Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight)
Reload this Page >

Disruptive Passengers - MERGED

Wikiposts
Search
Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) If you are regularly a passenger on any airline then why not post your questions here?

Disruptive Passengers - MERGED

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 6th Jun 2015, 06:30
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: BHX LXR ASW
Posts: 2,272
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
Nice to see Monarch joining Jet2 in banning thugs from flying.

Monarch Airlines bans six passengers FOR LIFE for 'drinking and smoking in toilets' | Daily Mail Online

Now all that is needed is a system that prevents these people from using any other carrier (for life of course).
crewmeal is offline  
Old 6th Jun 2015, 09:16
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Absolutely the right action taken by Monarch & other Airlines when confronted with this situation. Now send these load of idiots the bill for the extra cost of the diversion incurred by the company.
kaikohe76 is offline  
Old 6th Jun 2015, 09:34
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It wasn't actually an Monarch aircraft nor a Monarch crew. It was the Danish airline JetTime operating on behalf of Monarch.
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 6th Jun 2015, 10:36
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: BHX LXR ASW
Posts: 2,272
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
It doesn't make any difference whether the aircraft was subcharted or who operated it, it is still a ZB flight. The call sign and everything else will be Monarch. Titan are operating on behalf of BA Gatwick next month and it will still be a BA flight (See elsewhere on this forum).
crewmeal is offline  
Old 6th Jun 2015, 15:59
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Calm down crewmeal, no need to jump down my neck! Having worked in the industry for 44 years I know all about sub charters etc. I wasn't in any way suggesting that Monarch were wrong to take the action which they did. I was merely mentioning, in passing, that the aircraft and crew were not actually Monarch. That was all. Nothing else.
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 09:59
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US/EU
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Kate Moss escorted from EasyJet flight after 'disruptive' behaviour

Forget the Greek economy, Russian intervention in Ukraine or ISIS. Here's the big story today. The big question, of course, is not why Kate Moss was escorted off a flight for being disruptive. We all know she's a drug addict. Rather, why was this obviously wealthy person flying on EasyJet?

Kate Moss escorted from easyJet flight after 'disruptive' behaviour | Fashion | The Guardian
Mark in CA is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 10:06
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: on the beach
Age: 68
Posts: 2,027
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
In reality though Mark, does anyone give a ?
Evanelpus is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 10:55
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Wow what a story! Drunk druggie clothes horse with zero talent causes a scene on low cost airline flight.

This could be a major Hollywood movie
vctenderness is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 11:27
  #69 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 67
Posts: 10,150
Received 62 Likes on 50 Posts
Did they know who she was or did she have to ask ...?
PAXboy is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2015, 14:16
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Given that she seems to have been escorted off at the end of the flight, with no subsequent consequences would seem to suggest that they did indeed know who she was. I'm dubious that a non-celeb met by the police at the end of a flight would have been so fortunate (leaving aside reports from other pax on the flight accusing the crew of over-reacting).
Curious Pax is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2015, 15:03
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not zero tolerance then. Well done EasyJet for not backing up your crew.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2015, 17:29
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: 03 ACE
Age: 73
Posts: 1,015
Received 33 Likes on 22 Posts
Rules for "them" and rules for "us" as usual !!
El Grifo is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2015, 18:23
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well done EasyJet for not backing up your crew.
Do we know that? If the police met the flight and then escorted Ms Moss away, it would seem EZY did the right thing by making a report prior to the aircraft coming on-stand.

For obvious reasons, now speaking generally regarding 'disruptive' passengers, any further action would be up to the police. In the event of them not proceeding, I suppose the airline might consider a private prosecution, although that wouldn't really be advisable.

However, as El Grifo said, perhaps too many cases of different rules for different people!
seafire6b is offline  
Old 10th Jun 2015, 10:34
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's up to the airline to press for prosecution. The police will just slap a few wrists and send them on their way. If you want to be seen to have zero tolerance, which is suddenly being espoused by a few as if it's a new idea, then the airline needs to see it through.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 10th Jun 2015, 14:10
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's up to the airline to press for prosecution.
Not disputed, but the airline can only press for a police prosecution. If however, the police/DPP decide against proceeding, then the only litigative option for the airline is pursuance of a private prosecution. As will be appreciated, that wouldn't generally be recommended for a variety of reasons.

Having said that, perhaps the airlines could be a little more generous about adding disruptive pax names to "No Fly" lists, and circulating such amongst themselves. Although would that in itself, without any previous supporting guilty verdict in a court, then lead to claims of "discrimination" against the airline concerned?
seafire6b is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.