Passengers to sue airline over Captain's PAs

[AJ]

A bizarre story from Brazil, courtesy of Ananova news:


Passengers to sue airline over pilot's comments

Passengers on an internal flight in Brazil are suing the airline over "inappropriate" comments made by the pilot.

They say the pilot made them feel "scared and nervous" with his comments on a flight from Rio de Janeiro to Vitoria.

The Gol airlines flights was scheduled to take one hour but took more than five hours and ended up at a different airport.

Passenger Ari Vieira Augusto told Terra Noticias Populares: "When he announced we couldn't land in Vitoria due to bad weather, he said he had some good news and some bad news.

"The good news was that he had made a good take off and the bad was that no airplanes were being successful in landing at our destination, and he didn't explain anything else.

"He was crazy, irresponsible and a joker. He said we were 10,000 feet above ground, 46 celsius degrees below zero and that he wouldn't advise anyone to get out of the airplane without a heavy coat."

Passengers also told how the pilot insisted on trying to land at Vitoria even after he knew the conditions weren't good.

They say he got to within 200 metres of the runway when he suddenly turned away, terrifying the passengers. The plane went on to land in the city of Belo Horizonte after another hour.

Passenger Henrique Rebelo added: "At the end the pilot even had the nerve to ask if we were as dizzy as him because of all the turns he had to make!"

[Jerricho]

"He was crazy, irresponsible and a joker. He said we were 10,000 feet above ground, 46 celsius degrees below zero and that he wouldn't advise anyone to get out of the airplane without a heavy coat."

That's great! :) Definately one of the better ones I have heard.

But what next? ATC being sued for a go-around that reminds people about a certain BBC documentary? I understand these things can scare people, and perhaps a little re-assurance from the pilot could have been useful. But to resort to litigation? Will airlines have to get people to sign an indemnity waiver covering for events that, while not endangering the aircraft, can scare the cr@p out of you?

[Final 3 Greens]

Jerricho

Maybe there's a difference between unfortunate stuff that just happens and airline employee induced discomfort?

I wasn't on this flight, so don't know if this was the case.

However, businesses just cannot let their employees scare people by inappropriate comments with zero payback. (And again, I'm not judging this case, but talking abstractly about the principle.)

This principle of acting sensibly extends to the pax too, e.g. making the 'bomb' joke at check in is no longer considered funny.

[akerosid]

It's ridiculous; what he said was perfectly innocent and indeed, if he were taken to task about it, he could defend it as a truthful comment! (An OAT of -46 generally requires a heavy coat!)

Indeed, it looks as if his intention was to cheer passengers up and it probably was lost on passengers who were probably pretty peeved as a result of being diverted.

[AJ]

Bear in mind the following:

1) Air travel in Brazil and indeed Latin America is not yet as common as in the US, Europe or Asia

2) GOL is a low-cost carrier, which might mean that:

3) Passengers may have been first-time flyers/inexperienced flyers, and thus hyper-sensitive.

Such pax may not have seen the lighter side of diversions/bad weather/go-arounds/cockpit humour.

[JJflyer]

Oh man... Next we hear that we get sued for the way we sit in the cockpit while PAX are boarding...

Taking al the fun out of the job.. Right? Smiling Cabin crew. That could be interpreted as trying to hit on PAX. No Smiles. What a rude crew! Meals on board. Oh thats just soooo bad that one can't eat it. No food and the service sucks.

On a BA flight from Gatwick to Malaga as PAX I heard a couple discussing the flight time and service. Seemed that they where very unhappy as their ticket had cost them "A lot" and it took BA "A lot" longer to get there than Easy Jet. What a horrible situation. Yes, the food was bad too.

One just can't please em all.


Back to my hole

JJ

[Devils Advocate]

Q). What was the best and briefest PA ever given ?

A). "Halfway"

Least said, soonest mended !

[RealFish]

A number of years ago my then boss spent a lot of time flying between GLA and the Islands, I remember he told of a captain who prior to a return flight walked to the a/c tapping a white cane and wearing dark glasses. Apparently is was a real hoot for the regulars but not for a couple of Americans who suffered a humour (sorry - humor) failure and complained.

As I subsequently found out to my cost that my boss was a lying b'stard, I was never really sure whether it was a true story.

[Meeb]

RealFish, cant say whether your boss is a liar or not, but the event he described did happen regularly in the old days!

for a couple of Americans who suffered a humour (sorry - humor) failure
so whats new.... ;)

[kabz]

If you want to really scare them, get them to help you holding the yoke in an engine out, near Vmc roll situation ... :}

[visibility3miles]

I was once flying World Airways into Newark when the pilot announced that
"We are starting our descent into Newark, New Jersey, home of the television show 'Little House on the Toxic Waste Dump.' "

This was when the show "Little House on the Prairie" was popular on TV.

I thought it was hysterical, but I'm not from New Jersey. Of course, World Airways stopped flying pax soon afterwards, so perhaps the pilot didn't care.

:D

[Onan the Clumsy]

PAX #1: The food here is awful.

PAX #2: I know; and such small portions.

[jetlinking]

How do you know when a plane load of Brits arrives at the gate?
When the engines are shut down the whinning continues.

[Airbubba]

>>PAX #1: The food here is awful.

PAX #2: I know; and such small portions. <<


Please credit Woody Allen in "Annie Hall"...

[Jerricho]

AJ, you're right. I'll admit I didn't take your points into consideration, and for a first-time passenger, these events may have been harrowing.

However as F3G metions payback........payback for what? Employee induced discomfort? What somebody may find uncomfortable (like the coat comment) somebody else may find relief ("The pilot doesn't sound worried......I feel much better!"). Perhaps the pilot was trying to share his frustration and discomfort as well when asking if people were dizzy?

Like always, there is the compulsion now for litigation. The people who want to sue and "get what's coming to them". How many people read and contributed to the thread about Aviation humour? How many of those were "quips" from the driver about an event during the flight.

[Final 3 Greens]

Jerricho

I would have found the PA hilarious, but the point I was making is that professionals must consider the lowest common denominator when talking to the great unwashed who pay for the privilege of whatever service they have bought.

In my day job, what would be a hilarious quip to a colleague could easily be highly offensive to a paying punter, so I avoid them although it often makes the day a little duller for me as a consequence.

A significant number of air travellers are nervous flyers and do not appreciate 'gallows' humour, so why take the commercial riks of offending them?

Ignore the principle and you end in difficulty (payback) - not necessarily in litigation, but more often by people voting with their feet.

[Gatwick Bugle]

The poor sod was slightly off key. But better the hint of originality than reading from the same old hackneyed songsheet. Regular BA pax must wince or just not listen to the same old banaal, trite, schmalz that is always churned out. There was one original who also wrote a book, but his humour of course was not welcomed by management as it strayed from the songsheet and even the laughable phonetic foreign version. Don't people feel embarrassed continually reading the same script or do we have to do everything by numbers.

[Goforfun]

This is worth a read!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/3199441.stm


Travellers feared train derailment

One carriage on a passenger train tipped on to one set of wheels as it took a bend too fast, according to passengers on board.
The West Anglia Great Northern (WAGN) train was alleged to have been trying to make up time after a 20-minute delay when the incident happened on Monday.

The train, the 0655 BST King's Lynn to London King's Cross service, was travelling between Letchworth and Hitchin in Hertfordshire.

Passengers reported the train tipped on to one set of wheels as it took a bend too fast - claims which WAGN said it was investigating.

One traveller on the King's Lynn to London service said bags and passengers were "flying all over the place".

A WAGN spokeswoman said: "We have started an investigation and we take any incident such as this very seriously."

She added: "According to passengers, a carriage was shaking.

"The driver has been suspended, which is normal procedure while incidents are being investigated.

"He has been tested for alcohol and drugs but it will be a few days before we have the test results.

"The driver is being interviewed and the train has been taken out of service."


===========================

So the passengers could tell; the train was going to fast, was actually on one set of wheels, took the bend to fast and as a result the drivers job is now on the line (pardon the pun) And he is being tested for drugs and booze!

[Jerricho]

Fair 'nuff 3 Greens...............I see what you're getting at.

I just get so p*ssed off about the old "I'm gonna sue culture". Like those bloodsuckers that greet you in shopping malls with "Have you had an accident in the past 3 years???". Or the guy that falls out of the car screaming whip-lash for a bump at walking pace.

[norodnik]

Reminds me of 2 particular items a CSD came up with.

1) Pilot says for those of you on the right you can see Rockall, for those of you on the left you can see F...all

2) And after landing in Saudi, a CSD was heard to say, "Welcome to Riyadh, where the local time is about 300 years behind everywhere else"

I did not hear either of these, just stories, true or otherwise, retold.

[epreye]

GB, don't be too hard on BA. A few years back, I was pax on MUC-LHR 757. As we boarded, RB211's were gently windmilling with the usual clunking of the fan blades, some pax were obviously concerned and brought this to the attention of the CC.

Once airborne the Capt. came on the P.A. to allay fears, said he would send the F.O. outside to check all was ok with the engines when we reached cruise level. Everyone enjoyed a laugh.

Before descent he offered the jumpseat to any pax or wannabee who would like to view the approach to LHR. Great flight.

Pity neither of the above are acceptable any longer in our p.c. sterile environment.

[Buster Hyman]

Just read on Dunnunda about a Virgin Blue FA calling "Brace, brace, brace" whilst taxiing! Don't know if it's true, but...oh dear!:hmm:

[411A]

Always thought that the best solution was to have the First Officer give the PA...as generally they seem to do a better job anyway. That, and a couple of extra sectors (beyond every other) keeps 'em smiling.

[Dani]

Whether suing or not is appropriate, I cannot judge.
It is a clear fact that it is neighter professional nor psychological wise to make ambiguous announcements, that can be understand as cheerful or frightening. You just don't do it! Period.

Pilots who do are eighter too funny to think or never understood the CRM lession "Begin to think what the others think about your statements". Flying business is never stick and throttle only, but taking a lot of different factors into consideration, of which one is practical psychology. I am shure this Brazilian commander behaves the same with his crew: with disrespect

Dani

[Final 3 Greens]

Jerricho

I hate ambulance chasers too :)

Gatwick Bugle

"Regular BA pax must wince or just not listen to the same old banaal, trite, schmalz that is always churned out"

Well I'm a regular BA pax and I don't find the scripting offensive, in fact I believe that the demonstrated discpiline of sticking to SOPS in airline Ops is a very Good Thing.

[BrightonGirl]

Re the train that allegedly was speeding... Am I missing something? Isn't it completely appropriate for the incident (including the physical condition of the conductor) to be investigated? I should think it would be mandatory. Derailments do happen, and can be just as unfortunate for passengers as flying accidents.

[mgc]

BrightonGirl

I think you are missing the point. It is totally impossible for a punter on a train to know if a train is on 2 wheels (4 actualy, total of 8 on most coaches). I think this is actually an impossible situation without a major accident. What we are actually looking at is uninformed punters making wild speculations about somthing they know nothing about. Result is that an industry that is paranoid about percieved safety totally over reacts so that they are seen to take the 'incident' seriously. Result one suspended proffessional, 1 train out of action resulting in umpteen delays and cancellations and associted costs of all other aspects of the 'investigation'. Why? because they are all to scarred to tell the proles their allegations are tripe and to tell them to **** off.

relate this to aviation, the 'see you in court mentality' and the ability of the media to make a typhoon out of the dregs in your tea cup and you should get the message!

[BrightonGirl]

mgc,

Of course I don't know the details, but it seems to me that passengers who might travel that same train often could conceivably know when it's going faster around a curve than it usually does. And if baggage is being tossed around? Even allowing for some exaggeration -- and I'm not saying there mightn't be some in the account posted -- I don't see why the perceptions of any and all passengers would be deemed up-front to be worthless.

Maybe it's highly unlikely that the wheels on one side had actually left the tracks, but going through a curve or a turn with more centrifugal force than usual is something an alert passenger could notice accurately.

Rail accidents do occur, and I just think it's always wise to err [perhaps] on the side of safety. And for the authorities to err [perhaps] on the side of vigilance.

Which is exactly what I've noticed most pprune pilots think is appropriate in the air.

[Final 3 Greens]

mgc

Why? because they are all to scarred to tell the proles their allegations are tripe and to tell them to **** off.

I heard a wagn spokesman responding to the story on the radio.

The company admits the train was exceeding the speed limit, aka operating outside approved limits. (Don't a certain airline get stick on this board for similar alleged acts in the air and during taxi?)

Maybe the proles understand a little more than you give credit for.

[Jerricho]

Maybe it wasn't exceeding speed limits.................

Maybe for the first time in history the train actually reached the posted speed limit!! No buckled tracks, no leaves on the line, no "wrong snow". The driver probably though "Let's do it!!!" :D

[LGS6753]

This is your captain speaking.
I hope you are enjoying your flight with xx airlines.
Those of you on the starboard side of the aircraft may be able to see a small, yellow dinghy.
I am speaking to you from that small, yellow dinghy...

[ww1]

Good morning, everyone, this is your captain speaking. Welcome to flight ###. Passengers on the right side of the aircraft, look to your left. Passengers on the left, look to your right. SMILE....SAY "HI!"...

[mgc]

brightongirl and final3greens
I'm a bit surprised by your last postings

There are many reports and threads on these pages of uniformed passengers making outrageous accusations of breechs of safety. It is normal for air accident investigators to take all reports and statements from non proffessional witnessess with extreme caution due to well documented tendancies for the uninformed to see/ hear/ feel things that never happened or that happened in a different order to what the observer belived to happen. Why should things been different on the railways?

I would never suggest that safety should be compromised- BUT totally outrageous accusations should be treated as such. That is largely where this thread started from. We are plagued by self appointed 'experts' who know more than the true experts. It is these self appointed experts who often start the legislative process, beliving that they can make a case to win compensation. It is now widely accepted in technical / engineering circles that legal truth and real truth are two very different things

[spork]

I'm reminded of an incident not long ago, with our local suburban trains, where some peak hour trains pass through a couple of stations without stopping. Needless to say, they travel faster at certain places because of this. One such place was where a branch line joined, and there was always a lot of noise and lurching due to traversing the points.

I used to take the fast train at times, and was truly amazed at how fast a driver would take a train through that spot, with the carriages lurching from side-to-side, with standing passengers being thrown off their feet. During my holiday week, a train derailed at that very spot, due to a broken rail. I don't recall if there were any fatalities, but obviously that was an extremely dangerous occurrence.

At what point am I allowed to have an opinion on this sort of event? (I wasn't uniformed incidentally)

[mgc]

what opinion do you want to have.

that trains lurch when going fast over junctions?

that trains going fast over junctions= broken rails?

that if trains lurch people get jostled about?

that trains going fast over junctions is dangerous?

that trains are dangerous?

You are entiltled to your view on all the above. It does not however mean that all your views are correct. Your views on 1 and 3 are probably correct, bassed on repeated observed cause and effect. Your view on 2 is almost certainly biased by one incident close to you. You are however unlikely to have much experience to draw any meaningful scientific conclusion. In this respect you are uninformed and your view, scientifically, counts for nothing. 4 and 5 are unquantified. 4 is a qualification of 5. It may be your view that 4 is more dangerous than 5, but still unquantified and therefore to all intense and purpose meaningless for most scientific purposes!

Sorry if thats confusing, but thats the way it is. Neither does it mean that any of your views and experiences are any the less valid for you.

[spork]

Just interested where you draw the line on anyone knowing anything at all. Regardless of the laws of physics and metallurgy then, I suppose it was a sparrow landing on the rail that broke it.

[mgc]

Its very simple

If their statement contains outrageous statements (to the informed) i place very little credit to the remainder of their statement, until proven otherwise.

If their statement seams viable (to the informed) I will treat it with the respect it deserves.

That is why accident investigators, be it AAI or HMRI tend to be the most informed available so that they can sort the gems from chaff.

[Slim20]

Personally I am glad that the vast majority of passengers remain largely ignorant of the intricacies of air travel. At least it confines the lawsuits to matters of comfort and perceived fears rather than any concrete critique of our performance by passengers who know *just* enough to be dangerous......

[spork]

Ah! Thanks for informing me, mgc.

Incidentally, your spelling, syntax, and punctuation all need more attention if you are not to appear uninformed.

[runner3]

i have to agree with slim20 ignorance is definately bliss!!
A little knowledge is dangerous. Ive had the great pleasure of having to straghten out a few PAX.
Favourite example: PAX "what is that coast line ahead?"
(after asking Cpt) SA " the French coast Nice and Cannes ahead
PAX: "No it isnt it cant be"
SA "Madam if the captain says its the french coast line then you better hope it is" :mad: :mad: :mad:

[BrightonGirl]

mgc,

you refer to people's inability to draw "any meaningful scientific conclusion" .....

It has nothing to do with science!! "Accidents" -- or perhaps I should use the word "incidents" -- can be examined scientifically. But what spork and I are talking about (if I may be so bold, spork, as to include you) is the combination of reasoning, life experience and common sense.

[keithatl]

There's a BIG difference between humor and comedy.

When making PA's from the cockpit, humor is OK, but comedy is inappropriate.

Sounds like this Brazilian Captain was trying to be a flying comedian and it backfired on him.

Over the years I've heard more complaints from my non-airline friends about their recent flights where "the pilot" got on the PA and talked and talked and talked and talked and talked and talked and talked and talked.

Fellow pilots: Please shut the *%# up and just fly the airplane. Get your PA's down to about a minute. Leave the comedy, political/social commentary, and geography lessons to others. Your passengers will LOVE you for it!!
.

[geo7E7]

Can't use much of a sense of humour nowdays, can we? Flying is getting a bit too serious in the eye of the public! Can't blame them though.....:(

on PA;

Capt: Ladies and gentlement, for those of you who're seated on the righthand side of the aircraft, you should be able to see a magnificent view of Mt Kilimanjaro and to those seated on the left will be able to see the people on the right looking at Kilimanjaro......;)

Pax: "stewardess, may I have a complaint form please...."

[BrightonGirl]

About 29 years ago, when I was on an AA (I think) flight from New York to Los Angeles, the Captain announced that on one side of the plane there was a great view of the Grand Canyon, the best we'd ever see. Then he said that so we didn't all have to get up and go over to that side, he'd circle round it so those of us on the other side would be able to see it, too! And he did -- made a nice little loop and came back by it on the other side!

I have to say, I like hearing from the Captain, and I love the geography lessons!

[ATR42 Guy]

Sounds like he was just trying to ease the frustration of a bad day by cracking a couple of funnies. Something to be learned here regarding the average intelligence of pax.

[timmcat]

Something to be learned here regarding the average intelligence of pax.

A tad arrogant, don't you think?

[Ralph the Bong]

Ha this is nothing! There was a Captain at Ansett who used to love to put on his hat and coat and address the captive audience with the FA handset at the front. One day going SYD to Norfolk Is. He put on his hat and coat and made a PA that went..." Good afternoon ladies and gents, Capt "Micheals" here. we are currently just passed our point of no return for Sydney and the latest weather for Norfolk is, well, attrocious. As we dont have enough fuel to get back to Sydney, we have to continue, but we might miss out on Norfolk and have to divert to Tontuta. The weather there isn't great either. But look folks, I was in the air force for over 30 years and if anyone can get you in, I can". With that, he returned to the cockpit. Passengers started to cry. The Captain was invited to Melboune for 'tea and biscuits' with the Director Flight Ops over this one.

[broadreach]

I’m pretty sure I’ve flown with this captain. He’s pretty unmistakeable from the few times I’ve seen him on Rio-São Paulo flights – where he’s had the cabin in stitches.

“Seen him”? Yes, he’s come aft to address everyone! Great PR. I’d feel comfortable with him any time and would be ready to come to his defense as a character witness in any lawsuit. Yes, he might be a bit OTT for the more sphincterisc pax; like Gol itself he’s taken a page out of the Southwest book and is pretty heavy on the humour. I can well imagine how the “good news and bad news” would sit with some passengers. For my own part, having flown into Vitoria in bad weather, and being aware of the geography, I’d feel considerably reassured knowing via PA that the guys up front were even more aware. So I hope to hell he’s not been reprimanded.

There have been some comments earlier on about the average intelligence of passengers and, perhaps more specifically, about that of LCC pax in Brazil. You might be surprised. Gol have been fairly succesful in attracting corporate accounts, not an easy task when they don’t offer mileage.

Gol are up against a moribund traditional carrier, Varig (Boeing aircraft), and an innovative one with a good track record, TAM (Airbus throughout), who are trying to merge and having the devil’s own time doing so. And making hay.

Lastly, Brazil’s legal system is second only to that of the US as regards ease of litigation. Somehow, about thirty years ago, an education in law became “the way forward” in Brazil; statistically there is probably a 90% chance of there being a lawyer on any flight. Gol are now a fairly large target. Go figure.