Passenger Rights Are Being Rewritten. The Airlines Couldn’t Be Happier.

It’s being introduced as a long-overdue update. A clarification. A way to ensure consistency in how air passenger rights are applied across Europe. But the European Commission’s proposal to amend Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 is not a win for passengers. It’s a calculated shift in favor of airlines, packaged in technical language that hides what’s really at stake.

Langround has reviewed the proposal closely. We are aligned with the people who are actually affected by these changes: travelers who deal with cancellations, delays, and rerouting. We believe the changes don’t just weaken protections. They also lower the bar for airline accountability at the exact moment passengers need stronger support.

Delays Will Matter Less. For Airlines, Not for You.

Under current EU rules, passengers are entitled to compensation if they arrive at their final destination with a delay of three hours or more. This standard came after years of debate and multiple legal challenges, including the landmark Sturgeon ruling.

The new proposal moves this threshold to five hours for all intra-EU flights. For longer flights outside the EU, the requirement stretches even further: nine hours for medium-haul and twelve hours for long-haul journeys.

While the text suggests this change aligns compensation with rerouting rights, the effect is clear. Fewer passengers will qualify for compensation. Airlines will be off the hook in more cases. People who experience serious disruptions will now be told it’s not quite serious enough.

No Increase in Compensation, Despite Inflation.

We’ve already explained why compensation amounts haven’t been adjusted over the years. At the time, we felt neutral about it. There was a logic to keeping the amounts fixed as long as the structure around them held up. We’ve talked about that here.

But with the new thresholds being introduced, that neutrality no longer feels justified. If passengers must now endure longer delays before qualifying for the same €250 to €600, the lack of adjustment starts to look like a quiet downgrade.

To be clear, the Commission is updating compensation limits for baggage under the Montreal Convention, citing inflation. But for delays and cancellations that affect real-time plans, lost days, missed meetings, and holidays? Nothing changes. That sends a message about which rights are prioritized and which are overlooked.

Extraordinary Circumstances: Easier to Invoke, Harder to Challenge.

Airlines are currently not liable for compensation when a delay or cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances. This is meant to cover events outside their control, such as political unrest or volcanic ash.

Over time, courts clarified that routine technical faults do not qualify. These are part of daily airline operations and must be managed accordingly.

Now, the Commission proposes expanding and codifying a list of what counts as extraordinary, including many technical issues. This is not just about clarity. It quietly reopens a door that case law had started to close.

This is happening at a time when airlines are facing more claims than ever and when more passengers understand their rights. The regulation arrives just as accountability is catching up with the industry.

Rerouting: The Clock Keeps Ticking.

The proposal includes new language around rerouting, aiming to define timelines and clarify what options must be offered to passengers.

But even with those definitions, the burden still falls on passengers to wait. Airlines are only required to offer alternatives with other carriers or transport modes if they cannot reroute you on their own flights within 12 hours.

Twelve hours is a long time to be stuck in an unfamiliar airport, especially if you are traveling with kids, elderly relatives, or under time pressure. Passengers do not get to move quickly. The airline decides when it's time to explore other options.

Caps on Accommodation: A Ceiling With Consequences.

Currently, airlines must provide hotel stays and meals for as long as passengers are stranded, regardless of the disruption’s cause.

The proposed revision limits this to three nights at €100 per night, except in the case of passengers with reduced mobility, children, or people with medical needs. While the exception is important and justified, the broader cap introduces real risk for everyone else.

During major events like strikes or extreme weather, passengers could be stuck for much longer than three days. Booking a hotel near a major hub like Heathrow, Schiphol, or Frankfurt for €100 is already difficult. It becomes nearly impossible during peak disruption.

Once the three-night window passes, passengers are left to manage on their own.

“No Show” Policies: Still Allowed, Just Softened.

The proposal includes a partial fix for one of the most frustrating industry practices: airlines canceling a return flight because the passenger didn’t take the outbound leg.

The revised text says passengers cannot be denied boarding on the return leg solely for that reason. That is a welcome change. But it does not prevent airlines from attaching fees or enforcing other restrictions when flight segments are not used in order.

Passengers are still navigating rules that benefit airline pricing strategies, not people.

Tarmac Delays: Better Defined, Still Constrained.

For the first time, the regulation addresses tarmac delays directly. Airlines must provide basic services like toilets and water after one hour and allow disembarkation after five hours unless safety concerns prevent it.

That is progress on paper, but it doesn’t guarantee real comfort in the moment. Terms like “safety and security” give airlines broad leeway to delay disembarkation, and there is no clear process for challenging those decisions if they seem unreasonable.

Fewer Rights, Framed as “Balance”.

The Commission presents the proposal as a balancing act. It is described as a way to preserve passenger protections while reducing pressure on airlines. But the balance here is not between equals.

Passengers are individuals. Airlines are corporations. The current regulation was never perfect, but it offered a clear message. If your trip is severely disrupted, the airline owes you something.

This new version adds conditions, extends thresholds, and makes it easier for airlines to decline compensation. It also assigns more weight to what is financially sustainable for carriers than to what is fair for passengers.

The Message This Sends.

Langround works on EU261 claims every day. We help passengers who have been misled, ignored, and forced to chase what the law already says they are entitled to.

Many airlines do everything they can to avoid paying. We have seen the tactics, the delays, and the pressure put on passengers to give up.

That is what makes this proposal so disappointing. It is not just the specific changes. It is the signal it sends. Airline convenience matters more than passenger protection.

Don’t Wait. Your Rights Still Exist. For Now.

Until these changes are adopted, the current rules still apply. If your flight was delayed by three hours or more, if it was canceled, or if you were denied boarding, you may still be entitled to compensation under the existing Regulation (EC) No 261/2004.

Langround is here to help you claim it. Quickly, transparently, and without hassle.

Because rights only matter if people can exercise them. And if we do not speak up, they will be rewritten in ways that make them harder to use, harder to enforce, and easier to ignore.

Note: This proposal is not the law yet. It is set to be debated and voted on later this year. However, the current draft makes its intentions clear. While changes may still come during the legislative process, the text as it stands is deeply disappointing. It weakens existing protections and reflects a concerning shift in favor of airline interests.