Drug Smugglers - To Eat or not Eat...

[PaulE]

Hi guys,

This is more a rumour type question I'd like confirmed.

Is it procedure (inbound for Australia in particular) to report any passenger who does not eat or drink anything onboard a flight, coming in from a long haul destination?
I have heard mixed reports from working online and our SOP's dont state anything per say. However, I would like to hear from anyone else who could shed some light onto the matter?

There are unwritten rules regarding 'seating children next to male pax' and I was wondering if this was another one of them.

Any information would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks guys!

[cargosales]

Hmm .. On balance I'd suggest that you don't eat drug smugglers, regardless of how meagre the crew meals are - you never know what you'll catch.

On a serious note, if this is indeed worthy of being considered such a question, I'd suggest that anyone who is 'in the know' about 'unwritten rules' is hardly likely to post such information on a public forum like this. Unless I've missed the point completely and you have a completely valid reason for asking the question?

But why the interest in drug smuggling into Australia particularly, other than the fact your profile says you're an Aussie and you perhaps bid successfully to be rostered to go there a fair bit???

[PaulE]

LOL!

Cargosales, I was just wondering what other companies procedures are. I was wondering if anyone (crew have similar experieces/procedures in place) could shed some light on the matter.
I take it your not crew but, there are a lot of unwritten rules within the organisation - ie unaccompanied minors next to male passengers, airline regulations on passengers caught smoking in a lav, children sleeping on the floor under passengers feet on long haul flights, the use of extension seat belts etc. These are very grey areas for some carriers, mine in particular.

With regards to my question. I am curious as to what other people have heard or experienced online.
Reason being, on my last Australian flight one of my seniors stated that we must write down seat numbers of passengers who do not eat and/or act suspiciously when offered food and/or visit the bathroom too frequently. This was new to me. But from what she said, it made sense.

I want to know if this is a Australian/NZ custom specific 'unwritten regulation' etc

Regardless of this being a 'public forum' I dont really think it matter so much what people read and/or speculate. Because if someone really wanted to smuggle something into a country I believe this would be the last place they'd look! lol

Its nothing sinistar!! Just clarification on my behalf.

Thanks all!

[Glamgirl]

Quote:

I take it your not crew but, there are a lot of unwritten rules within the organisation - ie unaccompanied minors next to male passengers, airline regulations on passengers caught smoking in a lav, children sleeping on the floor under passengers feet on long haul flights, the use of extension seat belts etc. These are very grey areas for some carriers, mine in particular.
Unquote.


Oh dear me, you've got to be kidding! The so-called unwritten rules you've mentioned are not unwritten rules unless you work for an amateur outfit of an airline!

UMs do not get placed next to a male (for the protection of both). It's written down.

Passengers smoking (in the lav or otherwise) - It's against THE LAW

Children (or anyone else) sleeping on the floor - again written down

Extention seat belts - that should be in your manual.

Actually, all these should be in one of your manuals. End of story. Maybe time to re-read them? Or maybe the airline you work for doesn't give a stuff to safety? Or maybe you don't work for an airline at all?

By the way, I won't give you any hints and tips on drug smuggling. Feel free to tell us who you work for though, as I'll make sure I avoid it.

Sorry to sound harsh and narky, but seriously, your "unwritten" rules are just daft.

Sorry to any other ppruners if I've just fed someone I shouldn't feed.

Gg

[PaulE]

LOL OK thanks for the info "Glam"girl

Firstly, for your informtion EVERY airline does NOT have a written regulation regarding male passengers being seated next to unaccompanied minors (children) mostly because it goes against WRITTEN discrimination legislation IE read the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_airways under controversies.

Trust me my airline is no "amateur outfit". Being a 4 star airline, we have many unwritten rules and regulations. Being a Middle Eastern Carrier we create our own rules and regulations. Be it written or verbal. Which proves difficult at times. Hence my questioning.

Not every airline out there has concrete written rules, as we DONT ALL HAVE UNIONS. Please understand this.

Within my SOP's there is nothing that stipulates the punishment of 'smoking pax' etc. The passenger is always right. Ive had crew members on my flight who have been spat on, yelled at and even groped by passengers - and nothing was done.

Within my carrier, it is up the passenger 'as they see fit' to use a infant seatbelt. We advise them of our procedure. If they decide against it its their responsibility. Same goes with serving hot liquids while the seat belt sign is on. Our SOP's dont state if children are allowed to sleep on the floor (no isle)

I cant say I agree with these policies, as this gives us lee way to fall into the blame category, if something goes wrong. But thats the way things are at the moment.

My quesiton relates to speculation/rumour if you will. I was wondering if this is an unwritten crew ruling or just a rumour. Simple as that. No need to be so defensive!! lol

Trust me, being a middle eastern cabin crew member, I DONT involve myself in drugs or people associated with drugs. I am simply asking a question to Ultra Long haul crew members who ACTUALLY FLY TO AUSTRALIA. That is all.

Thanks guys!

Paul

Thanks again

[Glamgirl]

Paul,

All I can say is that the behaviour of your airline is to me, amateur. Sorry if that offends you, but that's how I feel. To me, safety and security is much more important than anything else. Customer is right most of the time, but not when it comes to safety. I'm actually quite shocked that this kind of thing goes on still.

In regards to the UM situation. The reason we don't put a man next to a UM is to protect them both. If a man is part of a couple or family, then it is deemed to be ok to place him next to an UM. Can you imagine, little Billy comes off a flight and Mummy is meeting him: Mummy says: Did you have a nice flight, Billy? "Yes", he says, "I sat next to a nice man who chatted about where we live, he gave me sweets and helped me take my jumper off". Mummy goes: "EEEEEEEEEek!"

All that happened on the flight, was that the man was trying to make conversation and didn't have much experience with children. Little Billy has problems with his ears, so the man offered him a boiled sweet. Little Billy felt hot and had problems taking his jumper off, so the man helped him.

The man was obviously innocent, but when children tell others what happened, they sometimes have a way of saying things that in this cynical world makes it sound sinister. Therefore, we don't place a male pax and UMs together.

Also, sometimes we have very young (5-6 yo) UMs who are upset and crying. All we as crew can do is to talk to them. All they need is a cuddle and comforting. But we are not allowed to. This is for our own protection as much as theirs. Same scenario again. Billy meets Mummy and says: "Mummy, I was a bit upset, but the nice lady/man in uniform gave me a nice cuddle and I felt better".

Most sane parents will not react to this in a bad way, but we have so many parents these days who are (somewhat rightly) very worried about people in this world and how their children may be treated. You only need one such parent to "over react" and you lose your job.

Gg

Ps. I did not mention Unions in my post and neither have I said anything about whether I fly/flew to Australia.

Pps. I'm still shocked that a so-called 4 star airline have such blatant disregard for basic sop and safety procedures.

[stroppy jock]

", we have many unwritten rules and regulations. Being a Middle Eastern Carrier we create our own rules and regulations. Be it written or verbal. Which proves difficult at times."

Can I avoid your airline too - unwritten rules aren't worth the paper they are written on.

I am not surprised it is difficult - how do you know which unwritten rules are valid today?

[indamiddle]

ok, back to the original question of this thread.
yes, note the seat number and name of pax from onboard paperwork and hand this to customs on arrival. hopefully the captain will have radioed ahead. customs in oz do find this 'interesting behaviour'. you will unlikely be required to identify pax to customs, they usually hunt them down by their own means at customs desk and 'process' them at an inspection bench

[PaulE]

Indamiddle, THANK YOU! Thats all I was asking for. Finally, some common sense in the forum!!

I suspected some truth in this rumour.

Thanks a million!

[PaulE]

Stroppy Jock - I think you missed the point here

Quote: "Can I avoid your airline too - unwritten rules aren't worth the paper they are written on."

Ummmm - an unwritten rule is 'unwritten' - NOT ON PAPER.... hence unwritten????????

LOL

[PaulE]

Glamgirl, thanks for the lecture on your airlines UM policy. I do understand the reasoning behind it. My actual question related to it being an unwritten rule.
If your airline SOP's STATE in BLACK AND WHITE that UMs cannot be placed next to a MALE then your insinuating that ALL MALE passengers are sexual predators. Which is wrong. Leaving yourselves OPEN to many legal/court cases.
Search BA, QANTAS etc and other such non 'amatuer' airlines under constroversies. Its interesting reading.
Many airlines have unwritten rules, both amatuer operations and non ameatuer operations - as you refer to them.

[gadgetman]

I know specifically of a couple of middle eastern airlines that have very clear and specific rules regarding carriage of UMs - it's simply a case of RTFM. Not seating them next to male pax is NOT insinuating that all males are sexual predators for christs sake, just that 99% of all sexual predators are male. Unless you have time to vet all your pax thoroughly with background checks, references and notes from their mum, it's just easier to take one potential out of the equation.

Regarding pax who refuse to eat on board - definite sign of drug smuggliness, and they should be prevented from going to the bathroom as well in case they try and jettison their drugs before deplaning. In fact, check out that fat bastard in 36G, I'm almost certain that roll of fat he's carrying on his waistline is actually a couple of keys of Colombian snowflake strapped to his body.
I'd also watch that kid in 17C with the lollipop, I heard that's how LSD was transported in the 80's.
Don't forget the grungy couple in the homeknit jerseys on 25AB, that unwashed odour is definitely a masking agent for the stench of reefer that I'm sure they have stashed in their dreads.

Logical reasons why people might not eat airline food, not including the Jenny Craig drug mule diet:

1: Airline food tastes like cardboard warmed over.
2: They spent the last few days partying it up, and hangovers don't mix with omlettes that are turning green.
3: They didn't get the special meal they demanded and are on a hunger strike in protest.
4: They are concerned about their allergy to nuts or similar and don't want to risk eating something that might cause their airway to close up.
5: It's ramadan/lent and they are fasting.
6: They are vaguely health conscious and don't feel like eating 2000 calories of fat soaked carbs.
7: Returning from their dream holiday in Montezumastan, they picked up the worst case of food poisoning since Yo Sushi offered chicken sashimi, and are incapable of eating anything.
8: Their bodyclock is telling them its 0300 and they just don't WANT to eat anything at that time.


As crew, a pax not eating can be symptomatic of a lot of things, smuggling drugs probably shouldn't be your first assumption.

[summa101]

PauleE
I just finished ground school for an Australian Airline and yes it was mentioned to us to be aware of pax on long Haul flight that do not eat or drink...regardless of all the other strange excuses and other answers you recieved on here.. the only reason we were told this was they could be concealing drugs.,and I'm pretty sure the check -in crew of airlines are given direction on where to place unaccompanied minors on aircraft....and its is unwritten so as not be be declared as discrimination. Hope this helps.

[EI-CFC]

...god help anyone who's had any gastric surgery too then

[PaulE]

Hey Summa101, thanks for your info. Clearly my senior has been chatting to fellow Aussie crew from different carriers. As this was somthing I was not familiar with. Like I said when she finished her blurb in briefing it did make sense. Thanks for taking the time to publish your findings. I appreciate it!
Happy flying

[Juud]

Glamgirl, perhaps a tad hasty in your conclusions there?
I work for one of the world's oldest airlines, which is also one of the world's bigger ones. We are not a LoCo, yes we do make money and we also have a pretty good safety record.

What we do not have is a written or unwritten rule about next to whom an UM can be seated. It is left up to the common sense and experience of the Senior Purser and the vigilance of the FAs.

What we do not have either is a policy of reporting our passengers to the authorities when they do not eat or drink onboard our aircraft.
As crew we are aware of the dangers on certain routes, and we keep an extra eye on certain pax when we suspect them of possibly being mules with a gut full of drug-filled condoms. Not to report them, but to be ready to ease their death when the condoms break. We also inform the pilots when we suspect that we have a sick mule, so they can be prepared for the eventuality of a death on board.

Our airline does not consider it the task of its cabin crew to function as amateur cops. We are not qualified for the role.
Our national aurhorities agree with that view, so to avoid drug mules entering the country, there is a 100% customs X-ray check of all pax on certain routes.
We look after the safety and well being of our pax, the authorities send qualified law enforcement staff to check for drugs.

Personally, I don't think that's amateurish.
Just different from what your company and your country asks of you.

[Glamgirl]

Juud,

I don't think I was being too hasty. My issue with Paul's employer being amateur (in my opinion) doesn't have that much to do with UMs, but more with the fact that parents can choose whether they want their babies strapped in (with extention seat belt) or not. Also, that they can (and I get the impression - must) serve hot beverages when the seat belt sign is on. Another thing is allowing children to sleep on the floor, and not forgetting the fact that if passengers feel like smoking, threatening or abusing the crew, they won't be reprimanded, because, as Paul says, the passenger is always right.

I find the lack of SOPs regarding these issues highly irresponsible. Babies and children can't make informed decicions. It has been proven that babies are safer when strapped in (remember the baby that died in a Delta emergency?). Also, if you have a child (or adult for that matter) sleeping on the floor, the potential for injury is huge. Turbulence, being stepped on, decompression, the list has many more potentially dangerous situations.

Therefore, I feel I wasn't too hasty in my critisism. I can't imagine working for an airline who doesn't have SOPs for such issues and the fact that they wouldn't look after the crew regarding disruptive passengers.

Gg

Ps. I didn't really comment about the policing of potential drug mules. Nor am I on an aircraft to be an amateur cop. I'm there to look after passenger's safety and security.

[Hunter58]

Gadgetman

one more possibility for not wanting to eat:

9. You just spend some other 8 or more hours in an airplane fo the same company connecting into this flight and you simply don't want anything more than sleeping since they are paid to be fresh at destination (that usually is a business traveller - there is no law requiring her/him to alos sit in C).



Now for people who go to the toilets rather often: what about elderly people with a capacity/restraint problem?

It is liek everywhere in life: use some common sense.

[Rush2112]

Blimey, I've flown into Oz a few times now and I drink so much of the free beer and wine that I spend half the flight peeing it back out. I dread to think what the CC would think of me!

[rickbrit87]

I have to agree that I think Glamgirl has been rather hasty and almost quite offensive and bitter in her judgments. I worked for one of the oldest and biggest airlines of the world also and I worked for a charter airline based in the UK. There are no written rules on a) people not eating, b) children sleeping on the floor.

We have had situations where UM have had to sit next to male PAX and this is the problem with working for an airline. There are either some operational needs, that prevent some things from being enforced.

If you read over your past comments, it does seem rather demeaning to a) Cabin crew at this airline and b) the airline itself. It was so terrible, this airline probably wouldn't be around still.

I just think some people are being rather hasty and offensive in their opinions