The article does not clearly specify the problem to be solved. But it general, it would seem the author is concerned about choosing a data representation for date and time and place of a future event that stable under changes to the local timezone. In other words, he wants a flaccid designator.

UTC is clearly not suitable for this.

On the other hand, no-one is looking to add 8 months to a localtime and have it make sense. This kinds of scheduling decisions will always be supervised by humans.

And the "Chile" example just goes to show you should be prepared to update a schedule. Airlines do this all the time.

Food for thought.