What Conditions Dictate The Removal Of A Passenger?
Guest
Posts: n/a
What Conditions Dictate The Removal Of A Passenger?
NOTE: This discussion is not intended to p!ss off flight attendants! Some of my best friends are FAs. I'm merely on a fact-gathering mission! 
This morning one of the passengers on my commuter train conveyed an interesting story re a flight he took yesterday, June 27. Seems he was flying from ATL to, I assume, SNA. He lives in Orange County. I likewise assume he flew DL. Anyone here have access to DL "Unusual Occurance" reports? 
Here's what happened: (Remember, this is his version, and there are two sides to every story.)
Flight is readying for takeoff and FA comes down the aisle shutting the overhead luggage bins. One guy complains that she's slamming them shut too loudly. Further up the aisle, another guy, maybe with a hangover, voices the same complaint and it gets progressively uglier as words are exchanged between him and the FA.
FA thinks that this incident is serious enough that the passenger needs to be removed from the aircraft, and, indeed, he is removed from the aircraft.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My questions: Is there a policy amongst the airlines as to what degree of provocation has to take place before it's decided to remove a passenger, or is this something that is left up entirely to the FA? Are there certain "lines that have to be crossed," (i.e., pax using profanity) to build a case for pax ejection? Any other criteria?
The guy who witnessed all this and told me about it thought it was totally uncalled for for the FA to have reacted to the degree that she did. Akin to using a sledgehammer to kill a housefly.
With all the stuff happening re air rage, is it possible that some FAs may be just a tad too quick in determining when a pax needs to be removed from the plane? In other words, operating with a short fuse?
It sure would be interesting to read the unusual occurance report.
[This message has been edited by Mr. Perplexed (edited 01 July 2001).]
This morning one of the passengers on my commuter train conveyed an interesting story re a flight he took yesterday, June 27. Seems he was flying from ATL to, I assume, SNA. He lives in Orange County. I likewise assume he flew DL. Anyone here have access to DL "Unusual Occurance" reports?
Here's what happened: (Remember, this is his version, and there are two sides to every story.)
Flight is readying for takeoff and FA comes down the aisle shutting the overhead luggage bins. One guy complains that she's slamming them shut too loudly. Further up the aisle, another guy, maybe with a hangover, voices the same complaint and it gets progressively uglier as words are exchanged between him and the FA.
FA thinks that this incident is serious enough that the passenger needs to be removed from the aircraft, and, indeed, he is removed from the aircraft.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My questions: Is there a policy amongst the airlines as to what degree of provocation has to take place before it's decided to remove a passenger, or is this something that is left up entirely to the FA? Are there certain "lines that have to be crossed," (i.e., pax using profanity) to build a case for pax ejection? Any other criteria?
The guy who witnessed all this and told me about it thought it was totally uncalled for for the FA to have reacted to the degree that she did. Akin to using a sledgehammer to kill a housefly.
With all the stuff happening re air rage, is it possible that some FAs may be just a tad too quick in determining when a pax needs to be removed from the plane? In other words, operating with a short fuse?
It sure would be interesting to read the unusual occurance report.
[This message has been edited by Mr. Perplexed (edited 01 July 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
If the F/A was guilty of going OTT I would have thought the other pax would have come to this guy's defence. The fact that they didn't makes me lean towards the conclusion that he got what he deserved. Let's face it, the original noise complaint against the F/A was also OTT!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Over The Top.
Well as far as I am concerned anything that looks/smells as though any aspect of flight safety may be put at risk is an reason to offload someone.
This maybe was going too far, but then all bar room brawls and football hooliganism start with taunting.
Passengers should be as tolerant as they expect crew to be!
Perhaps the bins needed slamming to ensure they were properly closed; couldn't have something falling out otno your head and risk being sued now could we!?
Well as far as I am concerned anything that looks/smells as though any aspect of flight safety may be put at risk is an reason to offload someone.
This maybe was going too far, but then all bar room brawls and football hooliganism start with taunting.
Passengers should be as tolerant as they expect crew to be!
Perhaps the bins needed slamming to ensure they were properly closed; couldn't have something falling out otno your head and risk being sued now could we!?
Guest
Posts: n/a
So, in other words, FAs are allowed to "paint with a very broad brush" in determining if a passenger poses a certain danger to the safe operation of the flight? Is there any "check and balance" system that ensures uniformity? Getting back to the incident on the flight I described earlier, since human nature dictates that we all have different personalities, it's very possible that FA "A" might have a higher level of tolerance (more forgiving?) if a passenger became a little "mouthy" with him/her or said something that could be construed as "cross," (a good British term) while, at the same time, FA "B" could have a zero-tolerance point for the same "wise-ass" comment(s). Is it, to some degree, the "luck" of the draw as to which specific FA one is dealing with? It reminds me of a cop that writes a citation for a traffic offense that his partner might let off with a verbal warning. Or, the judge that might impose a sentence of five years jail time while, across town, in a different court room, another more
lenient judge might impose two years plus probation for the same offense.
I hope I don't run into any FAs who used to be Marine Corps Drill Instructors!
Is this the new "equation" a FA could possibly be considering when deciding to eject a pax?
Awareness of growing problem of "air rage" + higher number of "trailer park trash" passengers + business travelers prone to making sarcastic, wise-ass comments + decision by airline management to switch crew lodging from Hilton to Motel 6 in LBB = ejection of offending passenger(s)
lenient judge might impose two years plus probation for the same offense.
I hope I don't run into any FAs who used to be Marine Corps Drill Instructors!
Is this the new "equation" a FA could possibly be considering when deciding to eject a pax?
Awareness of growing problem of "air rage" + higher number of "trailer park trash" passengers + business travelers prone to making sarcastic, wise-ass comments + decision by airline management to switch crew lodging from Hilton to Motel 6 in LBB = ejection of offending passenger(s)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mr P.
Thats human nature I'm afraid. Your right, one copper might give a ticket, another wouldn't. Same with judges, bosses and almost any other aspect of life. Thats because we are all differant and have varying levels of tolerance.
Difficult to coment on this case without being there. However when you say a 'discussion' took place, what exactly was said. If it was one "wise ass" crack, as you put it, then I would say it was over the top. Most F/A's I know put up with a lot of rudeness. If every 'mouthy' pax was removed from the aircraft there would be a lot of empty seats. If he started swearing and being overly rude, like making personal verbal attacks, then I would say the skipper and the purser would have a good case for removing him in the intrests of flight safety and the comfort of other pax. If he is behaving like that over how the overheads are closed, then he sounds like a good bet for an airage case at FL390. Only trouble is you can't get rid of him at that stage.
regards
YS
Thats human nature I'm afraid. Your right, one copper might give a ticket, another wouldn't. Same with judges, bosses and almost any other aspect of life. Thats because we are all differant and have varying levels of tolerance.
Difficult to coment on this case without being there. However when you say a 'discussion' took place, what exactly was said. If it was one "wise ass" crack, as you put it, then I would say it was over the top. Most F/A's I know put up with a lot of rudeness. If every 'mouthy' pax was removed from the aircraft there would be a lot of empty seats. If he started swearing and being overly rude, like making personal verbal attacks, then I would say the skipper and the purser would have a good case for removing him in the intrests of flight safety and the comfort of other pax. If he is behaving like that over how the overheads are closed, then he sounds like a good bet for an airage case at FL390. Only trouble is you can't get rid of him at that stage.
regards
YS
Guest
Posts: n/a
BRUpax's comments in italics Mr. Perplexed's comments in boldface
If the F/A was guilty of going OTT I would have thought the other pax would have come to this guy's defence.
Not necessarily. My guess is that when the other passengers were seeing how easily one can get booted off an aircraft, they were probably inclined to sit down, be quiet and not get involved. That's a very prevalent way of doing things in society these days, especially on public transportation. If an ugly situatuion develops, you "cocoon" into your own world and don't get involved in "outside" problems. It's the "That's HIS problem." approach. They just wanted to get home and not get tangled up in an "incident." Coming to the defense of the "mouthy" passenger would do nothing more than p!ss off the FA involved. Name something positive that would come from THAT?
Let's face it, the original noise complaint against the F/A was also OTT!
Going on the assumption that profanity was not used and threats were not conveyed, is that justification for removing the passenger?
I'll see if I can track down the guy who told me of this incident. Perhaps he can join this discussion thread and give us a more accurate account of what happened. Stay tuned.
[This message has been edited by Mr. Perplexed (edited 01 July 2001).]
If the F/A was guilty of going OTT I would have thought the other pax would have come to this guy's defence.
Not necessarily. My guess is that when the other passengers were seeing how easily one can get booted off an aircraft, they were probably inclined to sit down, be quiet and not get involved. That's a very prevalent way of doing things in society these days, especially on public transportation. If an ugly situatuion develops, you "cocoon" into your own world and don't get involved in "outside" problems. It's the "That's HIS problem." approach. They just wanted to get home and not get tangled up in an "incident." Coming to the defense of the "mouthy" passenger would do nothing more than p!ss off the FA involved. Name something positive that would come from THAT?
Let's face it, the original noise complaint against the F/A was also OTT!
Going on the assumption that profanity was not used and threats were not conveyed, is that justification for removing the passenger?
I'll see if I can track down the guy who told me of this incident. Perhaps he can join this discussion thread and give us a more accurate account of what happened. Stay tuned.
[This message has been edited by Mr. Perplexed (edited 01 July 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
And I guess we'll have to ask the railway guards not to slam the doors shut next! I'm sorry but in order to prepare the aircraft for departure the F/As have to accomplish a number of duties in very little time. One is closing the bins. You try and do this in double quick time without making a bit of a din.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, the inquiry I was trying to make was: What behaviour determines when a passenger will be thrown off a plane? We have the weakness of second guessing in this particular case, because I wasn't there and everything I've heard was through a second party. Hopefully we can get that rectified.
Let's say the guy never used profanity or made threats against anyone or anything. Let's say he just made a couple of rude, wise-ass comments. Would that warrant ejecting him from the plane?
I'll be the first to admit that if he used ANY form of profanity or threatened anyone or anything, in any manner, he should, rightly, have been escorted off the plane so fast his head would be spinning. There's no excuse for that type of behaviour.
On the other hand, if he did NOT use profanity and did NOT threaten anyone or anything, if he was only guilty of being rude and making a wise-ass comment or two, is that grounds for expulsion?
The responses I've seen here is, "Yes, it could be."
[This message has been edited by Mr. Perplexed (edited 01 July 2001).]
Let's say the guy never used profanity or made threats against anyone or anything. Let's say he just made a couple of rude, wise-ass comments. Would that warrant ejecting him from the plane?
I'll be the first to admit that if he used ANY form of profanity or threatened anyone or anything, in any manner, he should, rightly, have been escorted off the plane so fast his head would be spinning. There's no excuse for that type of behaviour.
On the other hand, if he did NOT use profanity and did NOT threaten anyone or anything, if he was only guilty of being rude and making a wise-ass comment or two, is that grounds for expulsion?
The responses I've seen here is, "Yes, it could be."
[This message has been edited by Mr. Perplexed (edited 01 July 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mr. Perplexed
Do you have any sort of background in customer service? My limited experience has taught me that some people simply have the 'wrong attitude' towards people who are there to provide a service. It is not necessary to use profanity or a physical threat in order to cause concern. It is a case of the 'Here we go...' scenario, when you just know this is going to be one of those awkward customers.
It is quite a threatening situation to be in, especially, I expect, if facing the prospect of being locked in an aluminium tube with this person for 8 hours. If in doubt, removing a passenger should be FA's perogative. Any manager worth his salt would always back up his staff and ask questions later, even if they are being heavy handed.
Moral of story: Don't p!ss the flight attendants off any more than you would p!ss the captain off. To a passenger, they are essentially one in the same.
Pie
Do you have any sort of background in customer service? My limited experience has taught me that some people simply have the 'wrong attitude' towards people who are there to provide a service. It is not necessary to use profanity or a physical threat in order to cause concern. It is a case of the 'Here we go...' scenario, when you just know this is going to be one of those awkward customers.
It is quite a threatening situation to be in, especially, I expect, if facing the prospect of being locked in an aluminium tube with this person for 8 hours. If in doubt, removing a passenger should be FA's perogative. Any manager worth his salt would always back up his staff and ask questions later, even if they are being heavy handed.
Moral of story: Don't p!ss the flight attendants off any more than you would p!ss the captain off. To a passenger, they are essentially one in the same.
Pie
Guest
Posts: n/a
Absolutely right.
Far too much of this going on these days, no common courtesy extended at all.
I work for an airline and as we speak we have just offloaded two passengers who were becoming rowdy (a little too much to drink may be one of the reasons as well) on a flight which has been delayed due to technical reasons (fuel leak). They are unhappy, agreed, but we do the best we can to get the aircraft fixed asap and have a crew left to fly it. Guess what? About another 90 passengers are p*ssed off 'cos we offloaded the two rowdy ones and say they do not now wish to travel!
Now guess what!
We just took all their bags off too! and they can now sit and wait at their own expense for the next two days until there is a seat on another flight!
How dare people try to hold an airline (or any other business) to ransom in a manner like this!
Far too much of this going on these days, no common courtesy extended at all.
I work for an airline and as we speak we have just offloaded two passengers who were becoming rowdy (a little too much to drink may be one of the reasons as well) on a flight which has been delayed due to technical reasons (fuel leak). They are unhappy, agreed, but we do the best we can to get the aircraft fixed asap and have a crew left to fly it. Guess what? About another 90 passengers are p*ssed off 'cos we offloaded the two rowdy ones and say they do not now wish to travel!
Now guess what!
We just took all their bags off too! and they can now sit and wait at their own expense for the next two days until there is a seat on another flight!
How dare people try to hold an airline (or any other business) to ransom in a manner like this!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well done Icarus! I too have seen the way some people treat the FAs - as if they were there as their personal slaves (or lower if that were possible)instead of for their security and safety. I want to be as safe as possible when flying and not have to contend with obnoxious fellow passengers. There will always be the one who becomes disorientated or confused because of illness or accidental dehydration but most people will understand if a person is ill.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I totally understand where you are coming from and you many be right that this FA may have over reacted. At the end of the day though the final desicion of whether to offload someone is made by the cabin crew, after all they are the people who have to spend the flight with the pax.You do have to consider the following though. For one the length of the flight, and what was actually said to the FA. Alot of pax sitting nearby do often not hear everything that is said to the crew. And it does not all depend on one persons opinion. The crew often discuss the pax amongst themselves to come to a final desicion to get a ,more objective opinion. Most crew will only offload as a final resort as at the end of the day we all worry about complaints made against us. If the pax trully beleived that he was unfairly rejected from the AC he has a legitimate reason to complain to the carrier which believe me will be traced back to that FA and they will have to justify thier actions. As someone who has had thier fair share of disruptive pax it is always better to get rid of aggresive people on the ground as unfortunatly things have a way of escilating in the air and it is the crew who have to deal with the situation and in some circumstances restrain disruptive pax. Not a nice experience, trust me. Sometimes it only takes a minor incident that can erupt into a major one, and on a longhaul flt this can be very dangerous and quite scary. I hope some of this answers your question. Unfortunatly today with the increasing incidents of air rage the cabin crew have to be very vigilant about spoting potential nutters. We dont like having to do it but sometimes off loading people is the only option, and not one which is taken lightly. It is a sad fact that some people have no respect for FAs anymore, and have the opinion that we are just punching bags for them to take thrir aggression out on. Some crew however have very short fuses, like any normal person and cannot deal with some situations correctly and in the end provoke arguments. In these circumstances they should just walk away and let someone more proffesional deal with it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just a quick update, out of the ninety 'brave' men & women I mentioned above, 80 of them shut up and got back on once they knew we were serious.
The other 10? Don't know, hopefully they are slumming it in AUH airport (my God a fate worse than death!) with their begging bowls at the ready!
The other 10? Don't know, hopefully they are slumming it in AUH airport (my God a fate worse than death!) with their begging bowls at the ready!
Guest
Posts: n/a
A sympathy vote for the other passengers originally, then they bottled out when they knew we weren't joking about leaving them behind as well. Flight was already late due tech, further delays due to this stupidity may have ended up as a cancellation or massive delay due to crew running out of duty time etc. So we called their bluff.
Guest
Posts: n/a
To follow some of the points already raised, I do to an extent sympathise if a FA has a truly aggressive/unwieldy passenger, but I really must relate this to an experience of mine recently.
Flight was delayed, and passengers (who were on board) were asking reason for delay etc...
Now, in my book, if 50 passengers ask the same legitimate question, then the FA should either answer the group or all individually.
However, in this situation, I mis-heard the reply (I really do have dodgy hearing- and before any smart arse replies- some hearing loss cannot be helped with a hearing aid). When I asked the FA again to repeat the reply, he assumed I was taking the p*ss etc.. and became very aggressive. Fortunately for him I'm one of the good guys and could see he and his colleagues were having a bad time of it.
Now, the point here is this, could I have been thrown off the plane? I believe the original question is valid and needs addressed by airlines and their staff.
In an industry where many (not all) relate to its paying customers as SLF, I do believe that airlines must realise that making draconian regulations for 'getting rid' of 'difficult' customers is the wrong approach.
At present, FAs are getting a lot of media support regarding air rage, but I do think (as I found)that the balance can shift too far.
As regards the FA in my 'experience' above, I didn't make a formal complaint, but would consider doing so if a similar scenario developed again.
The final point I wish to make in relation to this is that I really have lost count of the number of sarcastic/caustic comments I have heard from airline staff (not just FAs) to passengers - so why are they so surprised if passengers make caustic comments back. Passengers, especially frequent flyers, learned much of this from their teachers- flight attendants.
It really is wrong to paint all FAs as poor defenceless innocent souls. In my experience most are ok, some are really good, and some are truly wicked and abuse the authority they have.
Customer service is about one thing - SERVICE.
The posting about offloading 80 or 90 passengers beggars belief- but what really concerns me is the terrible attitude of the person recounting the tale. Do you really hate the people who pay your salary so much? I think you are in the wrong industry.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Dear Flypast
While I sympathize with your point concerning caustic cabin crew and their apparent need to make your life that bit more difficult there is a wider picture. I'm not seeking to justify curt treatment just explain why.
In a delay situation I try my best. If its A.T.C.(which 90% of the time it is) its not our fault. I will explain why, I will keep getting updates to the pax,I will suggest alternative routes, I will offer to relay messages. In short I will run my cotton socks off trying to make things right. Yet everyday, even when things are apparently running smoothly I receive abuse.
I'm not just talking about the odd comment, a passenger mildly upset because we haven't got a copy of the Jamaican Evening News(even though we are in Helsinki)I'm talking about real venom. The most degrading insults because I accidently missed someone with a hot towel, angry fists slammed against a bulkhead because we have to hold short of the stand for five minutes, I'm talking about passengers who call me bitch or worse because I ask them politely to move their baggage.
The problem is we are not employed as customer service agents. Are raison etre is not to jump into jacket hanging action whenever a passenger forefinger is crooked in our direction. We are their for safety. Your safety. That unfortunately means asking you to move your bags, fasten your seatbelt, put the b.c.f down...whatever it takes to make sure you don't get crushed by your own luggage, or killed because you don't know how to operate the exit. I do this duty with respect and what I hope is politeness, but I'm met with constant hostility.
Is it any wonder that I or my colleagues are sometimes brusque or over react? I wish I could be pleasant 100 per cent of the time but there are only so many occasions you can be called "ignorant cow" or "brain dead bitch" and still come up smiling...
While I sympathize with your point concerning caustic cabin crew and their apparent need to make your life that bit more difficult there is a wider picture. I'm not seeking to justify curt treatment just explain why.
In a delay situation I try my best. If its A.T.C.(which 90% of the time it is) its not our fault. I will explain why, I will keep getting updates to the pax,I will suggest alternative routes, I will offer to relay messages. In short I will run my cotton socks off trying to make things right. Yet everyday, even when things are apparently running smoothly I receive abuse.
I'm not just talking about the odd comment, a passenger mildly upset because we haven't got a copy of the Jamaican Evening News(even though we are in Helsinki)I'm talking about real venom. The most degrading insults because I accidently missed someone with a hot towel, angry fists slammed against a bulkhead because we have to hold short of the stand for five minutes, I'm talking about passengers who call me bitch or worse because I ask them politely to move their baggage.
The problem is we are not employed as customer service agents. Are raison etre is not to jump into jacket hanging action whenever a passenger forefinger is crooked in our direction. We are their for safety. Your safety. That unfortunately means asking you to move your bags, fasten your seatbelt, put the b.c.f down...whatever it takes to make sure you don't get crushed by your own luggage, or killed because you don't know how to operate the exit. I do this duty with respect and what I hope is politeness, but I'm met with constant hostility.
Is it any wonder that I or my colleagues are sometimes brusque or over react? I wish I could be pleasant 100 per cent of the time but there are only so many occasions you can be called "ignorant cow" or "brain dead bitch" and still come up smiling...