Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

JQ27 & The mile-high fighters

Old 21st Jul 2016, 23:34
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 69
Posts: 836
JQ27 & The mile-high fighters

Just reading in today's news papers about the onboard altercation involving 6 drunken passengers.

First question coming to mind is how the Jetstar airport manager allowed intoxicated people to board in Sydney?

Second point ,JQ27 operated as a VH- registered aircraft, therefore RSA
( responsible service of alcohol) rules apply ,preflight and more importantly, inflight!

Thirdly how does Jetstar management explain the apparent RSA rules conflict with Jetstar's Commission pay structure for Cabin Crew encouraging them to sell more booze to intoxicated passengers so crew can bolster their meagre pay resulting in " a violent fight that left blood everywhere"!

More than a " move along ,nothing to see here " response is needed from Jetstar management to address the above points is needed I believe!
blow.n.gasket is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 00:34
  #2 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: A dozen towns ago
Posts: 107
All good points, Blow.n and it will be for these reasons that no cost recovery action will happen.
Diversion costs will be absorbed by "the group", no surprises there.
caneworm is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 01:01
  #3 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 326
I actually work for the competition so I have no iron in the fire here but you have made a few assumptions there that would
possibly lead the reader into believing that you have already decided the answers to your own questions and are ready to drop the guillotine.

Reading the facts from the daily press...............caveat emptor!

1 How do you KNOW that the Airport Manager allowed the intoxicated passengers on board?

2 Yes I guess Jetstar do operate to RSA. Are you saying they did not?

3 Does Jetstar Management "encourage" CC to sell alcohol on an unlimited basis to individual passengers? I doubt it
I doubt the CC want the grief either!
36 years in the industry and I am pretty sure I know what the CC want to be doing during flight and it is not running up and down the aisle quenching the thirsts of the unwashed.

Not sure why Jetstar has your interest up but I would say it is a pretty regular occurrence world wide.

I know my mob has its fair share of idiots on board.
Qantas along with any other Airline carrying warm meat will have the same issues.

Do we as an industry try to prevent it? Yep.
Can we as an industry stop it? Possibly not.
Can we as an industry put processes in place to reduce the risk? Yep

Last edited by ad-astra; 22nd Jul 2016 at 01:29.
ad-astra is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 01:54
  #4 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1
Not to mention the fact that maybe they weren't actually that drunk. Maybe they were just dickheads using alcohol as an excuse?
das Uber Soldat is online now  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 02:22
  #5 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 70
Posts: 1,803
das Uber Soldat has hit the nail on the head. One look at the level of tatts and the social media posts of the people involved, and these give a good indication of the level of social skills of the offenders.
The problem is, if you offer low bus fares to bogan destinations, you're going to get a large number of bottom feeders filling the seats.
Then you need to upgrade the level of pax control to the same level as bogan nightclubs. Perhaps a simple breath test for suspect pax might ensure cabin calm in future?

6 fighting drunks cause JQ diversion
onetrack is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 03:58
  #6 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 423
Years ago an aircraft that I was crew on, had a well publicised "incident" with a Victorian football team into the US.

The main problem there was that the offending pax had their own duty free and drank it during the night. There is mention in the press report of one pax on the JQ flight being hit by a bottle, so I assume the others had bottles as well.

In my incident no airline would carry them from their island temporary home and they stayed there for about a month until their club had them escorted home on another carrier.

On my incident the offenders were met by the usual US walking arsenals who were not very gentle or civil. I hope the Bali Police gave these guys the same treatment.

Wunwing is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 09:52
  #7 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 556
I hope the Bali Police gave these guys the same treatment.
Usually the case.

PoppaJo is online now  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 15:54
  #8 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 435
And lets also hope QF Group Security respond appropriately with a long (10 year or more?) term ban from ALL QF Group Aircraft.

Unfortunately I won't be holding my breath...

Popgun is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 20:55
  #9 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kichin
Posts: 371
Good to hear the "group" will recover the costs for this. Pre LCC, bogan ferrals couldn't afford to trip around the world so they stayed put in their ghetto neighbourhoods procreating and doing burnouts. Qantas management created Jetstar, therefore they created the problem. Simples.
gordonfvckingramsay is online now  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 21:27
  #10 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 218
QF anything did not create this problem . The quest for cheap fares did as it allows the scum of 'no rules' society tp travel. I guess the Bali Police are used to dealing with Australian "anti-social terrorists" disguised as tourists...
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 21:32
  #11 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 230
These idiots have been named - I hope Virgin/Tiger and other carriers would join the QF Group in banning them.

They will be back on a flight very soon if they are allowed, they wont learn any lesson
Qantas 787 is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2016, 22:28
  #12 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,404
there used to be an IATA 'ban list" that covered their members.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 24th Jul 2016, 00:29
  #13 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Thailand
Age: 77
Posts: 496
Apparently alcohol while flying dehydrates.So if this is bad for you why not have a total ban on alcohol?I should not think passenger revenue would fall, and look at the weight saved!
oldpax is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2016, 05:16
  #14 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 40
Not to mention the fact that maybe they weren't actually that drunk. Maybe they were just dickheads using alcohol as an excuse?
Having worked with one of the 6 if the other 5 come in at his level then I'd have to say we are talking intellectual sharpness at the level of a bag of marshmallows!
From memory he got the sack for trying to help cover up a punchup between some other workers, CCTV quickly foiled that attempt and the lot went out the door never to return.
SnowFella is online now  
Old 24th Jul 2016, 08:44
  #15 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 2,724
I hope Virgin/Tiger and other carriers would join the QF Group in banning them.
Well given that Australian domestic airlines have no idea who is actually on board their aircraft it would be a symbolic action only.
Icarus2001 is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2016, 04:22
  #16 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: NSW
Posts: 64

Rumour has it the Captain and F/o stood down on arrival in Phuket and paxed home the next day for a thorough debriefing. Something about a pilot leaving the flight deck to talk to individuals and make an assessment. I wonder if their pay was docked for the paxing sector home?
The 2 tech crew operation a bit of stretch when going Syd direct Phuket I guess they should of gone to the hotel in Bali and not extended their duty. I hear J* run a " just culture" so they probably keep their jobs after a few sectors line training and re-check to line.
Jet Jockey is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2016, 09:40
  #17 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney & Launceston, Australia
Age: 70
Posts: 10
I remember that national sporting teams also had major problems years ago until they started to take responsibility for their teams behavior.

One national team on a flight to Honolulu did so much damage and disruption that Qantas refused to carry them back to Sydney and they had to find alternate means of getting back.

All airlines have had similar problems and some still do.

Subjective if it is worse now as more flights, more airlines and many more passengers?

Most airlines handle these issues appropriately.
ausworld is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2016, 10:19
  #18 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 97
The J* rules are clear if there is a disturbance in the cabin and I'm sure they are the same as other QGroup airlines. What if the other pilot was knocked unconscious? You would now be left with a single pilot operation. Its unfortunate for the cabin crew but the tech crew can not be responsible for the security of the cabin in this day and age .
Lookleft is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2016, 01:36
  #19 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 545
Feel for the drivers and CC involved - If I got a call to say there's a group of blokes brawling in the cabin, the decision is already made.

Difficulty today is that many CC are young and there is still a higher percentage of female crew so restraining p15s-head wombats such as these in the cabin is not always an option even when the CC's verbal de-escalation techniques fail.

It does reinforce the point that the role of the CC is much more than a waiter/waitress.

Yet another case of people who should be issued with fluro red passports which prohibits them boarding any aircraft. Would hope that the carrier seeks to recover costs from these idiots

airtags is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2016, 01:56
  #20 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 119
As Icarus says, Domestically putting their names on a no go list is futile, as anyone can travel under the name of their choice, and just check in online!
However as Airtags has suggested, why dont the Airlines ask the Govt to flag their Passports for 10 years, no travel ex Aust as part of their penalty!
Such an action might send a message to their fellow Morons that this type of behaviour on an Aircraft will have consequences!
Boe787 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.