Bad day at the office!
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read my lips (and my previous posts): there WAS NO outrageous passenger.
Really? The NY newspapers that are based on NYC police reports must have it all wrong, I suppose. Anyway, what seems clear at this point is that the crew member pulled a dangerous stunt that was totally uncalled for under the circumstances.
This is not a stunt that I want to become common place in the future, so the man should be severly punished and, hopefully, this will provide a sufficent incentive for others not to repeat this.
Really? The NY newspapers that are based on NYC police reports must have it all wrong, I suppose. Anyway, what seems clear at this point is that the crew member pulled a dangerous stunt that was totally uncalled for under the circumstances.
This is not a stunt that I want to become common place in the future, so the man should be severly punished and, hopefully, this will provide a sufficent incentive for others not to repeat this.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The NY newspapers that are based on NYC police reports must have it all wrong, I suppose."
Yes, they indeed are, since there were no NYPD witnesses to what happened.
I don't know what NY papers you read, but I subscribe to both the Times and the Wall Street Journal, and the Journal had a particularly extensive piece this morning based on interviews with passengers--actual witnesses. I won't bother to re-report what it said, but virtually none of the original "story" turns out to be true.
I get my news not from TV or, god help me, the Internet but from real, made-from-paper, relatively respected newspapers.
Yes, they indeed are, since there were no NYPD witnesses to what happened.
I don't know what NY papers you read, but I subscribe to both the Times and the Wall Street Journal, and the Journal had a particularly extensive piece this morning based on interviews with passengers--actual witnesses. I won't bother to re-report what it said, but virtually none of the original "story" turns out to be true.
I get my news not from TV or, god help me, the Internet but from real, made-from-paper, relatively respected newspapers.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I know it makes a good story on first glance..poor, abused Cabin Crew member, beaten to the point he just couldn't take it anymore...
Unfortunately facts are proving this guy may have been just an abusive fool and his initial excuse for his outrageous behavior may be false.
While I will agree that we all, regardless of our occupations, have at times thought "It would be amazing if I did this rather than listen to this "*!$" no Cabin Crew member should be expressing anything more than just "ewwww".
Mr. Slater may now, after sobering up, wish to have his wings back, but God help any passengers that were subjected to flying with him.
Time for a career change.
Unfortunately facts are proving this guy may have been just an abusive fool and his initial excuse for his outrageous behavior may be false.
In fact, Slaters legal aide attorney, Howard Turman, told the media on Thursday Slater actually suffered the injury in Pittsburgh, before Flight 1052 even took off.
Mr. Slater may now, after sobering up, wish to have his wings back, but God help any passengers that were subjected to flying with him.
Time for a career change.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: St Johns, Newfoundland,Canada
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank goodnes Im rotary wing, west lakes, that reconstruction is too funny, love the bit where he pops the beer on the ramp.... rest of my crew still rolling on floor LOL
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe the problem is that some passengers think that by purchasing an airline ticket they are purchasing the right to do as they please. Little by little, in aviation customer service, your patience runs out. In my case, I limit myself to a few sarcastic comebacks, or simply enforcing my authority to remember the passenger that they are breaching safety or security rules. If my personal circumstances and psychological state were altered by important personal life concerns, like this guy seemed to have, I donīt know if I could react in another, more drastic way. The problem is, employers donīt recognise personal life. For most of them, you only exist while at work, and work is all you do as far as they're concerned. If I need time off for anything related to personal problems, it'll cost me money, for sure.
But donīt try to condone all behaviour by passengers, please. You wouldnīt loose sight of your suitcase on the street, or in a shopping centre, or at the hospital. That would be a very stupid thing to do, as there are pickpockets and thieves everywhere. But come to an airport, and as soon as they hear the announcement to not leave luggage unatended, many passengers feel the anavoidable impulse of leaving their cases on the floor and start wandering around talking on their mobile phones, as if it was to show off that they do as they please. If you remind them that they have to keep their luggage with them at all times, they ignore you or sometimes even abuse you. Once I had half terminal 2 at LHR evacuated for that reason, and the passenger made a complaint about me because he had told me he was only going to the shop, and why didnīt I trust him? Did he look like a terrorist? Fortunately, the police didnīt let him fly and took him away for questioning (apparently, for running away and leaving a 'suspicious package unnatended'). Of course he wasn't a terrorist (he would have been an extremely incompetent terrorist!), but security rules are there for all of us to comply with. This gentleman wouldnīt do the same thing anywhere else, but in an airport, of all places, where even 4 year old kids know that you don't have to leave your bags unnatended, this man decided to do it. He could have simply carried the wheelie bag with him to the shop when I repeatedly told him, citing the rules, but he decided to make clear that he was special, he was a passenger, and he could do whatever he wanted.
My company, though, kind of told me off slightly, as check-in had been interrupted and some flights were delayed. Something like some people have said about Slater's actions, "it was a bit over the top, calling security, wasn't it?" "You should have waited for a few minutes to see if he really came back from the shop", etc. This is what some, and I repeat, SOME, passengers take advantage of. The companies constant disregard for safety in the name of avoiding bad publicity or delaying a flight. And it has to stop.
But donīt try to condone all behaviour by passengers, please. You wouldnīt loose sight of your suitcase on the street, or in a shopping centre, or at the hospital. That would be a very stupid thing to do, as there are pickpockets and thieves everywhere. But come to an airport, and as soon as they hear the announcement to not leave luggage unatended, many passengers feel the anavoidable impulse of leaving their cases on the floor and start wandering around talking on their mobile phones, as if it was to show off that they do as they please. If you remind them that they have to keep their luggage with them at all times, they ignore you or sometimes even abuse you. Once I had half terminal 2 at LHR evacuated for that reason, and the passenger made a complaint about me because he had told me he was only going to the shop, and why didnīt I trust him? Did he look like a terrorist? Fortunately, the police didnīt let him fly and took him away for questioning (apparently, for running away and leaving a 'suspicious package unnatended'). Of course he wasn't a terrorist (he would have been an extremely incompetent terrorist!), but security rules are there for all of us to comply with. This gentleman wouldnīt do the same thing anywhere else, but in an airport, of all places, where even 4 year old kids know that you don't have to leave your bags unnatended, this man decided to do it. He could have simply carried the wheelie bag with him to the shop when I repeatedly told him, citing the rules, but he decided to make clear that he was special, he was a passenger, and he could do whatever he wanted.
My company, though, kind of told me off slightly, as check-in had been interrupted and some flights were delayed. Something like some people have said about Slater's actions, "it was a bit over the top, calling security, wasn't it?" "You should have waited for a few minutes to see if he really came back from the shop", etc. This is what some, and I repeat, SOME, passengers take advantage of. The companies constant disregard for safety in the name of avoiding bad publicity or delaying a flight. And it has to stop.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 32°55'22"S 151°46'56"E
Age: 39
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
"Vld1977" I understand that you followed protocol, and took the most security conscious method. However, what did you achieve from the way you handled that situation? Could you have handled it better, and educated the passenger at the same time?
Unfortunately for many of the infrequent passengers, travelling is a highly emotional and stressful time. They are exposed to an environment that they are not familiar with, they hand over control to someone else, they are following what may seem like an endless list of rules, and I can see how it can become very easily confusing and disorientating.
Emotions may be high because people are leaving family behind, or heading to a funeral etc, Overseas workers may be heading to a new job in unfamiliar surroundings where they could be working away for years at a time. They may all have something preoccupying their minds. You can have people who don't speak English and may have been in a shanty town somewhere remote a few days earlier and may be just overwhelmed.
It's very easy to lose sight of the fact that whilst you have many frequent travellers who bring their own problems, you have a lot of people who travelling is a very stressful means to and ends, and thus it becomes easy to understand that they do strange things.
Some flights, in some countries, it seems the norm for everyone to get up and open the overhead lockers whilst taxying to the stand, and the CC don't take any action. If English is not their first language (which can be expected for people travelling/transitting), then they may be not understand what is wrong with the situation.
Unfortunately for many of the infrequent passengers, travelling is a highly emotional and stressful time. They are exposed to an environment that they are not familiar with, they hand over control to someone else, they are following what may seem like an endless list of rules, and I can see how it can become very easily confusing and disorientating.
Emotions may be high because people are leaving family behind, or heading to a funeral etc, Overseas workers may be heading to a new job in unfamiliar surroundings where they could be working away for years at a time. They may all have something preoccupying their minds. You can have people who don't speak English and may have been in a shanty town somewhere remote a few days earlier and may be just overwhelmed.
It's very easy to lose sight of the fact that whilst you have many frequent travellers who bring their own problems, you have a lot of people who travelling is a very stressful means to and ends, and thus it becomes easy to understand that they do strange things.
Some flights, in some countries, it seems the norm for everyone to get up and open the overhead lockers whilst taxying to the stand, and the CC don't take any action. If English is not their first language (which can be expected for people travelling/transitting), then they may be not understand what is wrong with the situation.
CCTV vid of slide blowing: I'll leave further comment to our jokers.
BBC News - CCTV 'shows air steward's emergency exit'
BBC News - CCTV 'shows air steward's emergency exit'
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CCTV vid of slide blowing: I'll leave further comment to our jokers.
BBC News - CCTV 'shows air steward's emergency exit'
BBC News - CCTV 'shows air steward's emergency exit'
Erm, hang on a minute here. If this is the CCTV of the slide blowing, why did the guy blow the slide instead of walking up the airbridge? Wasn't the airbridge drama enough?
The catering truck is attached, as is other ground equipment, so the chocks must be on (unless you're an AA777 in DFW
). This whole thing is getting more and more odd.
Head already cut?
Ref post #80, if the FA head was cut before the flight started, maybe he was for that reason unfit to fly. An apparently minor head injury could be more serious than it looks.
why did the guy blow the slide instead of walking up the airbridge? Wasn't the airbridge drama enough?
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
L' Aviateur,
I understand your point of view and I sympathise with what you are saying, but after a number of years in the business, believe me, I can tell a disoriented passenger from a frequent traveller bloke who just wants to make a point. The main difference is that disoriented and unfamiliar passengers usually are confused about the rules and comply with them as soon as you tell them politely, no problems at all.
I can see that, obviously, the pax is just a childishly proud person who just wants to make clear that he wants me to consider him special and treat him as if he was a 'regular' celebrity. But, what if he was a DFT secret shopper testing my response to a breach of security regulations? I would have had my ID and my right to work at the airport removed. Rules are there to comply with them, even when we think of them as disproportionate. To be honest, I was concerned that it could have been a trial, as when the DFT tries to smuggle weapons through security, to check the quality of security procedures, but, nevertheless, a passenger who, despite reminding him of the regulations, INSISTS in leaving his bag unnatended at all costs (in an airport, of all places, a security sensitive building and also one infested by thiefs), is what, in the security training courses, is described as evident suspicious behaviour, and as such, even if I'm sure he is just being pedantic, my duty is to inform security.
It's like being between a rock and a hard place. Your company may have a go at you for delaying flights, but you could wind up in a much more serious situation for ignoring it, just because another know-all frequent traveller had to make a point and make clear that he is above the law. He carried the damned thing from home, and he is all inconvenienced by having to drag it twenty yards to the shop?
I understand your point of view and I sympathise with what you are saying, but after a number of years in the business, believe me, I can tell a disoriented passenger from a frequent traveller bloke who just wants to make a point. The main difference is that disoriented and unfamiliar passengers usually are confused about the rules and comply with them as soon as you tell them politely, no problems at all.
I can see that, obviously, the pax is just a childishly proud person who just wants to make clear that he wants me to consider him special and treat him as if he was a 'regular' celebrity. But, what if he was a DFT secret shopper testing my response to a breach of security regulations? I would have had my ID and my right to work at the airport removed. Rules are there to comply with them, even when we think of them as disproportionate. To be honest, I was concerned that it could have been a trial, as when the DFT tries to smuggle weapons through security, to check the quality of security procedures, but, nevertheless, a passenger who, despite reminding him of the regulations, INSISTS in leaving his bag unnatended at all costs (in an airport, of all places, a security sensitive building and also one infested by thiefs), is what, in the security training courses, is described as evident suspicious behaviour, and as such, even if I'm sure he is just being pedantic, my duty is to inform security.
It's like being between a rock and a hard place. Your company may have a go at you for delaying flights, but you could wind up in a much more serious situation for ignoring it, just because another know-all frequent traveller had to make a point and make clear that he is above the law. He carried the damned thing from home, and he is all inconvenienced by having to drag it twenty yards to the shop?
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Out there, somewhere
Age: 60
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VLD1977
Although I am not challenging your account, the vast majority of frequent travellers don't make a habit of doing things like you describe, anymore than cabin crew tend to depart down the slide with a beer. It is simply too risky to get on the wrong side of the authorities.
L'Aviateur has made some good points in his/her post and asked the pertinent question, could you have handled the situation better?
Sometimes it is not what we say, but how we say it, that makes all the difference and there is a well known saying that "the best tool for dealing with difficult people is a mirror", since inter personal chemistry is a two way street.
It is always wise to remember in a service industry, those of us who provide a service are there because of the customers, who we may not always like, but whose money funds the system that pays us.
Like you, I am in a customer facing role and sometimes get very annoyed at the bs I have to deal with, but managing it with a smile is part of the job.
Although I am not challenging your account, the vast majority of frequent travellers don't make a habit of doing things like you describe, anymore than cabin crew tend to depart down the slide with a beer. It is simply too risky to get on the wrong side of the authorities.
L'Aviateur has made some good points in his/her post and asked the pertinent question, could you have handled the situation better?
Sometimes it is not what we say, but how we say it, that makes all the difference and there is a well known saying that "the best tool for dealing with difficult people is a mirror", since inter personal chemistry is a two way street.
It is always wise to remember in a service industry, those of us who provide a service are there because of the customers, who we may not always like, but whose money funds the system that pays us.
Like you, I am in a customer facing role and sometimes get very annoyed at the bs I have to deal with, but managing it with a smile is part of the job.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Suffolk
Age: 80
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an observer to this thread may I add a point or two. I have every sympathy with cabin staff who are having to deal with such people for the duration of a flight. Equally, travellers who have no intention of causing any form of disruption also become frustrated with some of the antics. I do feel that much of such behaviour stems from alcohol. Returning from Mexico a boozed up couple had no scruples about their attempted sexual misconduct no matter that there where children and disgusted passengers adjacent to their seat. On another flight a young man sporting headphones and engrossed in the seemingly funny movie (Simpsons) was laughing so loudly he drowned out the noise of the engines...and....kept catching an elderly couple with arms and feet. The holiday charter gets quite a share,(or did when I last flew) popping to the WC,within a minute banging on the door with raised voices. Outside were two mid life painted females, sloshed and being quite rude to all and sundry. The list is endless. All of this makes for quite a tense and fractious journey for all concerned. This particular cabin staff had taken enough. From the passengers point of view...I no longer fly unless absolutely necessary. Was there a time when flying was a joy for all...YES....flying with British Eagle in a turboprop Brittania with seat and leg room. Due to engine problems we eventually landed at Singapore thirty six hours later!
I had to spend my two days of during the next month in court as the pax sued us for whiplash and God knows what else, the judge was not impressed and gave him a large fine for deliberatley ignoreing a lawfull order.
Your tone considered, I appreciate your providing the Aircraft Commander's perspective.
Beyond that, I'll comment as I like, given the crap sandwich air travel has become in the past ten years. It sometimes takes an observation or a comment to evoke the response that leads to enlightenment or understanding.
@ Juud: thanks as well.
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 16th Aug 2010 at 13:40.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lotpax, no, I donīt believe I couldn't have handled it better. Most of the time, you only need to politely remind pax of the regulations, and they comply immediately. I politely requested that this gentleman kept his luggage with him. He completely ignored me, and I followed him and asked him again, politely, to go back to his luggage, as, first, it could get stolen (an empty coffee shop table is not going to stop a thief), and second, that it was my duty to report unnatended luggage to security (which it is, and it gets drilled into our brains every day, especially back then, three weeks after a bunch of unnatended bags blew up three commuter trains in Madrid). The gentleman smiled and kept saying it was only for a minute, and off he went. I donīt mind that the shop is just across the hall. As I said, it could have been someone official trying to check my response.
I am extremely professional dealing with passengers, but everything has a limit. We once had a passenger disrupting the entire boarding because his seat had been changed. We told him that there had been an aircraft change and the config was different, so that seat didnīt exist, basically. It didn't matter to the passenger, even when we told him he would be compensated. He started to be extremely rude, and when all passengers were on board and the aircraft ready to go, he was still shouting abuse and demanding his original seat. What whould we have done? Call in the engineers and build a nice extra seat for him? After repeatedly been told that that wasn't possible and asking him to please get in the aircraft, as he was delaying the flight, he answered that he wouldn't go on board unless he had that seat, and that he was not getting inside because he had two bags checked in and he knew we would wait in order to avoid a delay while getting his bags off. After a few minutes, the dispatcher tore his boarding pass in two, as the captain had have enough and instructed her to close the door and start offloading the bags, to which the passenger reacted by accepting his new seat and the compensation, quite rudely. The captain didn't accept him for the flight and left him behind, as he had already caused a delay, took the bags off and the aircraft departed 20 minutes later.
Now, what is the correct way of dealing with abusive passengers with totally unreasonable demands, even if itīs not their fault? What should this captain have done, considering the passenger would only accept a solution that was totally impossible, didn't listen to explanations, prevented the gate team leader from organising the boarding and thus slowing it considerably, and was outright abusive? Keep talking to him for 20 more minutes? Cancel the flight and request an aircraft change?
Some times you cannot be as proffessional as you would like, and all of this was done with courtesy and understanding. The passenger was looking for an upgrade, that was obvious as well, but sorry, the aircraft is full and we are not going to downgrade someone who has paid for a ticket in business just because you cannot have an aisle in the bulkhead, especially when you didn't even pay for it.
I am extremely professional dealing with passengers, but everything has a limit. We once had a passenger disrupting the entire boarding because his seat had been changed. We told him that there had been an aircraft change and the config was different, so that seat didnīt exist, basically. It didn't matter to the passenger, even when we told him he would be compensated. He started to be extremely rude, and when all passengers were on board and the aircraft ready to go, he was still shouting abuse and demanding his original seat. What whould we have done? Call in the engineers and build a nice extra seat for him? After repeatedly been told that that wasn't possible and asking him to please get in the aircraft, as he was delaying the flight, he answered that he wouldn't go on board unless he had that seat, and that he was not getting inside because he had two bags checked in and he knew we would wait in order to avoid a delay while getting his bags off. After a few minutes, the dispatcher tore his boarding pass in two, as the captain had have enough and instructed her to close the door and start offloading the bags, to which the passenger reacted by accepting his new seat and the compensation, quite rudely. The captain didn't accept him for the flight and left him behind, as he had already caused a delay, took the bags off and the aircraft departed 20 minutes later.
Now, what is the correct way of dealing with abusive passengers with totally unreasonable demands, even if itīs not their fault? What should this captain have done, considering the passenger would only accept a solution that was totally impossible, didn't listen to explanations, prevented the gate team leader from organising the boarding and thus slowing it considerably, and was outright abusive? Keep talking to him for 20 more minutes? Cancel the flight and request an aircraft change?
Some times you cannot be as proffessional as you would like, and all of this was done with courtesy and understanding. The passenger was looking for an upgrade, that was obvious as well, but sorry, the aircraft is full and we are not going to downgrade someone who has paid for a ticket in business just because you cannot have an aisle in the bulkhead, especially when you didn't even pay for it.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do I detect a bit of thread wandering here?
Isn't the issue really that Mr. SkyBlue is a putz, and though he took a rather dramatic circus ride in his exit he's still rather a huge failure. Nothing for either Cabin Crew or passengers to be celebrating.
All of the side issues being presented have nothing to do with this Cabin Crew failure's actions. Good on him for not only ruining his future but diminishing the view of Cabin Crew in their passengers' view.
Heaven's. Bad enough we have to look at fellow passengers to see if they are trying to light their shoes on fire, now we are supposed to worry about Cabin Crew having snit fits at 30,000. Yeah, keep cheering this drama queen while you insist on being called professionals.
As SLF this is just scary.
Isn't the issue really that Mr. SkyBlue is a putz, and though he took a rather dramatic circus ride in his exit he's still rather a huge failure. Nothing for either Cabin Crew or passengers to be celebrating.
All of the side issues being presented have nothing to do with this Cabin Crew failure's actions. Good on him for not only ruining his future but diminishing the view of Cabin Crew in their passengers' view.
Heaven's. Bad enough we have to look at fellow passengers to see if they are trying to light their shoes on fire, now we are supposed to worry about Cabin Crew having snit fits at 30,000. Yeah, keep cheering this drama queen while you insist on being called professionals.
As SLF this is just scary.
