Pratts still board airliners
Thread Starter
Pratts still board airliners
It seems the idiotic morons will never learn.....
Nine men thrown off Ryanair flight ?after shouting Allahu Akbar and making bomb joke'
Nine men thrown off Ryanair flight ?after shouting Allahu Akbar and making bomb joke'
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is that once they've had too much to drink they are no longer capable of rational thinking. Nevertheless, they should definitely be billed for the costs involved.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Either the back of a sim, or wherever Crewing send me.
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Here's one of several instances that Jet2 have pursued the bill through the courts
Jet2.com Continues Zero Tolerance Stance Against Disruptive Passengers | Jet2.com
Jet2.com Continues Zero Tolerance Stance Against Disruptive Passengers | Jet2.com
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: london
Age: 58
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The other week going to Spain from gatwick 730 in morning same troops all in witherspoons getting tanked up asked one of the airport reps about this reply was gatwick generating revenue do you think they are going to stop this ? Also witherspoons where doing promotions so sad fill for flight staff
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Stockport MAN/EGCC
Age: 70
Posts: 991
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Somebody please tell me that the airlines swap/circulate banned lists.
So that a no fly listing on one carrier is a no fly listing on as many as possible.
If not why not?
So that a no fly listing on one carrier is a no fly listing on as many as possible.
If not why not?
Freedom of information I suppose, although insurance companies manage it OK.
You can theoretically share information on disruptive passengers and it's occasionally done in extreme cases, (the information commissioner has approved the practice) but it's far from easy. For a start, airlines have very different booking systems that can't just simply share this type of information at the click of a button. Then there's the numbers, a medium sized UK carrier will have 3 to 4 hundred cases a year, so an easyJet sized carrier will have more like 1500. Considering that easy's booking systems and watchlists aren't the same as say, Thomson's, then somebody would have to input all of that information into their own watch list, and then do the same with all the cases from the other airlines. Putting together a case file and adding a passenger to a watch list used to take me 30 mins minimum. Getting unmanageable already isn't it?
Then consider that very few airlines even have a watchlist so they'll not necessarily be able to do anything with the information anyway. Then there's mistaken identity issues, the possibilities of changing passports... it all needs to be very, very carefully managed even in the one airline managing its own problem passengers. So no, airlines can't simply share the information en masse. I've done it when we've had an extremely violent passenger outbound resulting in the inbound leg being cancelled; I shared the case with the 3 other carriers who also operated a UK sector from that airport, but what they could do with the information was very likely not much, certainly not in the longer term. So it's a battle you have to pick.
Same with the other PPRuNe phrase... "Send them the bill!". Work on just one case pursuing a very poor person for the costs of a divert, and you'll soon know the futility of it. It costs the airline a fortune in legal costs on top of the divert, and then your disruptive passenger pays you back bit by bit if you're successful, at whatever the court has found they can afford. In one case I dealt with, we were in the region of 120k out of pocket, and he's paying us back at 80 pounds a month. You can't simply get money back that they don't have. Jet2 have pursued a few recently but that's more to send a message, and it's still very expensive for them to do. Again you have to pick your cases wisely even if you're only going for the PR benefits, because courts are an expensive option, even for the winner.
Then consider that very few airlines even have a watchlist so they'll not necessarily be able to do anything with the information anyway. Then there's mistaken identity issues, the possibilities of changing passports... it all needs to be very, very carefully managed even in the one airline managing its own problem passengers. So no, airlines can't simply share the information en masse. I've done it when we've had an extremely violent passenger outbound resulting in the inbound leg being cancelled; I shared the case with the 3 other carriers who also operated a UK sector from that airport, but what they could do with the information was very likely not much, certainly not in the longer term. So it's a battle you have to pick.
Same with the other PPRuNe phrase... "Send them the bill!". Work on just one case pursuing a very poor person for the costs of a divert, and you'll soon know the futility of it. It costs the airline a fortune in legal costs on top of the divert, and then your disruptive passenger pays you back bit by bit if you're successful, at whatever the court has found they can afford. In one case I dealt with, we were in the region of 120k out of pocket, and he's paying us back at 80 pounds a month. You can't simply get money back that they don't have. Jet2 have pursued a few recently but that's more to send a message, and it's still very expensive for them to do. Again you have to pick your cases wisely even if you're only going for the PR benefits, because courts are an expensive option, even for the winner.
Here we go again..........
Drunk holidaymaker restrained on Birmingham plane after clashing with woman over spilt drink - Birmingham Mail
This time she got away with it. What message does that send out? Courts don't seem to give a flying fig about disruption these days.
Drunk holidaymaker restrained on Birmingham plane after clashing with woman over spilt drink - Birmingham Mail
This time she got away with it. What message does that send out? Courts don't seem to give a flying fig about disruption these days.