Travel update: Brussels Airport cancels 30% of flights amid nationwide strike
Airports in Belgium are bracing for major service disruptions tomorrow, Tuesday 29 April, amid a nationwide strike of both private and public sector workers.
Brussels Airport and Charleroi Airport have warned travellers to expect cancellations and delays, particularly for departing flights.
The walk-out has been organised by Belgian trade unions CVC/ACV and FGTB/ABVV to protest against government reforms affecting pensions, working conditions and wage regulations.
The industrial action is expected to severely impact security and baggage handling at Brussels Airport in Zaventem on Tuesday.
Belgium's main flight hub announced that it has requested airlines to limit operations in preparation. At least 30 per cent of departing flights have already been cancelled.
'Significant disruption is expected throughout the day,' the airport has warned. Official advice for passengers is to check flight status updates regularly and prepare for possible delays or last-minute changes.
Arriving flights are expected to run on schedule, although the airport says modifications may occur as the situation develops during the day.
A spokesperson added that further departing flights may be scrapped depending on how the industrial action develops over the next 24 hours.
Brussels Airlines, which is based at the airport, will be most affected by the strike.
The carrier has already scrapped around 70 flights on Tuesday. Passengers are being notified via email and should receive guidance on rebooking or claiming a refund through a dedicated online portal.
'This process takes several hours, as we aim to offer travellers alternative solutions immediately - such as rebooking on a different flight or routing via another airport,' Brussels Airlines spokesperson, Nico Cardone, said.
Charleroi Airport (BSCA) will also feel the impact of the strikes. It has scrapped all departing flights on Tuesday, citing insufficient staff "to run operations in complete safety", according to news site Brussels Times.
The latest updates are that arriving flights should not experience major disruption, although passengers are advised to monitor updates in the run-up.
Travellers have also been warned to leave plenty of time for journeys to airports in Brussels.
Public transport across the city will be disrupted by the strikes, with train, metro, tram and bus services all affected.
"We will do everything in our power to ensure at least part of the service, and will inform passengers in real time about the situation on the network," public transport operator STIB/MIVB said.
Related
Symbol of a connected Europe: Eurostar's drive for reinvention amid Brexit, competition and strikes
Europe's travel strikes: Flight and train disruption you can expect in 2025
Brussels Airport advises passengers to arrive at least two hours before departure for Schengen destinations and three hours for non-Schengen flights.
The transport hub has urged passengers to follow updates on official communication channels and monitor airline websites closely.
'We are doing our utmost to minimise the inconvenience for our passengers, but given the national scope of the strike, disruption will be unavoidable,' the airport added.
Nearby airports may experience knock-on effects of the strikes as flights are re-routed or passengers book alternative routes.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
British holidaymakers to miss out on compensation after EU rule change
Britons will miss out on compensation for delayed flights after Brussels adopted a rule change following complaints from airlines. Payouts that were previously triggered by delays exceeding three hours will now only be made after four hours of holdups, European transport ministers agreed. The new regulation, hammered out following a decade of discussions and bargaining over passenger compensation, will apply to all services from EU countries to the UK. For the time being, travellers headed from Britain to the Continent will still qualify for a refund when flight delays hit the three-hour mark, unless they are flying with an EU-registered airline. While raising the compensation threshold, ministers also agreed to increase the minimum level of payment from €250 (£210) to €300 for shorter journeys and to €500 for those above 3,500km (2,175 miles). The original regulation, known as EU261, was passed in 2004 with the aim of ensuring that passengers received money and assistance in the event of flights being cancelled at short notice. Following Brexit, the UK adopted it into law so that the rights of travellers remained unchanged. However, the Government will now have to decide whether to adopt the amendments for outbound flights or stick with the original version. Taking no action might be welcomed by consumer groups but would have consequences for UK airlines, which would be at a disadvantage to their European rivals. It could also affect fares, with Ryanair having claimed that EU261 costs passengers £7 per ticket. Airlines for Europe, an industry group, had pressed for a higher compensation threshold, arguing that extending it to five hours – as originally proposed by the European Commission – would allow 70pc of flights that are cancelled to be rescued. It argued said that airlines inevitably scrapped flights once compensation was triggered, especially since the payouts involved were often higher than the ticket prices charged. It said a five-hour threshold would have made it more practical for carriers to fly in replacement aircraft so that more flights would get away, potentially benefiting 10m passengers a year. A spokesman said: 'Getting to their destination is the primary concern of passengers, even if it means getting to bed or arriving at their holiday resort late. But with a low cancellation threshold it makes more sense to call off the flight and take that hit.' Airlines have also railed against the fact that the compensation applies whether delays are caused by a crew shortage or technical issue that might be laid at their door, or by severe weather or air traffic control issues beyond their control. A number of extraordinary circumstances are expected to be added as part of revisions to 31 different air passenger rights. The revisions must still clear the European Parliament but are expected to become law in the bloc by the end of the year. The Department for Transport said the UK did not have to amend its legislation in line with any changes from the EU, and that any potential future reforms would require careful consideration on their merits, and be subject to public consultation. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
British holidaymakers to miss out on compensation after EU rule change
Britons will miss out on compensation for delayed flights after Brussels adopted a rule change following complaints from airlines. Payouts that were previously triggered by delays exceeding three hours will now only be made after four hours of holdups, European transport ministers agreed. The new regulation, hammered out following a decade of discussions and bargaining over passenger compensation, will apply to all services from EU countries to the UK. For the time being, travellers headed from Britain to the Continent will still qualify for a refund when flight delays hit the three-hour mark, unless they are flying with an EU-registered airline. While raising the compensation threshold, ministers also agreed to increase the minimum level of payment from €250 (£210) to €300 for shorter journeys and to €500 for those above 3,500km (2,175 miles). The original regulation, known as EU261, was passed in 2004 with the aim of ensuring that passengers received money and assistance in the event of flights being cancelled at short notice. Following Brexit, the UK adopted it into law so that the rights of travellers remained unchanged. However, the Government will now have to decide whether to adopt the amendments for outbound flights or stick with the original version. Taking no action might be welcomed by consumer groups but would have consequences for UK airlines, which would be at a disadvantage to their European rivals. It could also affect fares, with Ryanair having claimed that EU261 costs passengers £7 per ticket. Airlines for Europe, an industry group, had pressed for a higher compensation threshold, arguing that extending it to five hours – as originally proposed by the European Commission – would allow 70pc of flights that are cancelled to be rescued. It argued said that airlines inevitably scrapped flights once compensation was triggered, especially since the payouts involved were often higher than the ticket prices charged. It said a five-hour threshold would have made it more practical for carriers to fly in replacement aircraft so that more flights would get away, potentially benefiting 10m passengers a year. A spokesman said: 'Getting to their destination is the primary concern of passengers, even if it means getting to bed or arriving at their holiday resort late. But with a low cancellation threshold it makes more sense to call off the flight and take that hit.' Airlines have also railed against the fact that the compensation applies whether delays are caused by a crew shortage or technical issue that might be laid at their door, or by severe weather or air traffic control issues beyond their control. A number of extraordinary circumstances are expected to be added as part of revisions to 31 different air passenger rights. The revisions must still clear the European Parliament but are expected to become law in the bloc by the end of the year. The Department for Transport said the UK did not have to amend its legislation in line with any changes from the EU, and that any potential future reforms would require careful consideration on their merits, and be subject to public consultation.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
What Trump's travel ban is really intended to achieve
Donald Trump's decision to bar the citizens of a dozen countries from entering the United States is his most sweeping visa ban yet. By casting his net wider than ever, the US president is ostensibly protecting Americans from foreigners who pose a threat to homeland security. Countries that do not properly vet their citizens or whose nationals overstay their visas were selected for outright bans, while seven other states were subjected to restrictions that would prevent as many as 90 per cent of their nationals from visiting the US. The move is a resurrection of a policy from his first term, but Mr Trump has considerably broadened his scope, imposing a much wider, if less draconian, set of measures — one that reflects a desire to overcome future legal challenges while pacifying his supporters. His 2017 executive order, which went through several iterations, saw a ban on travellers from seven nations with large Muslim majorities, earning adulation from his supporters. By contrast, just eight of the 19 countries hit by outright or partial bans under his latest edict have Muslim majorities. Credit: The White House Mr Trump's tour of the Middle East last month, during which he cemented friendships with a string of rich Gulf potentates, may be a factor. More likely, though, the US president is simply being more strategic than in his first term. By taking aim at non-Muslim states alongside the usual suspects in the Middle East and Horn of Africa, he is making the legal challenges he faced the first time around less likely to succeed. The White House has been careful to justify its choice of targets, saying the countries listed pose security threats either because their nationals tend to overstay visas or because they have a significant 'terrorist presence'. With an eye on the courts, Mr Trump has also carved out exemptions even for states facing an outright ban: Afghans who worked with the US military, or persecuted minorities in Iran will, in theory, still be allowed in. This will allow Mr Trump to claim a significant victory on an issue important not just to his base, but beyond. Securing US borders is a central plank of his America First ideology. The visa ban is one element of this strategy, complementing a range of steps on immigration — from raids to detain migrants, to mass deportations and restrictions on international students. The ban will have real consequences. Last year, the State Department issued 170,000 visas to the citizens of countries facing an outright ban. The list of affected countries is far broader geographically than in Mr Trump's first term, with nine drawn from sub-Saharan Africa, three from the Americas, three from the Middle East and four from elsewhere in Asia. Of the countries reprieved this time, two offer an instructive insight into Mr Trump's shifting geopolitical priorities. North Korea, added to the initial list later in 2017, is the first omission. In his first term, Mr Trump expended significant diplomatic capital in a fruitless quest to force Kim Jong-un to give up his nuclear arsenal. North Korea's inclusion may have been part of a pressure campaign designed to force concessions. That having failed, there is little value now in a symbolic measure like a visa ban. Very few North Koreans ever come to the United States, after all. The second is Syria, one of the main targets of the first ban because of the flood of refugees fleeing its civil war during Mr Trump's first term. But the war is over, the dictator Bashar al-Assad has been toppled and the White House has taken significant steps – over the objections of Israel but to the delight of most Arab states – to end Syria's isolation. Laying aside concerns about the new Syrian government's jihadi past, Mr Trump met President Ahmed al-Sharaa during his Middle East tour and announced an end to US sanctions on Damascus. Syria's exemption from the ban is further evidence of its accelerating rehabilitation. Other countries have remained on the banned list for more obvious reasons. Libya, Somalia and Yemen are all conflict-ridden with a large jihadi presence. In other cases, diplomatic factors may be at play. Iran has been included again – presumably to increase diplomatic pressure for a nuclear deal. Removing it from the list could be an inducement the Trump administration hopes to dangle to extract concessions from Tehran. Russia was floated in March as a possible candidate but avoided the final list – despite the threat posed by Russian sleeper operatives in the US. But Mr Trump, whose affinity with Moscow is well known, has no wish to alienate Vladimir Putin while he hopes for a peace deal with Ukraine. Including Russia would also have triggered pushback from Moscow's allies on the American right. The most puzzling entries are some of the countries whose citizens are facing a ban for the first time. Chad, Equatorial Guinea and the Republic of Congo – not to be confused with its larger neighbour, the Democratic Republic of Congo, which is in talks with Washington over a critical minerals deal – are hardly obvious candidates for Mr Trump's ire. The three may not have cooperated sufficiently in accepting nationals deported from the US but none poses a more serious security threat than nearby states. Chad's neighbours in the African Sahel – Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger – are military dictatorships that have lost swathes of territory to jihadist groups, but escaped without a visa ban. Immediate answers are not obvious. But it is worth remembering that decision-making in the Trump administration can be arbitrary. Under the 'Liberation Day' tariffs announced in April – and later suspended – countries were hit with different rates based on rudimentary trade calculations. It is possible that some of the African states now on the visa ban list have suffered a similar fate. They may also serve to camouflage accusations of anti-Muslim bias. And as low-profile countries unfamiliar to most Americans, the risk of diplomatic blowback is small. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
