BMI captain has passenger arrested for peeing

[GordyOZ]

I found a thread on FlyerTalk about a passenger having to pee really bad and after refusing the FA's directive to remain seated the captain returned to the gate and had the passenger arrested. The full details aren't known but it does seem to me to be way overreacting if the story is a simple as was reported. Wonder what the professionals of this forum think about such situations.

Thread reference:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=803875

[BMEDFO]

From what you hav typed it seems like a over reaction to me. Most Pilots would just stop the a/c and let the guy go quickly as assuming he did and returned to his seat with belt fastened ASAP. 1) its quicker than going back to stand and delaying all the other pax and 2) saves a wet seat (they do happen).

[JEM60]

Jem60

Some years ago, coming out of CDG, Air France Airbus, taxiing out, had had too much coffee in the lounge. Absolutely desperate, got out of my seat, smiled at the FA, pointed at the loo, she nodded her head, I went, returned eventually to my seat, not a word said. Recently,not going to mention the airline, Mombasa to Nairobi, my wife feeling distinctly ill, was in the loo when the aircraft touched down, although I did explain the situation to the very obliging FA.

[malc4d]

Is it just me........or is everyone involved in aviation or airports trying their hardest to pi*s off the paying customer...........

[Contacttower]

While I think the FA could have let the guy go to the loo I can understand the captain's reaction to one of passengers apparently disobeying an order to sit down.

[isi3000]

Sounds like they would have preffered the wet seat

[Capot]

is everyone involved in aviation or airports trying their hardest to pi*s off the paying customer.........

It's a fair question; but the answer is a bit more complex.

The problem is increasingly poor training, in several respects, and a growing alientation between airport and airline staff and the paying passengers, all stemming for a growing contempt for the customer that starts at the top in airports and airlines.

Most junior passenger contact staff, ground services and aircrew, are not only not empowered to make the often very small adjustment needed to give a passenger what's needed to resolve a problem, they are not even aware of what could be done. Moreover they have been imbued with a culture of "mustn't let them get away with it".

Then there are managers who lay down absurd and silly rules that customers must obey, often totally unnecessary, and threaten staff with dismissal if they "let them get away with" ignoring them. As often as not these rules are all to do with the airline's convenience and not the customer's, and the customer can spot this a mile off.

Most passenger have been using airlines for a lot longer than many junior staff have been working for them. And yet staff seem to be trained to think that they have some unique knowledge, and must treat passengers as though they are mentally sub-normal.

Now you have a new phenonenum of flight deck crew becoming unnecessarily macho, at the drop of a hat, and throwing people off their aircraft; occasionally one suspects that they do this in the mistaken belief that they must "back up the cabin staff" regardless of whether the cabin staff have behaved sensibly. The case this thread is about illustrates that.

I have heard the cabin safety announcement about twice every 2 weeks, on average, since 1968, and I don't actually need to hear it again. It's not my job to look interested "as an example to others". So I don't need some teenager telling me it's "for my own good", in the tones of a primary school teaching assistant. I've been in one or two evacuations, not just the crew training one.

I think that the Airline series on TV has a lot to answer for; week after week it sent a message that passengers were people to be treated like idiots, especially by handling staff, and herded from A to B to suit the convenience of staff.

Another culprit is the "you get what you pay for" culture, which a lot of passengers actually believe means they should have no expectations, and which many staff interpret as "I don't have to treat you as a customer; I'll treat you like the cheapskate you are". You only have to read some of the threads in the CC forums to get a taste of that attitude.

It all boils down to pervasive contempt for the customer that is relatively new to the air transport industry. I would date its onset as about 1995.

The blame sits, as always, at the top. Junior staff are what their companies have made them. When BAA behaves with magnificent contempt by subjecting passengers to the hell they have to endure, because BAA thinks that they are stupid enough to be encouraged to buy over-priced tat and blocks all its terminals with shops selling that, how can anyone blame its staff for spicking up on the message "These People are Mugs", and behaving accordingly.

For God's sake, the door into the terminal from Customs in T1 at LHR is covered by a huge sign; "ARRIVALS SHOPPING", it says! And sure enough, when you get through it you have to negotiate shops selling stuff that you can buy at half the price in the High Street.

Sorry, got diverted there. No, people are not trying to p**s off the paying customer, they don't even know they're doing it. Rant over.

[Avitor]

Compromise! Has that word disappeared and the word intransigence taken its place.
A pax can hardly tote a receptacle and in cases of dire need use that, he is in too close proximity to other pax and liable to an indecency charge.
cc are not, I suppose, in a position to waive standing orders, the alternative? Wet pants and a wet seat. The reality arrest. This cannot be right. This is a rule catch 22 situation.
In my opinion it needs discussing at training and management level.

[malc4d]

CAPOT you have said it all.................
I've also been flying much longer than l would like to admit to. It used to be fun. Now its all ' rush rush ....wait wait......rush wait.. get pissed off at some stupid rule.......wait wait.'
And dont get me going on that airline show........How in hell Easyjet allow the show to air with proof of how badly their spotty faced babies handle and talk to fare paying passengers. ......... Most of the problems they cause the passengers could be resolved in 2 seconds flat with a little bit of a change in their 'tude'.......
Maybe its a generation thing........
God l could go on....

Happy snowy Easter to you all....

[GunkyTom]

Sorry for the thread drift but I must comment on the statement below

Capot

I have heard the cabin safety announcement about twice every 2 weeks, on average, since 1968, and I don't actually need to hear it again. It's not my job to look interested "as an example to others". So I don't need some teenager telling me it's "for my own good", in the tones of a primary school teaching assistant. I've been in one or two evacuations, not just the crew training one.

You are not the only person on board. It is a legal requirement to make the announcement and can be reassuring to nervous pax and less seasoned travellers.If you have been told it's 'for my own good' then there must have been a reason. The CC wouldn't normally comment on someone politely sitting there whilst they go through the no doubt repetetive but necessary narrative. Maybe if you briefed them on your vast experience, they would allow you to decide what is necessary when briefing an aircraft full of different nationalities,ages and experience I too, am well travelled and have been in aviation for 30+ years. I wouldn't dream of being so rude or disrespectful as to assume I know better. Pilots, CC et al sit there and listen politely when travelling. What makes you bigger than that. I don't normally read tis forum but it has opened my eyes a little to what CC have to deal with on a daily basis. Rant Off

[Contacttower]

Airline staff could do a lot more in the 'customer service' department but Capot your post does look rather 'one sided'; what strikes me from watching programmes like Airline and travelling for real is not how poorly trained the staff are (far from it most seem quite good actually) but for whatever reason how rude and difficult passengers have become.

A lot of the people that appeared on Airline (obviously the cameras tend to focus on them) seem to behave as if losing a piece of luggage is the end of the world....or take out anger on staff who's only crime is delivering bad news (like there has been an ATC strike in Spain or something) and have no appreciation that actually in the bigger scheme of things their problems don't warrant their outbursts of swearing that they direct towards staff.

[jimworcs]

Capot vs Gunky Tom

Capot did not say that the announcement should not be made, just that he does not have to pretend to paying attention when he knows the routine by heart. I fly a to CDG every two weeks on the same type of aircraft and carrier for the last 3+ years. I could do the presentation myself, without error. Cabin Staff vary in their response to customers. I have seen some get irritated with SLF who don't pay attention but were not in any way disruptive. One passenger ahead of me was looking out of the window and the CC came over and asked him to pay attention. I think that is OTT, she had no idea if he did the flight daily. On the other hand, passengers who talk through the safety demo should be corrected, as they could be interfering with another passengers ability to hear the presentation. There is no law saying a passenger must listen, just one that says that the briefing takes place. Furthermore, any CC who says that their attention has not drifted during a training session is just a liar, so why get so high and mighty with a passenger who has seen and heard the presentation dozens or even hundreds of times?

I once commented to a pilot friend of mine at EZ that I couldn't understand why EZ allowed the programme to show, because it often showed their staff in a poor light. I remember one episode with a scouser of oriental origin who was literally goading a passenger who was upset and seemed to be trying to provoke her. It was astounding the stroppy attitude she had towards a passenger who was in the wrong, (late as usual), but obviously distressed and very anxious. His reply was that EZ regarded the programme as a valuable tool for lowering passenger expectations and educating them about the rules and expectations of low cost travel. In that respect the show was useful for them.

Only snag with this, is that if you watch the show often enough you will find the staff apply the rules erratically, are often wrong themselves and don't know how to handle it when they are. They often become belligerant or disappear when they get it wrong. The other day the same scouse "customer service agent" was denying boarding to a group of Somali travellers to Switzerland becuase they didn't have the right documentation. She was rude, hostile and aggressive. She was also wrong. When she was told she was wrong, she was less than apologetic and instead started justifying herself. Pathetic.

[13 please]

Good evening everyone.. first time poster here, please be gentle.. after 16 years as cabin crew, this is my take on it.. aircraft starts taxi, obviously the seatbelt sign is on. Pax gets up to go to loo.we cannot physically stop a pax from getting up, just remind them that the seatbelt sign is on, for a pretty good reason. we don't know the conversation between cc and pax. but the cc would have to inform senior cc that the cabin is not secure. the senior would pass that on to flight deck.ultimately the captain would make the decision then. whether it's "let me know when it is secure", or whatever.It's the captain 's call.never would I imagine the plane to stop during taxi and wait for pax to sit down...!! That would close LHR..!! pax is disregarding a direct order by getting up while seatbelt sign is on. captain's decision.. end of story... should have gone before you got on..

[G-BPED]

Good Evening 13 Please

Welcome to PPRuNe.

I think you will find that " being gentle" is not something that happens too often on here

Your words " end of story.. should have gone before you got on"

If you read the thread of FlyerTalk you would have read that the aircraft had doors closed and pushed back then remained on the ground for about 1 hour.

Seems that the pax could not wait to go and with having a 1 hour wait on the ground then soon the call of nature is going to affect some people.

We are not all equipped with the bladder of a bull

[easy1]

He was a grown man for sake, could he not hold it?!

[13 please]

I did read it, but I did just go back and read it again properly. I had realised there was a delay on the ground, but missed the 2nd one, after starting to taxi. From a pax perspective, the problem would have been the aircraft stopping again after starting to taxi.I appreciate the feeling of needing a wee, have been very heavily pregnant, twice..However once that pax undoes the seatbelt and walks, while the seatbelt sign is lit, the cabin crew member has no choice but to inform senior cc, that the aircraft is not secure for take-off. It's not a punishment, or a power trip, just our job. I wonder sometimes reading these posts, that pax want us 2 be over zealous in some parts of our job, but not bother with other aspects. And I have been cc in this situation many times, and I will be the first to say, it's not what you say but how you say it, and i'm talking about crew here, but the cc did the right thing, but maybe never thought it would come to going back to stand and off loading the pax.

Very unlucky for the pax.

by the way my two young kids spent 5hrs in the car without a wee....

[boardingpass]

not knowing the whole story, but there's so much time to go during boarding, why wait till we're taxiing? Every passenger survey comes back saying on time performance is the most important criterion, so we do our best to meet OTP. If a pregnant woman asked me to go, fine, but couldn't he have held it for another 10 mins? So please give cabin crew a break, we see about 500 pax a day, and even if only .01% are nutters, that's still quite a few we see each month. A colleague of mine got peed on when she told a pax he couldn't go to the toilet. Yes, he was met by police on the stand.

[Avman]

Capot, a very good post

easy1, a very very stupid statement - made without due consideration to a possible medical condition.

My wife had a medical problem which prevented her from "holding it" for more than a few minutes. She did her best to avoid creating any problems but sometimes circumstances, such as unexpected undetermined ground delays gave her no choice but to have the need to go to the loo just prior to taxy. Fortunately, she was always lucky to have sympathetic CC.

[JEM60]

My own problem is that I am not as young as I used to be, and it's all very well for people to say hang on to it, but I can assure you that the desire comes on VERY quickly at times, AND CANNOT BE HELD. My wife assures me that women are much more capable at hanging on. I have found that the ONLY way I can deal with this, if boarding an aircraft, is to TOTALLY abstain from ANY liquid intake for at least two hours before boarding. I have the greatest respect for FAs, especially the Air France one mentioned in my earlier thread, you have so many different personalities to put up with. My wife and I have always appreciated your efforts. Thankyou.

[UniFoxOs]

but couldn't he have held it for another 10 mins

Maybe - but how would anyone in that situation know it was only going to be ten minutes - they had been "taking off" for an hour already.

UFO
BTW I have to take water tablets, make me want to go at some very inconvenient times, managed to hold it until seatbelt signs off every time so far, but could never guarantee I always will be able to.