• Steve@communick.news
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yes. It’s still the right thing to do.
      Cheaper nonrefundable tickets should be banned also.

  • RustyEarthfire@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    The complete rules are here: https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/refundsfinalruleapril2024

    The meat of it is the table on pages 9-14 and mostly comprehensible.

    Worth noting:

    • A change to your flight number is always a “cancellation” and you may choose to accept a refund
      • The expectation is most people would not, for the same reason most don’t cancel their refundable tickets - they want to go on the flight
    • There are no carve outs for weather, etc.
      • I am really glad to see this because airlines could claim “weather” for connecting flights, so any weather anywhere meant they could delay your flight
    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, the weather note is huge. Historically, airlines would just cite “weather” because there was a single cloud in the sky halfway to the destination. Because if a cancellation was weather related, they didn’t have to pay out.

      I basically see this as the government going “look, we tried to be nice and give you some leeway. But you abused that by citing weather for every single cancellation. So now you’re on a tight leash and can’t even cite it when it’s valid.”

    • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Even if demand was perfectly inelastic and the burden was paid entirely by the consumer… I’d still rather get what I paid for than leave it up to chance.