SLF Ignoring CC. What to do?
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Netherlands
Age: 53
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
for many of us they are merely a help to trimming the aircraft, a boarding sequence number, and a constant impediment to OnTimePerformance!!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Oh stop being so pompous Classic!" 
And stop clutching that straw man while you’re at it. I know it makes you feel good, but it doesn’t do much for a sensible discussion.
Of course nobody arrests anybody for watching a PDA. Any FA worth his salary will diffuse such a situation pronto.
Try and widen your angle of view here a bit though.
(among other things by realising that there’s more aviation than the UK, and that for example, many companies consider their FAs well able to decide when handing out a yellow card might solve a problem, without having to go and ask permission from the captain to use that tool)
Passenger aggression is a daily problem world wide. Since you are focused on the UK, here are some numbers for you.
The CAA received 2702 reports of disruptive behaviour on board aircraft during 2008. That's a bit more than 7 incidents a day reported on UK aircraft.
7 a day reported Classic, think about that number for a bit.
Actual aggression incidents follow a fixed pattern:
At this point there are a number of scenarios, none of them pretty:
Other pax interfere successfully; flight continues in a safe manner.
FAs restrain pax, flight carries on; flight continues in a safe manner.
Captain decides to divert and offload disruptive pax; flight eventually continues in a safe manner.
With me so far?
At point 2 described above is where the authority of the CC, as an extension of the captain’s authority, becomes relevant.
All rules apply to all pax. It is not up to the CC nor the pax to decide which rules can be applied and which ones ignored. Only the captain can deviate from that, and even (s)he only in exceptional circumstances.
Sticking to SOPs is a large part of flying safely.
CC need to enforce the rules. Not just some of the rules, but all of them.
Enforcing only some of them is the start of a slippery slope which can and often does result in a breach of safety. A breach of safety that could have been avoided if the CC had not given the pax access to the slippery slope in the first place.
And that’s where the PDA comes in. In itself it is likely not a problem.
As the start of a slippery slope, it definitely is a problem.
I flew for 15 years as a rank and file FA. In those years, I witnessed a number of serious incidents. All of them could have been avoided if the No1 had put a stop to the initial bad behaviour, rather than letting it go and hoping that the pap would see sense by himself.
Letting the small stuff go is the failsafe recipe for creating a big problem.
Prompt and functional intervention is the key to not letting a problem turn into a safety hazard.
As I say during every CC briefing: “Use your charm, your sense of humour and your brains when dealing with a difficult pap. Always remember that you started this job because you liked dealing with people. An amiable solution is better than a confrontation. However, when a pap crosses the line of what is acceptable in regard to the safety rules, goes beyond the rules of normal civilised behaviour or starts pawing you, also remember that you have to be able to make the switch from service provider to safety enforcer.
Do not accept the crossing of that line, and if you can’t deal with it, come and get me or the Assistant Purser, and we will deal with it. If you make a mistake, we will handle that between you and me, but I will back you up 100% in front of the pax and with the company. Don’t fail to take action when it is needed.
If we all do that, both our pax, the pilots and we will have a safe and pleasant flight.“
............................................................ .........
And stop clutching that straw man while you’re at it. I know it makes you feel good, but it doesn’t do much for a sensible discussion.
Of course nobody arrests anybody for watching a PDA. Any FA worth his salary will diffuse such a situation pronto.
Try and widen your angle of view here a bit though.
(among other things by realising that there’s more aviation than the UK, and that for example, many companies consider their FAs well able to decide when handing out a yellow card might solve a problem, without having to go and ask permission from the captain to use that tool)
Passenger aggression is a daily problem world wide. Since you are focused on the UK, here are some numbers for you.
The CAA received 2702 reports of disruptive behaviour on board aircraft during 2008. That's a bit more than 7 incidents a day reported on UK aircraft.
7 a day reported Classic, think about that number for a bit.
Actual aggression incidents follow a fixed pattern:
- Pax acts out in way that disrupts service and threatens safety.(there's 3 main types of aggression: pap has mental prob, pap has been treated badly and needs that acknowledged, pap uses aggressions as a mean to achieve a goal)
- FA tries to defuse situation with correct demeanour, body language and verbal techniques taught by company. FA informs pap that the behaviour is unacceptable and needs to stop.
- Pax ignores intervention and continues undesirable behaviour. "yellow card" is handed out and pax is told to stop behaviour.
- Pax continues acting out and ignores crew’s attempts to defuse situation.
At this point there are a number of scenarios, none of them pretty:
Other pax interfere successfully; flight continues in a safe manner.
FAs restrain pax, flight carries on; flight continues in a safe manner.
Captain decides to divert and offload disruptive pax; flight eventually continues in a safe manner.
With me so far?
At point 2 described above is where the authority of the CC, as an extension of the captain’s authority, becomes relevant.
All rules apply to all pax. It is not up to the CC nor the pax to decide which rules can be applied and which ones ignored. Only the captain can deviate from that, and even (s)he only in exceptional circumstances.
Sticking to SOPs is a large part of flying safely.
CC need to enforce the rules. Not just some of the rules, but all of them.
Enforcing only some of them is the start of a slippery slope which can and often does result in a breach of safety. A breach of safety that could have been avoided if the CC had not given the pax access to the slippery slope in the first place.
And that’s where the PDA comes in. In itself it is likely not a problem.
As the start of a slippery slope, it definitely is a problem.
I flew for 15 years as a rank and file FA. In those years, I witnessed a number of serious incidents. All of them could have been avoided if the No1 had put a stop to the initial bad behaviour, rather than letting it go and hoping that the pap would see sense by himself.
Letting the small stuff go is the failsafe recipe for creating a big problem.
Prompt and functional intervention is the key to not letting a problem turn into a safety hazard.
As I say during every CC briefing: “Use your charm, your sense of humour and your brains when dealing with a difficult pap. Always remember that you started this job because you liked dealing with people. An amiable solution is better than a confrontation. However, when a pap crosses the line of what is acceptable in regard to the safety rules, goes beyond the rules of normal civilised behaviour or starts pawing you, also remember that you have to be able to make the switch from service provider to safety enforcer.
Do not accept the crossing of that line, and if you can’t deal with it, come and get me or the Assistant Purser, and we will deal with it. If you make a mistake, we will handle that between you and me, but I will back you up 100% in front of the pax and with the company. Don’t fail to take action when it is needed.
If we all do that, both our pax, the pilots and we will have a safe and pleasant flight.“
............................................................ .........
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: NEW FOREST
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But it's not like that in Mile High
I think a few people here need to take a reality check. It's all very well stating from the 'book' what can/can't or should/shouldn't be done, but reality is a totally different scenario.
You do what you have/should to according to the situation at the time. Human nature dictates that we will react very differently to similar situations, some of which will be to difuse/calm and get the desired result, others which will possibly exacerbate, antagonise and make things far worse. There's no accounting for people.
It's certainley not for me to advise another pax of their wrongdoing (unless critical), I'd advise a trolley dolly (it's a term of endearment
) and then let her/him to their job.
Mobile devices and EMF ? Arguments both sides, none of which have been adequately proven or not, therefore we must just follow the current directive whether we agree or not and that includes those up-front ! Maybe a few ops departments should remember that. the rules may seem out of date or just plain daft, but that's life ! Don't forget to raise your window blind now !
As for dressing for survival ? Do you not find that you get strange looks sat in seat 23b wearing your smokehood ? Do you often hear babies crying near you ? Ever thought why ? If you have a long stretch over sea it must be worrying whether to decide to keep your flippers on or take them off. You know how feet swell in the air !
Airports and aeroplanes (not airplanes) - Why do seemingly normal people become agitated, confused and lose all sense of normality and direction as soon as they step foot inside them ? Does it happen when riding a bus ? No, well not for most, so why when travelling by air ?
Nothing like the simple life, get on board, adhere to the rules, enjoy your flight, have a drink, maybe a bite to eat, arrive safely. What could be easier ?
I think a few people here need to take a reality check. It's all very well stating from the 'book' what can/can't or should/shouldn't be done, but reality is a totally different scenario.
You do what you have/should to according to the situation at the time. Human nature dictates that we will react very differently to similar situations, some of which will be to difuse/calm and get the desired result, others which will possibly exacerbate, antagonise and make things far worse. There's no accounting for people.
It's certainley not for me to advise another pax of their wrongdoing (unless critical), I'd advise a trolley dolly (it's a term of endearment
) and then let her/him to their job.Mobile devices and EMF ? Arguments both sides, none of which have been adequately proven or not, therefore we must just follow the current directive whether we agree or not and that includes those up-front ! Maybe a few ops departments should remember that. the rules may seem out of date or just plain daft, but that's life ! Don't forget to raise your window blind now !
As for dressing for survival ? Do you not find that you get strange looks sat in seat 23b wearing your smokehood ? Do you often hear babies crying near you ? Ever thought why ? If you have a long stretch over sea it must be worrying whether to decide to keep your flippers on or take them off. You know how feet swell in the air !
Airports and aeroplanes (not airplanes) - Why do seemingly normal people become agitated, confused and lose all sense of normality and direction as soon as they step foot inside them ? Does it happen when riding a bus ? No, well not for most, so why when travelling by air ?
Nothing like the simple life, get on board, adhere to the rules, enjoy your flight, have a drink, maybe a bite to eat, arrive safely. What could be easier ?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately for CC, the vast majority of SLF (that's me!) do NOT appreciate the difference in legal status of these "flying bus "crews.
Were the airlines to print a bold, simple statement on the ticket, EG.-
The captain has full legal authority on the aircraft. you have a LEGAL DUTY to obey any crew orders whilst on,entering or leaving an aircraft.
FAILURE TO CO OPERATE MEANS YOU CAN BE PUT OFF THE AIRCRAFT AND WILL BE CHARGED FOR THE COSTS.
or similar wording- Once the pax understand that the staff HAVE authority, the message becomes clearer.
Unfortunately one seldom hears of "joe prole" being sucessfully sued for £5k for the return to gate, ejecting him and finding/ejecting his luggage.
Air travel is no longer the preserve of the economic and social upper-classes.
It's cheap, mass-travel, by a large number who include the antisocial and unaware, as well as the just plain thick. Subtle communication doesn't get through, hence the "in your face" idea of the "this is how it is, do as you're told or you don't get the ride" message which every pax should be made to read before boarding...........perhaps it would pass the time waiting in "security" or the "secure" airside departure-area?
Were the airlines to print a bold, simple statement on the ticket, EG.-
The captain has full legal authority on the aircraft. you have a LEGAL DUTY to obey any crew orders whilst on,entering or leaving an aircraft.
FAILURE TO CO OPERATE MEANS YOU CAN BE PUT OFF THE AIRCRAFT AND WILL BE CHARGED FOR THE COSTS.
or similar wording- Once the pax understand that the staff HAVE authority, the message becomes clearer.
Unfortunately one seldom hears of "joe prole" being sucessfully sued for £5k for the return to gate, ejecting him and finding/ejecting his luggage.
Air travel is no longer the preserve of the economic and social upper-classes.
It's cheap, mass-travel, by a large number who include the antisocial and unaware, as well as the just plain thick. Subtle communication doesn't get through, hence the "in your face" idea of the "this is how it is, do as you're told or you don't get the ride" message which every pax should be made to read before boarding...........perhaps it would pass the time waiting in "security" or the "secure" airside departure-area?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like it - I can see a new sport evolving - Not cage fighting but tube wrestling! The direct approach has worked in a variety of ways for Ryanair etc - THIS IS HOW IT IS, IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT - THEN **** OFF!
Problem is that the LEGAL ( i.e. governed by Statute etc. ) and CONTRACTUAL obligations get all muddled up. It seems prettyy clear from this thread that most CC and SLF can't actually distinguish between each.
Plain english, setting out the rules of engagement and spelling out the consequences is possibly the best way forward - its just that you might have expected that someone would have thought of that by now!
Problem is that the LEGAL ( i.e. governed by Statute etc. ) and CONTRACTUAL obligations get all muddled up. It seems prettyy clear from this thread that most CC and SLF can't actually distinguish between each.
Plain english, setting out the rules of engagement and spelling out the consequences is possibly the best way forward - its just that you might have expected that someone would have thought of that by now!
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: In the Air
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Were the airlines to print a bold, simple statement on the ticket, EG.-
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you read the 'now closed' thread you would know that the opportunity was created by CC not being able to distinguish between Cattle class and Premium pax. Although It remains to be seen what the actual difference is on some airlines, other than ticket price!
If you make a mistake, we will handle that between you and me, but I will back you up 100% in front of the pax and with the company.
And that Judd, with the greatest of respect to people who sometimes have a difficult job, is where things can get out of control.
When young or inexperienced CC make a mistake in dealing with an experienced passenger, blind loyalty to your staff can escalate a problem when a quiet word and apology would have settled everything.
After twenty five years of premium travel, if I had a pound for every time I've seen it....
On the other hand, during the same period I have seen people who deserve to be dealt with quite firmly treated with kid gloves to achieve the peace.
A difficult balancing act I accept.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clareprop, with a bit of tact and brains, not too mention far too many years of experience, it is quite possible to back up the FA while still calming down the pax. Trust me, I'm an old Wagon Dragon.
Also, and I hope you understand this the way I intend it, because of the way I am, what I say in the briefing and my somewhat "scary" looks, I seldom have FAs who do a bad job or who are surly with the pax. It happens, but rarely.
Other thing is that during the first 3 hours of the flight, I don't do any admin. Instead I am all over the aircraft like a bad rash. By continuously moving around, chatting with pax, observing the FAs, lending a hand where needed, the FAs know my beady eye is on them and the pax feel 'seen'.
It's a good way of spotting potential trouble areas and stepping in to soothe the waters before the sh!t hits the fan.
As you say the whole thing is a balancing act, and of course mistakes get made occasionally. Both by the pax, by me and by the FAs. It happens, and it's very embarrassing and makes me feel awful.
Usually though, if you find a face-saving way for people to back off (doesn't matter if it's pax or FAs) the majority are only too happy to do so.
Funny thing is that after such an episode, both the FA and the pap will go out of their way to be pleasant and polite with each other and often the pap will thank us for an excellent flight.
Still, when a pap is abusive in the manner of "I fly a million miles a year and you are a brainless tolley dolley whom I can treat as badly as I want" I back my FAs all the way. They are humans, they do their best and they deserve a minimum of respect. And I will make sure they get it.
Weak Seniors, afraid of their pax and wont to apologise when the FAs had not been in the wrong were what I hated most when I was an FA myself. I vowed never to become one of those and I haven't so far.
If an FA needs correcting I most certainly do that, and without mincing my words, but in private and with the understanding that it's the behaviour there is something wrong with, not him or her as a person.
Treating your 'staff' like you treat your customers, with respect and kindness but with no latitude for cr@p goes a long way.
Also, and I hope you understand this the way I intend it, because of the way I am, what I say in the briefing and my somewhat "scary" looks, I seldom have FAs who do a bad job or who are surly with the pax. It happens, but rarely.
Other thing is that during the first 3 hours of the flight, I don't do any admin. Instead I am all over the aircraft like a bad rash. By continuously moving around, chatting with pax, observing the FAs, lending a hand where needed, the FAs know my beady eye is on them and the pax feel 'seen'.
It's a good way of spotting potential trouble areas and stepping in to soothe the waters before the sh!t hits the fan.
As you say the whole thing is a balancing act, and of course mistakes get made occasionally. Both by the pax, by me and by the FAs. It happens, and it's very embarrassing and makes me feel awful.
Usually though, if you find a face-saving way for people to back off (doesn't matter if it's pax or FAs) the majority are only too happy to do so.
Funny thing is that after such an episode, both the FA and the pap will go out of their way to be pleasant and polite with each other and often the pap will thank us for an excellent flight.
Still, when a pap is abusive in the manner of "I fly a million miles a year and you are a brainless tolley dolley whom I can treat as badly as I want" I back my FAs all the way. They are humans, they do their best and they deserve a minimum of respect. And I will make sure they get it.
Weak Seniors, afraid of their pax and wont to apologise when the FAs had not been in the wrong were what I hated most when I was an FA myself. I vowed never to become one of those and I haven't so far.
If an FA needs correcting I most certainly do that, and without mincing my words, but in private and with the understanding that it's the behaviour there is something wrong with, not him or her as a person.
Treating your 'staff' like you treat your customers, with respect and kindness but with no latitude for cr@p goes a long way.
Judd,
....so, would you back him up 100% in front of the pax...
BA steward groping rap - mirror.co.uk
....so, would you back him up 100% in front of the pax...
BA steward groping rap - mirror.co.uk
