pwm2txlhopper wrote:N62NA wrote:qf789 wrote:
Since it was a weather event out of the airlines control, I doubt the airline would have rebooked diverted passengers on another carrier?
However, maybe I’m wrong and Qantas actually assists customers in these “acts of God, out of the airlines control”, unlike American carriers these days.
Would hope the passengers at least got hotel vouchers when they got to LAX?
The late night shows could make a great joke at Detroit’s expense about the plane full of Aussies that got diverted to Detroit, and decided going back to LAX was better than being stuck in Detroit!
Qantas do, they have an obligation under Australian law which doesn’t have the same weather related exceptions that the US carriers rely on. In my time I’ve seen quite a few of my customers rebooked by Qantas onto United due to both weather and mechanical delays. Oddly enough I haven’t yet had anyone rebooked on AA72/73 when required, but have seen people reaccommodated on United on both SYD-LAX and SYD-SFO.
In this instance the passengers would have got hotels in LAX, and then anyone who could be rebooked on QF11 the next day would have done. Anyone left over would have been put on AA or VX (who they also interline with), maybe UA to EWR is if they were desperate. Technically though the obligation is to get them to JFK, not somewhere near JFK, so anyone rebooked to EWR would have either done so voluntarily or QF would have provided ground transport.