Male passenger sues BA
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: MANCHESTER
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fact of the matter is that the rule states that UM's cannot be seated next to "Male passengers travelling alone"! Therefore it is actually up to the checkin agent to ensure when the UM is being allocated a seat that it is next to a female. What happened on board this flight happened because the crew member WAS IN THE WRONG. This man was NOT travelling alone so therefore does not come under the ruling AND even if he was, the rule does not state that the male needs to move, the crew member should have used some cop on and just move the kid without causing any fuss or even needing to reveal the rule.
Every company has idiots like that who both get the rules wrong and seem to glee in imposing their version of the rules on others...suppose its a power trip thing! 18th January 2010 13:27
Apaddyinuk,
Sadly these mistakes do happen from time to time.
These situations are not cut and dry. The check in agent may well have seated the female of the couple next to the UM. People often swap places when they get on the aircraft. I am sure you have done it yourself.
The child was allowed to be sat next to the male pax anyway as he was travelling with his wife. It really seems unfair to accuse the ground staff person of getting rules wrong when they clearly have followed the rules.
The crew member unfortunately did get the rules wrong by asking the man to move as he was accompanid by his wife.
A more experienced crew member would not have made this mistake.
This problem is something that BA needs to bear in mind when rushing people through training courses to work on board as temporary crew. There really is so much to know and learn to work on board as cabin crew. As an ex trainer I am fully aware that there is a limit to how much can be learnt and absorbed in the proposed 3 day training.
Every company has idiots like that who both get the rules wrong and seem to glee in imposing their version of the rules on others...suppose its a power trip thing! 18th January 2010 13:27
Apaddyinuk,
Sadly these mistakes do happen from time to time.
These situations are not cut and dry. The check in agent may well have seated the female of the couple next to the UM. People often swap places when they get on the aircraft. I am sure you have done it yourself.
The child was allowed to be sat next to the male pax anyway as he was travelling with his wife. It really seems unfair to accuse the ground staff person of getting rules wrong when they clearly have followed the rules.
The crew member unfortunately did get the rules wrong by asking the man to move as he was accompanid by his wife.
A more experienced crew member would not have made this mistake.
This problem is something that BA needs to bear in mind when rushing people through training courses to work on board as temporary crew. There really is so much to know and learn to work on board as cabin crew. As an ex trainer I am fully aware that there is a limit to how much can be learnt and absorbed in the proposed 3 day training.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Stalybridge
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regards to Falcon #40
I know exactly what you mean.The hardest thing when my youngest was nappy changing in public stores and the look on the face of the women passing when I came out of the changing room and I was asked to leave a Mothercare store because I wanted to change my little one in the "Mother and Baby" room,because I was male I was banned from changing her. At my kids school I am the only single parent male and it took over a year for any other parent to speak to me as an equal instead of behind my back or down their noses.I find it harder on my girls because they get invited to sleep overs,etc.But when I have offered to have a sleep over here this has been rejected I suspect because I am male. It is a minefield after 7 years I am still learning and all the PC crap isn't helping.
I know exactly what you mean.The hardest thing when my youngest was nappy changing in public stores and the look on the face of the women passing when I came out of the changing room and I was asked to leave a Mothercare store because I wanted to change my little one in the "Mother and Baby" room,because I was male I was banned from changing her. At my kids school I am the only single parent male and it took over a year for any other parent to speak to me as an equal instead of behind my back or down their noses.I find it harder on my girls because they get invited to sleep overs,etc.But when I have offered to have a sleep over here this has been rejected I suspect because I am male. It is a minefield after 7 years I am still learning and all the PC crap isn't helping.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Dublin
Posts: 1,806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doorstowomanual said:
I wasnt actually blaming the check in agent at all, it was the crew member who was in the wrong, there was nothing wrong with where the UM was seated by the ground staff.
As for the training, I totally agree. And can you believe that BA now wish to train up ground staff, managers and other office staff for a week or two to work as crew on flights in the event of a strike?
It really seems unfair to accuse the ground staff person of getting rules wrong when they clearly have followed the rules.
As for the training, I totally agree. And can you believe that BA now wish to train up ground staff, managers and other office staff for a week or two to work as crew on flights in the event of a strike?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes I can believe it. As you have pointed out, the ground crew member got it right on this occasion. Seems to me a sensible step to take by BA to have those who get the rules right carrying them out on board the aircraft.
Crikey about 20 years ago I was travelling from London to Cheltenham on a morning train to meet a few people for a "chat" and got on the train at Paddington. A woman appeared with a 7 year old who was travelling on her own to Bristol and put her in the seat across from me and asked would I keep an eye on here until station I was leaving at.
I chatted to the young lady during the trip as far as Bath and think bought her a hot chocolate from the trolly, she had the money but as I was buying a coffee anyway I did it plus a biscuit. I had a pleasant train journey with a very polite young lady
10-12 years ago was in central london and lots of train disruption and a 10 year old on way to her grandparents from Norwich to Bournemouth at station and the trains weren't running. She asking for help very upset and no idea and everybody not helping, asked what was the problem and used my mobile to call her grandparents and let them know trains were kaput, suggested that if they could get to Guildford which was miles away from where I needed to be then would stay with her at station until they arrived. They duly arrived and GC was picked up, a nice call received from her parents a week later saying thanks.
Reality is kindness of a complete stranger is more likely to happen than anything else but PC brigade want to terrorise everyone. A child is more at risk at home than anywhere else.
I chatted to the young lady during the trip as far as Bath and think bought her a hot chocolate from the trolly, she had the money but as I was buying a coffee anyway I did it plus a biscuit. I had a pleasant train journey with a very polite young lady
10-12 years ago was in central london and lots of train disruption and a 10 year old on way to her grandparents from Norwich to Bournemouth at station and the trains weren't running. She asking for help very upset and no idea and everybody not helping, asked what was the problem and used my mobile to call her grandparents and let them know trains were kaput, suggested that if they could get to Guildford which was miles away from where I needed to be then would stay with her at station until they arrived. They duly arrived and GC was picked up, a nice call received from her parents a week later saying thanks.
Reality is kindness of a complete stranger is more likely to happen than anything else but PC brigade want to terrorise everyone. A child is more at risk at home than anywhere else.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a difficult one...I am boarding a 3 hour domestic flight (am CC) and am confronted with 6 UM's. All have seats at the back of the plane and together, except 1 who in seated in 6C. Of course I questioned this then noticed the comment on the boarding pass "do not change seats". I thought this was odd and when I took this little guy to 6C he appeared scared and felt alone. There was a male in the next seat. I asked him if he wanted to sit there and he said no. I asked if he would like to sit at the back with the rest of the kids and thats what he wanted. Without even getting permission from the Purser or Captain I immediatedy took him to the back and moved a single pax into his seat at row 6. I know I should have asked permission to move pax but I felt this was a valid reason. Why on earth would a father book his child in a seat and say "do not change seats" and why the hell was this allowed by ground staff? We as cabin crew are becoming more and more responsible for not only our jobs but for looking out for the welfare of children. Enough is enough, we don't need grief if your child is abused or assaulted under our care. Travel with your kid, not post them around the country like a commodity.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
interpreter
i hope you have sufficient funds to cover the cost of a court case in the event that someone decides to sue you for your comment and i quote "most males who are likely to "interfere" with young males have a homosexual predisposition"
to make such a statement is totally unjust as it has been proven in many court cases that the vast majority of a*use cases are infact carried out by heterosexual males who have no homosexual tendancies whatsoever.
your statement was just as out of order as the actions of the cc (imho)
i hope you have sufficient funds to cover the cost of a court case in the event that someone decides to sue you for your comment and i quote "most males who are likely to "interfere" with young males have a homosexual predisposition"
to make such a statement is totally unjust as it has been proven in many court cases that the vast majority of a*use cases are infact carried out by heterosexual males who have no homosexual tendancies whatsoever.
your statement was just as out of order as the actions of the cc (imho)
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 419 Likes
on
221 Posts
When he was 14 my son travelled as an UM a number of times.
"Where were the parents?", someone asked, tut, tut.
Over 6,000 miles away! After his first flight, where he was allocated a member of staff to look after him, he specifically asked not to be "nannied" over again as he found it very embarrassing. He was perfectly capable of getting himself from boarding school in Lincolnshire to LHR and onto the flight. We spoke to the airline in this respect and subsequently wrote a letter waiver to them, which was accepted.
He came to no harm. But by that age he was nearly 6ft tall and was an athletically built rugby player; he towered over the CC and many other pax.
"Where were the parents?", someone asked, tut, tut.
Over 6,000 miles away! After his first flight, where he was allocated a member of staff to look after him, he specifically asked not to be "nannied" over again as he found it very embarrassing. He was perfectly capable of getting himself from boarding school in Lincolnshire to LHR and onto the flight. We spoke to the airline in this respect and subsequently wrote a letter waiver to them, which was accepted.
He came to no harm. But by that age he was nearly 6ft tall and was an athletically built rugby player; he towered over the CC and many other pax.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The "child" involved in this incident was not a child in the eyes of BA, but a 12 year old adult. As such there was no requirement to sit them next to any specific person. Any person over 12 years old is able to travel without being registered as a UM.
I think the crew should have handled this in a better way.
I think the crew should have handled this in a better way.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would obviously would now have to pay to ensure my 7 & 5 year daughters sit next to a parent. I would rather fly with somebody else.
Right Way Up, In BA (and in many others), children under 12 will ALWAYS be seated next to an accompanying adult. Even if the group or family is split, no children under 12 who are travelling with parents/guardians are to be seated on their own. Even gold card holders would be moved, and if they don't like it, they can fill in a complain form, but, as I said, your daughters HAVE to be seated next to, at least, one of the adults they are travelling with.
In the terms and conditions of travel of most airlines, you will find a clause that says that airlines can move passengers (even with pre allocated seats, or even with prepaid seats, obviously refunded) whenever they need it for operational reasons, like children under 12 separated from their families, or trim restrictions, for example.
Right Way Up, In BA (and in many others), children under 12 will ALWAYS be seated next to an accompanying adult. Even if the group or family is split, no children under 12 who are travelling with parents/guardians are to be seated on their own. Even gold card holders would be moved, and if they don't like it, they can fill in a complain form, but, as I said, your daughters HAVE to be seated next to, at least, one of the adults they are travelling with.
In the terms and conditions of travel of most airlines, you will find a clause that says that airlines can move passengers (even with pre allocated seats, or even with prepaid seats, obviously refunded) whenever they need it for operational reasons, like children under 12 separated from their families, or trim restrictions, for example.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Geneva
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA compensates man 'humiliated' over child seat policy
Well, the fellow had his day in court and won... nice touch that he donated the compensation to a child protection charity:
BBC News - BA compensates man 'humiliated' over child seat policy
Now I wonder if BA will actually change the policy.
BBC News - BA compensates man 'humiliated' over child seat policy
Now I wonder if BA will actually change the policy.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: About 3000 below Midhurst SID I reckon
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a flight 5 years ago, I spotted an UM sitting next to male passenger. I asked a colleague (European language being her mother tongue) if she had seen him board with anyone. She went off and in a very strong accent said to him - "I must move you in case you interfere with this boy". Once the poor guy had moved and she and the boy were out of earshot I then follwed up her rather diplomatic approach, explaining to him that it is a rule to protect him. For example, if the child fell asleep and the man needed to jump over him to get to the lav. Or, if he dropped his book on the floor and leant down to get it, accidentally brushing the boys knee or hand, the boy could tell a guardian and it could be misconstrued. So we try to remove all risk of any false accusation or misunderstanding. (Or words to that effect).
I have had to move four gentlemen in the past, (its not always an allocation issue, they have mostly just swapped seats to allow couples to be seated together and landed themselves next to the UM).
I always try to phrase it so it seems we are looking after their best interests, all have been very co-operative and understanding so far.
It is something not taught in training, how to approach the situation.
The other delicate issue is an obese passenger in an exit row (not allowed).
Best tip from me - they are probably obese if they request an extension seatbelt. I politely say that extension seatbelts (same for babies) are not allowed at emergency exits (maybe they could become a trip hazard in an evacuation?). Sometimes the seats are more comfortable further back anyway because the armrests are movable between the seats whereas the exit armrests as as a rule aren't always.
Six
I have had to move four gentlemen in the past, (its not always an allocation issue, they have mostly just swapped seats to allow couples to be seated together and landed themselves next to the UM).
I always try to phrase it so it seems we are looking after their best interests, all have been very co-operative and understanding so far.
It is something not taught in training, how to approach the situation.
The other delicate issue is an obese passenger in an exit row (not allowed).
Best tip from me - they are probably obese if they request an extension seatbelt. I politely say that extension seatbelts (same for babies) are not allowed at emergency exits (maybe they could become a trip hazard in an evacuation?). Sometimes the seats are more comfortable further back anyway because the armrests are movable between the seats whereas the exit armrests as as a rule aren't always.
Six
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Age: 50
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the point the court made, was that the policy was discriminatory and unfair, as well as illegal (as proved by the award of damages). It matters not which crew member made the mistake, the general policy needs examining and amending.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE England
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the point the court made, was that the policy was discriminatory and unfair, as well as illegal (as proved by the award of damages). It matters not which crew member made the mistake, the general policy needs examining and amending.
Just to clear up something from earlier posts. A clear enhanced CRB check does not mean a person is no risk. It means they have not come to police attention. There is nothing wrong with having some suspicion. Thats what risk assessment is about. The question to ask is, if it were my child what would I want to happen?
I think the point the court made, was that the policy was discriminatory and unfair,
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Europe
Age: 49
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being male I do not like the policy itself (although I do not like yelling kids near to me either).
This world is going worse each day. When I was a kid and barely learned to walk we were playing naked outside in hot summers. It was more comfortable for us and easier for our parents - no diaper for us. On various occasions our relatives took pictures when we were running into the water or piling up some sand on the beach. Do it today they may arrest you and call you perverts. Its stupid. Who feels sexual stimulated buy a naked minor? A little percentage of mankind forces governments to bring in
rules.
This world is going worse each day. When I was a kid and barely learned to walk we were playing naked outside in hot summers. It was more comfortable for us and easier for our parents - no diaper for us. On various occasions our relatives took pictures when we were running into the water or piling up some sand on the beach. Do it today they may arrest you and call you perverts. Its stupid. Who feels sexual stimulated buy a naked minor? A little percentage of mankind forces governments to bring in
rules.
