So if airlines have to compensate passengers when at fault for delayed/cancelled flights. Should Nav Canada have to do the same when they are at fault?
I can see how at face value your comment makes sense, but I'm afraid that it's not that simple.
My understanding is that NAV Canada charges airlines per track mile for the flying they do. I believe that if the flight doesn't go, they don't charge for the service they didn't provide.
As has been discussed in other threads, more staffing at Pearson is required to run the "triple" due to the complications of that operation (better explained by someone who isn't me). The short staffing doesn't make the airport close. NavCanada isn't cancelling flights. The flights can still go, it just may take longer for them to get airborne and on course.
What's interesting about this conversation and story is that it reads like everyone is looking to blame someone for the delays/cancellations. The airlines blame the airport, the airport blames NAV Canada, NAV Canada blames the union.
Also, in accordance with their mandate, NAV Canada just reduced their rates and refunded carriers:
(Ottawa, August 11, 2017) – NAV CANADA today announced it will proceed with its proposal to decrease existing base rates charged to its customers by an average of 3.5 per cent and also implement a temporary one-year rate reduction of 0.4 per cent. This effectively continues the temporary rate reduction that was implemented last year. The Company also announced its decision to reimburse its customers approximately $60 million in a one-time 4.6 per cent refund.
Maybe you should ask the airlines why they didn't pass that money onto you?
What about the fuel surcharge? Is that flowing back to the customers since (I think) fuel prices stabilized?
I'm hardly a spokesperson for NAV Canada (I have lots of awful things to say about the place), but there's some information available publicly that makes your suggestion of refunds from NAV Canada absurd.