Originally Posted by
Planemike
. I do understand the situation re. exit rows. Have sat in them in my time. .......Off loading just seems over the top. ..... As I said I was not there.
Respectfully, sitting in the exit row and being responsible for the correct oversight of the exit row are two very different things. If the crewmember is later found lacking or negligent in failing to have removed a pax from the row ho should not have been there, that can be their job done with.
Yes, you were not there as you correctly state. Therefore its safe to presume that the crew action was proportionate to the pax behaviour. I don't doubt that 'sticking her fingers in her ears' was only the start. Once they start behaving like that, 'diplomacy' rarely works. It becomes a battle of wills and if you lose authority of that cabin then in an emergency you are toast.
You'll find for many airlines, it IS a requirement to pay attention to briefing if seated at the exit.
it's been some time, but I believe the Qantas exit row cards start with the phrase: "It is a requirement that..." Anyone unwilling/unable to comply was to be moved if possible, and if not, offloaded. It's possible there were no empty seats available and/or willing swap-ees to trade places.
Or, she was being such a prat that offload was the sensible choice to prevent further issues or delay down the track.