European Airlines Warn EU Parliament Move on Passenger Rights Risks Higher Fares and Fewer Travel Options

EU261 already imposes the heaviest consumer protection costs on airlines globally, costing the sector and passengers an estimated €8.1 billion every year, according to the associations.

 

Europe’s leading airline associations have warned that the European Parliament’s latest push to overhaul air passenger rights could undermine consumer choice, raise ticket prices and weaken the competitiveness of Europe’s aviation sector.

Airlines for Europe (A4E), the European Regions Airline Association (ERA) and the International Air Transport Association (IATA) expressed deep concern after the European Parliament’s Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) voted to maintain its most stringent proposals for revising EU Regulation 261/2004 (EU261).

The airline groups said the move ignores clear evidence that passengers prioritise choice, value for money and punctual services over additional compensation measures that ultimately increase costs for travellers.

EU261 Already the World’s Most Burdensome Regime

EU261 already imposes the heaviest consumer protection costs on airlines globally, costing the sector and passengers an estimated €8.1 billion every year, according to the associations.

The European Commission’s original proposal to revise the regulation aimed to rebalance passenger protections, ensuring fair treatment for travellers while allowing airlines to operate a modern, competitive and resilient air transport network.

“The TRAN Committee’s position moves in the opposite direction,” the groups said, “adding new financial and operational burdens without addressing the real causes of disruption.”

Root Causes of Disruption Ignored

Airlines stressed that infrastructure bottlenecks and air traffic management (ATM) constraints—not airline intent—are the primary drivers of delays and cancellations across Europe.

“More compensation does not fix congested airports or fragmented airspace,” the groups said. “It does, however, threaten affordability, connectivity and consumer choice.”

Key Concerns Raised by Airlines

The airline associations highlighted several critical flaws in the Parliament’s approach:

• No impact assessment: At a time when Europe faces a competitiveness crisis, proposing additional costs without assessing their impact on fares and route viability is “reckless.”

• Misalignment with passenger preferences: Passengers consistently report that they would rather arrive late than not arrive at all—especially in remote or peripheral regions with limited transport alternatives. The current three-hour compensation threshold does not allow sufficient time to source replacement aircraft and crews. Raising the threshold would help get delayed flights airborne faster.

• Disregard for operational realities: Proposals on carry-on luggage fail to consider aircraft capacity limits, the risk of added delays, heavier aircraft and higher emissions.

• Unclear extraordinary circumstances: A non-exhaustive list of “extraordinary circumstances” fails to reflect the complexity of safe and efficient flight operations.

Call for a Balanced, Realistic Approach

A4E, ERA and IATA urged EU lawmakers to reconsider their position and focus on clarifying existing rules, improving ATM performance, and keeping air travel accessible and affordable for European consumers.

“Airlines and passengers share the same goal: a reliable aviation network that delivers connectivity, value for money and on-time performance,” the groups said. “Weakening competitiveness and raising costs will not serve Europe’s citizens—or its economy.”