I have had this argument with a represenetative from BA who was auditing us as the Handling Agent and had found that we had committed a heinous crime by seating a UM next to a male passenger. Like others I was astounded that such a blanket rule can be brought in to cover ALL male passengers as potential kiddy fiddlers.
It is bldy nonsense and there is no justification for such a blanket ban. I have been vetted by the police and cleared as safe and suitable to coach youngsters at cricket, but this would not matter to BA, oh no, to them I am a male and therefore unable to control myself to behave decently and therefore a potential kiddy fiddler.
I hope he wins his law case. He felt embarrassed and insulted by the loud actions of the cabin crew member. Change the regs BA.
I have already stated my opinion that I think the rule is stupid and it does sound like the crewmember didnt exactly handly the situation with tact BUT I will defend it in the case of your arguement.
As a handling agent who are you to question (argue or debate) YOUR CLIENTS rules and regulations? you are getting paid by this company to do things as they want it done and by failing to do so you are simply passing the buck to the cabin crew and that is how these very examples occur! Lets not forget the highly unprofessional path you are taking your company down.
Also as a handling agent you should be aware that this is not BA rule, the vast majority of airlines impose such rules including all members of the Oneworld Alliance, Star Alliance and Skyteam (I have also worked for Qatar Airways in the past and they had the rule), correct me if I am wrong but I believe this rule has its roots in the US where even sneezing in the direction of someone can have you in court for attempted manslaughter!
Also, you may have undergone a security check to ensure you are not a kiddy fiddler but the airline cant prove that, its not like you carry these certicates prooving you are not a paedophile with you and anyways, just cos someone has never been caught doing something does not mean they dont!
At the end of the day airlines are taking huge gambles in accepting the carraige of children unaccompanied. We have already seen countless times in the past stories in the press of children being lost in airports by airlines, crews being sued by parents for administering first aid medication to sick kids etc etc. This is just another little rule (and lets face, in the grand scheme of things its no big deal and although "offensive" any reasonable person should understand why it is in place if explained as such) that the airlines have agreed to in order minimise their exposure to prosecution and I personally think this man sueing the company should not be allowed win any kind of monetary compensation simply because his problem seems to be with the crew member and not the rule itself and he is effectly getting on a high horse to make a point!
Yes the rule needs to change but apart from the idiot crew member involved I dont really see why BA is getting all the stick!