EU air passenger rights reform: still no deal — and passengers are paying the price

After two days of talks that ended without a breakthrough, Parliament and Council negotiators are still deadlocked on the reform of EU261 — the regulation that protects millions of air passengers across Europe. The hard deadline is 15 June — after that, the conciliation window closes. And the airline industry is lobbying hard to make sure passengers come out the losers.

A reform 13 years in the making — still stuck

EU261 has been the backbone of air passenger rights in Europe since 2004. It entitles passengers to compensation of between €250 and €600 when flights are delayed by three or more hours, cancelled at short notice, or when they are denied boarding. Airlines have fought to water it down almost from day one — and after more than a decade of stalling, they may be closer than ever to getting their way.

In June 2025, the Council — representing EU member state governments — finally broke its own decade-long deadlock and adopted an official position. Consumer groups immediately flagged it as a gift to the airline lobby: higher thresholds, lower payouts, weaker enforcement. The European Parliament pushed back hard, adopting its own position in January 2026 firmly on the side of passengers: keep the 3-hour rule, keep compensation levels, add new protections. Since then, the two institutions have been in formal conciliation talks — with a hard deadline of 15 June 2026. Both lead negotiators, Parliament President Roberta Metsola and Cypriot Transport Minister Alexis Vafeades, are unavailable before 9 June. That leaves barely a week to close what has so far been an unbridgeable gap.

What is actually being negotiated

The core sticking point is simple: how long should passengers have to wait before they receive any compensation at all? Parliament's negotiating team, led by rapporteur Andrey Novakov, remains split from the Council on two very different visions — and the stakes are enormous. Analyses suggest that under the Council's approach, 60–70% of passengers who currently qualify for compensation would lose that right, simply because of the higher delay threshold.

Parliament’s side: protect passengers. Keep the current 3-hour threshold, do not let compensation be cut, and modernise the rules where it helps travellers. As the talks have moved, Parliament has pushed to lift the minimum compensation to €350, up from the current €250 floor, with the higher distance-based tiers also set to rise (exactly how remains unclear as the talks continue), and the whole scale tied to an automatic inflation mechanism so it keeps its value over time — a fair correction, given that the current amounts have been frozen since 2004.

The Council’s side: take rights and money away from the passenger. Member states want to raise the delay threshold well beyond the current 3 hours, which alone would strip a large share of passengers of any right to compensation, and they have resisted tying compensation to inflation. The exact figures keep shifting from one session to the next, but the direction is consistent: less for the passenger.

There is a particular irony here. Air fares have risen steeply in recent years, and airlines pass every cost increase straight on to the passenger. Yet applying the same logic to compensation — which has been frozen at the same €250–€600 levels since 2004, and is now worth a fraction of its original value after two decades of inflation — is somehow treated as unthinkable. Parliament wants compensation indexed to inflation. The Council has resisted even that.

Because so much of this is being decided behind closed doors, the precise numbers are a moving target — which is exactly why passenger rights should not be treated as small change in a backroom deal.

What else is on the table: baggage, hidden fees, and more

The EU261 reform covers much more than flight compensation thresholds. Parliament is pushing for a package of genuine improvements that airlines have successfully blocked for years — and that the airlines are fighting just as hard to keep off the table:

• A legal right to free hand luggage. Without it, airlines keep the full freedom to charge €30, €50 or more for a bag that fits in the overhead bin — so a passenger who paid €50 for a ticket can end up paying the same again for a carry-on. No deal means hand luggage stays a cash cow, with no cap in sight.
• Ban on hidden fees for name corrections, check-in, and other ancillary services airlines have quietly monetised
• Refunds on airport taxes when passengers cancel their own booking
• Protection against airlines cancelling your return flight just because you missed the outbound leg
• Compensation indexed to inflation every three years — so it doesn't silently erode over time
• A standardised EU-wide list of 'extraordinary circumstances', ending the current game airlines play of citing any excuse to avoid paying

The Council, unsurprisingly, has been far less enthusiastic about most of these measures.

Airlines are profitable. They just don't want to pay.

While passengers wait hours at gates, airlines and their lobby groups are crying poverty in Brussels. Airlines for Europe (A4E) warns that any reform "could dismantle vital regional air networks". ERA, the regional carriers' association, calls the Parliament's proposal a "protection paradox" that might cancel routes altogether.

What they don't mention: European airlines have posted record profits in recent years. The idea that paying a few hundred euros per disrupted passenger would bring the industry to its knees is — to put it politely — not supported by the data. EU261 in its current form has actually been shown to reduce average flight delays by around 30% by creating a financial incentive to run on time. Weaken it, and you weaken that incentive too.

Consumer organisation Euroconsumers and APRA (the Association of Passenger Rights Advocates, of which Flight-Delayed.com is a member) have been direct: Parliament is "the only institution firmly on the side of European consumers". The Council's position "continues to prioritise industry interests". Any deal that cuts current rights, they say, "would represent the single greatest rollback of consumer rights in the history of the EU".

“We are hugely relieved that the European Parliament has stood squarely behind passengers. At the same time, it is baffling that the member states in the Council simply swept the much-needed inflation correction off the table. Air fares have soared in recent years, yet governments refuse to bring compensation — frozen for twenty years — in line with reality. In this case, no deal is far better than the bad deal the Council was trying to push through.”

— Tom van Bokhoven, CEO of Flight-Delayed.com

Meanwhile, the UK is heading in the opposite direction

While EU negotiators argue over how much to roll back passenger rights, the UK government this week introduced the Civil Aviation Bill — a piece of legislation that moves in exactly the opposite direction. The bill would give the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) new enforcement powers, including the ability to directly fine airlines that fail to compensate cancelled flights, assist passengers through disruption, or support disabled travellers. It also makes ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) mandatory — so passengers finally have somewhere to go without heading straight to court.

It is a striking contrast. While the EU — historically the global gold standard for passenger protection — is locked in a battle over whether to weaken its rules, the UK is passing laws to make theirs stronger.

What happens now

The 15 June conciliation deadline is firm. If Parliament and Council cannot agree by then, the reform process lapses — and EU261 remains exactly as it is today. For passengers, that is not the disaster it might sound like. The status quo keeps every existing protection in place:

• Three hours stays three hours. Passengers keep their legal right to compensation from a three-hour delay — no higher threshold.
• The current amounts stay protected. The €250, €400 and €600 tiers remain intact — nothing is cut.
• The case law survives. Every consumer-friendly ruling from the European Court of Justice — including the right to compensation for technical faults and staff strikes — stays in force.

But “nothing changes” cuts both ways. Without an inflation correction, the compensation amounts — frozen since 2004 and already worth a fraction of their original value — keep losing value year after year. Without baggage reform, the carry-on rip-off stays the norm. And without a political deal, the whole file is likely to sit in the freezer for years — reopened only when a future European Commission is willing to step back into this political minefield.

More than 80,000 Europeans have already signed the petition to defend their rights at change.org/p/say-no-to-worse-passenger-rights. If you think passengers deserve better than a race to the bottom designed to suit the airlines, now is the time to make that clear.

About Flight-Delayed.com

Since 2010, Flight-Delayed.com (part of Yource B.V.) has helped over two million passengers claim compensation for delayed, cancelled, and overbooked flights. Operating in 10+ countries, the company wins 98% of court cases and works exclusively on a no win, no fee basis.

About APRA

APRA (Association of Passenger Rights Advocates) is a non-profit organisation that fights for the protection of passenger rights in Europe. Flight-Delayed.com (Yource) is a member. APRA works directly with EU institutions, airlines, airports, and policymakers to ensure passengers have a voice at the table.