Easy Jet brawl diverts flight
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tredwaezy: "But been the only lad of 4 crew and the girls been all up to a size 10 i was glad i was there."
And there's the problem. No one can possibly expect the cabin crew to act as "bouncers" in this type of situation, and I hope it is not considered sexist to suggest that an all-female cabin crew may have had greater difficulty breaking up such an incident.
So what is the solution?
1) Ground staff should not be boarding drunk passengers. Whoever they answer to (the airline or the airport) needs to address this. Make them accountable.
2) When flight crew are suspected of drinking on duty, security personnel have no qualms about calling the police and then we all read about it on the FD forum of this website. So why are airport officials not enforcing the same rules for passengers? Because said customers provide valuable revenue by buying overpriced drinks in the departure terminal.
3) If they do slip through onto the flight, I think that the crew via the authority of the commander should have absolute discretion to kick them off before departure. This policy should be supported by the airline. And to those who say: "but wait! the company needs their custom!" I suggest that rather more passengers (i.e. an entire aircraft) were inconvenicned by this easyJet diversion than the delay incurred before departure had the offenders been offloaded. Does the company really prefer the former?
I recognise that this is all much more difficult when the problems only materialise in the air.
Nick
And there's the problem. No one can possibly expect the cabin crew to act as "bouncers" in this type of situation, and I hope it is not considered sexist to suggest that an all-female cabin crew may have had greater difficulty breaking up such an incident.
So what is the solution?
1) Ground staff should not be boarding drunk passengers. Whoever they answer to (the airline or the airport) needs to address this. Make them accountable.
2) When flight crew are suspected of drinking on duty, security personnel have no qualms about calling the police and then we all read about it on the FD forum of this website. So why are airport officials not enforcing the same rules for passengers? Because said customers provide valuable revenue by buying overpriced drinks in the departure terminal.
3) If they do slip through onto the flight, I think that the crew via the authority of the commander should have absolute discretion to kick them off before departure. This policy should be supported by the airline. And to those who say: "but wait! the company needs their custom!" I suggest that rather more passengers (i.e. an entire aircraft) were inconvenicned by this easyJet diversion than the delay incurred before departure had the offenders been offloaded. Does the company really prefer the former?
I recognise that this is all much more difficult when the problems only materialise in the air.
Nick
Join Date: May 2009
Location: A whole new world now!!
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nick - My point exactly. The ground staff should not have boarded these muppets. They were identified by other pax as being plastered at the gate.
With regard to point 3 below we do have the absolute discretion to kick them off prior to departure and we don't know why that was not done in this case as Tredwaezy has not commented on this. BTW Tred well done for keeping your cool with what you did have to deal with eventually and I bet the Girls did appreciate you!!
EZY would not prefer to have a diverted aircraft as it costs them a lot of money.....much more than the time spent on the ground looking for bags.
On top of that it will now be fielding a lot of corrospondence from the plane load of pax inconvienienced by a trip into Frankfurt. Furthermore if the Cpt declared a PAN into Frankfurt that has other implications for the flight crew, ATC, other planes on approach etc etc.....believe me it is easier to offload these clowns at departure.
Drunks should not be allowed to board a departing flight.... end of. I have to say I do agree with F3G with his approach to this. The other pax rely on both the ground staff and the CC to ensure their safety/inflight experience is not affected by drunken brawls....it's our responsibility.
I have a zero tolerance approach to rowdy drunks as a #1. If they are a problem on the ground they stay on the ground. If they are not identified to me by the ground staff and become a problem on boarding they get off.....no more problem
Always supported by the flight crew and company as well.
Why would we want to take them to 35,000 feet where we have no back up and the only way we can get rid of them is divert and land?
With regard to point 3 below we do have the absolute discretion to kick them off prior to departure and we don't know why that was not done in this case as Tredwaezy has not commented on this. BTW Tred well done for keeping your cool with what you did have to deal with eventually and I bet the Girls did appreciate you!!
EZY would not prefer to have a diverted aircraft as it costs them a lot of money.....much more than the time spent on the ground looking for bags.
On top of that it will now be fielding a lot of corrospondence from the plane load of pax inconvienienced by a trip into Frankfurt. Furthermore if the Cpt declared a PAN into Frankfurt that has other implications for the flight crew, ATC, other planes on approach etc etc.....believe me it is easier to offload these clowns at departure.
Drunks should not be allowed to board a departing flight.... end of. I have to say I do agree with F3G with his approach to this. The other pax rely on both the ground staff and the CC to ensure their safety/inflight experience is not affected by drunken brawls....it's our responsibility.
I have a zero tolerance approach to rowdy drunks as a #1. If they are a problem on the ground they stay on the ground. If they are not identified to me by the ground staff and become a problem on boarding they get off.....no more problem
Always supported by the flight crew and company as well.Why would we want to take them to 35,000 feet where we have no back up and the only way we can get rid of them is divert and land?
