AC denied compensation for sky marshal program

The federal government has declined to compensate Air Canada for the more than $100 million the airline has claimed to have spent accommodating sky marshals on its flights over the past five years.

Established after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the U.S., the Canadian Air Carrier Protective Program involves placement of sky marshals, known as in-flight security officers, on select commercial routes to prevent planes from being overtaken by terrorists.

The Canadian Press used the Access to Information Act to obtain a censored version of a secret Public Safety Canada memo prepared earlier this year for Steven Blaney, minister at the time, and an accompanying letter from a senior departmental official to Derek Vanstone, an Air Canada vice-president.

In the document, Air Canada expressed concerns about the sky marshal program in 2013 and met representatives of the RCMP, Public Safety and Transport Canada, which prompted the follow-up correspondence.

A written submission to the government in review of the Canadian Transportation Act in February read that carriers provide seats to in-flight security officers at no charge. If an officer requests a specific seat it must be provided - even if it has been sold to a passenger.

In these cases carriers must remove the passenger and negotiate compensation for the seat, representing “a significant cost and lost opportunities to carriers.”

In the last five years the value of the seats Air Canada has provided to security officers has reached more than $100 million, according to the submission, which adds that in most jurisdictions, foreign governments provide compensation for similar programs to their carriers.

Air Canada recommended the Canadian security program buy seats from airlines at market rates, or else allow airlines to write off the value of seats against taxes and to charge officers for in-flight food and entertainment.

In some cases, the airline noted, security officers have requested seats on so-called positioning flights - which have no passengers on board - simply to travel to another airport.

Air Canada also recommended the RCMP share all data regarding risk assessments for individual flights with airlines, allowing carriers to make educated judgments about whether to cancel a flight, and to generally focus the program on flights that have a pre-agreed level of risk, only.

Public Safety had no immediate response to questions.

But in its letter to Vanstone, much of which remains secret, the department said the federal policy requiring airline expenditures on the sky marshal program - including in-flight meals and luggage handling - is “consistent with other countries” and the government is “not considering any amendments.”

The letter also points out there is no evidence that security officers are taking advantage by filing expense claims for free meals, stating that the RCMP conducted a review and confirmed that appropriate oversight and controls are in place, and that officers are not reimbursed for a meal when one is provided on board.

The air-carrier protective program contributes to the safety of Air Canada staff, passengers and equipment and, generally, all Canadians, the letter added.