[...] Under these "use it or lose it" regulations, prior to the pandemic carriers had to utilise at least 80pc of their scheduled take-off and landing slots.
This was revised to 50pc as coronavirus saw travel become increasingly difficult – but airlines are still struggling to hit this target.
As a result of Lufthansa Group's latest figures, the Belgian federal government has written to the European Commission, calling for a change to the rules on maintaining slots.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 12 2022, @11:48AM (2 children)
As stated in the headline (do people even read those anymore?) these flights were required to keep their airport landing slots. Those slots are strictly 'use it or lose it' and losing your slot means that you can't land at that airport anymore. I shouldn't need to say why losing access to a major hub is a Bad Thing™.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Wednesday January 12 2022, @03:12PM (1 child)
That is not some unbreakable natural law of the universe. Its an administrative rule that could be easily adjusted. Certainly be a lot cheaper and more environmentally friendly to modify a rule than to make 18000 unnecessary flights.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 12 2022, @03:58PM
Wouldn't it be better to make 18000 unnecessary rules to ensure the right people get paid?