Same in the EU - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Passengers_Rights_Regulation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Passengers_Rights_Regula... Although air

Same in the EU - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Passengers_Rights_Regulation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Passengers_Rights_Regula... Although air carriers can offer passengers alternative compensation if the passenger chooses to accept it. For example, vouchers or a lower sum of money and no accommodation. Sometimes they present it as the only option to mislead the passenger. If challenged in court on refusing to pay out, air carriers sometimes claim extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided. This is an exception in the law. But it is for really force majeure events, like real disasters. Meanwhile, airlines often claim that something like the airplane breaking down or an employee calling in sick is extraordinary circumstances. This falls squarely within ordinary day-to-day operations of an airline. So it doesn’t fly in court, but it’s used more as an intimidating tactic to show to the plaintiff that their lawsuit would supposedly fail and to force awful settlement terms. Lots to be said about airlines trying to weasel out but it generally doesn’t work. Unless the passenger signs that they accept alternative compensation. I know the law doesn’t seem to allow that, but the phrasing is specific enough that it falls within the law.