Southwest Adds 'Mechanical Difficulties' To Act Of God List 223
Posted
by
samzenpus
from the blameless-travel dept.
from the blameless-travel dept.
War, earthquakes, and broken washers are all unavoidable events for which a carrier should not be liable if travel is delayed according to Southwest Airlines. Southwest quietly updated their act of God list a few weeks ago to include mechanical problems with the other horrors of an angry travel god. From the article: "Robert Mann, an airline industry analyst based in Port Washington, NY, called it 'surprising' that Southwest, which has a reputation for stellar customer service, would make a change that puts passengers at a legal disadvantage if an aircraft breakdown delays their travel. Keeping a fleet mechanically sound 'is certainly within the control of any airline,' Mann said. 'Putting mechanical issues in the same category as an act of God — I don't think that's what God intended.'"
Mechanical failure (Score:4, Insightful)
So if my car breaks and crashes into a state trooper, killing him, I can claim that my shoddy repairs were an act of god? AWESOME! *goes for a drive*
Re:Sorry, but SWA can PROVE this is valid. (Score:1, Insightful)
Have you been on a soutwest plane recently? you dont say it quietly
Re:It only makes sense (Score:3, Insightful)
. Until this is better defined I cannot see it holding any legal power in any court.
Re:God Does Not Roll Dice... (Score:1, Insightful)
But He has been known to loosen a nut from time to time.
Particularly those of some of the nut jobs that claim to be one of his/her greatest followers.
Re:Mechanical failure (Score:2, Insightful)
And thus the obligatory "Slashdot automobile analogy" requirement is fulfilled.
Yeah. I feel dirty too.
Re:This story is false (Score:5, Insightful)
Those still seem like maintenance issues that the airline is responsible for as they rent those services to provide service to their customers. They in that case sure as hell should be refunding tickets and compensating travelers stuck in those closed airports. The airline should then seek relief from the airport under whatever contracts they have.
Re:This story is false (Score:5, Insightful)
Those aren't acts of god.
Those are acts for which the people who are liable are liable.
They may not be Southwest's fault, but they're certainly the responsibility of someone who should pay for the delays.
The air travel system didn't sell me a lottery ticket, it sold me a takeoff and landing time at two identified airports. If any of those things is wrong, it's on their heads.
This wasn't "lazy reporting" (Score:4, Insightful)
This wasn't "lazy reporting" or a "reporting error", the plain wording of the contract was quite clear. If they meant "mechanical difficulties with things we don't own or operate", then they should have said so.
SirWired
Re:If 'mechanical difficulties' has been added... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:You buy a ticket from a carrier, not a system (Score:4, Insightful)
I should go after southwest if they do not refund the tickets or provide accommodations over this, they can seek relief from the airport. They sold me the ticket, not the airport.
Legal term for random event (Score:3, Insightful)
"Acts of God" is a legal term encompassing chance events, sudden natural disasters, and other unforeseeable and uncontrollable happenings. Forest fires, lightning, earthquakes, meteor strikes, volcanic eruptions, sudden sinkholes, etc.
The lawyers and judges understand what it means. It's a standard part of contracts and has nothing to do with any deity or religious belief whatsoever.
Re:This story is false (Score:5, Insightful)
I pay the airline, and the airline pays the airport, the fuel service, etc. The airline owes me if they don't deliver me to my destination on time; if it is somebody else's fault, the airline can go after their suppliers, vendors, etc. to recoup their costs (presumably they have that type of thing in their contracts).
Re:I think they're right (Score:4, Insightful)
A part failing is outside of human control. Whether or not you have spare parts on hand, however, is well within human control. Similarly, whether or not you have a spare plane to use while the first one is being repaired is also well within human control. The question of whether force majeure [wikipedia.org] or equivalent contract clauses should apply is not one of whether a failure could have been prevented, but rather whether the failed flight could reasonably have been prevented by having plans in place to handle equipment failures gracefully.
Failures are a part of doing business. The term "acts of God" is intended to protect only against failures that either cannot reasonably be foreseen (overthrow of a government, for example) or are so catastrophic that they cannot be dealt with when they do occur (a hurricane, for example). It is not intended to allow a company to not take responsibility for normal day-to-day failures. A competent, responsible company is expected to have contingency plans in place to deal with a reasonable number of normal day-to-day failures. If a company does not, it is inept and should be allowed to go bankrupt as quickly as possible so that more competent companies can take its place.
Remember that any delay caused by aircraft equipment failure could have been prevented with a single spare plane in the right location.
Re:This story is false (Score:4, Insightful)
> Those still seem like maintenance issues that the airline is responsible for
> as they rent those services to provide service to their customers.
The air traffic control system is not a service they rent. It's a Federal government monopoly. They use it or they don't fly and they have no recourse when in breaks down.
> The airline should then seek relief from the airport under whatever
> contracts they have.
The airports are generally local government monopolies. It's unlikely that the airline has any recourse their either.