'Drunk' cabin crew claim cancels flight - Manchester to New York
 

If you want to disrupt a flight you don't any longer ring to claim there's a bomb on board, just ring up and say the crew is drunk. :}

If you want to disrupt an airline, annonimously claim everybody/anybody wearing their uniform is drunk.

Where will it all stop.

camlobe

"Officers contacted the airline to make them aware so they could carry out their own inquiries."

Which presumably they did? or are crews automaticallly pulled?

Drunk crew
 

This is now pathetic, be it either tech or cabin crew, there are too many non
industry folks who hate the :mad: our industry and will do very silly and spiteful
thinks to satisfy their jealousy. I've had to work with this at non UK stns, so am not surprised, but it's still ****e went it happens.

Rant over

I have to agree with merlin.....this is absol;utely pathetic, truly disgusting. How on earth a cabin crew can be partying just 6 hours before take off is outrageous. BA should sack them all on the spot and let be a lesson to the other trolley dollys.

chookattack. Is that your tongue I see pressed into your cheek? :O

Wonder if a pax was running late and looked at delaying the flight a little?

Or maybe 'tree huggers' / Green's... a lovers tiff / etc... making scurrilous accusations ?! :E

Funny, when its pilots have these accusations thrown at them by the media you guys on here say " innocent until proven guilty"

when its cabin crew... well its just "sack em"

How do you know it was a pilot (s) that wants to "sack" cabincrew?
And if it was, maybe it was meant "tongue in cheek".

Correct. you don't

here here true tui

Will the passengers get some cash for the two canx flights?

It all just seems incredible to me. Just what is happening? The temptation nowadays for many young airline staff members must be strong to break particular carrier airline rules. We hear of pilots, we here of cabin crew - what next ATC?

Ironically, and lets not forget this, pax are reminded constantly, drunk or not drunk, of attitude behavioural "norms" expected while passing through airports and whilst in the air. I for one would be in trouble for being intoxicated on my job - and what many "professionals" in the aviation business seem to forget, or deliberately forget that we use your services - not just for the fun of it - but - shock horror - we rely on "a service industry" and that is what you are , to get us to where we want or have to be to carry out our own areas of specialism.

If I ever thought I was being delayed, losing business, or upsetting clients because the staff operating my particular chosen mode of transport were under the influence I would be livid.

Perhaps there is more publicity these days on such "occassions" - thankfully they appear minimistic - however nevertheless it worries me. Pax are always "in the hands" of air crew- for safety and to deliver what we have effectively payed for - to get us where we want to be, hopefully on time with at least some gratification as to why we chose YOU to deliver us. Recent times have made so many changes to how pax are supposed to behave on board - guess it would be nice if the "service industries" - albeit the minority - followed suite and followed their own employers rules.


Nivsy

> Wonder if a pax was running late and looked at delaying the flight a little?

Six hours before departure? ..and he'd have to know which hotel the crew were in.

Does anybody else hate the BBC's dislike of anything to do with aviation? For example, why splash over the front page of the website EVERY alleged indiscretion in the industry, without ever reporting the counter claims when the rumours prove to be false? :ugh::ugh: I don't know whether this one is true or not, but you can bet your bottom dollar that if it does turn out to be another false accusation the story will disappear quietly onto the cutting room floor...

Interesting that the reaction was made so public and presumably predictable that it will no doubt encourage thousands of copycats without retribution.
Apparently there is no sane way of dealing with annoymous reports of this kind short of placing them in a public (news) setting of the ignorant deciding both the fate of the crew and the economic outcome for all concerned.
We truly sow what we deserve to reap.
and we thought Danny had it difficult trying to vet the posers from the truth sayers among us. How does BA expect to do that over a phone? or did they get an admission from the crew that they are not telling us about?

I'm still trying to find out what "minimistic" means, Nivsy :confused:

As a humble pax, I am amazed that they cancelled over 5 hours before flight was due, and with apparently no confirmation of their drunkenness. I presumes as the crew were told to remain at the hotel there was no opportunity for managers to check them. If the cabin crew were not available, surely it would have been preferable to get another crew in rather than move the passengers.

Excuse me. The police say that no criminal offence has been committed.

I understand that in this country we are no longer innocent until proven guilty, and that the press and media pass judgement with the click of a mouse. I also understand that the chattering classes, who believe we live the life of Riley, will appoint themselves as public servants by shopping anyone of us as the opportunity presents, on the basis that even if we're innocent then we probably have been guilty in the past or future.

So it's about time that we started fighting back. If you falsely accuse someone of rape, you go to jail. If you call someone a poof, you go to jail. If you incite hatred you go to jail.

So it's about time that crew enjoyed some of that top cover.

This country. I tell you.:ugh: