3 Competition and Markets Authority would have this kind of disregard of statute within their remit though, and they (the CMA) definitely have the teeth.
And it seems the CAA is closer to a fluffy toy so far as the deliberate failure of airlines to provide statutory entitlements of airline consumers is concerned.
Should the CAA be funded by HM Treasury instead of from airlines?
And it seems the CAA is closer to a fluffy toy so far as the deliberate failure of airlines to provide statutory entitlements of airline consumers is concerned.
Did you not read what I wrote?
The CAA simply does not have the power to enforce the regulation!
And it seems the CAA is closer to a fluffy toy so far as the deliberate failure of airlines to provide statutory entitlements of airline consumers is concerned.
Did you not read what I wrote?
The CAA simply does not have the power to enforce the regulation!
It’s described as a NEB though.
Did you read what I wrote BAFIS? What do you think a fluffy toy is ?:-)
Hoping everyone got the flights they needed in the end. Luckily I’m not affected but do wonder if anyone has any view on how long the 787 issues may take to resolve? I think I have only one BA flight currently scheduled to be on this aircraft type before Christmas and not much else yet confirmed before July of next year. I note the current 1st April date for the KL route but will much have changed by then supply chain wise at Rolls Royce? Will this become a rolling issue?
@Richie I think you completely misunderstand the role of an NEB, the role/remit of the CAA and how the CAA quite unlike other countries has ensured compliance via two free or cheap routes of redress, not available elsewhere.
In this respect, it has quite correctly in effect delegated its powers to competent tribunals and provided to those tribunals detailed guidance using its aviation expertise. Courts interpret the law, not QUANGOs. What more do you seriously expect? It would be absurd for the CAA to intervene in individual cases when it has neither the power nor legal competence to do so.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Popular articles this week:
