The latest is Southwest canceling thousands of them, citing air traffic controller issues, despite the airports themselves saying they have no issues at all.

I am so sick of all these airlines cancelling all of these flights all the time. In the last 6 months, it's happened more than ever. Screw everyone. It doesn't matter people are stuck wherever they are. It doesn't matter that these people have kids they have to get home to. It doesn't matter that they are now going to miss appointments. It doesn't matter that they are going to end up sleeping on airport floors. Nope. the airlines have their money, so they can do what they want.

I'm tired of this, and so are millions of travelers that keep getting stranded. Is there NOTHING that can be done about this? Can we pass laws holding airlines responsible for passengers lodging every single time they cancel a flight? Why can they not put them on other airline like they used to? Start making airlines be responsible for putting their passengers up in hotels each and every time they do this, and see how fast it stops.

Did you factor in the pandemic in your rant?

TriL1011Star wrote:

The latest is Southwest canceling thousands of them, citing air traffic controller issues, despite the airports themselves saying they have no issues at all.

I am so sick of all these airlines cancelling all of these flights all the time. In the last 6 months, it's happened more than ever. Screw everyone. It doesn't matter people are stuck wherever they are. It doesn't matter that these people have kids they have to get home to. It doesn't matter that they are now going to miss appointments. It doesn't matter that they are going to end up sleeping on airport floors. Nope. the airlines have their money, so they can do what they want.

I'm tired of this, and so are millions of travelers that keep getting stranded. Is there NOTHING that can be done about this? Can we pass laws holding airlines responsible for passengers lodging every single time they cancel a flight? Why can they not put them on other airline like they used to? Start making airlines be responsible for putting their passengers up in hotels each and every time they do this, and see how fast it stops.

Why are you absolving travelers of their end of responsibility? We are not in an economic or operational space where people can expect everything to go smoothly right now - if people expect otherwise, that's on them for not doing their homework. Anyone working in almost any industry is aware of these impacts in whatever operations they're exposed to.

TriL1011Star wrote:

The latest is Southwest canceling thousands of them, citing air traffic controller issues, despite the airports themselves saying they have no issues at all.

I am so sick of all these airlines cancelling all of these flights all the time. In the last 6 months, it's happened more than ever. Screw everyone. It doesn't matter people are stuck wherever they are. It doesn't matter that these people have kids they have to get home to. It doesn't matter that they are now going to miss appointments. It doesn't matter that they are going to end up sleeping on airport floors. Nope. the airlines have their money, so they can do what they want.

I'm tired of this, and so are millions of travelers that keep getting stranded. Is there NOTHING that can be done about this? Can we pass laws holding airlines responsible for passengers lodging every single time they cancel a flight? Why can they not put them on other airline like they used to? Start making airlines be responsible for putting their passengers up in hotels each and every time they do this, and see how fast it stops.

I think you're underestimating the extreme difficulties of rostering and day-to-day operations during the pandemic.

I agree with the OP, this is not a good look for Southwest, or the other airlines who have done this recently. Some airlines have done a pretty good job maintaining their schedule, or at least more proactively changing things before they go sideways, so it's obviously possible. I think some stricter laws about compensation (maybe a 150% refund or $500) or a fraud lawsuit might motivate some change in this regard.

From the outside, this looks like a classic case of selling more product than you can deliver, most likely someone in flight scheduling lining up more flights than could realistically be flown, and crew scheduling not being in the meeting or not piping up and saying it would not be doable. If I pay money and sign a contract with a vendor to do X for me, that vendor is on the hook for delivering. How exactly they get there is none of the customers' business.

Some products and services are expensive and difficult to deliver. Boeing sold 787s for 2010 delivery, Airbus sold A380s for 2006 delivery. Both missed those dates. Sucks for them, pay up. It's not the customer's responsibility to look over a vendor's shoulder and make sure they're using the right CATIA version or managing subcontractors properly, that's 100% the vendor's responsibility. It's a pretty basic rule in business: don't sell what you can't deliver.

TriL1011Star wrote:

The latest is Southwest canceling thousands of them, citing air traffic controller issues, despite the airports themselves saying they have no issues at all.

I am so sick of all these airlines cancelling all of these flights all the time. In the last 6 months, it's happened more than ever. Screw everyone. It doesn't matter people are stuck wherever they are. It doesn't matter that these people have kids they have to get home to. It doesn't matter that they are now going to miss appointments. It doesn't matter that they are going to end up sleeping on airport floors. Nope. the airlines have their money, so they can do what they want.

I'm tired of this, and so are millions of travelers that keep getting stranded. Is there NOTHING that can be done about this? Can we pass laws holding airlines responsible for passengers lodging every single time they cancel a flight? Why can they not put them on other airline like they used to? Start making airlines be responsible for putting their passengers up in hotels each and every time they do this, and see how fast it stops.

'Murica .

The only thing that can be done involves heavy, deep, overwhelming bi-partisan and public support for something so grand that it can overcome the most deep pocketed and entrenched lobby groups.
Basically, something along the lines of Constitutional Amendment.

Considering all the greater issues frozen in society, the practical answer is No; NOTHING will be done.
You'll need to drive, take a bus, a train, or always, always , always have a Plan B for every stinkin flight and never be surprised.

For an airline, canceling is hitting the easy button. It's very, very difficult and expensive to not cancel. Many times it seems counterintuitive to not cancel because the cost is so great. Often you delay many more flights which then puts those crews at risk of timing out. However, when massive system disruptions occur the size of those currently at Southwest, the only way out is mass cancelations. Even then, there should be a plan to the cancelations.....continuing to do them tactically indicates that the management has lost control of the operation. Mho.

Survey after survey has shown that the number one negative feedback item from airline customers is cancellations. They hate them. Delta broke the code on this several years ago. I daresay that their non-union workforce (except pilots and dispatchers) has helped them immensely, there is a culture of service there that simply doesn't exist elsewhere. It's the core reason for their successs imho.

Southwest is the industry darling. They typically don't get poor customer service scores because they don't offer much service. Expectations are low. Prices are low. There will be a temporary negative blowback from this event. My feeling is that 6 months from now this will all have blown over and the discount divas will still be flying Southwest. Mho.

FlyHappy wrote:

TriL1011Star wrote:

The latest is Southwest canceling thousands of them, citing air traffic controller issues, despite the airports themselves saying they have no issues at all.

I am so sick of all these airlines cancelling all of these flights all the time. In the last 6 months, it's happened more than ever. Screw everyone. It doesn't matter people are stuck wherever they are. It doesn't matter that these people have kids they have to get home to. It doesn't matter that they are now going to miss appointments. It doesn't matter that they are going to end up sleeping on airport floors. Nope. the airlines have their money, so they can do what they want.

I'm tired of this, and so are millions of travelers that keep getting stranded. Is there NOTHING that can be done about this? Can we pass laws holding airlines responsible for passengers lodging every single time they cancel a flight? Why can they not put them on other airline like they used to? Start making airlines be responsible for putting their passengers up in hotels each and every time they do this, and see how fast it stops.

'Murica .

The only thing that can be done involves heavy, deep, overwhelming bi-partisan and public support for something so grand that it can overcome the most deep pocketed and entrenched lobby groups.
Basically, something along the lines of Constitutional Amendment.

Considering all the greater issues frozen in society, the practical answer is No; NOTHING will be done.
You'll need to drive, take a bus, a train, or always, always , always have a Plan B for every stinkin flight and never be surprised.

I’m not sure why this reality causes so much consternation. People who can’t afford to drop $500 or $1,000 on dealing with something unexpected probably should not be flying (or should be buying appropriate travel insurance). It’s hard for me to see why that is the government’s problem or to imagine what sort of government intervention would even change this effectively.

Cubsrule wrote:

I’m not sure why this reality causes so much consternation. People who can’t afford to drop $500 or $1,000 on dealing with something unexpected probably should not be flying (or should be buying appropriate travel insurance). It’s hard for me to see why that is the government’s problem or to imagine what sort of government intervention would even change this effectively.

I get the impression you work in law in some capacity, so you would know more than I, but what about a class-action lawsuit for fraud: fraud for selling a product (schedule) they cannot deliver. Fraud for taking customers' money and not delivering the product they paid for.

I paid for Southwest to fly me from BNA to DCA on Friday, October 8, at 3:10 p.m. They did not provide that service. When I cancelled my ticket, they were offering to provide that service at 5 p.m. the following day--26 hours later. That is not what I agreed to. And thanks to contracts of carriage that are completely tilted in favor of the company (something else that should also be investigated), I am not entitled to a refund because my flight was technically not cancelled.

I find your post socio-economically offensive. Why should I have to pay more money to solve a problem because a company failed to provide the service they delivered? If WN wants to pay $1,800 to book me on AA instead (which is what a comparable roundtrip flight on American was going for online at the time), they are welcome to, but that burden shouldn't be on me. So now only rich people should be able to fly? Ah, the good old days!

I can think of few industries where the balance of power is so lopsided between customer and company as it is in the airline industry. While I wouldn't have started a whole thread about the subject, I understand the OP's point.

UALFAson wrote:

I paid for Southwest to fly me from BNA to DCA on Friday, October 8, at 3:10 p.m. They did not provide that service. When I cancelled my ticket, they were offering to provide that service at 5 p.m. the following day--26 hours later. That is not what I agreed to. And thanks to contracts of carriage that are completely tilted in favor of the company (something else that should also be investigated), I am not entitled to a refund because my flight was technically not cancelled.

I'm not sure how the CoC is heavy-handed or one-sided in this instance. WN sells a ticket that is fully (and, often, nearly immediately) refundable. That evidently was a product you chose not to buy. WN can't make aircraft or crew appear out of thin air. Did their treatment of you in some way violate the CoC?

UALFAson wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

I’m not sure why this reality causes so much consternation. People who can’t afford to drop $500 or $1,000 on dealing with something unexpected probably should not be flying (or should be buying appropriate travel insurance). It’s hard for me to see why that is the government’s problem or to imagine what sort of government intervention would even change this effectively.

I get the impression you work in law in some capacity, so you would know more than I, but what about a class-action lawsuit for fraud: fraud for selling a product (schedule) they cannot deliver. Fraud for taking customers' money and not delivering the product they paid for.

I paid for Southwest to fly me from BNA to DCA on Friday, October 8, at 3:10 p.m. They did not provide that service. When I cancelled my ticket, they were offering to provide that service at 5 p.m. the following day--26 hours later. That is not what I agreed to. And thanks to contracts of carriage that are completely tilted in favor of the company (something else that should also be investigated), I am not entitled to a refund because my flight was technically not cancelled.

I find your post socio-economically offensive. Why should I have to pay more money to solve a problem because a company failed to provide the service they delivered? If WN wants to pay $1,800 to book me on AA instead (which is what a comparable roundtrip flight on American was going for online at the time), they are welcome to, but that burden shouldn't be on me. So now only rich people should be able to fly? Ah, the good old days!

I can think of few industries where the balance of power is so lopsided between customer and company as it is in the airline industry. While I wouldn't have started a whole thread about the subject, I understand the OP's point.

This is a capitalist country. That has been the status quo for dog's years.

TriL1011Star wrote:

I am so sick of all these airlines cancelling all of these flights all the time.

It's not 'all of these airlines.' Cancellation rates vary a lot by U.S. carrier. The DOT puts out a monthly report (with a bit of reporting delay) that shows cancellations by carrier - both operating and marketing, to capture the regionals under the DL/AA/UA/AS brands.

https://www.transportation.gov/individu ... er-reports

Delta got mocked for cancellations around Thanksgiving and Christmas last year but runs ops with very few cancellations. The DOT's most recent report (Sept '21) has data for July. % of cancellations by marketing carrier:

Hawaiian, 0.2%

Delta, 0.3%

Alaska, 0.8%

Southwest, 1.7%

American, 1.7%

Spirit, 1.8%

United, 2.5%

JetBlue, 2.6%

Frontier, 3.4%

Allegiant, 5.8%

Remember that P2P carriers present far fewer re-route opportunities, irrespective of frequency on an airport pair.

The regional ops of DL/AA/UA/AS have higher cancellation rates to worsen the marketing carrier rates above, but DL's branded codeshare partners (the DOT term for the regionals) had a lower cancellation rate in July at 0.6% than the mainline ops of every carrier other than DL itself ( at 0.1%) and Hawaiian.

For the seven months Jan '21 - July '21, inclusive, WN had more cancellations than the industry average in five months.

If you value reliability, choose a reliable carrier.

Aaron747 wrote:

Why are you absolving travelers of their end of responsibility? We are not in an economic or operational space where people can expect everything to go smoothly right now - if people expect otherwise, that's on them for not doing their homework. Anyone working in almost any industry is aware of these impacts in whatever operations they're exposed to.

My view is that if an airline is selling me a ticket, I, as a consumer, should be able to make a reasonable assumption that the airline will be able to deliver the product I purchased.

I think it's unfair to think that I, as a consumer, should have to understand the vagaries of airline staffing and dispatching in order to purchase a ticket.

The fact that this issue seems to have specifically affected WN suggests to me that someone at WN screwed up.

As for the pandemic, we are over 18 months into it. If you're running a business, then you need to take that into account.

DocLightning wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Why are you absolving travelers of their end of responsibility? We are not in an economic or operational space where people can expect everything to go smoothly right now - if people expect otherwise, that's on them for not doing their homework. Anyone working in almost any industry is aware of these impacts in whatever operations they're exposed to.

My view is that if an airline is selling me a ticket, I, as a consumer, should be able to make a reasonable assumption that the airline will be able to deliver the product I purchased.

I think it's unfair to think that I, as a consumer, should have to understand the vagaries of airline staffing and dispatching in order to purchase a ticket.

The fact that this issue seems to have specifically affected WN suggests to me that someone at WN screwed up.

As for the pandemic, we are over 18 months into it. If you're running a business, then you need to take that into account.

In an ideal world that would be the case, but in the US we don’t live in a consumer friendly society. The government says these contracts of adhesion the airlines use as carriage policies are legal. Most of them state something like ‘published schedules are not guaranteed and form no part of this contract. We may substitute alternate carriers or aircraft, delay or cancel flights, change seat assignments and alter or omit stopping places shown on the ticket at any time. Schedules are subject to change without notice’.

Consumers need to be aware of that and accordingly keep expectations realistic.

Want absolute control over your travels— by a plane or a Net Jets contract or be prepared to knock out the miles in your car, if no water crossing is involved. I’ve dozens of times said, “screw the airlines”, got in the car and best them in travel time. It’s no wonder people are beating down the door of the charter/fractional operators.

Or accordingly pass legislation that reregulates them if they can't run a business properly.

bfitzflyer wrote:

Or accordingly pass legislation that reregulates them if they can't run a business properly.

Because that worked out so well the first time.

Is the issue THAT BAD in the US?
I look through the flights that I have taken in my life since 2005
50 longhaul
10 North America (Mexico, Costa Rica)
70 South America
100 Europe
100 Asia
50 Australia and the Pacific
3 Africa (Morocco)

I had only TWO cancellations (by Royal Air Maroc and Sriwijaya)
which is less than 0.6 percent
In Asia or South America or Europe I find it natural that nothing gets cancelled. I have an impression that airlines there do their best NOT TO cancel. Am I just lucky or is it that much worse in 'Murica?

ZKCIF wrote:

Is the issue THAT BAD in the US?
I look through the flights that I have taken in my life since 2005
50 longhaul
10 North America (Mexico, Costa Rica)
70 South America
100 Europe
100 Asia
50 Australia and the Pacific
3 Africa (Morocco)

I had only TWO cancellations (by Royal Air Maroc and Sriwijaya)
which is less than 0.6 percent
In Asia or South America or Europe I find it natural that nothing gets cancelled. I have an impression that airlines there do their best NOT TO cancel. Am I just lucky or is it that much worse in 'Murica?

Only in some people’s minds. I’ve had similar experience over similar time frame, maybe not as many total airline flights but we’ll over 200 (I can’t be bothered keeping track), not one cancellation, a couple of late luggage (delivered when they said it would be); a couple of delays in massive snowstorms. Big whoop, nothing is more reliable than an airline—US included.

That said, yes, on a ULCC like Spirit even WN, you get what you pat for.

This had absolutely nothing to do with ATC

LH707330 wrote:

From the outside, this looks like a classic case of selling more product than you can deliver, most likely someone in flight scheduling lining up more flights than could realistically be flown, and crew scheduling not being in the meeting or not piping up and saying it would not be doable. If I pay money and sign a contract with a vendor to do X for me, that vendor is on the hook for delivering. How exactly they get there is none of the customers' business.

This is very much true, not just in US, but in other parts of world too right now.

Airlines are simply loading flights into their system they have no intention on operating. They'll collect the fare, cancel the flight close to departure, then rebook the pax or give options of an itinerary which would extremely absurd; like reroute through a one or two-stop flight with long layovers, or rebook on some other day, or if lucky get a flight at any other random hour on the same day, which would be the best-case scenario of a plan B.

Even though there are laws over cancellations, refund, or on providing alternatives/accommodation/refreshments, etc, it seems airlines are able to get away with not complying with these rules using the excuse of the pandemic. Not saying pandemic doesn't affect airline ops, but airlines are obviously using this excuse to take advantage of the leniency they are having from authorities.
I have made it a must now to check the history of a flight on fr24 before booking, to avoid disappointment later.

Just got home from a trip where I had to buy new tickets last minute on DL for $2000 for two people when our original Southwest tickets were $180 each.

We showed up at the airport on Monday 10/11 at 4am only to learn our PWM-BWI flight was cancelled and it was going to be five days before Southwest could get us to JAN! Nothing out of MHT, BOS, PVD, BDL, even 300 miles away at LGA!

I had to be in Mississippi the following evening and had no choice but to fork over $2000 for the two of us. Then rush to take a bus three hours to BOS to catch the Delts flight we rebooked.

I get delays happen. But when it’s going to take five days to put you on the next flight, that’s too much. SW should have rebooked customers on other carriers, even if that’s not their regular policy. I purposely chose SW for five years exclusively because I thought they took care of you. Now I’m out $2000 for being loyal. For $2000 could have flown to Hawaii.

UALFAson wrote:

I paid for Southwest to fly me from BNA to DCA on Friday, October 8, at 3:10 p.m. They did not provide that service. When I cancelled my ticket, they were offering to provide that service at 5 p.m. the following day--26 hours later. That is not what I agreed to.

DocLightning wrote:

My view is that if an airline is selling me a ticket, I, as a consumer, should be able to make a reasonable assumption that the airline will be able to deliver the product I purchased.

Agreed, this is a pretty simple case of "I paid you for service X, now deliver it." I wonder if a fraud case could be mounted using a "reasonable person" interpretation of a timetable NOT meaning "we may or may not get you there sometime that day if we screw up."

avier wrote:

Airlines are simply loading flights into their system they have no intention on operating. They'll collect the fare, cancel the flight close to departure, then rebook the pax or give options of an itinerary which would extremely absurd; like reroute through a one or two-stop flight with long layovers, or rebook on some other day, or if lucky get a flight at any other random hour on the same day, which would be the best-case scenario of a plan B.

It appears that this is what happened at Southwest, per this op-ed from one of their pilots: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 468282002/

Looks like a simple case of poor internal coordination leading to a failure to deliver a contracted service.

Cubsrule wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

TriL1011Star wrote:

The latest is Southwest canceling thousands of them, citing air traffic controller issues, despite the airports themselves saying they have no issues at all.

I am so sick of all these airlines cancelling all of these flights all the time. In the last 6 months, it's happened more than ever. Screw everyone. It doesn't matter people are stuck wherever they are. It doesn't matter that these people have kids they have to get home to. It doesn't matter that they are now going to miss appointments. It doesn't matter that they are going to end up sleeping on airport floors. Nope. the airlines have their money, so they can do what they want.

I'm tired of this, and so are millions of travelers that keep getting stranded. Is there NOTHING that can be done about this? Can we pass laws holding airlines responsible for passengers lodging every single time they cancel a flight? Why can they not put them on other airline like they used to? Start making airlines be responsible for putting their passengers up in hotels each and every time they do this, and see how fast it stops.

'Murica .

The only thing that can be done involves heavy, deep, overwhelming bi-partisan and public support for something so grand that it can overcome the most deep pocketed and entrenched lobby groups.
Basically, something along the lines of Constitutional Amendment.

Considering all the greater issues frozen in society, the practical answer is No; NOTHING will be done.
You'll need to drive, take a bus, a train, or always, always , always have a Plan B for every stinkin flight and never be surprised.

I’m not sure why this reality causes so much consternation. People who can’t afford to drop $500 or $1,000 on dealing with something unexpected probably should not be flying (or should be buying appropriate travel insurance). It’s hard for me to see why that is the government’s problem or to imagine what sort of government intervention would even change this effectively.

Do you realize how insanely pretentious and privileged this sounds? Most Americans do not have an extra $500 or $1,000 to deal with flight cancellations. Should all those people simply never fly?

This sort of casual "why don't you peasants just have more money" attitude is of a feather with the attitude consumers see in the airlines. I wouldn't have made a full thread about it like OP, but airlines are hardly perfect.

example: WS has been, and continues, to sell non-stop YXE-USA flights. Anyone want to guess an airport that isn't on Canada's list of approved entry points right now? These are completely fictitious flights. They don't exist except as a way for WS to capture bookings. But the pax who take WS at its word that it will fly them from YXE are the ones at fault here? Please. Nor are the pax who are left stranded because (as another poster further down noted), the airline dropped the ball on crew scheduling.

And to the idea of "having alternate arrangements" - sure, if you're in something like the Acela or I-5 corridor. I went back and looked - roughly 1% of the flights I've taken could be driven in <14 hours. Alternate arrangements? Should I try dog sled, pony express, or Amtrak?

alo2yyz wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

'Murica .

The only thing that can be done involves heavy, deep, overwhelming bi-partisan and public support for something so grand that it can overcome the most deep pocketed and entrenched lobby groups.
Basically, something along the lines of Constitutional Amendment.

Considering all the greater issues frozen in society, the practical answer is No; NOTHING will be done.
You'll need to drive, take a bus, a train, or always, always , always have a Plan B for every stinkin flight and never be surprised.

I’m not sure why this reality causes so much consternation. People who can’t afford to drop $500 or $1,000 on dealing with something unexpected probably should not be flying (or should be buying appropriate travel insurance). It’s hard for me to see why that is the government’s problem or to imagine what sort of government intervention would even change this effectively.

Do you realize how insanely pretentious and privileged this sounds? Most Americans do not have an extra $500 or $1,000 to deal with flight cancellations. Should all those people simply never fly?

This sort of casual "why don't you peasants just have more money" attitude is of a feather with the attitude consumers see in the airlines. I wouldn't have made a full thread about it like OP, but airlines are hardly perfect.

example: WS has been, and continues, to sell non-stop YXE-USA flights. Anyone want to guess an airport that isn't on Canada's list of approved entry points right now? These are completely fictitious flights. They don't exist except as a way for WS to capture bookings. But the pax who take WS at its word that it will fly them from YXE are the ones at fault here? Please. Nor are the pax who are left stranded because (as another poster further down noted), the airline dropped the ball on crew scheduling.

And to the idea of "having alternate arrangements" - sure, if you're in something like the Acela or I-5 corridor. I went back and looked - roughly 1% of the flights I've taken could be driven in <14 hours. Alternate arrangements? Should I try dog sled, pony express, or Amtrak?

I’d absolutely suggest that people who don’t have a good sense of what they are going to do if things go sideways and the airline offers the bare minimum of what is required under the CoC shouldn’t be flying. You seem to be reading into my comments a suggestion that that reality is “right” or “fair.” It isn’t, and I didn’t suggest that it is.