Although the principles of the revised Code of Conduct remain solid and seem to afford protection to consumers regarding neutrality and transparency of information presented on CRS, there is a potentially fatal flaw which could result in higher fares said the International Airline Passenger Association. The flaw is that the…
Although the principles of the revised Code of Conduct remain solid and seem to afford protection to consumers regarding neutrality and transparency of information presented on CRS, there is a potentially fatal flaw which could result in higher fares said the International Airline Passenger Association.
The flaw is that the Code of Conduct could effectively be rendered impotent by a new interpretation of the term “parent carrier”. This term has always been understood to apply to airlines that own a share of a CRS, and the Code has key restrictions on such airlines’ behaviour to prevent them from introducing bias to the CRS display that would favour their own flights.
Now IAPA understands that what constitutes a “parent carrier” could be interpreted (for the first time) as excluding the key airlines Lufthansa, Air France and Iberia which, between them, own 46% of Amadeus, the leading CRS in Europe.
The implications of this are that these airline would no longer be constrained by the restrictions of the Code, and travel agents, consumers and competitive airlines alike would have to rely on those airlines’ good nature and sense of fair play to ensure that CRS flight listings remain neutral and unbiased.
If this proves not to be enough, these airlines could squeeze competitive flights and fares off the crucial first page of results from travel agents’ CRS displays and some key internet travel sites, allowing them to increase their own fares. Meanwhile, the worthy clauses of the Code of Conduct, which have served travel agents and airline passengers well for nearly two decades, would gather dust on the shelves.
IAPA called on all MEPs to ensure that the intentions of the Code are honoured in practice and not just on paper, and to ensure that a level of ownership of 46% is actually recognised as leading to the potential for influence.