Disgusting Jetstar
No, sheep do.
Do you think the CC called the AFP in order to employ their negotiating skills or do you think its understood that such a move would guarantee physical conflict?
This is a downright scary comment to make.
Jetsar have just turned an aeroplane into a gulag and so many people are comfortable with that.
Do you think the CC called the AFP in order to employ their negotiating skills or do you think its understood that such a move would guarantee physical conflict?
This is a downright scary comment to make.
Jetsar have just turned an aeroplane into a gulag and so many people are comfortable with that.
To get back on topic. When, in your opinion, passengers should stop disobeying CC and start following their instructions?
Last edited by admikar; 31st Mar 2023 at 17:08.
The following 2 users liked this post by admikar:
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are unable to obey authority, then you should be punished. Otherwise society can not function. If Jetstar was wrong on the reason why he was asked to leave: argue that in court. Make em pay.
You dont say "I will leave when the police come" and then not leave. Police in these situations will always side with the crew (as they have the authority on board), everybody with say 3 braincells or more, will know that. The theatrical reaction to "the footage" does not impress me either.
The "I did nothing wrong" defence won´t work.
If CC 'instructed' you to drop and give them 10 push ups, would you comply? Instructed you to pat your head and rub your tummy at the same time? Instructed you to swap seats with your partner sitting right next to you, because you're sitting in the seat allocated to her and she's sitting in the seat allocated to you?
You've been 'instructed'.
Some on here seem to take the view that any failure to follow any CC 'instruction' of itself causes a safety risk (and is an offence). That view is patent nonsense.
Old mate could have the left the aircraft when requested ... leaving his wife and infant child on board.
Have you ever had a wife and infant child?
Last edited by Lead Balloon; 31st Mar 2023 at 20:36.
Answer: When failure to follow the instructions would have an effect on the safety of the aircraft or other POB.
I find screaming babies intensely annoying. I find BO intensely annoying. I find bad breath intensely annoying. I've yet to find any CC who'll do anything about passengers with screaming babies, BO or bad breath. But that's why I've never flown Jetstar.
The AFP tasers would be running out of charge if we expected this level of compliance on every flight.
Old mate could have the left the aircraft when requested ... leaving his wife and infant child on board.
Have you ever had a wife and infant child?
Have you ever had a wife and infant child?
I find screaming babies intensely annoying.
I ask you and das a third time:
I also note, again, that TIER’s question to das remains unanswered:
As a matter of interest, how many different airlines have you flown for, Lookleft? You das? If for more than one, did all their Ops Manuals impose exactly the same obligations on crew about who deals with passengers who refuse to comply with a direction from CC, and in what way?
[W]hat is the wording in the ops manual, this mysterious OM12, that the JQ CC was following to the letter that resulted in this situation? How else can we establish if the operational personnel were in fact complying with the policy and procedures of their ops manual.
Guys, love to see you analysing this using points of law, etc, etc...I think we all know that any action by the police or the Jetstar crew will find some sort of justification in some sort of obscure law paragraph.
And this is the problem...That right now, everyone is supposed to follow those law paragraphs which no longer give you any freedom of judgment in the best interest of the passengers or the flight. If a certain
captain of the Olympic Airways followed everything as per paragraph, then perhaps Acropolis would not exist today together with 300 people on that flight. Do you notice how doctors these days look into their
'rules' book ? For problem A - prescribe this, for problem B prescribe this....So, for everything there is a paragraph, and if a doctor steps out of line (ie: alternative medicines, different course of anybiotics) ,
he gets in trouble. In the old days, the doctors were still following the rule 'every patient is different hence requires different investigation and potentially different way of treatment from standard norm" - these days are sadly gone. Same with cabin crew,
in the old days, you were still allowed to 'think' and how to solve the problem . Now ? you are not supposed to think, you are supposed to follow a paragraph - "paragraph says: everyone must seat in their allocated seat before take off!!! - there is no space for interpretation
here, no alternatives, no avenues and the second paragraph follows : " for anyone not compiling - remove them, using force if needed" - right ? It doesnt matter that its 'safe' to switch seats, but no, the paragraph says 'no', so you
follow it, otherwise, its tea with no biscuits right ? . Same with pilots, these working for Emirates know what I mean.....
And this is the problem...That right now, everyone is supposed to follow those law paragraphs which no longer give you any freedom of judgment in the best interest of the passengers or the flight. If a certain
captain of the Olympic Airways followed everything as per paragraph, then perhaps Acropolis would not exist today together with 300 people on that flight. Do you notice how doctors these days look into their
'rules' book ? For problem A - prescribe this, for problem B prescribe this....So, for everything there is a paragraph, and if a doctor steps out of line (ie: alternative medicines, different course of anybiotics) ,
he gets in trouble. In the old days, the doctors were still following the rule 'every patient is different hence requires different investigation and potentially different way of treatment from standard norm" - these days are sadly gone. Same with cabin crew,
in the old days, you were still allowed to 'think' and how to solve the problem . Now ? you are not supposed to think, you are supposed to follow a paragraph - "paragraph says: everyone must seat in their allocated seat before take off!!! - there is no space for interpretation
here, no alternatives, no avenues and the second paragraph follows : " for anyone not compiling - remove them, using force if needed" - right ? It doesnt matter that its 'safe' to switch seats, but no, the paragraph says 'no', so you
follow it, otherwise, its tea with no biscuits right ? . Same with pilots, these working for Emirates know what I mean.....
When they are reasonable, rational instructions concerning safety.
Lead man, the rules state that the PIC must check the safety equipment on board before flight, I never do this as the cabin crew do it (most airlines the same). They then make a statement to me that “ all the safety equipment….blah blah blah”
How does that sit with your thoughts on “delegation” of PIC authority and requirements,
How does that sit with your thoughts on “delegation” of PIC authority and requirements,
passengers with screaming babies, BO or bad breath
But that's why I've never flown Jetstar.
Lead man, the rules state that the PIC must check the safety equipment on board before flight, I never do this as the cabin crew do it (most airlines the same). They then make a statement to me that “ all the safety equipment….blah blah blah”
How does that sit with your thoughts on “delegation” of PIC authority and requirements,
How does that sit with your thoughts on “delegation” of PIC authority and requirements,
Here's an idea: Write to CASA and ask them.
Something to be found on any of the worlds airlines, can't say I've endured such on any Jetstar flight.So how can you prattle on as an expert (self appointed) on the subject of Jetstar standards, I bet you write restaurant reviews without having eaten in the establishment.As said previously, I'm a very, very happy Jetstar passenger, on the face of it I'd rather not welcome sitting along side your good self on any airline.
And it appears that if I were to choose to fly on Jetstar and we were to be allocated adjacent seats, you'd have no choice but to sit along side me and, if you were to change despite CC direction, you'd be a criminal. Enjoy!
Part of a hypothetical discussion I know:
But they do interpret it. Because they don't check that everyone is in their allocated seat before takeoff. They pick and choose which passengers to apply it to. So claims that CC are strait jacketed into following their ops manual are BS. They apply only those parts they feel they need to.
you are supposed to follow a paragraph - "paragraph says: everyone must seat in their allocated seat before take off!!! - there is no space for interpretation
The following users liked this post:
And can I get this as an official statement, just in case I happen to be seated behind you?
It was already said, passengers are not capable of making the call if instructions are safety related or not (most of them).
To answer LB, yes, I have a wife and had infant children. Travelled without any problems. You would be surprised how some respect gets a lot of things done your way.
The following 2 users liked this post by admikar:
The following 3 users liked this post by Icarus2001:
Travelled without any problems. You would be surprised how some respect gets a lot of things done your way.
Icarus2001 said:
[P]assengers are not qualified to make that call [i.e whether instructions are reasonable and rational concerning safety]. They do not know the “why”. It appears cabin crew are now the same.
In a similar vein, admikar said:
It was already said, passengers are not capable of making the call if instructions are safety related or not (most of them).
But let’s deal with the basic issue, head on: Let’s assume that crew – cockpit and cabin – are the only POB “qualified and capable” of deciding whether an instruction is a “reasonable and rational” direction concerning safety. Even if that assumption were true, it does not automatically follow that every direction in fact given by crew has a causal consequence for safety in fact. Unless…
It does automatically follow that every direction in fact given by crew has a causal consequence for safety in fact, if a person’s failure to comply with a direction from crew is of itself the safety issue. (And I’m guessing the Cartmans among us would take the view that it’s axiomatic that a failure to respect the orr-tho-rit-tie of crew is, of itself, a safety issue.) Let’s make that assumption.
On that assumption, it would follow that a passenger’s failure to comply with a crew direction to: “Drop and give me 10 pushups” or “Pat your head and rub your tummy at the same time” is a safety problem and an offence justifying ejection of the passenger from the aircraft. Ditto a failure by black passengers to comply with a crew member’s direction that all black passengers must sit in their allocated seats. After all, the direction was given by someone “qualified and capable” of deciding whether it’s a direction concerning safety. This crew member decided that he needed to confirm that passengers in the exit row had the physical strength and dexterity to open the emergency doors at the end of the row, rather than to accept their assurances that they were fit and able, and to confirm that all black passengers will do what they are told during the flight. After all: Any non-compliance equals a safety problem, equals an offence equals justification for ejection from the aircraft.
At this point, some of you will be saying that that is a completely ridiculous outcome and others will be saying it makes perfect sense. The content of this thread is a fascinating but unsurprising insight into the legal and philosophical aspects of obedience. The ‘Milgram Experiment’ is another and a more famous example providing that insight.
Clearly there are numerous contributors to this thread who believe there is ‘Cartman Clause’ in Part 91. If a passenger does not respect the authority of CC and comply with whatever instructions they give, the passenger is automatically a criminal and must be punished. Otherwise society cannot function. Those contributors would no doubt be licking their lips at the prospect of administering the 450 volt shock on instruction from an authority figure, in a latter-day version of the ‘Milgram Experiment’. It’s no wonder tasers are so popular!
As to crew being qualified and capable of making these safety judgments, I’m reminded of a PPRuNe thread about the weirdest habits and behaviours of PICs heavy metal. One contributor – corroborated by others – reported a PIC’s insistence that, for reasons of safety, all COMNAV frequency selector knobs MUST ONLY BE ROTATED CLOCKWISE when making selections. According to that PIC, anti-clockwise rotation increased the risk of damaging the controllers. I **** you not.
The expectation that cabin crew can be summoned to deploy the catch all “you must do as I say” is a very slippery slope particularly when dealing with customers who are simply being “intensely annoying”.
Who gets to evaluate which particular behavior is annoying?
What if you came sashaying down the aisle in a tee shirt that said “Fxxx God”, as happened recently in the US.
To me that is “intensely annoying” and offensive. Should I call the cabin crew and request they demand you change shirts? Are you prepared to get tasered over the issue and carted away by the AFP?
But the situation the tasered passenger found himself in was one that would have made no sense to him. “You cant swap seats with another passenger because its unsafe despite originally being allocated the seat you have swapped into on the cancelled flight” is ridiculous to a layman and 5 minutes of customer service in the form of an explanation could well have changed the outcome dramatically.
Customer service, leadership and training are seriously lacking in this event along with very pooir judgement by the AFP who according to SEVERAL witnesses issued instructions to the man at the same time as grabbing him.
How many times did this guy expect to ask "Tell me what I am doing wrong"? Delaying every person on that plane and obstructing
the whole operation. In our mob though we have to deplane the whole aircraft before these types can be forcibly dragged off no wonder we have degenerated into a
society of entitled crybabies.
A good lesson for the man's family and kids. If not him, somebody needs to teach them. In life if they refuse legal orders to vacate from a trespass or sensitive safety/security situation police WILL deal with them harshly and take them to jail.
the whole operation. In our mob though we have to deplane the whole aircraft before these types can be forcibly dragged off no wonder we have degenerated into a
society of entitled crybabies.
A good lesson for the man's family and kids. If not him, somebody needs to teach them. In life if they refuse legal orders to vacate from a trespass or sensitive safety/security situation police WILL deal with them harshly and take them to jail.
Last edited by Koan; 3rd Apr 2023 at 22:15.