Why Air Canada Sucks
I overheard the news while eating dinner and almost ended up coughing noodles up through my nose.
As a frequent flier (for a student, anyways), there’s nothing more important to me than the service received from an airline. Fortunately, I grew up in a time when the staff was courteous, and when pillows and blankets and meals was actually included in your ticket, no matter if you’re traveling overseas or domestic.
How times has changed.
Now, I understand the whole economy of things, skyrocketing fuel costs, and major competitions between the airlines are wrecking down the profits earned by these airlines. Excellent services that I use to get no longer seems applicable. Nevertheless, airlines still need to realize that they’re not just hauling bodies across the sky, and some core services still needs to be maintained.
Air Canada, on the other hand, decides that some core services are just not worth it. Now, you’ll have to fork out $25-35 extra on top of your ticket to get assistance in terms of hotel arrangement, car rentals, and other travels, including re-booking flights when you get stranded at airports due to any unexpected delays and cancellations. This is a pretty surprising, not to mention an incredibly stupid move considering the fact that they’ve just reported a no-growth March in terms of passenger number, while West Jet continues to soar (pun totally intended).
This is almost like being asked to pay extra for the use of plates and utensils when I walk into a restaurant.
It’s true what they say, when price responds to competition we usually see a decline in service. But we’re not just talking about an extra in-flight movie or meals here. We’re talking about funding the failure of an airline to honour a purchase and sales agreement that has been in place since the beginning of the air travel industry. I personally believe that when it comes to weather related delays, airline has every right to not get their passenger a complementary hotel stay, after all, the bad weather isn’t their fault, as for mechanical failures, depends on the situations, the airline should make a decision based on the availability of flights and number of passengers for booking hotels, but food and drinks? Definitely should be provided. Instead, travelers will now pay, if it’s a mechanical failure, for their own compensation. How wrong is this picture?
Air Canada definitely needs to seriously rethink their guest-service strategies, and maybe they’ll finally see their passenger numbers go up. Until then, I have decided that I will never ride Air Canada.
Apr 06, 2008 @ 13:58:27
I actually think Air Canada is quite genius with that plan… if people do pony up the money. Because in the worst case scenario, they have to get you hotel for a night, $25-35 is probably how much they pay for hotel anyways. In the case that you don’t need their service (99% of the time), that’s extra cold hard cash in their pockets; they don’t even need to give you aeroplan for that.
With Air Canada flights, they tend to put better crew and pilot on the better air planes, this mostly means their A340, B777, A333 and some of their newly renovated aircrafts.
Apr 06, 2008 @ 14:01:42
Tim, this template is way too wide…
Apr 06, 2008 @ 16:39:43
I have no doubt that it is a great way to increase their profit. The idea is genious in terms of upping the moola. But from a consumer’s stand point, it’s simply a quick cash grab from my pocket for an expected, and essential service.
As for the template, is it not showing up properly?
May 26, 2008 @ 13:56:08
You’re an idiot…Here’s an idea…Rather than using your ridiculous website to question a policy that you clearly misunderstood…try doing some good in this world rather than whining and bitching about your piddly little issues. You actually have the entire policy backwards!!! Rather than attempt to educate you…I’m going to do you a favour…Re-read the policy that AC has implemented – ask questions – educate yourself – and then please, keep your opinion to yourself – you don’t have to use a website as a soapbox.
May 26, 2008 @ 18:49:46
Well Hello Rick from Air Canada, nice to meet you too!
I do enjoy a good debate from time to time, but I’d much prefer it to be civilized. I would have much preferred if you attempted to “educate” me with your holiness on “piddly little issues” instead of degrading yourself to… a piddly little person!
Perhaps you need to educate yourself on what exactly a blog is, and learn some manners, especially manners. I sincerely hope your response here is not a standard for any Air Canada customers who happens to come your way and have a few disagreements. This is my blog, my space, and I am entitled to any opinion I say here. (And I do know that I’m within reason here). If you find it too much to handle, you are free to close this browser and never return, no one is forcing you to read my blog. And if you have something to say, at least let it be something constructive, not this diarrhea of words you’ve just dumped.
Yes, I have read the new On My Way travel assistant services both here and here before writing this rather ancient entry. And no, I do not like the plan, I still don’t like it, and I’ll probably never use it. I simply do not believe in paying extra for something as trivial as rebooking flights for the same or other airlines. While I understand that this services is still available to travelers who did not opt in, the phrase “very limited” is not good enough for me, as a customer, because now fliers are faced with a new excuse: “You didn’t purchase the plan, sorry!” as oppose to just do what an airline is suppose to do: Actually book the plane tickets, or a hotel — is that so hard to ask without paying a surcharge?
And so I ask you to do yourself a few favours as well. Don’t judge people based on one simple blog entry, because you don’t know who I am, and I’m sure you’re a nicer person without the anonymity of the internet. And while I’m on this subject, news flash, it’s not anonymous! So I’d think twice about engaging Air Canada customers in an errr… unconventional fashion — while using the Air Canada’s company network, not so great on the PR side of thing, if you know what I mean.
May 26, 2008 @ 19:09:54
Way to go Tim!
“and then please, keep your opinion to yourself – you don’t have to use a website as a soapbox”
Why can’t HE keep his opinion to himself and not have to use YOUR website as a “soapbox”
May 26, 2008 @ 19:39:45
All I can say is WOW.
That was one rude response Rick.
Maybe the retail business should add a surcharge too
“If you would like to have the opportunity to exchange or return this at a later date check here (a $15 surcharge will be applied).”
I noticed that new charge on Air Canada when we were looking at flights for Orlando.
But trust me when I say that I know what it is like to be in a business that is hard to cut a profit and the average Joe doesn’t understand why it costs so much to get a good product. Even so, it wouldn’t give me the right to berate someone just for writing an opinionated blog about that industry.
There are more tactful ways to rebut an argument. And there are more worthy causes to fight.
May 26, 2008 @ 20:20:17
Actually, the reason I come here is to read Tim’s Personal Soapbox website!
And shouldn’t Rick be editing Air Canada’s wiki entry or something?
May 26, 2008 @ 21:46:19
Sucktastic on the part of Air Canada. However, it sounds pretty much exactly like something Aer Lingus would do. If a summer of working at an airport taught me nothing, it’s that the best way for a flag carrier to do business is as a flag carrier-and not as a low cost, budget airline.
This sort of malarky by Air Canada is exactly the same sort of shiz that Aer Lingus has been pulling which has led me to not want to ever fly with them again.
Flag carriers had an important place in the aviation industry, but with them pulling this kind of silliness, it’s going to be getting smaller and smaller-justifiably so.
Jul 28, 2009 @ 20:35:12
rick is being mean.