At a B.C. tribunal, the fine print in the Air Passenger Protection Rules helped WestJet save $500..According to Blacklock’s Reporter, an arbitrator decided that the compensation for bad service by Swoop Inc., a part of WestJet, should be at a lower "small carrier" rate..“I agree with Swoop,” wrote Eric Regehr, adjudicator with the Civil Resolution Tribunal, B.C.’s small claims court. .“Businesses of all kinds operate subsidiaries for legitimate reasons. I do not agree an airline having a subsidiary is a ‘malicious loophole.’”.Jia Rong Qi from Abbotsford, B.C. filed a lawsuit asking for compensation when Swoop suddenly cancelled his flight to Toronto on October 8. Qi is asking for $1,000 based on federal regulations..Swoop said only $500 should be paid since it met the definition of a “small carrier” under the Protection Regulations with fewer than two million passengers in the previous two years. .Qi disputed the claim, noting Swoop was owned and operated by WestJet, a large carrier that should pay the maximum $1,000 “based on ethical principles and to protect customers from malicious loopholes.”.“He relies on the fact that Swoop’s representative in this dispute is a WestJet lawyer and that WestJet plans to eventually ‘absorb’ Swoop,” wrote Arbitrator Regehr. .“He described Swoop’s status as a small carrier as ‘self-defined’ and argues it would set a ‘dangerous precedent’ to allow airlines to create paper subsidiaries to reduce their exposure to Air Passenger Protection Regulations claims.”.“Swoop says that it is a separate corporate entity from WestJet,” wrote the Tribunal. .“It provided evidence proving it holds its own Transport Canada air operator certificate and its own Transportation Agency air carrier licence. Swoop also provided evidence showing the Agency considers Swoop a small carrier. In short, Swoop says that its ownership structure is irrelevant.”.“If as a matter of public policy the government wished to include subsidiaries in the definition of large carriers it could have done so,” wrote Arbitrator Regehr. .“It did not. I find that Swoop is a small carrier under the Air Passenger Protection Regulations. I have no discretion under the regulations to depart from its compensation scheme. For these reasons I find that Mr. Qi is entitled to $500.”.WestJet announced they will stop using the Swoop brand for their flights by October 31. According to the Transportation Agency, Swoop had an average of 13 complaints for every 100 flights. This is the third-highest number of complaints among Canadian airlines. Flair Airlines had 15 complaints and Sunwing Airlines had 14 complaints per 100 flights.
At a B.C. tribunal, the fine print in the Air Passenger Protection Rules helped WestJet save $500..According to Blacklock’s Reporter, an arbitrator decided that the compensation for bad service by Swoop Inc., a part of WestJet, should be at a lower "small carrier" rate..“I agree with Swoop,” wrote Eric Regehr, adjudicator with the Civil Resolution Tribunal, B.C.’s small claims court. .“Businesses of all kinds operate subsidiaries for legitimate reasons. I do not agree an airline having a subsidiary is a ‘malicious loophole.’”.Jia Rong Qi from Abbotsford, B.C. filed a lawsuit asking for compensation when Swoop suddenly cancelled his flight to Toronto on October 8. Qi is asking for $1,000 based on federal regulations..Swoop said only $500 should be paid since it met the definition of a “small carrier” under the Protection Regulations with fewer than two million passengers in the previous two years. .Qi disputed the claim, noting Swoop was owned and operated by WestJet, a large carrier that should pay the maximum $1,000 “based on ethical principles and to protect customers from malicious loopholes.”.“He relies on the fact that Swoop’s representative in this dispute is a WestJet lawyer and that WestJet plans to eventually ‘absorb’ Swoop,” wrote Arbitrator Regehr. .“He described Swoop’s status as a small carrier as ‘self-defined’ and argues it would set a ‘dangerous precedent’ to allow airlines to create paper subsidiaries to reduce their exposure to Air Passenger Protection Regulations claims.”.“Swoop says that it is a separate corporate entity from WestJet,” wrote the Tribunal. .“It provided evidence proving it holds its own Transport Canada air operator certificate and its own Transportation Agency air carrier licence. Swoop also provided evidence showing the Agency considers Swoop a small carrier. In short, Swoop says that its ownership structure is irrelevant.”.“If as a matter of public policy the government wished to include subsidiaries in the definition of large carriers it could have done so,” wrote Arbitrator Regehr. .“It did not. I find that Swoop is a small carrier under the Air Passenger Protection Regulations. I have no discretion under the regulations to depart from its compensation scheme. For these reasons I find that Mr. Qi is entitled to $500.”.WestJet announced they will stop using the Swoop brand for their flights by October 31. According to the Transportation Agency, Swoop had an average of 13 complaints for every 100 flights. This is the third-highest number of complaints among Canadian airlines. Flair Airlines had 15 complaints and Sunwing Airlines had 14 complaints per 100 flights.
