AirHelp – the leading travel tech company supporting passengers with flight disruptions – is raising the alarm over proposed changes to Europe’s Regulation (EC) No. 261.
- A new EU proposal stipulates that compensation for flight delays should only be paid after delays of five, nine or twelve hours, depending on the distance, instead of the current three hours
- This proposal represents a significant weakening of consumer rights
Increasing the compensation threshold beyond the current three-hour delay would significantly weaken air passenger rights and marks a major step backward for travellers across Europe, AirHelp says.
In 2024, more than 287 million passengers across Europe were affected by flight cancellations and delays. AirHelp recorded that 9.7 million Irish passengers were disrupted last year, and 460,000 people were eligible for €600 compensation under the current EC 261 regulation.
The three-hour threshold is a fair compromise for consumers and airlines
For affected passengers within Europe, EC 261 has established compensation rights for travellers for over 20 years and is considered a global success story in consumer protection. It stipulates that passengers are entitled to compensation payments in the event of a delay of at least three hours under certain conditions. The EU’s goal with this policy is to provide passengers with consistent, and reliable protection in the event of travel disruptions.
Current discussions suggest altering the compensation criteria to apply only for delays of five, nine, or even 12 hours, depending on flight distance. However, the existing three-hour threshold represents a well-considered balance between safeguarding consumer rights and acknowledging the operational challenges faced by airlines. A delay of three hours, already longer than the average flight duration within Europe, can result in considerable disruption to passengers’ travel plans. It is also important to note that the current eligibility criteria are already favourable to airlines: compensation is only granted in cases where the delay is within the airline’s control.
Other jurisdictions have already modelled their laws on the European regulation or are in the process of doing so. The UK, Canada, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Brazil, and soon the US, are all adopting the three-hour rule. The proposed changes would ensure that Europe cedes its sovereignty in the industry to other countries. Furthermore, creating discrepancies in thresholds between the EU and other jurisdictions would create confusion for passengers rather than clarity and certainty.
Changes are intended to benefit airlines financially – at the expense of consumers
Extending the three-hour threshold to five hours or even longer would only further maximise airline profits – at the expense of consumers. According to estimates by the International Air Transport Association (IATA), the industry’s revenue in 2024 amounted to around 940 billion euros, an increase of 6.2% compared to the previous year.
Airlines are backing this outdated 2013 proposal, claiming that current compensation levels are too high and financially burdensome. But how do they explain the billions in profits reported by major European carriers like Lufthansa, IAG (British Airways, Iberia), and Air France-KLM? IAG alone posted a €4.3 billion profit in 2024—a 22% increase from the previous year. This raises a crucial question: why are airlines seeking to dismantle a long-standing and effective regulation by citing cost concerns- despite enjoying record-high profit margins?
Moreover, according to AirHelp’s analysis, the cost of compensation under EC 261 is only 0.58 cents to 1.17 euros per passenger. Although airlines insist the regulation is financially burdensome, none have produced any substantive data to back this claim, despite multiple formal requests from the institutions. Therefore, to strip passengers of their rights simply to increase airline profits is not only unjust, but deeply unethical.
EU regulation as an incentive to minimise delays
Speaking on the proposed changes, Tomasz Pawliszyn, CEO at AirHelp said: “The three-hour rule is an important incentive for airlines to be on time. It forces them to optimise their turnaround times, maintenance schedules and crew availability in the long term. This leads to better use of existing airport infrastructure and reduces the need for additional compensatory flights, which would also increase CO₂ emissions, among other things. Maintaining the current threshold ensures that sustainability and efficiency are at the heart of EU aviation policy.
“Our data shows that changing the proposed rules would mean that over 80% fewer flights would be eligible for compensation. As a result, there would no longer be an incentive for airlines to minimise delays. At AirHelp, we believe that the three-hour rule ensures adequate compensation for significant delays, promotes public confidence and makes air travel more reliable for millions of passengers. Raising the threshold would water down these long-standing protections and undermine one of the EU’s most recognised achievements in consumer policy. We therefore call on politicians to maintain the three-hour threshold.”
