Disruptive Passenger

[Duck Pilot]

I was on a flight from Melbourne to Darwin the other day and there was a young lady who was somewhat affected by something, not sure what however her behaviour and language was quite abnormal, even before we got in the air.

Once we got airborne, I had a few words to the cabin crew about the lady whom they were certainly aware of. The lady calmed down for most of the flight and flared up again as we approached Darwin. Subsequently no problems, however there was an opportunity to return to the gate in Melbourne to have her offloaded IMHO. I have no idea what the flight crew knew, however if I was the Captain and knew how this lady was behaving before we departed I would have had her removed.

I haven’t contacted the airline with regards to this event, however I’m pretty sure the cabin crew would have reported this event through their normal reporting SMS/SOPs.

Any comments?

[morno]

Was she violent or non-compliant?

If not, then I’d expect the cabin manager to manage it as he/she saw fit. You can’t just go and offload someone because you think they’re a nuisance. Otherwise there’d be people getting offloaded every second flight!

[machtuk]

Was she violent or non-compliant?

If not, then I’d expect the cabin manager to manage it as he/she saw fit. You can’t just go and offload someone because you think they’re a nuisance. Otherwise there’d be people getting offloaded every second flight!


The Capt has that authority and can offload anyone he/she sees fit!

[morno]

The Capt has that authority and can offload anyone he/she sees fit!

Of course they do. But there’s a difference between a power trip and a necessary offload.

Just because someone is being a bit disruptive it doesn’t mean they’re any more likely to become violent or non-compliant than the person in (insert random seat number here).

I trust my crews to handle all situations under their responsibility and then when they require my assistance or provide me with information that concerns me about the safety of the aircraft and it’s crew or passengers, I will make a decision to offload.

[Duck Pilot]

The pax wasn’t behaving normally, abusive comments towards religion in general were being yelled out and rude behaviour (swearing) to the cabin crew were observed.

It wasn’t normal behaviour and I don’t think she was drunk.

[morno]

The pax wasn’t behaving normally, abusive comments towards religion in general were being yelled out and rude behaviour (swearing) to the cabin crew were observed.

It wasn’t normal behaviour and I don’t think she was drunk.

Well then if you were that concerned why didn’t you say something?

[golfbananajam]

Duck Pilot I assume you've already ruled out any kind of illness?

[Duck Pilot]

I did say something to the Cabin Crew Morno without making an issue of it.

I’m no expert on human behaviour, however the behaviour was nothing I have ever seen anywhere let alone on an aeroplane. Having said that I was confident that she would have been able to be controlled should things have gotten out of hand considering the other passengers seated near her.

[wheels_down]

This carrier has a poor history of handling these situations. Hate to be critical but the JQ ground team especially, and CC have made the news here and across the ditch on regular occasions for what the appears to be, the lack of training of handling such situations. Whether it’s mobility related, disruptive people, they just don’t know how to handle it.

All the flight crew do is be informed then offload. It’s getting to that point where things go wrong or have no structured way of getting to that point.

Usually stems from no guidance or training from HQ

File a complaint against the flight number with lack of action from cabin crew and I’m sure it will be dealt with.

[novice110]

Hi Wheels_down

Where does it say here the airline involved ?

[morno]

Ohhh here we go, out come the macho power tripping captains who always know best.

Ever considered not using a sledgehammer and perhaps a measured, thought out response that a good pilot in command will use?

[Duck Pilot]

I have purposely not mentioned the airline as I was only asking for advice. Thanks for the comments.

[Bend alot]

The Capt has that authority and can offload anyone he/she sees fit!
Absolutely - but as a mere employee they are also accountable to management.

Offloading paying passengers at the drop of a hat can lead to unemployment legally.

A Captain has many ways to deal with many situations and arrogance is not the best method.

The passenger may have a history known by the crew and a prior risk assessment carried out - the seating placement may have been planned.

After a court case with my ex that she lost and her and her children were facing visa cancellation, we both had to fly home to different locations. I was going to a location that could be a stop to her destination and she was pretty angry. When I checked in I mentioned the issue to the check-in staff and gave them her name, they made arrangements to keep us separated - she never knew I was on the flight. The check-in staff were very grateful for the information.

[Lookleft]

Off loading passengers at the drop of a hat is not common practice. There are many reasons why a passenger is unfit to fly and that is the usual criteria applied when a pax is offloaded. Most people would be amazed at the range of behaviours demonstrated by pax and it is not always a simple solution. The OP stated that the pax calmed down for most of the flight. It would appear that the cabin crew did a great job and managed the situation in the cabin. They may not have even advised the PIC during the taxi out if they felt the situation was in hand.Certainly they would have been informed after departure and they were probably comfortable with what the CM had done. The CM was probably very experienced and had encountered similar situations many times before. I have never been disciplined for off-loading pax or for calling the AFP to meet the aircraft on arrival.

[Lapon]

I have no idea what the flight crew knew, however if I was the Captain and knew how this lady was behaving before we departed I would have had her removed.

And thats the issue, the captain is highly unlikely to have met or the seen the passenger so can only go on what he/she is told.
Pain in the a*rse and rude passengers are standard fare, disruptive to the point of have to be removed much rarer. In practice it's really the cabin crew who are left to make the assessment and the captain merely act on thier report/recommendation.
In this scenario its possible that the CC opinion of how disruptive the person was differs to yours.

[73qanda]

I have offloaded a passenger before based on the CM’s opinion/ reports and on reflection thought that a different CM would have been able to keep things calm and under control. The Captain is kinda hamstrung though because if you don’t back up your CM you have a different issue to deal with. Also, it is rare that the Captain can make their own assessment. Probably worth pointing out that I’ve offloaded others based on CM reports and it was definitely the best option.

[Bend alot]

I have offloaded a passenger before based on the CM’s opinion/ reports and on reflection thought that a different CM would have been able to keep things calm and under control. The Captain is kinda hamstrung though because if you don’t back up your CM you have a different issue to deal with. Also, it is rare that the Captain can make their own assessment. Probably worth pointing out that I’ve offloaded others based on CM reports and it was definitely the best option.
A very good example.

As the Captain receiving the reports from several CM's and noting that one has a very high offload request compared to others, continuing to just offload at that CM's opinion could leave you open to disciplinary action (for not bringing the CM's high incident rate to management attention and loss of customers as a result).

Some Cabin Crew should have some better fatigue limit requirements, I think I would make a very grumpy CC on some of those rosters.

[Lookleft]

As the Captain receiving the reports from several CM's and noting that one has a very high offload request compared to others, continuing to just offload at that CM's opinion could leave you open to disciplinary action (for not bringing the CM's high incident rate to management attention and loss of customers as a result).

I dont think that is what is being suggested.It also assumes that a particular Captain is flying with a particular CM (who uses offload as a regular event) frequently enough to notice a trend. I probably fly with any individual CM no more than twice to three times a year. If a CM requests an offload there is usually a good reason. Most cabin crew and pilots just want to get through the day with a minimum of fuss and don't take the offload option lightly.

[TBM-Legend]

...and the passengers who actually pay the Captain and crew do not want to be disturbed by disruptive other pax.

[Lookleft]

Quite agree but they also don't want to be disturbed by crying babies, smelly hippies, overweight people in the middle seat, amorous couples who can't leave each other alone. They also don't want to go into a toilet where the previous occupant has smeared their poo all over the walls or sit in seats that someone has left chewing gum on. If they're disabled they don't want to be hoisted on a rickety lifting device or manhandled onto a narrow airline weelchair or told they have to return to their port of embarkation because there are only stairs available to get them off. If you want travel perfection then you need to charter your own corporate jet otherwise we all have to cope with the inconveniences of mass public airline travel.

[Bend alot]

Quite agree but they also don't want to be disturbed by crying babies, smelly hippies, overweight people in the middle seat, amorous couples who can't leave each other alone. They also don't want to go into a toilet where the previous occupant has smeared their poo all over the walls or sit in seats that someone has left chewing gum on. If they're disabled they don't want to be hoisted on a rickety lifting device or manhandled onto a narrow airline weelchair or told they have to return to their port of embarkation because there are only stairs available to get them off. If you want travel perfection then you need to charter your own corporate jet otherwise we all have to cope with the inconveniences of mass public airline travel.
Worse being under weight in the middle seat next to two considerably over weight passengers - that in an emergency reduce my chance of survival significantly and a simple look by any Captain would know that. But the show in this case, must go on.

[Manwell]

I did say something to the Cabin Crew Morno without making an issue of it.

I’m no expert on human behaviour, however the behaviour was nothing I have ever seen anywhere let alone on an aeroplane. Having said that I was confident that she would have been able to be controlled should things have gotten out of hand considering the other passengers seated near her.





Just for the fun of it dear Duck, let's construct a Hypothetical. From your comments lets accept there was something actually wrong with this person, and she wasn't drunk. What could it be that would prevent cabin crew from kicking her off at the earliest opportunity, or at least giving her a hard talking to? I once questioned why we had to fold tray tables and sit upright in the wee hours of the morning just after TOPD, and was treated like an animal in cattle class, so it does seem odd that her behaviour and your comments weren't taken seriously. That suggests; one, that this person was mentally disturbed, and two, that a possible cause was ice. Another could be psychiatric drugs, some of which have the odd side-effect of causing the problem they're designed to alleviate. There are others, but they're really getting into Twilight Zone territory. Why she said the things she said suggests a form of radicalization has taken place, brainwashing in simple terms. And why the airline didn't kick her off the flight suggests either the CC were too timid that day, they had been warned not to be too reactionary with pax like her, or they actually wanted her to make the news. Any air time can be spun to suit the airline by good PR staff, and I'd guess this particular airline has good PR staff. Yes, I have completed a course in deduction after watching many episodes of The Mentalist. Don't alert the authorities either because they have a track record of ignoring disturbed individuals too.

[73qanda]

I once questioned why we had to fold tray tables and sit upright in the wee hours of the morning just after TOPD
Well you have to do it at some stage....would you prefer 100nm prior to TOD or at the 500ft rad alt call?

[deja vu]

Well you have to do it at some stage....would you prefer 100nm prior to TOD or at the 500ft rad alt call?

Well that demonstrates the sarcastic power tripping mentality that is so rife now, either 100 nm before TOD or 500ft RA. !!!!!
What about something that is reasonable and manageable taking into account the comfort of all involved.

[Bend alot]

Well that demonstrates the sarcastic power tripping mentality that is so rife now, either 100 nm before TOD or 500ft RA. !!!!!
What about something that is reasonable and manageable taking into account the comfort of all involved.
You think the GOD up front has ever spent a single day to see or know what the CC do on a flight - to many economy is a dirty word and never to be entered.

The PA announcements are the same as the seventies - we have the weather now on phones and do not care on the altitude just make it smooth. Just make a recording, we do not listen anyway.

[73qanda]

Sounds like you’ve got sensitive egos. The decision was made to prepare the cabin and what......you thought you were so important that you’d question it.......in flight.....to someone who is just trying to do their job....? They’re probably tired and busy and have lots of other people to check.
Are you sure you’re not ‘that guy’ ?
You think the GOD up front has ever spent a single day to see or know what the CC do on a flight - to many economy is a dirty word and never to be entered.
Thats even funnier cause I used to work in the cabin :)

[Manwell]

Sounds like you’ve got sensitive egos. The decision was made to prepare the cabin and what......you thought you were so important that you’d question it.......in flight.....to someone who is just trying to do their job....? They’re probably tired and busy and have lots of other people to check.

Thats even funnier cause I used to work in the cabin :)

qanda, it's apparent from your response that you did work in the cabin, and still share the contempt they have nowadays for the people who pay their wages. Hosties used to treat pax with respect, and weren't such little drama queens. Now, they have been indoctrinated with the belief that their job is to ensure pax safety, when that couldn't be further from the truth. Their job is to help make customers comfortable and enjoy the service they're paying for, it's the pilots' job to ensure safety by avoiding crashes.

Somehow, they got it into their tiny minds that pax are their slaves, because they're responsible for their safety, and what they want is secondary to their comfort. Yes, I thought I was so important, being a paying customer whose patronage ensures they remain employed, that I dared to question them about why they needed to disrupt pax so early prior to landing. The requirement to stow tray tables and have seat backs upright is based on the flawed assumption that people won't be able to exit their seats in an emergency, and that would only be useful in an emergency. Even having seat belts fastened is unnecessary if the pilots don't crash, so I was interested to see if the CC actually knew why they did things, or whether they've simply been indoctrinated without any rational basis for their actions. Years ago, when a plane landed safely, they used to say "Once again, skill and science has triumphed over ignorance and superstition". This behaviour indicates a regression back to superstition and ignorance, and that has a long term corrosive effect on society in general. In simple terms, any society or business founded on flawed thinking can't last, so you could say I was doing my bit to correct their thinking, and thereby ensure their long term safety. Unfortunately, the small-minded wouldn't see it that way, and usually have to learn the hard way, through bitter experience.

BTW, the God up front would only be courting conflict with the drama queens in cabin if they dared to observe the way their pax were being treated, so it's logical they'd avoid it like the plague. If you can fly like an eagle, why would you willingly choose to associate with turkeys?

[Manwell]

Well that demonstrates the sarcastic power tripping mentality that is so rife now, either 100 nm before TOD or 500ft RA. !!!!!
What about something that is reasonable and manageable taking into account the comfort of all involved.

Correct, deja vu. Cabin crew have been transformed from customer servants into masters by convincing them their primary role is pax safety, as if that is more important than pax service. Both are equally important, and should complement each other to ensure the viability of the air service is maintained.

[regional_flyer]

Even having seat belts fastened is unnecessary if the pilots don't crash

And yet, if the pilots were a bit hard on the brakes and you found yourself up against the bulkhead because "seatbelts are unnecessary", you'd surely be calling out the CC for not making you fasten it. Your posts certainly indicate that you are "that" kind of passenger.

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

Thank you Manwell, that’s some of the best satire I’ve read in a long time. Well played. :D

[Manwell]

And yet, if the pilots were a bit hard on the brakes and you found yourself up against the bulkhead because "seatbelts are unnecessary", you'd surely be calling out the CC for not making you fasten it. Your posts certainly indicate that you are "that" kind of passenger.

Reg, if there were more of "that kind of pax" keeping the bastards honest, the rest wouldn't have to deal with their petty power trips, and that applies to political bastards too. And just to clarify, I assume full responsibility for everything I do, and therefore, never blame anyone else for my own mistakes. In fact, that's what Pilot In Command means. In future, be kind enough not to presume that I share the same characteristics that you or your friends possess. It's a sign of lazy thinking.

[Manwell]

Thank you Manwell, that’s some of the best satire I’ve read in a long time. Well played. :D

I'm glad you've misunderstood my comments in a positive direction at least. It's not really that bloody hard to comprehend reasoned argument is it, or has political correctness infected everyone lately?

[73qanda]

Oh dear....if there were more of "that kind of pax" keeping the bastards honest, the rest wouldn't have to deal with their petty power trips,
if there were more pax who can’t cope when given instruction travel would be less pleasant that’s for sure. Who are the bastards you refer to? The cabin crew who turn up to do an honest days work?

[bankrunner]

Even having seat belts fastened is unnecessary if the pilots don't crash

Take an afternoon flight into Las Vegas in late July. As you're coming over the mountains you'll very quickly change your tune.

[Squawk7700]

The pax wasn’t behaving normally, abusive comments towards religion in general were being yelled out and rude behaviour (swearing) to the cabin crew were observed.

It wasn’t normal behaviour and I don’t think she was drunk.

Possibly on Ice. It wrecks your brain, that’s for sure :-( If you hang around or work in Melbourne CBD, you’ll frequently see this type of behaviour. Pretty sad really, especially when ice gives you super-human strength and you’ll go so far as breaking and arm when restrained and trying to get out of a hospital bed.

I used to work with someone who fried his brain on marijuana. He was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic, however his behaviour did not represent that as above exactly. He was more into explosive outbursts at himself.

He went on to assault flight crew, attempt to hijack a Qantas Jet by torching the pilots with zippo lighter fluid bottles and a lighter, in order to crash the aircraft into the Walls of Jerasulem national park, to release the devil and bring on Armageddon.

That is why pilots and crew need to take security seriously!

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/hijacker-gets-a-day-on-town/news-story/41827f467b13ad01f88f73e936050a0f

[Manwell]

Oh dear....
if there were more pax who can’t cope when given instruction travel would be less pleasant that’s for sure. Who are the bastards you refer to? The cabin crew who turn up to do an honest days work?

Oh dear...

The bastards I refer to are the petty tyrants who care nothing about those they're paid to serve, whether they be in an aircraft cabin, or in public service. Cabin crew who turn up to do an honest day's work ain't the problem, obviously.

[Manwell]

Take an afternoon flight into Las Vegas in late July. As you're coming over the mountains you'll very quickly change your tune.

Thanks for stating the obvious bankrunner. For the record, I've hit the ceiling twice, once north of Sydney in Bankstown's light aircraft lane in a Piper Warrior. The aircraft encountered a standing wave, causing it to drop rapidly in smooth conditions, which caused an aircraft battery and a toolbox in the baggage compartment to be thrown against the hatch, and drop into the waterway below. The other time, in a Baron approaching Balgo Hill in WA. Where did you fly bank runs?

[Vag277]

Manwell

You clearly do not understand why there are cabin crew. Their primary role is passenger safety and that is why their numbers are specified in regulation. Their primary role is NOT to pander to you.

[Manwell]

Manwell

You clearly do not understand why there are cabin crew. Their primary role is passenger safety and that is why their numbers are specified in regulation. Their primary role is NOT to pander to you.

vag, on the contrary, you do not know enough history about cabin crew to know why they were employed in the first place. Their role was to attend to pax needs - basically to serve them like waiters in a restaurant. Much like they still do for pax up in first and business.

It was only much later that they transformed from customer servants into customer safety dictators, and the whole concept of their role being primarily pax safety is unable to be substantiated in the real world. That's the one we actually live and die in when our thinking gets too far removed from reality.

Yes, their numbers are specified in legislation, which should imply the following - If something is a practical necessity it wouldn't require legislation mandating it. You are correct that the justification for legislating cabin crew is based on a safety argument, but that argument conveniently perceives only a very small part of the whole picture. In reality, airlines survive by selling seats. If an airline is considered safe, but provides such poor cabin service that pax get pissed off, the airline can fail. Conversely, if an airline provides great cabin service, but get a bad safety record, they'll lose patronage and potentially fail. Therefore, the primary safety role is managed by the person occupying the front left seat, and the primary customer relations role is managed by the cabin manager. Both are essential for airline profitability, but one accident would have a far greater effect than one bad cabin service. That's how it works in reality. Anything else is folly dreamed up by fools who have allowed themselves to be deceived, usually for personal gain.

Probably the most critical factor in failures of any kind, whether they be airlines, societies, or simple pilot error, is folly and self-deception. That doesn't mean an airline, society, etc. will immediately fail as soon as their thinking becomes flawed. These things take time, providing plenty of opportunity for fatal flaws to be corrected. History shows that once a society, company, etc. pass a certain critical point, the possibility of correction is unlikely. Hence, the adage, "The bigger they are, the harder they fall."

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

Yes, their numbers are specified in legislation, which should imply the following - If something is a practical necessity it wouldn't require legislation mandating it.

First, this doesn’t really make sense. You don’t seem to have a proper grasp of the meaning and usage of the word ‘imply’.

Second, there are plenty of practical necessities which are still mandated by legislation. One of them is that you need to follow the instructions of the crew, whether or not you feel that they’re beneath you and would benefit from your efforts to ‘educate’ them. If you’re unwilling to comply with this particular piece of legislation, then you need to find an alternative means of transportation.

[73qanda]

Probably the most critical factor in failures of any kind, whether they be airlines, societies, or simple pilot error, is folly and self-deception.
Cool. I’m not going to argue with that. It does make me wonder though..... this is a genuine question and is coming from a good place , (ie not antagonistic).......if you ( Manwell) were to take part in a survey on commonly held view points and beliefs, and then separately an IQ test, do you think you’d fall within one standard deviation on both of them? Either of them? None of them?
I’m interested to know what you think and I am not planning any smart arsed response.
Cheers

[Lookleft]

If the travelling public think that customer service is something the airlines are interested in beyond lip service then they are setting themselves up for constant disappointment. I can't comment on the training that a full service airline provide to their cabin crew but in the LLC that I fly for new CC get three weeks of fire hose training for the regulatory part and 2 days for the onboard customer service part. Just like ATMs, self-service checkouts and fill your own tank service stations businesses are not interested in providing outstanding customer service. They are happy to take your money and will provide what you have paid for. With an airline you pay for a seat on an aircraft that will take you from your departure point to your arrival point. If you want outstanding customer service then be nice to those you expect to serve you food and drink. Its just common decency and respect for others. If you go in there demanding outstanding service then don't be surprised at the resultant attitude. There have been quite a few instances where the aircraft have crashed but the passengers have survived. That is when the training and the safety role of the cabin crew comes to the fore. In that instance they require and expect you to follow their commands and they won't be gentle about it.

[Bend alot]

If the travelling public think that customer service is something the airlines are interested in beyond lip service then they are setting themselves up for constant disappointment. I can't comment on the training that a full service airline provide to their cabin crew but in the LLC that I fly for new CC get three weeks of fire hose training for the regulatory part and 2 days for the onboard customer service part. Just like ATMs, self-service checkouts and fill your own tank service stations businesses are not interested in providing outstanding customer service. They are happy to take your money and will provide what you have paid for. With an airline you pay for a seat on an aircraft that will take you from your departure point to your arrival point. If you want outstanding customer service then be nice to those you expect to serve you food and drink. Its just common decency and respect for others. If you go in there demanding outstanding service then don't be surprised at the resultant attitude. There have been quite a few instances where the aircraft have crashed but the passengers have survived. That is when the training and the safety role of the cabin crew comes to the fore. In that instance they require and expect you to follow their commands and they won't be gentle about it.
Well it is strange that First Class and Business even have a market in this World - should have been scraped years ago in favour of Premium Economy or less even Sub like the Titanic.

Most profitable airlines are fools for still keeping other than the LCC model as - no profit in good CC service as the market indicates.

I do not know why they consistently put many CC looking after such classes and only a few CC to look after the masses SLF if safety is the real factor.

If safety is the reality then so would be proportions to areas and levels per pax number - it is visible I get more safety (numbers per CC) when I travel more than economy.
Also clear I get better cabin service due the CC per person when in Biz travel.

[das Uber Soldat]

Cool. I’m not going to argue with that. It does make me wonder though..... this is a genuine question and is coming from a good place , (ie not antagonistic).......if you ( Manwell) were to take part in a survey on commonly held view points and beliefs, and then separately an IQ test, do you think you’d fall within one standard deviation on both of them? Either of them? None of them?
I’m interested to know what you think and I am not planning any smart arsed response.
Cheers
I've seen this MO before...

[73qanda]

Fair call, I’ll retract the question as it is a bit personal and not relevant to the thread. I would love to know though. I suspect Manwell is of above average intelligence and doesn’t mind if he/she is slightly out of step with those around them. That’s not necessarily a bad thing in my mind, without the left and the right we wouldn’t know where the middle was :)

[NRU74]

[QUOTE=Manwell The requirement to stow tray tables and have seat backs upright is based on the flawed assumption that people won't be able to exit their seats in an emergency, and that would only be useful in an emergency.[/QUOTE]

If it’s not a ‘flawed assumption’ does anyone know why the CC insist the seat arms are to be down for landing, I’d have thought seat arms up would be more sensible. (I appreciate you can’t always move the seat arm on the aisle seats on some aircraft)

[Bend alot]

If it’s not a ‘flawed assumption’ does anyone know why the CC insist the seat arms are to be down for landing, I’d have thought seat arms up would be more sensible. (I appreciate you can’t always move the seat arm on the aisle seats on some aircraft)
I always thought it was an inertia thing.

[Lookleft]

Bend a lot in case it has escaped your attention First Class doesn't exist anymore on domestic flights and Business Class on the majority of the domestic fleet is tiny so my argument regarding the airline priority stands. It doesn't matter whether its an airline or a casino if you want better service then you have to pay for it. I have noticed more and more people in suits travelling Jetstar so again the level of service is not the prime consideration. If a businessman gets on board a Jetstar flight expecting Business Class service then they are only setting themselves up for a major disappointment. If they are polite and treat the cabin crew as people and not as servants then they will be pleasantly surprised by the response they get. Have you noticed the difference in advertising for domestic travel. It used to be about flying the friendly way and the inflight service. Now its about low fares everyday and frequent flyer points. They know what is important to the business. If you want service that makes you feel like a VIP then pay the extra and go Business however what I have observed is that the regular Business Class passenger just wants a comfy seat, a cup of tea or coffee and mainly to be left alone.

[Bend alot]

Bend a lot in case it has escaped your attention First Class doesn't exist anymore on domestic flights and Business Class on the majority of the domestic fleet is tiny so my argument regarding the airline priority stands. It doesn't matter whether its an airline or a casino if you want better service then you have to pay for it. I have noticed more and more people in suits travelling Jetstar so again the level of service is not the prime consideration. If a businessman gets on board a Jetstar flight expecting Business Class service then they are only setting themselves up for a major disappointment. If they are polite and treat the cabin crew as people and not as servants then they will be pleasantly surprised by the response they get. Have you noticed the difference in advertising for domestic travel. It used to be about flying the friendly way and the inflight service. Now its about low fares everyday and frequent flyer points. They know what is important to the business. If you want service that makes you feel like a VIP then pay the extra and go Business however what I have observed is that the regular Business Class passenger just wants a comfy seat, a cup of tea or coffee and mainly to be left alone.
Who mentioned domestic?

https://www.pointhacks.com.au/reviews/emirates-a380-first-class-trans-tasman/

Many airlines have a lower number of business seats compared to economy but they yield a greater return than the economy class. I think you would find the 787 that Qantas operate domestic to/from Perth then on to London could be such a flight where business generates the most $ for the flight.

I tend to prefer the service when going business class, that includes the lounges - but the seats are pretty good.

When I flew my daughter up recently it was business class, she hated the seat, but being a vegan the service to her meals content was great by the single CC for the 6 pax.