Affecting

More than 3 million Brits travel there every year

UK travellers should be prepared for the risk of strike action over the next few weeks in a popular holiday hotspot. Millions of UK holidaymakers will be travelling abroad in the weeks ahead.

And France is one spot that will be popular with Brits. More than 17 million UK people travel there every year, according to the UK Foreign Office.

Now the new threat of industrial action has broken out – and it runs throughout the remainder of the summer holiday period. EasyJet cabin crew in France could walk out in strike action expected to run until September 2. Flight attendants there have complained about rota arrangements and working conditions.

French media report that three unions representing cabin crew at EasyJet France have issued strike notice covering the period from 7 August to 2 September. They have complained of a “continuing deterioration” in working conditions, according to a joint statement released this week.

What should you do if your flight is cancelled? For those planning to travel with the airline in the coming weeks, passengers whose flights are disrupted by cancellations or delays will be given 48 hours’ notice. Simply head to the ‘Booking’ tab in the EasyJet app to access the relevant information.

Should your flight be cancelled, you can request either a refund or a ticket change directly from the airline. If the replacement departure is scheduled for the following day, EasyJet may foot the bill for a hotel and a taxi to the airport.

The airports facing strike action include Lyon, Nice, Paris Orly, Bordeaux and Paris Charles de Gaulle. A spokesperson for ⁠easyJet said the company was disappointed and had made an offer of changes to tackle their concerns. ⁠They said: “Given we have planned negotiations in September, we call on the unions to call off this ⁠counterproductive action at this important time of the year for our customers”.

French news site RTL reports that workers are denouncing what they describe as “a vicious circle that has been going on for a year now”, with the SNPNC-FO, UNAC-CFE-CGC and UNPNC-CFDT trade unions condemning “the chronic instability of timetables, last-minute changes, imposed ‘trippings’ (a series of flights over several days, ed.), particularly gruelling rotas and a total lack of protective measures”.

“The notice period has been deliberately left open to cover the entire period,” the trade unions stress, adding that “key dates” for industrial action will be confirmed “48 hours in advance”.

The unions have accused management, whom they claim to have been warning “for nearly a year”, of failing to provide “concrete and binding” solutions to their concerns. Luckily for travellers, a previous strike call at EasyJet on Easter Monday in April had only a minimal impact on air traffic.

Local media say that as France’s second-largest airline by passenger numbers after Air France, British carrier EasyJet predominantly operates short- and medium-haul routes. The airline employs several thousand staff in France, a considerable proportion of whom work as cabin crew.

Gaël Leloup, a union representative for the Union of Civil Aviation Cabin Crew (UNAC), told RTL that “scheduling instability” has gradually become “the company’s normal way of operating”: “It’s normal to change people’s schedules once, twice, three or four times in the same day. And dozens of times a month, too. You might be moved from morning to evening shifts, or sent to another base in Europe for three or four days.”

The union representatives say they are fully aware of the disruption this strike action will cause to passengers’ travel plans, with another hectic weekend of holiday traffic on the horizon. “The sad thing is that it’s our passengers who will bear the brunt of it,” laments Gaël Leloup.

But with talks between staff and management having ground to a halt, workers feel they have been left with little choice: “After a year of discussions and still no solution, we have no option but to take major industrial action.”

For its part, EasyJet’s management said this week it is urging trade unions to withdraw the strike notice. The trade unions say they remain “open to negotiation” to call off the strike notice, provided that management “puts forward clear, concrete and binding solutions”.

RYANAIR is set to cancel hundreds of flights to and from a popular European country.

Two million seats will be axed from the winter season in Belgium and next summer due to rising air passenger tax.

The airline said today that it would be removing five aircraft from its base at Charleroi, according to local media.

Cuts will affect services at Charleroi and Brussels Airport in Zaventem starting later this year.

Ryanair said the axing of routes is a decision made as part of the Federal Government’s plan to increase the departure tax on air tickets.

Just a few days ago, the Belgian government announced it would raise the amount from €5 (£4.26) to €7 (£5.97) from January 1, 2027.

COAST EFFECTIVE

Best UK family theme & waterparks with cheap stays from just £3pp a night

DIVE IN

Mega waterpark hotels with EVERYTHING you ever wanted & all inclusive from £189pp

Despite this being lower than expected, Ryanair said it is still too high.

When the tax increase was announced at the beginning of the year, Ryanair boss Michael O’Leary slammed the plans, calling them “silly” and “damaging”.

He added: “Over the last 20 years, Ryanair has grown to be Belgium’s largest airline.

“This growth can easily be lost to tax abolishing countries like Sweden Hungary, Slovakia and Italy, and if Charleroi and Belgium don’t reverse these taxes.”

Ryanair currently carries 11.6million passengers to and from Belgium, making it the largest airline operating in the country.

It’s not yet clear whether the routes axed will be from the UK.

Current flights routes to Charleroi include from Manchester, Newcastle and Edinburgh.

BOSTON — A federal judge on Friday struck down a Trump administration policy enacted after the shooting of two National Guard members that made it harder for immigrants from dozens of countries to stay and enter the U.S.

In a ruling harshly criticizing the administration, U.S. District Chief Judge John McConnell Jr. said the policy “threw the lives of countless immigrants living in the United States into indeterminate legal limbo,” and he accused the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services of ignoring the law.

“In enacting its latest immigration policies, USCIS: claims statutory and regulatory authority that it does not possess; makes decisions without the reasoned explanations that it must provide; acts without regard for the reliance interests of applicants that it must consider; and justifies its actions with pretextual concerns of ‘national security’ that mask anti-immigrant sentiments that it is forbidden from letting influence its decision-making,” he wrote. “In legal terms that means USCIS’s actions are contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The policies enacted after the National Guard shooting last year meant that immigrants from 39 African, Asian, Latin American and Middle Eastern countries have been “categorically barred” from receiving final decisions on, among other things, their asylum, work permit, green card and citizenship applications.

“This ruling reaffirms a basic principle: the federal government cannot shut down lawful immigration pathways or discriminate against people based on where they come from,” said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which represented the plaintiffs in the case. “These unlawful policies caused enormous harm to families, workers, asylum-seekers, and communities across the country who were left in limbo, unable to work, access protections, or move forward with their lives.”

The policies apply to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which approves applications for immigrants to work and become citizens. The agency, which is within the Homeland Security Department, often grants asylum, but only for those already in the United States when they apply. Immigration judges grant asylum to those who are stopped at the border; the ruling does not affect them, and neither do the policies that sparked the lawsuit.

It is part of an ongoing effort by the administration to tighten U.S. entry standards for travel and immigration, in what critics say unfairly prevents travel for people from a broad range of countries. The administration suggested it would expand the restrictions after the arrest of an Afghan national suspect in the shooting of two National Guard troops over Thanksgiving weekend.

In its motion to dismiss, which the court denied, the government argued that Congress gave the executive branch broad authority over immigration policy, including “the entry of aliens into the United States as well as discretion within the statutory scheme to confer as well as withdraw various discretionary benefits.”

“This case rests on a remarkable premise: that a federal court should prevent an agency from issuing the very policy guidance that provides government personnel with the guardrails necessary to ensure consistent, non-arbitrary, and individualized decisionmaking consistent with federal law,” the government wrote in its brief.

Immigration groups celebrated the ruling.

“This ruling sets a powerful precedent that the administration cannot ignore the law as laid down by Congress and cannot arbitrarily bar immigration benefits on the basis of national origin by fiat,” said Jamal Abdi, president at the National Iranian American Council. “Fortunately, this is still a nation of laws, and those who uphold America’s values have recourse to challenge and push back on such discriminatory, arbitrary policies.”

Shawn VanDiver, a Navy veteran who heads a coalition that supports Afghan resettlement efforts called #AfghanEvac, said the ruling was a “significant victory for the rule of law and for thousands of Afghan allies and other immigrants who followed every requirement asked of them.”

“Just this week in Dallas and Fort Worth, we met people who feared losing jobs because delayed work permit renewals threatened their livelihoods, families who postponed education, travel, and homeownership because they did not know when their cases would be resolved, and future Americans who had expected to become citizens only to see their applications stall without explanation,” VanDiver said.

Casey writes for the Associated Press.

Critics of the current system say it doesn’t reflect reality

The Government has issued an update about tax changes affecting UK air travel. The policy update could impact journeys with major airlines such as Ryanair and EasyJet. The ministerial response comes after major concerns were raised about the current system, which campaigners branded “completely unfair”.

The Treasury has issued a response to a petition to Parliament that garnered more than 10,000 signatures calling for a review of the scale rate expenses paid to employees who travel outside the UK, such as airline cabin crew. These scale rate payments are where a business provides an employee with a set amount of cash, to cover business expenses such as travel and meals, so the worker does not have to provide receipts for each item. The petition called for ministers to “review and increase” the expenses rates. The campaign said: “We feel the rates are not reflective or the real costs for people whose work takes them abroad, and that the way they are put into blocks of 5/10 or 24 hour blocks is completely unfair.

“We want these rates to be reviewed by HMRC so they are up to date with the current cost of living.” These time blocks refer to the fact there are different rates that apply depending on the length of time the expenses relate to. There are different rates for a period of more than five hours but less than 10 hours, another one for more than 10 hours but less than 24 hours, and still another rate for a period of more than 24 hours.

The petition goes on to make the case why the current system is unfair: “If a flight is delayed by an hour this can mean dropping from the 24 hour payment down to the 10 hour payment so essentially working 12 hours without a payment. This is a common occurrence in air travel, hence crew being penalised for something out of their control.

“We believe the scale rates need to provide a wider range of rates and time blocks so that if you fall between rates you are not penalised.” Just over 11,000 people have pledged their support for the petition at the time of writing. If a petition reaches 10,000 signatures, the Government is obliged to pen a response.

You can read the petition in full

Government response

The Treasury has now issued a reply. On the question of whether there could be changes to HMRC’s policies in this area, the group said: “The Government keeps all taxes under review as part of the policy making process.

“Any decisions on future changes in this area will be taken in the context of the wider public finances.” The group also set out the reasoning behind the current scale rates system.

The Treasury said: “Overseas scale rates (OSR) allow employers to reimburse overseas travel costs without receipts. Where costs exceed rates, receipts can be used. The Government keeps OSR under review. The Government recognises that employees who travel overseas for work, including cabin crew, incur additional costs and that employers need practical ways to reimburse those costs fairly.

“HMRC’s overseas scale rate system is intended to support this by providing a consistent, evidence based framework for tax free subsistence payments where employees are travelling abroad as part of their role.” The Government body went on to explain that the scale rates are not intended to reflect a person’s expenses in every case, but instead provide a “standard set of benchmark amounts” that employers and employees can use.

Bespoke rates

Further explaining the rules, the response set out: “Employers are not required to use HMRC’s published scale rates if they believe these do not reflect their employees’ circumstances. Employers can agree bespoke rates with HMRC based on evidence of actual costs, or they can reimburse the actual costs incurred where receipts are available.

“These alternatives allow employers greater flexibility where working patterns, disruption or sector specific issues mean the standard rates are not appropriate.” You can sign the petition on the website.