Air Canada: a little bit of Westjet?

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog

Blastor
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 964
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 11:20 am
Location: North America

Air Canada: a little bit of Westjet?

Post by Blastor »

Air Canada new philosophy...
The airline pays more for fuel; you start paying for the pillow

By BRENT JANG

Thursday, October 13, 2005 Page B1, TRANSPORTATION REPORTER

Forget Fido, the fluffy pillow and the fully loaded luggage.

Air Canada raised fees for transporting pets and cut back its baggage allowance yesterday, part of a series of measures designed to combat soaring fuel prices. On overseas flights, pets are no longer allowed in the cabin, at any price.

And starting Nov. 1 on short-haul flights, Air Canada will charge $2 for a "comfort zone" kit that includes an inflatable plastic pillow and polyester blanket.

Passengers who fork over the toonie can keep the kit, which is actually a plastic pouch that includes a pillow case, a blanket and an instruction card on blowing up the pouch into a pillow, an Air Canada agent said yesterday. The optional kit is for domestic routes and transborder flights into the United States lasting 90 minutes or less, she said.


The idea is that every little bit helps when it comes to reducing the costs of replacing or cleaning pillowcases and blankets aboard short-haul flights. The new, lighter-weight kits help to lessen the loads on aircraft to conserve fuel.

"We all need to remain extremely sensitive and vigilant as to how we utilize our fuel and conserve energy," Air Canada president Montie Brewer said in a statement.

He estimated that the Montreal-based airline's so-called "weight reduction team" has identified various savings that could be worth $45-million annually in reduced fuel bills.

Air Canada is seeking to post its first annual profit since 1999.

And to pull it off this year, Air Canada, which emerged from bankruptcy protection a year ago, has been scouring its operations for ways to bolster revenue and slash costs.

Air Canada and WestJet Airlines Ltd. already have raised fuel surcharges twice this past summer. Both carriers have also started fuel-hedging programs in an effort to control their energy bills.

While the two airlines remain in a fierce battle for passengers, WestJet never offered pillows in the first place, so Air Canada didn't feel pressure to engage in a "pillow fight," choosing to sacrifice cabin comfort, consumer advocates say.

"When you're on a flight, creature comforts are important. Airlines are nickel and diming people to death," complained Harry Gow, a spokesman for lobby group Transport 2000.

Michael Janigan, executive director of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre in Ottawa, said he isn't impressed by various extra charges and "annoying" service downgrades.

"It's a constant search to see how many ways that passengers' pockets can be picked," he said.

He noted that on Air Canada's lowest fare category called Tango, passengers have to pay $15 each for one-way, advance seat selection.

For budget-minded families, "it could mean having the children in the back and the parents in the front," Mr. Janigan said.

"I think there should be a minimal level of service that a passenger is entitled to, with the purchase of a ticket."

WestJet is considering implementing an optional fee, where a passenger could choose to receive a sandwich, drink, higher-quality headset and movie. Advance seat selection is currently free, but could become a perk.

U.S. carriers also have been paring their expenses wherever possible. This month, American Airlines Inc. cut scheduled service at its Dallas/Fort Worth and Chicago hubs. Earlier this year, American emptied pillows from its first-class and coach cabins on domestic flights, except its Hawaiian route.

Air Canada insists it's now charging fees that better reflect the extra costs of special services, and many consumers are willing to pay higher fares for improved service and greater flexibility.

Air Canada's website yesterday outlined charges for pets, including $105 for a one-way flight within North America, either in the cabin or in cargo as checked luggage. That new "blended continental fee" is up from $40 in Canada, but down from $110 in the United States. Pets have to go in a secure container and fit under the seat to fly in the cabin on North America flights.

But on overseas flights, even if Fido fits under the seat, Air Canada now bans pets from the cabin, although flying cargo internationally is an option for a $245 fee.

Air Canada also tightened weight limits yesterday for its free checked baggage allowance. The free luggage allowance for two bags will fall to nearly 23 kilograms each from almost 32 kilograms each. In that instance, travellers with a bag weighing 23 kilograms to 32 kilograms face a $35 fee for North American travel and $60 fee for international travel.

Separately, the upper limit for a single checked bag falls to 32 kilograms from 45 kilograms.

In other changes, the "unaccompanied minor fee" rises to $60 from $40 one-way, affecting children aged 5 to 11 who board a plane without a parent or other adult but under the supervision of Air Canada staff.

Children aged 12 to 17 who travel without a parent or adult now face a $60 fee for Air Canada supervision, compared with free service previously.


pets are no longer allowed in the cabin, at any price.
ABOUT TIME!!! Will WJ follow suit? Not if there's a dime to be made.

WestJet is considering implementing an optional fee, where a passenger could choose to receive a sandwich, drink, higher-quality headset and movie. Advance seat selection is currently free, but could become a perk
A Perk? Have they no decency? What 's next? $5.00 for Westjet Extra soft toilet paper?


:wink:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Canus Chinookus
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 707
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 6:30 pm

Post by Canus Chinookus »

I completely agree about not allowing pets in the cabin. This issue is WAY overdue. IMHO it's no less offensive to smoke in the cabin as it is to carry an animal which can trigger severe allergic reactions to many people on board.
---------- ADS -----------
 
bcflyer
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1358
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:35 am
Location: Canada

Post by bcflyer »

Amazing that the same people that are "annoyed by the service downgrades" and want a steak dinner served on fine china, free booze, lots of leg room and first run movies, are the ones that want it all for $150.00 round trip... Then they wonder why airlines go bankrupt....... Its cheaper to fly than take the bus in some cases..
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by bcflyer on Thu Oct 13, 2005 8:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sulako
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 2421
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:01 pm

Post by Sulako »

Lol, this is the first time I have actually really read one of your posted articles thoroughly. Dude has issues.

I"m glad you have decided to switch teams from time to time, just to mix it up a little, and do your cut 'n paste 'n highlight schtick in the AC forums. Now you can be hated by more people than ever :)

I find it interesting that you are upset that WJ 'might' charge for seat selection in the future, when in the same article it shows that AC already charges $15 for seat selection on Tango.

AC now charges extra for people who send their unaccompanied rugrats to the relatives' houses for holidays, but WJ hasn't followed suit.

And the part about pets? You are against pets in the cabin, right? Somehow I think that if WJ follows AC's example and halts the practice, you'll comment like "WJ hates the blind and their seeing eye dogs", or "WJ refuses to transport injured kittens for life-saving surgery"


Thanks for amusing me though! :)
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Sulako on Thu Oct 13, 2005 8:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Jaques Strappe
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1847
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 6:34 pm
Location: YYZ

Post by Jaques Strappe »

It amazes me how when a ticket from Toronto to Miami in 2005 costs $154.00, while in 1962 a ticket from Toronto to New York was $72.00, how people can bitch about the airlines trying to pick their pockets. :x
---------- ADS -----------
 
Standby for new atis message
. .
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2670
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:53 am

Post by . . »

I'm also very strongly agaisnt pets in the cabin. My two worst flying experiences have both been in the seat beside someone with a cat that wouldn't stop meowing every 5 seconds for 4hrs. I think I actually blacked out for the last 3hrs 50 minutes of the flight.
---------- ADS -----------
 
EI-EIO
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 604
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:16 pm
Location: Toronto, ON
Contact:

Post by EI-EIO »

Having been shifted into the last Y seat (non-reclining but the one ahead was) on a BA 777 YUL-LHR to accommodate a family travelling together I say get thee to the airport well ahead of time when there are still seats, pay the $15pp or just bloody live with it.

I used free PC check-in and seat selection YYZ-YOW at the 12 hour check-in stage and I had no problem seating my travelling companion and I together well forward, especially since we were on different tickets.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Blastor
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 964
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 11:20 am
Location: North America

Post by Blastor »

You got this all wrong

I hate blind people getting the window seat.

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
gelbisch
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1095
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 5:49 am
Location: Guelph, ON

Re: Air Canada: a little bit of Westjet?

Post by gelbisch »

"When you're on a flight, creature comforts are important. Airlines are nickel and diming people to death," complained Harry Gow, a spokesman for lobby group Transport 2000.
You beat me to it, bcflyer!

I'd say it's the people nickel and diming the airlines to death. Literally! People have such short memories... with the proliferation of LCCs air fares have become affordable as never before. The public quickly forgets this, however, and now wants more service even at the unbelievably low fares they pay. Airlines taking any measure to ensure survival are just being greedy, of course.

:roll:

And of course it's too much to ask that the layman understand the difficulties a modern airline faces. ("What do you mean we can't land 'cause of weather???") It's a pretty big stretch for someone bitching about the cost of keeping the 50 L tank in his car filled that the same issue applies to the nth degree in machines that suck tonnes upon tonnes of fuel.

I suppose it'll never change, though. In my experience, the average Joe is pretty uninformed with regard to the aviation industry, and not really interested in hearing how things really work. They pay what the airlines ask, and complain about it... be the fares high or low.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Machiavelli
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 201
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:53 pm

Post by Machiavelli »

I agree with Gelbisch and others that say that Transport 2000 et al are out of line with their complaints. Airlines, even Big Red, need to make money by charging more for tickets and perks and cutting costs where possible. It doesn't take an analyst to tell me that. Profit margins are absurdly low and that's no way to sustain a business, airline or otherwise.

Complaints need to be directed to Navcanada's management for gross negligence as well as the airport authorities for same (two non-profit inefficient bureaucracies). The federal government should also be held responsible for the huge fees tacked on to joe travellers fares as well as the taxation (fuel, GST, security etc.) that straps airlines to charging $1 for headsets and $2 for "doggy bags". It's insane actually. Is there any other industry that is so plundered and pirated?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rebel
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1552
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:43 pm

Post by Rebel »

Machiavelli

You are absolutely right; we in the industry have allowed folks who do not understand this industry to hijack this industry. This business in not like any other business and we should hold both our Airline CEO’s, union leaders and Government accountable for their actions.

Sadly we don’t..
---------- ADS -----------
 
WJflyer
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 912
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 1:08 pm
Location: CYVR/CYYZ

Post by WJflyer »

And a remarkable coicidence: Air Canada and Westjet are BOTH having a 50% off seat sale today only... hmmm... :ANAL:
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Yoyoma
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1465
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 4:01 am
Location: Somewhere in time...

Post by Yoyoma »

So what exactly are pet owners supposed to do? I own pets that cannot go in the cargo area!

I understand the discomfort you guys talk about, but I have a hard time picturing a noisy cat over those Engines, noisy kids, seat-belt - F/A bells etc.

If you want comfort, avoid air travel! Advice of the day...!
---------- ADS -----------
 
Image In the business world, the rearview mirror is always clearer than the windshield...W. Buffett
User avatar
ice ice baby
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:02 pm
Location: BC

Post by ice ice baby »

On the subject of discriminating against the blind or disabled here is an article about Ryanair in the Oct. 14th edition of the times online.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... _1,00.html
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rebel
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1552
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:43 pm

Post by Rebel »

Ryanair is all about the bottom line. The carriage of passengers requiring special services affects their turn around times which hurts their bottom line. The Captain was only following Ryanair’s SOP. Sad isn't it?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Herc_Driver
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 1:48 pm
Location: Ontario
Contact:

Post by Herc_Driver »

Canus Chinookus wrote:I completely agree about not allowing pets in the cabin. This issue is WAY overdue.
I couldn't agree more!!!
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Herc_Driver on Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
Hhhmmm, is this thing on?
User avatar
Yoyoma
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1465
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 4:01 am
Location: Somewhere in time...

Post by Yoyoma »

It's funny cause the thing that annoys me more than any cat, kid or ghost on the plane are pilots that sit next to me and try to explain to me how things work.

"...Euh...That would be the landing gear now. They gotta bring it up to continue climb! We should level off shortly though..."

"...Oh...we're flying that route today...this baby has a EF AM ESSE that will do the work for you...quite nice isn't it...!"

"...Now don't worry, that's just some clear air turbulence, this baby can witstand much more!!...


Yeah thanks Maverick! :roll:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Image In the business world, the rearview mirror is always clearer than the windshield...W. Buffett
Canus Chinookus
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 707
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 6:30 pm

Post by Canus Chinookus »

I have no interest in getting rid of pets in the cabin only because they're annoying to some people. I have never been annoyed by an animal in the cabin. However, I do believe it's impossible to take the annoyance out of travelling, that's not what it's about. It's a health issue. Know anyone with a cat allergy? I know a few people and I have seen them suffer. A plane is a small, closed space, and you can't escape an allergic reaction on a plane.

I've yet to see an allergy to a child... many reactions but no allergic ones! :p
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
gelbisch
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1095
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 5:49 am
Location: Guelph, ON

Post by gelbisch »

I find whiny kids as annoying as the next guy... but you can't blame them, they're just being kids. It's the PARENTS. DO something about your child... that's why you're the PARENT!! I think useless parental figures such as this should be made to ride out the balance of the trip in the wheel well.

People are too afraid to discipline their kids in public nowadays... like I'd rather have a little clown behind me kick the back of my seat for three hours than have to listen to Mom tell him to wisen up a couple of times.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
leftyxl
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 6:01 pm
Location: base of the mountain

Post by leftyxl »

As a "PARENT" of three I am hoping that the comment about kids was tounge in cheek. I am giving you the credit of not being a total imbicile that equates livestock to humans. I agree with Geibisch about the parent taking responsibility for there children. My older two are good travelers. We bring them toys, snacks, books, crafts, and they know they are expected to behave like humans. Now three year old is a MONSTER!!!!!! ......................


So of course we give him a dose of Gravol and it's night night little man.
Peace reigns and all on the plane are happy

Kids will be kids. We need to be parents and be responsible

I wouldn't mind the wheel well some times probably quieter
---------- ADS -----------
 
"Hey pile it, you wanna hold my bottle?"
User avatar
Herc_Driver
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 1:48 pm
Location: Ontario
Contact:

Post by Herc_Driver »

leftyxl wrote:As a "PARENT" of three I am hoping that the comment about kids was tounge in cheek. I am giving you the credit of not being a total imbicile that equates livestock to humans.
Of course it was tongue in cheek. :roll:
And it is spelt "tongue" and “imbecile”. :roll:

edit for spelling .............. :shock:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Herc_Driver on Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
Hhhmmm, is this thing on?
User avatar
Panic
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 7:55 am

Post by Panic »

[quote="Herc_Driver] ... I too hate having some infant scream it's head off during climb and descent. ..[/quote]

You obviously don't have kids - you can't just "explain" to an infant the Valsalva technique. They aren't just screaming for no reason, they hurt and that's how they express it.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Yoyoma
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1465
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 4:01 am
Location: Somewhere in time...

Post by Yoyoma »

Canus Chinookus wrote:I have no interest in getting rid of pets in the cabin only because they're annoying to some people. I have never been annoyed by an animal in the cabin. However, I do believe it's impossible to take the annoyance out of travelling, that's not what it's about. It's a health issue. Know anyone with a cat allergy? I know a few people and I have seen them suffer. A plane is a small, closed space, and you can't escape an allergic reaction on a plane.

I've yet to see an allergy to a child... many reactions but no allergic ones! :p
I understand that, but most modern traveling carry-ons are designed to prevent any hair, fluid, dust or whatever your pet uses as a weapon, to seep out!

In my case, I react badly to perfume/cologne, after-shave or that old lady hair spray! My eyes water, my nose runs and I spend hour after hour of sneezing and blowing (nose blowing, using Kleenex that is). Yet I can't prevent people that are wearing that to sit next to me.

It's already really hard for people to move with pets. If I get a job tomorrow in Europe, I can't move because of all the pet restrictions and what not! If you're a pet owner, you understand because there is also a sentimental value.

As far as the Kid comment, I own pets, I have no kids. I don't really care to have any right now but I would never harass a person with kids just cause his baby's crying.

Yoyoma
---------- ADS -----------
 
Image In the business world, the rearview mirror is always clearer than the windshield...W. Buffett
just curious
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 3592
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 9:29 am
Location: The Frozen North
Contact:

Post by just curious »

Using the same line of thought and logic, I believe that we should take all screaming, nose-picking, diaper-crapping, flu-bug-carrying, noisy little f**king children, shove them in a crate and jam them into the cargo compartment as well.
We would never put little kids in the cargo compartment. Good God man ... what were you thinking?! Herc them to a pallett on the floor. Nobody wants crayon on their cargo!
---------- ADS -----------
 
wsguy
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 8:15 am

Post by wsguy »

As far as the Kid comment, I own pets, I have no kids. I don't really care to have any right now but I would never harass a person with kids just cause his baby's crying.

Yoyoma


Yoyoma:

I once heard it said that one does not actually have kids..... they are actually pets... and then they turn into teenagers.... and your pets die.


Mine died a couple of years ago!

:D


PS. please don't anyone take this literally....
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”