With the new rules in place to avoid passengers being forced to sit out on the runway for hours, a debate brews over whether or not the massive number flight cancellations were pre-emptive cancellations by the airlines to avoid the $27,500 per passenger fines for planes sitting on the tarmac for longer than 3 hours. Was it too big of a gamble for the airlines to load up planes headed to the East Coast or was it truly dangerous weather conditions that caused all the cancellations?
If your purpose for flying was to catch your cruise, then it doesn’t really matter to why your flight was cancelled. You just missed your cruise.
The 2010 Blizzard is just another reminder of the importance of travel insurance. Travel insurance protects you from weather related delays or cancellations. If your flight is cancelled for weather related reason and the cruise ship departs without you then the cruise line is not going to refund your money. Your only chance to get a refund is for you to have travel insurance.
While I think it is ridiculous for passengers to sit on the tarmac for 2 + hours, I also believe that the new rules will cause more cancellations. Increased flight cancellations during weather situations increases the importance of travel insurance. Just one of a hundred reasons why you need travel insurance.
So I’m curious, do you think the new fines will cause the airlines to cancel more flights during weather situations?
Photo credit: Scazon on Flickr