Easy-PC
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy-PC
From today's Daily Mail. What would you, or you airline have done in these circumstances?
Quote:
Mother and her children grounded by the PC pilot.
To Ann Jordan and her family, it was simply a kind gesture from a fellow passenger who wanted to help resolve a problem.
But instead of allowing one of her two young children to sit on the lap of another traveller during take off add landing, the airline marched her off the plane.
The reason given, by easyJet had nothing to do with safety on board the short haul flight. It was made, it was explained, because of child protection fears.
And even though Mrs Jordan was sitting next to the woman passenger who had offered to look after her three month old son. Kaleb, she was told it was too much of a risk.
Rather than the airline finding an alternative, the 35 year old mother of two was hauled off the plane in tears and told to find a suitable booster seat before she could fly home.
'It was insulting, not just to me but to the passenger who wanted to help,' she said. 'I was absolutely disgusted. It’s correctness gone mad.
'I was in tears when they took me off the plane, 1 felt humiliated. The captain and the cabin crew just would not see sense and compromise, It was crazy.'
Mrs Jordan was flying from Bristol to Newcastle last week after visiting family in Cardiff when the furore erupted
Although she had arrived at the airport with a booster seat for one year old daughter Azrael, once on board she realised it would not fit the planes seats.
The woman passenger next to her happily offered to hold Kaleb, while Azrael sat with Mrs Jordan. But the captain claimed that because the woman passenger was a stranger it was possible although highly unlikely – that Kaleb could be abused
Other travellers tried to persuade the cabin crew to allow the family to continue their journey home but after a delay they were removed the flight. She and her children waited hours for another flight and were allowed to board only after Mrs Jordan's mother drove 60 miles through blizzards with a new safety seat.
Mrs Jordan, whose husband David, 31, is a computer engineer, said she would not fly easyJet again. 'The captain could have let the baby sit next to me on the lady’s knee, but instead, he left us stranded,' she said.
Mrs Jordan had no trouble flying to Bristol because she had been with her sister, Clare Ash, 27, and each sat with a child on their knee. But her sister was not with her for the return journey.
EasyJet said: 'Under the Child Protection Act, it is not easyJet's policy to allow another passenger to take responsibility for an infant to be seated on their lap for Take off or landing
'These Policies and our result action s were taken to ensure the safety of Mrs Jordan and her children. The safety of our passengers is our top priority.’
Quote:
Mother and her children grounded by the PC pilot.
To Ann Jordan and her family, it was simply a kind gesture from a fellow passenger who wanted to help resolve a problem.
But instead of allowing one of her two young children to sit on the lap of another traveller during take off add landing, the airline marched her off the plane.
The reason given, by easyJet had nothing to do with safety on board the short haul flight. It was made, it was explained, because of child protection fears.
And even though Mrs Jordan was sitting next to the woman passenger who had offered to look after her three month old son. Kaleb, she was told it was too much of a risk.
Rather than the airline finding an alternative, the 35 year old mother of two was hauled off the plane in tears and told to find a suitable booster seat before she could fly home.
'It was insulting, not just to me but to the passenger who wanted to help,' she said. 'I was absolutely disgusted. It’s correctness gone mad.
'I was in tears when they took me off the plane, 1 felt humiliated. The captain and the cabin crew just would not see sense and compromise, It was crazy.'
Mrs Jordan was flying from Bristol to Newcastle last week after visiting family in Cardiff when the furore erupted
Although she had arrived at the airport with a booster seat for one year old daughter Azrael, once on board she realised it would not fit the planes seats.
The woman passenger next to her happily offered to hold Kaleb, while Azrael sat with Mrs Jordan. But the captain claimed that because the woman passenger was a stranger it was possible although highly unlikely – that Kaleb could be abused
Other travellers tried to persuade the cabin crew to allow the family to continue their journey home but after a delay they were removed the flight. She and her children waited hours for another flight and were allowed to board only after Mrs Jordan's mother drove 60 miles through blizzards with a new safety seat.
Mrs Jordan, whose husband David, 31, is a computer engineer, said she would not fly easyJet again. 'The captain could have let the baby sit next to me on the lady’s knee, but instead, he left us stranded,' she said.
Mrs Jordan had no trouble flying to Bristol because she had been with her sister, Clare Ash, 27, and each sat with a child on their knee. But her sister was not with her for the return journey.
EasyJet said: 'Under the Child Protection Act, it is not easyJet's policy to allow another passenger to take responsibility for an infant to be seated on their lap for Take off or landing
'These Policies and our result action s were taken to ensure the safety of Mrs Jordan and her children. The safety of our passengers is our top priority.’
Rather unfair on the pilot who no doubt (and all too commonly these days) had no choice or discretion in the matter. A pathetic situation to get in to though and a reflection on societies near hysterical, tabloid fuelled paranoia about child safety in general rather than EasyJet who probably feel that they have choice but to enforce such rules. I can't find anything in our manual about it so in the absence of any rules I have to say I would let sense prevail if I could.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is also the question of course as to whether a complete stranger, volunteering on the spur of the moment to help out by having someone else's infant on their knee has the remotest idea of the responsibility they are in fact taking on in the event of an emergency , and particularly an evacuation, on takeoff and landing. It is a kind offer to make, but its consequences could be dire. Imagine the Mum then claiming that the helpful stranger didnt do enough to save their child etc etc. It is far from a simple matter and is to do with legal correctness, not political correctness. The Captain did entirely the right thing despite any pressures he might have been under to do the contrary. Good to see Easyjet immediately and unequivocally supporting the decision.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The woman passenger next to her happily offered to hold Kaleb, while Azrael sat with Mrs Jordan. But the captain claimed that because the woman passenger was a stranger it was possible although highly unlikely – that Kaleb could be abused
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Over the Moon
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly I think it has.
The Capt made the only decision he could based on the ops manual. If he'd compromised and there had been an incident the company would have been liable and he would have been on a sticky wicket for disobeying the ops manual.
I've had to offload passengers for a variety of reasons and its the most miserable thing to have to do. Well done to Ezy for suppporting their man.
The Capt made the only decision he could based on the ops manual. If he'd compromised and there had been an incident the company would have been liable and he would have been on a sticky wicket for disobeying the ops manual.
I've had to offload passengers for a variety of reasons and its the most miserable thing to have to do. Well done to Ezy for suppporting their man.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes it has.
The safety reasons are quite right and, I am afraid, the child protection. As has been said, we have become a nation of morons who follow every word of the out of control tabloid press. Add to that a justice system that will go for the easy kill every time and you cannot blame prople for being as cautious as this crew was.
Sad but true.
And we are all responsible. Because we have let it happen.
The safety reasons are quite right and, I am afraid, the child protection. As has been said, we have become a nation of morons who follow every word of the out of control tabloid press. Add to that a justice system that will go for the easy kill every time and you cannot blame prople for being as cautious as this crew was.
Sad but true.
And we are all responsible. Because we have let it happen.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Capt made the only decision he could based on the ops manual
Yet she had no trouble flying to Bristol with her sister both of whom had an infant on their knee. Just because there is a family connection between the adults does not eliminate the possiblity of abuse or legal action should something happen. Most adults would, I believe, in that situation put the safety of the child first over their own.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't think PC comes into it, although the reasons given to the pax sound a bit daft. From Easyjet's carrier regulations on their website:
If an adult is travelling with more than one infant under the age of two years, but no less than six months, one infant may sit on the accompanying adult's lap and the other infant(s) must occupy separate seats and be seated in a car seat in accordance with the above table.
and
easyJet does not operate an indemnity policy and therefore under no circumstance, under the Child Protection Act, must another passenger be asked to accept responsibility during flight of an unaccompanied minor.
Seems pretty clear for once, especially as the EZY site also defines the acceptable dimensions for a child seat to be used on board.
If an adult is travelling with more than one infant under the age of two years, but no less than six months, one infant may sit on the accompanying adult's lap and the other infant(s) must occupy separate seats and be seated in a car seat in accordance with the above table.
and
easyJet does not operate an indemnity policy and therefore under no circumstance, under the Child Protection Act, must another passenger be asked to accept responsibility during flight of an unaccompanied minor.
Seems pretty clear for once, especially as the EZY site also defines the acceptable dimensions for a child seat to be used on board.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Put out to graze
Age: 64
Posts: 1,046
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
From Bristol they checked in and boarded as a family.
This is somewhat different to being at the gate or in the aircraft and having to ask a complete stranger if they would mind taking responsibility for the baby.
Its no wonder the cabin crew and so the captain sought advice and acted accordingly.
This is somewhat different to being at the gate or in the aircraft and having to ask a complete stranger if they would mind taking responsibility for the baby.
Its no wonder the cabin crew and so the captain sought advice and acted accordingly.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: eire
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only thing I can add to this sad commentary is a thought which continually recurs to me these days, primarily when operating through the UK : Rules are there for the guidance of wise men and the blind obedience of ...... What more can you say?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Here 'n there
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Damned if you - damned if you don't.
" easyJet does not operate an indemnity policy and therefore under no circumstance, under the Child Protection Act, must another passenger be asked to accept responsibility during flight of an unaccompanied minor."
Interestingly, in this case, can the child be classified as "unaccompanied" if mom is there?? Also, if another passenger volunteers through "goodwill", can it be argued that that passenger has been asked?
Regardless, my position would be that the capt has to take into account the presenting information, his understanding of company policy and his esteemed professional judgement to make a decision. He is there - he is responsible for that a/c and I am sure that in any set of similar curveball circumstances different pilots will make different decisions for different reasons and be equally able to justify that decision.
Judgement - for the capt.
" easyJet does not operate an indemnity policy and therefore under no circumstance, under the Child Protection Act, must another passenger be asked to accept responsibility during flight of an unaccompanied minor."
Interestingly, in this case, can the child be classified as "unaccompanied" if mom is there?? Also, if another passenger volunteers through "goodwill", can it be argued that that passenger has been asked?
Regardless, my position would be that the capt has to take into account the presenting information, his understanding of company policy and his esteemed professional judgement to make a decision. He is there - he is responsible for that a/c and I am sure that in any set of similar curveball circumstances different pilots will make different decisions for different reasons and be equally able to justify that decision.
Judgement - for the capt.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Good on the skipper...............
Two screaming rugrats and a septic mother are not worth a career
A classic example of the Daily Mail molehill into mountain mentality, I would advise PAX to read the terms and conditions.
PC my arse
Two screaming rugrats and a septic mother are not worth a career
A classic example of the Daily Mail molehill into mountain mentality, I would advise PAX to read the terms and conditions.
PC my arse
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: usa
Age: 79
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bad Business
Why does it have to be one or the other?
A successful business does everything it can to accommodate its customers. A boster seat was on hand but didn't fit the seat. Does it fit in a first class seat?
Any management person should forsee this problem and have a booster seat stored at the terminal. No? Odds are somebody at the terminal has one. Borrow one or take $500 out of the till and buy one.
Rule one. Solve the customer's problem. If it costs a few dollars, it's money well spent. And when your work force applies this principle, back em up!
A successful business does everything it can to accommodate its customers. A boster seat was on hand but didn't fit the seat. Does it fit in a first class seat?
Any management person should forsee this problem and have a booster seat stored at the terminal. No? Odds are somebody at the terminal has one. Borrow one or take $500 out of the till and buy one.
Rule one. Solve the customer's problem. If it costs a few dollars, it's money well spent. And when your work force applies this principle, back em up!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: EGNT
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was at work at NCL on friday night when this happened. The flight was delayed arriving into BRS an hour late and then delayed a further 45mins whilst the pax was removed. Just as the a/c was due to leave BRS I had the womans husband come up to me in the airport shouting and swearing, being called incompetant and allsorts!
