What Conditions Dictate The Removal Of A Passenger?

[Mr. Perplexed]

NOTE: This discussion is not intended to p!ss off flight attendants! Some of my best friends are FAs. I'm merely on a fact-gathering mission! :)

This morning one of the passengers on my commuter train conveyed an interesting story re a flight he took yesterday, June 27. Seems he was flying from ATL to, I assume, SNA. He lives in Orange County. I likewise assume he flew DL. Anyone here have access to DL "Unusual Occurance" reports? :) http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/tongue.gif

Here's what happened: (Remember, this is his version, and there are two sides to every story.)

Flight is readying for takeoff and FA comes down the aisle shutting the overhead luggage bins. One guy complains that she's slamming them shut too loudly. Further up the aisle, another guy, maybe with a hangover, voices the same complaint and it gets progressively uglier as words are exchanged between him and the FA.

FA thinks that this incident is serious enough that the passenger needs to be removed from the aircraft, and, indeed, he is removed from the aircraft.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My questions: Is there a policy amongst the airlines as to what degree of provocation has to take place before it's decided to remove a passenger, or is this something that is left up entirely to the FA? Are there certain "lines that have to be crossed," (i.e., pax using profanity) to build a case for pax ejection? Any other criteria?

The guy who witnessed all this and told me about it thought it was totally uncalled for for the FA to have reacted to the degree that she did. Akin to using a sledgehammer to kill a housefly.

With all the stuff happening re air rage, is it possible that some FAs may be just a tad too quick in determining when a pax needs to be removed from the plane? In other words, operating with a short fuse?

It sure would be interesting to read the unusual occurance report. http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/eek.gif :)



[This message has been edited by Mr. Perplexed (edited 01 July 2001).]

[BRUpax]

If the F/A was guilty of going OTT I would have thought the other pax would have come to this guy's defence. The fact that they didn't makes me lean towards the conclusion that he got what he deserved. Let's face it, the original noise complaint against the F/A was also OTT!

[Mr. Perplexed]

Pardon my ignorance. What's "OTT"?

[Icarus]

Over The Top.

Well as far as I am concerned anything that looks/smells as though any aspect of flight safety may be put at risk is an reason to offload someone.

This maybe was going too far, but then all bar room brawls and football hooliganism start with taunting.
Passengers should be as tolerant as they expect crew to be!
Perhaps the bins needed slamming to ensure they were properly closed; couldn't have something falling out otno your head and risk being sued now could we!?

[Mr. Perplexed]

So, in other words, FAs are allowed to "paint with a very broad brush" in determining if a passenger poses a certain danger to the safe operation of the flight? Is there any "check and balance" system that ensures uniformity? Getting back to the incident on the flight I described earlier, since human nature dictates that we all have different personalities, it's very possible that FA "A" might have a higher level of tolerance (more forgiving?) if a passenger became a little "mouthy" with him/her or said something that could be construed as "cross," (a good British term) while, at the same time, FA "B" could have a zero-tolerance point for the same "wise-ass" comment(s). Is it, to some degree, the "luck" of the draw as to which specific FA one is dealing with? It reminds me of a cop that writes a citation for a traffic offense that his partner might let off with a verbal warning. Or, the judge that might impose a sentence of five years jail time while, across town, in a different court room, another more
lenient judge might impose two years plus probation for the same offense.

I hope I don't run into any FAs who used to be Marine Corps Drill Instructors!

Is this the new "equation" a FA could possibly be considering when deciding to eject a pax?

Awareness of growing problem of "air rage" + higher number of "trailer park trash" passengers + business travelers prone to making sarcastic, wise-ass comments + decision by airline management to switch crew lodging from Hilton to Motel 6 in LBB = ejection of offending passenger(s)

:)

[You splitter]

Mr P.

Thats human nature I'm afraid. Your right, one copper might give a ticket, another wouldn't. Same with judges, bosses and almost any other aspect of life. Thats because we are all differant and have varying levels of tolerance.

Difficult to coment on this case without being there. However when you say a 'discussion' took place, what exactly was said. If it was one "wise ass" crack, as you put it, then I would say it was over the top. Most F/A's I know put up with a lot of rudeness. If every 'mouthy' pax was removed from the aircraft there would be a lot of empty seats. If he started swearing and being overly rude, like making personal verbal attacks, then I would say the skipper and the purser would have a good case for removing him in the intrests of flight safety and the comfort of other pax. If he is behaving like that over how the overheads are closed, then he sounds like a good bet for an airage case at FL390. Only trouble is you can't get rid of him at that stage.

regards
YS

[Mr. Perplexed]

BRUpax's comments in italics Mr. Perplexed's comments in boldface

If the F/A was guilty of going OTT I would have thought the other pax would have come to this guy's defence.

Not necessarily. My guess is that when the other passengers were seeing how easily one can get booted off an aircraft, they were probably inclined to sit down, be quiet and not get involved. That's a very prevalent way of doing things in society these days, especially on public transportation. If an ugly situatuion develops, you "cocoon" into your own world and don't get involved in "outside" problems. It's the "That's HIS problem." approach. They just wanted to get home and not get tangled up in an "incident." Coming to the defense of the "mouthy" passenger would do nothing more than p!ss off the FA involved. Name something positive that would come from THAT?

Let's face it, the original noise complaint against the F/A was also OTT!

Going on the assumption that profanity was not used and threats were not conveyed, is that justification for removing the passenger?

I'll see if I can track down the guy who told me of this incident. Perhaps he can join this discussion thread and give us a more accurate account of what happened. Stay tuned. :)



[This message has been edited by Mr. Perplexed (edited 01 July 2001).]

[BRUpax]

And I guess we'll have to ask the railway guards not to slam the doors shut next! I'm sorry but in order to prepare the aircraft for departure the F/As have to accomplish a number of duties in very little time. One is closing the bins. You try and do this in double quick time without making a bit of a din.

[Mr. Perplexed]

Well, the inquiry I was trying to make was: What behaviour determines when a passenger will be thrown off a plane? We have the weakness of second guessing in this particular case, because I wasn't there and everything I've heard was through a second party. Hopefully we can get that rectified.

Let's say the guy never used profanity or made threats against anyone or anything. Let's say he just made a couple of rude, wise-ass comments. Would that warrant ejecting him from the plane?

I'll be the first to admit that if he used ANY form of profanity or threatened anyone or anything, in any manner, he should, rightly, have been escorted off the plane so fast his head would be spinning. There's no excuse for that type of behaviour.

On the other hand, if he did NOT use profanity and did NOT threaten anyone or anything, if he was only guilty of being rude and making a wise-ass comment or two, is that grounds for expulsion?

The responses I've seen here is, "Yes, it could be."



[This message has been edited by Mr. Perplexed (edited 01 July 2001).]

[Pielander]

Mr. Perplexed

Do you have any sort of background in customer service? My limited experience has taught me that some people simply have the 'wrong attitude' towards people who are there to provide a service. It is not necessary to use profanity or a physical threat in order to cause concern. It is a case of the 'Here we go...' scenario, when you just know this is going to be one of those awkward customers.

It is quite a threatening situation to be in, especially, I expect, if facing the prospect of being locked in an aluminium tube with this person for 8 hours. If in doubt, removing a passenger should be FA's perogative. Any manager worth his salt would always back up his staff and ask questions later, even if they are being heavy handed.

Moral of story: Don't p!ss the flight attendants off any more than you would p!ss the captain off. To a passenger, they are essentially one in the same.

Pie

[Icarus]

Absolutely right.
Far too much of this going on these days, no common courtesy extended at all.
I work for an airline and as we speak we have just offloaded two passengers who were becoming rowdy (a little too much to drink may be one of the reasons as well) on a flight which has been delayed due to technical reasons (fuel leak). They are unhappy, agreed, but we do the best we can to get the aircraft fixed asap and have a crew left to fly it. Guess what? About another 90 passengers are p*ssed off 'cos we offloaded the two rowdy ones and say they do not now wish to travel!
Now guess what!
We just took all their bags off too! and they can now sit and wait at their own expense for the next two days until there is a seat on another flight!
How dare people try to hold an airline (or any other business) to ransom in a manner like this!

[Pielander]

LOL :) :) :) HAHAHA

I'll bet you never regretted getting out of bed that particular morning!

:) :) :)

Pie

[DX Wombat]

Well done Icarus! I too have seen the way some people treat the FAs - as if they were there as their personal slaves (or lower if that were possible)instead of for their security and safety. I want to be as safe as possible when flying and not have to contend with obnoxious fellow passengers. There will always be the one who becomes disorientated or confused because of illness or accidental dehydration but most people will understand if a person is ill.

[deepvainpain]

I totally understand where you are coming from and you many be right that this FA may have over reacted. At the end of the day though the final desicion of whether to offload someone is made by the cabin crew, after all they are the people who have to spend the flight with the pax.You do have to consider the following though. For one the length of the flight, and what was actually said to the FA. Alot of pax sitting nearby do often not hear everything that is said to the crew. And it does not all depend on one persons opinion. The crew often discuss the pax amongst themselves to come to a final desicion to get a ,more objective opinion. Most crew will only offload as a final resort as at the end of the day we all worry about complaints made against us. If the pax trully beleived that he was unfairly rejected from the AC he has a legitimate reason to complain to the carrier which believe me will be traced back to that FA and they will have to justify thier actions. As someone who has had thier fair share of disruptive pax it is always better to get rid of aggresive people on the ground as unfortunatly things have a way of escilating in the air and it is the crew who have to deal with the situation and in some circumstances restrain disruptive pax. Not a nice experience, trust me. Sometimes it only takes a minor incident that can erupt into a major one, and on a longhaul flt this can be very dangerous and quite scary. I hope some of this answers your question. Unfortunatly today with the increasing incidents of air rage the cabin crew have to be very vigilant about spoting potential nutters. We dont like having to do it but sometimes off loading people is the only option, and not one which is taken lightly. It is a sad fact that some people have no respect for FAs anymore, and have the opinion that we are just punching bags for them to take thrir aggression out on. Some crew however have very short fuses, like any normal person and cannot deal with some situations correctly and in the end provoke arguments. In these circumstances they should just walk away and let someone more proffesional deal with it.

[Icarus]

Just a quick update, out of the ninety 'brave' men & women I mentioned above, 80 of them shut up and got back on once they knew we were serious.
The other 10? Don't know, hopefully they are slumming it in AUH airport (my God a fate worse than death!) with their begging bowls at the ready!

[Nihontraveller]

Getting back to the original subject how about:-

Holding a French passport

or

Being a Middlesboro fan

(Sorry no offense intended, expect perhaps to Middlesboro fans...........)

Nihontraveller
(Waiting for that hate mail!)

[I'd rather]

Icarus, I'm confused. Were the other passengers refusing to board in protest that you'd offloaded the troublemakers, or because they were worried about the condition of the aircraft?

[Icarus]

A sympathy vote for the other passengers originally, then they bottled out when they knew we weren't joking about leaving them behind as well. Flight was already late due tech, further delays due to this stupidity may have ended up as a cancellation or massive delay due to crew running out of duty time etc. So we called their bluff.

[flypastpastfast]

To follow some of the points already raised, I do to an extent sympathise if a FA has a truly aggressive/unwieldy passenger, but I really must relate this to an experience of mine recently.

Flight was delayed, and passengers (who were on board) were asking reason for delay etc...

Now, in my book, if 50 passengers ask the same legitimate question, then the FA should either answer the group or all individually.

However, in this situation, I mis-heard the reply (I really do have dodgy hearing- and before any smart arse replies- some hearing loss cannot be helped with a hearing aid). When I asked the FA again to repeat the reply, he assumed I was taking the p*ss etc.. and became very aggressive. Fortunately for him I'm one of the good guys and could see he and his colleagues were having a bad time of it.

Now, the point here is this, could I have been thrown off the plane? I believe the original question is valid and needs addressed by airlines and their staff.

In an industry where many (not all) relate to its paying customers as SLF, I do believe that airlines must realise that making draconian regulations for 'getting rid' of 'difficult' customers is the wrong approach.

At present, FAs are getting a lot of media support regarding air rage, but I do think (as I found)that the balance can shift too far.

As regards the FA in my 'experience' above, I didn't make a formal complaint, but would consider doing so if a similar scenario developed again.

The final point I wish to make in relation to this is that I really have lost count of the number of sarcastic/caustic comments I have heard from airline staff (not just FAs) to passengers - so why are they so surprised if passengers make caustic comments back. Passengers, especially frequent flyers, learned much of this from their teachers- flight attendants.


It really is wrong to paint all FAs as poor defenceless innocent souls. In my experience most are ok, some are really good, and some are truly wicked and abuse the authority they have.

Customer service is about one thing - SERVICE.

The posting about offloading 80 or 90 passengers beggars belief- but what really concerns me is the terrible attitude of the person recounting the tale. Do you really hate the people who pay your salary so much? I think you are in the wrong industry.

[cabinkitten]

Dear Flypast

While I sympathize with your point concerning caustic cabin crew and their apparent need to make your life that bit more difficult there is a wider picture. I'm not seeking to justify curt treatment just explain why.

In a delay situation I try my best. If its A.T.C.(which 90% of the time it is) its not our fault. I will explain why, I will keep getting updates to the pax,I will suggest alternative routes, I will offer to relay messages. In short I will run my cotton socks off trying to make things right. Yet everyday, even when things are apparently running smoothly I receive abuse.

I'm not just talking about the odd comment, a passenger mildly upset because we haven't got a copy of the Jamaican Evening News(even though we are in Helsinki)I'm talking about real venom. The most degrading insults because I accidently missed someone with a hot towel, angry fists slammed against a bulkhead because we have to hold short of the stand for five minutes, I'm talking about passengers who call me bitch or worse because I ask them politely to move their baggage.

The problem is we are not employed as customer service agents. Are raison etre is not to jump into jacket hanging action whenever a passenger forefinger is crooked in our direction. We are their for safety. Your safety. That unfortunately means asking you to move your bags, fasten your seatbelt, put the b.c.f down...whatever it takes to make sure you don't get crushed by your own luggage, or killed because you don't know how to operate the exit. I do this duty with respect and what I hope is politeness, but I'm met with constant hostility.

Is it any wonder that I or my colleagues are sometimes brusque or over react? I wish I could be pleasant 100 per cent of the time but there are only so many occasions you can be called "ignorant cow" or "brain dead bitch" and still come up smiling...

[Icarus]

FPPF,
So you think it is right and fair for a large group of passenegrs such as the one I described to (essentially) hold an airline to ransom, costing it US$1000's per hour in delays (and possible misconnections on the outbound/return legs) for rightly offloading two abusive passengers; one which had been drinking and may in an emergency cost the life of others?
I think (hope) not!
Perhaps you need to broaden your horizons and see the big picture occassionally.

[Jungle Strip]

Yes, it is the luck of the draw, in the broad grey area between obvious extremes.

But I have to say that in the (large, national) airline I work for, I've noticed that the publicity given to "air rage" (funny how naming a phenomenon makes it both more acceptable and more threatening...) has led many F/As to act like the Gestapo. The fact that someone has had a lot to drink, or might even be decidedly tipsy, does NOT mean that they are necessarily going to become difficult, abusive, aggressive, violent or dangerous.
I've seen a lot of situations inflamed, or even created, by (usually) very young FAs telling an obviously seasoned traveller that he or she has "had too much." Next thing, A REALLY nasty situation.
Yes, safety is paramount. But some poor pax piling into the G&Ts a bit heavily is not AUTOMATICALLY a threat to it.

[Mr. Perplexed]

For me, these amorphous, undefined parameters that allow a FA to determine when to boot a passenger off a flight could be a cause for concern. "Power plays" and "testing limits" may or may not enter into the equation.

In my many years of flying, I've only had one "run in" with a FA. It was on Southwest Airlines where they have "open seating." I was boarding with a small carry-on suitcase and placed it in the overhead bin. The particular aisle seat I wanted was, perhaps, eight or ten rows further back in the aircraft. SWA places a lot of emphasis on "quick turnarounds" and I was just trying to help the boarding process for them. http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/cool.gif For some reason, the FA took exception to my placing my suitcase in an overhead bin that was so far away from the seat I would be occupying. I couldn't understand her logic. What difference did it make? She had me come back, retrieve my bag, and had me to place it in the bin directly over my seat. Without thinking, in my usual sarcastic style, I said loud enough for several people to hear "Oh, I wasn't aware we had assigned bin space!" She mumbled some lame explanation that, to this day, still doesn't make a whole lot of sense!

Maybe she was Drax or Poe and she was giving me a hard time because she knew I was Mr. Perplexed (that's an inside joke!)!

The point being, in this new age of heightened awareness of air rage and passengers that can potentially cause problems at FL320, I suppose, had I been dealing with the "wrong" FA (former Marine Gunnery Sergeant Hartman from Full Metal Jacket?), I might have been acquainting myself with airport security officers.

I notice in the safety spiel they have a new clause. I can't remember the exact wording, but it basically says "The FAA requires you to follow all crewmember instructions." Yes, even those that make absolutely no sense or logic. If you don't, we may boot you off the aircraft for being a potential (there's that word again) problem passenger.

I suppose, in the example shown above, I was the one that sealed my fate by my actions and restrained commentary. I followed her instructions, albeit begrudgingly. Had I said something like "If YOU don't like where my bag is, then YOU move it!" or "It's fine where it is!" I possibly could have found out how uncomfortable tightly-bound handcuffs are (that is, outside of a bedroom environment!). :)

Some people are natural-born a**holes. As for me, with some "method acting," it takes me a bit to work into the role! http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/tongue.gif :)

[This message has been edited by Mr. Perplexed (edited 04 July 2001).]

[Jungle Strip]

Nicely put, Cabinkitten.
Is there any other job in the world where you are expected to put up with ANYTHING and still smile and not answer back? And that in a situation where many of the people you're trying to smile at are stressed before they arrive, and it's All Your Fault..?

As for being assumed to be an airhead (without even the neat pun intended) because of what I do.... :mad:

I was recently informal with a passenger. No, I mean it: Informal. Not Rude, not Aggressive, not even Unobliging. I just did not do the Plastic Kowtow. He wrote to complain.

Keep smiling..! :rolleyes:

[World Traveller]

Jungle strip - what is 'the plastic kowtow'?

[BRUpax]

Not long ago I was flying on one of my regular BA flights to BHX. I had a row all to myself and whilst occupying the window seat I placed my hand baggage under the middle seat. The F/A asked me to place it under the seat in front of me until after take-off! I figured her reasoning was that it could slide back during take off and thus possibly impede my access to the aisle in the event of an emergency evacuation. Nevertheless, it was the first time I had ever been asked to do this. Since that flight I have flown four more sectors on BA with a row to myself - me at the window and bag under the middle seat. Haven't been asked once to move it. This and many other experiences leave me in no doubt that there is no consistency among F/As. This is what can lead to unpleasant situations. You (the pax) do something for years without any comment from the cabin crew and then one day WHAM you get bollocked!

My request to F/As: Follow only company approved policies (SOPs) and don't invent your own interpretations of these rules. For the sake of the passengers, be consistent in applying safety related rules.

[Icarus]

KOWTOW: The act of showing deep respect for someone in authority by kneeling and touching one's forehead to the ground.

[Dea Certe]

In my nearly 30 years as a f/a, I've only had two occassions to request a pax be removed. Both times involved alcohol and profanity (theirs, not mine!). It's an FAR that we not board intoxicated pax. I don't know any f/a who would have a pax removed unless it appeared to a serious problem in the making. It can be a bit subjective, I suppose, but why would one create paperwork and potentially an even bigger problem by tossing off anyone who offends you? Doesn't make sense.

Most of us have pretty thick skin and take lots of undeserved nasty behavior in stride. As has been pointed out, if we tossed everyone who acted snotty, we'd be flying around with light pax loads.

There has to be more to the story. Perhaps the gentleman making the comment smelled of liquor. I'll admit, I hate to hear those bins being slammed shut and can understand why pax would make complaint of it. But why would the f/a just have the guy removed? Doesn't sound right to me at all.

[Jungle Strip]

As Icarus says, BRUpax, but while juggling a laden tray, the pax's winter coat, vocal twin 3-month-olds, a fixed grin, and asking if there is anything else you can do for him.. ;)

I think much of the "inconsistency" in FAs' approaches stems from the fact much of the job is about common sense. Usually, you have to ask yourself whether a situation, bag stowage or behaviour really is potentially dangerous. Drunken passengers make up a grey area and that's where experience comes into play. But for me, the answer is usually fairly clear.

But we are all individuals, not bakelite automata, and have different levels of common sense and imagination. One FA's "It'll do" is another's "What might happen if..?"

It amazes me how often passengers refuse adamantly to part with their hand baggage. I have even had businessmen frantically cuddle their briefcases, while roundly abusing me for trying to stow them for the aeon it doesn't (usually!) take to get off, or back onto, the ground.

As is being discussed in another thread, is it really more important to keep hold of that precious bag / thwart the FA, than to stay alive? http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/redface.gif

[Ziggy]

At last "common sense" that and experience is what makes the difference between good and bad f/a's. We all have bad days, hopefully training helps some of us deal with it.
I've had the sarcastic comments from f/a's, normally the younger ones I might add, I've also seen pax who needed a good smack in the mouth, something you f/a's cannot do!!!!
Bottom line if a pax is abusive, I will happily help, I've done it before and would do it again, at the same time I have written a complaint about a particlary nasty f/a.
General observation:
Asian airlines....you see more abuse!!!!
Western Airlines.. Less!!!!

[Mr. Perplexed]

I encountered the passenger who was on board the aircraft in question and witnessed the incident. Here is his exchange of letters with Delta and brief commentary.

Mr. Perplexed

Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 09:11:20 -0700
Subject: PPRUNE Discussion Thread

Below, from bottom up, are my original comments to Delta Airlines, their initial response, and my reply. I hope this is sufficient for your discussion thread purposes. I'm curious enough now to watch the discussion, but I don't really want to join in. Thanks.

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

Ms. Padelford:

Thank you for your response to my initial correspondence. I find it quite difficult to believe, however, that there is no "historical data to determine the events that took place." How many people does Delta
escort off their airplanes for "air rage"? I certainly hope the numbers are not so high as to make it difficult to find a single incidence, especially when you know the exact flight number and date.

Even more disturbing to me is the fact that your response appears to be "canned", and if you look at it carefully, compare it with my original comments, you might even consider it an admission that the Flight Attendant was wrong, and therefore the passenger might have been wrongly ejected from the plane.

I told Delta in my original message that I don't have all the facts about what was said by the passenger, so possibly an "air-rage"
ejection was proper. My only purpose was to bring to Delta's attention that the entire incident was started by your Flight Attendant. This was a very serious incident, in my mind, and worthy of more than a
"canned" response.

/s/
===========================================

On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:05:04 -0400 Customer Care <[email protected]> writes:
Dear Mr. xxxxxxx,

Thank you for contacting Delta Air Lines about your recent trip.

While I do not have any historical data to determine the events that took place, courteous service is stressed at Delta. We make it very clear to our personnel that discourtesy or a lack of respect will not be tolerated.

Our people are given careful training when they are hired, and your report about the actions of the flight attendant concerns us a great deal. It is disappointing to have the efforts of many undone by the poor performance of one individual. Please let me assure you that appropriate corrective measures will be taken to prevent a recurrence.

Please accept our apology for the unfavorable impression you received in this instance.

We appreciate your selection of Delta and will always consider it a privilege to be of service.

Sincerely,

Sally MorrisPadelford
Manager, Customer Care

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

Original Message Follows:
------------------------
To Delta Airlines on their Web Site Comments page:

Comment:
As we were boarding this flight a tall, thin, Black Flight Attendant was walking from the rear of the plane towards the front, closing the overhead bin doors. Actually she was SLAMMING them - very, very loudly.
I was seated in 27D, listening to music with earphones on and I could hear the sound quite loudly from behind me.

A male passenger, some rows behind me, complained to the Flight Attendant about the noise she was making. His voice was loud,
and he was not very calm, but his message was simple: "Can you please stop slamming those doors shut - the noise is killing me."

Further discussion ensued that I could not hear distinctly, due to the earphones. When the discussion ended, quite quickly as I
recall, the Flight Attendant resumed her way forward, SLAMMING the bin doors shut even louder than before, including the ones directly over my head.
The look on her face that would have stopped a Mack Truck.

I heard or saw no further discussion about the matter until we were just about to depart when the passenger was escorted off the
plane, quite upset but being completely cooperative.

I'll admit I did not hear everything said. I'll admit that the passenger was loud and even a bit obnoxious, but I saw or heard nothing warranting ejection from the aircraft.

Presuming, however, that the ejection was proper, I can state categorically that the Flight Attendant precipitated the entire thing. I can imagine that the passenger involved probably had had a bad day and a migrain headache. Nevertheless, there was no valid reason I can think of why the Flight Attendant had to SLAM the bin doors shut, and once called on the issue she made certain that she SLAMMED them even harder.

I don't condone rude or obstreperous (sp?) passengers, but I truly don't believe that this incident was worthy of his being ejected.

[You splitter]

Mr P.

I don't know but it is possible that if any legal proceedings ensued form the incident, either criminal or civil, then it would be unwise and incorrect to discuss the details with a third party. Having said that why not just tell you, rather than saying there are no details.

I also admit to having doubts as to the need or the reason to have to explain this Gentleman's case to another party not involved with the incident (At least not directly)

You, quite rightly in your opinion, raised concerns over the attitude of the FA, and had every right to complain. The reply, I agree was canned and in no way comphrensive, but what did you expect.

"The staff member in question has been severly reprimanded and a strong warning letter has been placed on her personal records. Please send a self addresed stamped envelope if you would also like a copy of this letter. Rest assured such behaviour will not be tolerated from our staff, and we ask you to be constantly deligent in trying to search out any other 'rouge' staff members when flying with Delta....."

I'm sorry the above is OTT I know but what sort of reply does satisfy a disgruntled complainer? I do agree though that the reply does leave you to wonder if you original complaint was actually read and taken in.


:rolleyes:

[pilotwolf]

Shame the lazy pax couldn't shut their own overhead bins - that would have avoid the whole situation! :p

[Tartan Gannet]

Ive read through the entire thread and while I can see that the FA was being a bit annoying in the way she slammed the lockers I do not personally feel that this warranted such a vigourous response from the PAX in question .

In an aircraft about to depart there are many important tasks for FAs to perform and some require to be done quickly and thoroughly. Im an easy going type myself, it would take a direct personal insult or some really petty and officious behavior on the part of an FA to make me complain. Merely slamming an overhead locker door would hardly bother me at all.

Now we have heard one side of this situation, that of the PAX via his self appointed advocate Mr Perplexed. I would like to hear the FA's story, but dont suppose I ever will. It is stated that she was black, was a racist remark made to or about her? Did the angry passenger make some threat to her? Without such knowledge it is hard to judge.

In the end, with the many cases recently of air rage, serious assaults on Cabin Staff, even a madman gaining entry to the Flight Deck and almost puting a 747 out of control in flight over Kenya, I will sit easier in my seat if firm action is a taken by crew against potentially threatening or badly behaved passengers and if they get put off the aircraft then its a price worth paying for a peaceful and safe flight for well behaved passengers, the vast majority, and crew alike. To the grumpy passenger all I can say is TOUGH! :p

[incubus]

Perhaps a set of EAR defenders should accompany the in-flight magazine, in case the overhead lockers need a slam.