[j_lowder]

I am one of the latest victims of American Airlines.

I had booked a vacation from the East coast to Hawaii several months ago. I was informed a couple of days ago that the initial leg of my return flight had been cancelled. The alternative flights that American Airlines offered involved an extra layover (increasing from 1 to 2 stops) and an increase in travel time of 6-8 hours.

I felt that this unacceptable and requested some form of compensation. DENIED! I was informed the the airline (ONLY) reserves the right to make schedule changes as "they" seemed in THEIR best interest regardless of its effects on the traveler.

I next requested that only the "return leg" itinerary be cancelled and I would book with another carrier. This was stated possible only after they withhold what would be the "current" price of a oneway ticket for the outgoing flight. Now, much closer to the departure date, this oneway ticket cost exceeded the price of the prior round trip fare. So much for a refund.

If this seems fair, could someone please explain the reason(s) to me. Two reservation agents, two supervisors, and a manager were unable to convince me of fairness of this policy.

In the past I have tried to fly American Airlines if the route was available. I have now booked my LAST flight with American.

[Matt_FLL]

So, you sign a contract with a company. You will pay for a product at the current value, knowing that it will increase in value over time (for you as an individual passenger since tickets are non-transferable). As time increases, so will the value of a reasonable substitute. And then the company backs out of the contract and is only responsible for providing you with the value of that product several months ago. That's really egregious.

Even the most iron fisted policy-oriented airline employee would stumble around trying to find a good explanation on why THAT is fair.

In some respects I feel badly for the two reservation agents and two supervisors. Assuming they are human, they'd have to understand the disappointment and outrage someone in their own family would feel in this situation. Regardless, if I DID have a family and if I was talking to you on a recorded line at a bankrupt airline with layoffs just a few weeks away... I may think twice about agreeing with you. Your post is a painful view into the tragic irony of airlines.

But who cares. You are ultimately the one holding the burden of a battered airline, industry, and policy. Your crime? Supporting the industry by booking a flight to Hawaii. I feel frustrated just reading your post and I wish I could do something.

You deserve a private jet to Hawaii. If it means anything from a stranger, I'm so sorry that you went through this, and I hope you still enjoy your trip the way you deserve.

[jimworcs]

Interesting how they arrived at that calculation. Perhaps you could also compare the cost of the flight with 1 stop you had, compared to a flight with two stops now offered to you.

This is why you need re-regulation in the US. The airlines are abusive and yet they demand exemption from the normal rules of a competitive market which would normally control this market.

I consider taking this to small claims and reporting it to the State Attorney General's office. The airline defence is that you agreed to the Terms and Conditions when you purchased the ticket. The T&C's are so one sided, for all airlines, that there is no alternative. When an airline makes a substantial change to your schedule, you must be offered a refund if you decline to accept the change. In this case, they are making a mockery of this rule, by effectively staying you cannot be refunded half the cost of the ticket, because they will artificially reprice the outbound leg. This ruse to get round the rules is OUTRAGEOUS!

[The_Judge]

Agreed. However, these are the rules set forth and every passenger agrees to them by clicking purchase, one-sided as they are. Next........