Arrogant posters

[SNS3Guppy]

Yes but, SNS3Guppy, just because one is arrogant, even angry and even rude does not make one incorrect?

The question can only be answered in the context of a specific situation. At times directness is not only appropriate but warranted. In most cases, decorum and professionalism dictate that a less candid, more diplomatic approach is preferred.

Does being arrogant, angry, and rude make one incorrect? By technical subject matter perhaps not, but with respect to resolution of a conflict, or establishing the company presence and imagine, yes, it does.

What I see too often here, and it's really a concern brought up by the original poster, are individuals who may not have a full compendium of aeronautical knowledge at their whim, who ask a simple, innocent question. Not uncommonly we see them beaten and bludgeoned by pilots who act as though the individual should have been born with a doctorate in aeronautical science. This shouldn't be.

Now sometimes we see the opposite. Recently a poster on the tech forum asked if he should believe his aircraft flight manual regarding landing distance, or "wikipedia." As you might imagine, this elicited a number of sharp responses, including my own. Later, the poster revealed that he was a 15 year old young man, most likely a computer game player, asking from a much more basic level...had he revealed this information at the outset, the response would have been far different. As it was, once his case was established, many able posters were quick to provide good information.

In other recent cases, during technical discussions regarding critical safety of flight issues such as rejected takeoffs, posters have jumped in with an absolute lack of understanding, immediately critical, and certaily detrimental to the discussion. One can understand then, when the lack of patience displayed by the pilots participating in that forum, exceeded their tolerance. Directness in such a case would be, and was warranted.

In other cases individuals have entered the same forum asking the most basic of questions...how does a jet engine work, what's a compressor stall, how is lift formed...etc. Clearly these are people looking for information, and in nearly every case it's given generously. A simple, easy to understand reply is warranted, and there's no need for arrogance, or rudeness.

The specific situation dictates.

Some years ago I experienced a passenger who was quite over the top. He screamed and yelled, turned a purple color, balled up his fists, and was spitting as he talked through clenched teeth. He became an unpleasant character. I made an intermediate landing, and heard about enough as he demanded that I go fly him where he felt he should be. He made a similiar comment as someone earlier in this thread...that he was my employer, that he was paying my wages, and that I would do exactly as he said.

In that particular case it was a chartered flight in a corporate type aircraft. He was paying a lot of money to go somewhere. I told him very calmly that I was grounding the airplane and the flight based on his attitude, that he was behaving unsafely to be flown anywhere, and that his flight was over. He screamed and yelled and eventually calmed down. I made it clear to him that I have only one duty, and only one concern as the pilot in command of the airplane; safety of flight. That includes his safety, and the safety of the airplane. The "I'm paying your wage" arguement just doesn't cut it for me. I'm the pilot, it's my call, my authority, my responsibility, my duty.

The passenger isn't paying my wage. My employer is. However, even in the case of my employer, nobody is paying me enough to compromise, and nobody is going to win any points with me by trying to throw that in my face. "I'm paying your wage" doesn't hold a lot of water with me. If you're my passenger I'll accord you all the respect that's due a fellow human being regardless of whether you're flying for free or paying a hefty sum, and I expect the same in return...as well as respect for my position and the duty is entails. Once that relationship is compromised, I will do my utmost to restore it. Failing that, in the face of a passenger or customer (or employer) who elects to go beyond being civil, one may quickly learn that my own determination will quickly exceed theirs, and it's a fight they're not going to win.

Diplomacy is far more than a good idea, and where applicable, works best. Where it's not applicable, there are other appropriate means of handling a situation, particular to each case...but this is never preferred...by me, my true employer, or the passenger for whom I will bend over backward at any given moment to please.

[Rainboe]

What I see too often here, and it's really a concern brought up by the original poster, are individuals who may not have a full compendium of aeronautical knowledge at their whim, who ask a simple, innocent question. Not uncommonly we see them beaten and bludgeoned by pilots who act as though the individual should have been born with a doctorate in aeronautical science.

The way I see it, polite enquiries receive informative, courteous answers. I spend quite a lot of time answering sensible queries (in the right section!). But have a look at the major accident threads in Rumours and News! Full of non flyers acting as accident investigators, deciding how aviation should be changed and saying 'how it is'. I don't see that many polite enquiries, more blunt argumentive and outrageous statements, and so they shall be treated in return. The Ryanair depressurisation is a case in point.

The very anonymity of forums means that it is not apparent what basis people make enquiries from, and as you pointed out, the response could be inappropriate. I eventually deduced the young man was talking from a primitive basis and did not respond, but some did not see it. It behoves the original poster of any query to state from what basis he asks so that an appropriate answer can be framed.

I've been told 'I'm paying your wages!', I've been told 'you're lying to us!' and 'I'm a lawyer, I'm going to sue!' There are very easy responses. For the lying one, I had an outburst 'how DARE you accuse me of lying! I am not paid enough to lie to anybody so would you withdraw that PLEASE?'. The lawyer one I enjoy: dismiss it with 'please write to the customer service department with your complaint, now please excuse me I am VERY busy!' The wages one is good: 'Thank you Madam! I shall ensure it is well spent!'

[AR1]

real life's full of good people and bad people. Why would only the good people use the internet?

[marchino61]

Well, it is good to see the toxic people have reined themselves in, at least on this thread. Nice not to see mention of "idiots" and those who should remove themselves from the gene pool here......things are looking up :-)

[The Real Slim Shady]

In that particular case it was a chartered flight in a corporate type aircraft. He was paying a lot of money to go somewhere.

And I guess that following your arrogance he never used your company again.

10 out of 10, gold star and no tick.

When it comes to arrogant posters SNS3, you have the patent!

Tell what the solution is: you go and explain, quietly and calmly( borrowed from arrogant poster who knows better than anyone else - but he's probably "Murcain", redneck and proud of it) , that you can't carry him on the boarding card he is holding as you aren't permitted to, either by your airline, the CAA or the DFT.

You explain to him that his refusal to get off when asked is not helping the situation and that if he will accompany you to the gate you MAY be able to check him in, even though check in has technically closed, however, you can't guarantee anything, but will do your best.

If it doesn't work out, you will have to leave to him behind.

Fortunately, you manage to get him checked in and get a boarding card issued for the flight and make your slot.

On arrival the pax asks to visit the flightdeck, shakes your hand and offers his heartfelt thanks.

Arrogant my dear SNS3? Not at all.

I do my best on the basis that I would like to be treated the same way but get ticked off when loudmouth know it alls think they have a licence to complain about flight and cabin crew because they fly a freighter, or worse, have a PC with flight sim.

[remarkablebean]

Mutual respect on here and onboard will work wonders.

Rainboe is right.

I realize I am new to this forum but not others, and I have been around the block, at least once.

I've checked out a number of threads on here, and some of the questions and observations made by passengers both on operational matters and even commercial ones are very rudimentary - and a lot of the answers given by those in the industry are comprehensive and well thought out. Others, well, are shirty and they should be kept to themselves...things like "Spotters stay out of this" are just plain stupid.

We also run into the same frustrations as you e.g. airport security lines and jobsworths implementing at-the-time politically expedient policies - please remember that too - AND it's not our fault the parking lot is full, or if Gatwick smells like a fish kettle.

In the middle of a discussion about the 777 incident, the idiotic postings on the Ryanair depressurization (I mean even that got me going) or one closer to my own heart, the A310 over Quebec, it is disheartening and annoying to have one liners thrown in when the discussion is serious and for those of us in the industry, informative and enjoyable. (Thanks for your comments on that btw Rainboe).

In terms of "we pay your wages" - well.....you buy a ticket or an IT package which includes an airfare, and some very little of that does help pay my mortgage - true. However, in the UK and Canada you also pay taxes for health care, and when you go to get an X-Ray, is that what you say to the radiologist or radiographer ? Or before surgery, you say the same thing to the heart specialist ? I dooooon't think so.

Those who work the cabin do sometimes get a lot of abuse from passengers, clients or guests - whatever you want to call them. They're there for your safety, and believe me, they know better. It's not their fault if the chocolate is no longer on your tray or if the portions are smaller - and it's not their fault either if the IFE breaks...if you don't like the service, get in touch with head office, cause they can't do anything about it. I'm sure when the service is reduced, and the crews are used to delivering the very best, their embarrassment is matched by the passengers dismay. Working with the traveling public is NOT for the faint hearted. As someone else posted "mutual respect" works wonders.

We should view this forum as a series of discrete sections and try to maintain them. If there is an operational matter which requires debate - such as the potential icing of fuel, or another incident which has broader consequences for other operators, then professionals debate. By all means observe!!

Would a non medical professional discuss non-evasive surgery for tissue detaching from the oventum on an internet board and get away with it ??

Ask questions and many many aviators being still very proud of what we do, will answer the questions as valuably as possible.

In return, afford a little respect and understanding if we're not always smiley and happy slappy - and remember where to point your complaints in future. Thanks very much!

P.S. Rant over.

[wiggy]

remarkablebean

I think you sum it up very nicely in one statement when you post

"Would an non medical professional discuss non-evasive surgery for tissue detaching from the oventum on an internet board and get away with it"

No, quite rightly, they they wouldn't...
.

[Abusing_the_sky]

1) Is it a good idea to have such contempt for those who pay your wages? (the name Gerald Ratner comes to mind here - Google it if you don't know the story)

Dear Sir,
Please receive the attached 50p cheque as a full refund of the wages you claim you paid me


Like JSL mentioned, it's all a vicious circle; you pay my wages, i pay yours i.e. you are an optician, i need glassed, i pay you to get my glasses, you pay the factory who produces the frame, the factory pays the postman do deliver them and so on.... it's simple really.

And for my 2 cents, the pax do seem to be more confused than ever when anywhere near an airport; people are out of their comfort zone, it's stupid o'clock in the morning and they are not used to it, the airport is a big big building with lots of people, noise, millions of check in desks, police, dogs, security people and the list goes on, but they do change their behavior (i refer to the not so frequent fliers). They get anxious and what do they do? They take it out on "the uniform"; usually the cabin crew or the pilot when he/she is in sight. And it's not straight away, it's usually moaning about having to show the boarding card again or complaining in flight about temperature, seatbelt sign on, toilets busy, prices, other pax, you name it.
But do you see where I'm going with this? People, out of their comfort zone, are completely different people; hell, i go bananas when I'm ANYWHERE near a hospital


Rgds,
ATS

[SNS3Guppy]

And I guess that following your arrogance he never used your company again.

I don't believe in guesses or speculation. You "guess" incorrectly.

The passenger was a close friend of the CEO of the company. I called the CEO and spoke to him directly about the matter. I spoke to the passenger. He calmed down, ceased to be a safety risk, and I elected to continue with him tohis destination. It was my call.

Had he never used my company again, I couldn't have cared less.

Am I concerned that a passenger who throws tantrums, jumps up and down and screams loud enough that I could clearly hear him a hundred yards away, who's face turns purple with his rage, and who spits through clenched teeth doesn't fly with me again? Not in the least. My sole concern is safety of flight. I am paid for my judgement. If in my concern a passenger represents a safety risk...and this one did at the time, then that judgement is final...even the CEO understood that...and didn't question it. His advice to his good friend? Calm down and listen to the pilot.

Had you been there, of course, doubtless your unbridled wisdom might have merited some say in the matter. You were not, of course, and you do not. Enough said on that.

[Wireless]

Pilots are human beings, and therefore will behave in this way too (it would be statistically remarkable if they didn't) - they will also exhibit a full range of other human behaviors, including, of course, all of the positive ones. Since FA's, Engineers, passengers and indeed everybody is also human, the same is true all round. You can find good and bad everywhere you look - attempting to draw any kind of conclusion from what is seen will usually be fruitless.

The overwhelming, massive majority of Flight & Cabin Crew are pleasant, skilled and well intentioned people, anxious to do a good job for their customers. A minority, of variable size, is probably unsuited to the job. The trick, for us, when dealing with passengers, is always to treat as you would wish to be treated yourself, and to remember that most people are pleasantly disposed and will remain so if dealt with courteously and intelligently. The trick for passengers, when dealing with Airline staff, is to do the same.

I think Tightslot has summed it up. We have to be pleasant to security just as pax after being made to walk around in socks and feel like right old plums (mine normally have holes in too when it happens) so it all goes around

[apaddyinuk]

I commute between DUB and LHR before and after every duty so as a passenger as much as I am a crew member I see it all! I have seen fellow commuters (in uniform) chatting away or reading newspapers during the demo, I also have seen fellow commuters (in uniform) engaged in a conversation with fellow passengers actually make a point of stopping the conversation for the duration of the demo! So all in all its very relative to the individuals in question.

At the end of the day no airline controls its employees personalities and an interview is not a fail safe way of weeding those with the wrong personality out!

[remarkablebean]

Good Guppy!

In my top ten is a family of 4 going to Punta Cana, constantly being a pain in the butt in the cabin, almost disruptive to the point of no return (but calmed down after it was explained what would happen to them). Please remember we're there to operate safely from A to B - and cabin disruption to the level this lot were engaged in, I perceive as a very serious safety threat. Calmed, we proceed as planned to the DR.

The father of the troop on leaving told me I should have gone around (where I wondered), yelling at me the service was sh*t (it is a charter after all - no foie gras starters), he'd had a better flight on Angolan something or other (and survived), the movies were crap, and then capped it all by falling down the stairs onto the ramp.

Shame. Happy holidays buddy.

P.S. Paddy also makes a good point. In uniform commuting we all represent our employers/aviation professionals like it or not. Best behaviour required, otherwise we can't really show our disdain here or in the real world, can we ?

[Wireless]

Mmmm. Regarding getting through the net character wise. I agree to a certain extent that's true in lots of walks of life. However...

The Airline Industry is an odd fish. The Industry is one of the most tested and regulated there is. More so by far than the medical profession, if you believe what they teach you every year in CRM! Now. I'm not just talking about Pilot procedural, flying and Emergency training. We're assessed, in action, on line flights in EVERY ASPECT. Including how we act as personnel representing the position we hold within the company under public gaze. There's no faking this, even outside a line check. Sooner or later, any crew member who gives gives cause for concern about how they carry themselves during work, be it safety related or simply how they act around the paying passengers, will be picked up on. If not during a check flight then because any crew member worth his salt who has a genuine concern about someone will express it. It is the culture we work in, and it works. I'm proud of how flippin' good this industry is of looking at itself in an almost obsessive introspective way. So, yes, as humans the Character side will show and there will be lapses. E.G, the skipper talking during the demo, but I bet that skipper although he made a mistake in setting a bad example, will certainly be heavily checked and examined and will be ready when it comes to the crunch to take care if anything untoward happens.

[remarkablebean]

If we didn't give a crap we wouldn't be crafting diplomatic responses in "arrogant posters": we'd just tell everyone we don't like the sound of to go themselves and sit nicely. The perception of Joe and Josephine Public evidently matters a lot to us.

Wireless - well said too.

[G SXTY]

Like most professional pilots, I'm more than happy to answer questions from passengers and enthusiasts. I love it when people take an interest in my job and how I do it. Unfortunately however, a few people (and it is only a few) seem unable to accept the answers we give them. It can get a little wearing when we take the time to explain a concept or procedure, only to be cross-examined by someone who clearly has very little knowledge of the subject matter. Who knows, maybe some people just like to argue, but this thread is a 5 star gold-plated example:

http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf...-landings.html

The original poster wanted to know why Ryanair landings were harder than other airlines'. Several of us tried to explain that they are not, and any perceived hardness is due to the undercarriage design of the 737-800. The OP wouldn't have it. Note the same questions being asked over and over again, and note also the gradually rising level of frustration as people without any technical or operational qualifications persist in arguing the toss. Possession an airline gold card or 1,000hrs in MS Flightsim does not qualify one as an authority on how to land an airliner.

At the end of the day, this is a professional pilots' website, founded by a professional pilot for the benefit of other professional pilots and wannabes. Pax and enthusiasts are welcomed, and generally treated with patience and courtesy, but in return I would expect the courtesy of being listened to when I answer a question. If I'm not extended that courtesy, then - depending on the time of day, the state of my roster and the amount of red wine I've consumed - I may get a little ratty. I don't think I'm arrogant, just human.

[Wireless]

Reading that Ryanair thread makes one's bloody pressure rise and patience dwindle!

Well said G-SXTY. Can't say fairer than that!

[Final 3 Greens]

G-SXTY

I would suggest that the originator of that thread was probably aged about 13 3/4

Please note that a good number of the FQTV SLFs (also regular posters in this forum) did support the pilots on that thread and were also surprised by the OPs inability to digest the very helpful explanations posted by a number of people who knew what they were talking about.

[G SXTY]

I had my suspicions . . .

Like I said it's only a small minority, and that's why I can still be bothered to post on here at 1am (nothing to do with a knackered body clock, honest). In any group of people you'll get the odd prat or two - we tend to forget the hundreds of passengers that are polite and courteous, while remembering the occasional clever sod who announces (and I quote) "that pilot landed at the wrong angle" or "there was no need for a landing like that, they get paid enough money."

C'est la vie.

[Romeo India Xray]

Talking about unwelcome/uneducated comments, was SLF with Mrs RIX right at the back of a 733 - During the flight a 30 something year old guy was waiting next to us for the toilet at the time when Mrs RIX was asking me about the noise of escaping air. My explanation included outflow valves, natural seepage etc. 30yo (drunkish) guy then decided to chirp up about how I didn't know anything, this plane is pressurised.

Classic......

Mrs RIX turned to me and said "Darling, how many of the 38 aircraft types you have flown have been pressurised?"

[PilotsPal]

This recurring point concerning passengers who time and time again trot out the old cliche ("I pay your wages" etc etc). Is there not more revenue to be earned from the non-self loading freight in the hold these days - low cost airlines excepted I guess.