We need to fix more than just the burden of proof. We should start with clear definitions that mirror the European Union's definitions of “denied boarding” and “cancellation”. Then we need to move on to a presumption of liability for denied boarding, delay and cancellation on the carrier's part, as in the Montreal Convention. This is where the carrier has to rebut and show the extraordinary circumstances and why it should not be paying compensation.
We also recommend the removal of the “safety reasons” loophole, which does not exist in the European Union's regime and creates a lot of room for abuse. We agree with each one of the solutions, but we believe that we need all of them together to fix the system. Ultimately, one should not be requiring 1,000 pages of documents to decide the fate of a $400 compensation claim.