United GRU-ORD Divert to MIA to Offload Purser
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rainboe - Read it as you wish. I do not really care about "the trauma" an F/O goes through to get the 4th stripe, as I am sure a small minority will detail it at great length on this very site.
I deal with Captains every day. Some top people, highly educated and very professional. Most are even a pleasure to sit and have a beer with. Leaders? Probably about 80%. I can make that judgement because I am not in the chain of command. Decision makers? Absolutely. That is the pressure that pays the bucks. But bad decisions will be judged.
I deal with Captains every day. Some top people, highly educated and very professional. Most are even a pleasure to sit and have a beer with. Leaders? Probably about 80%. I can make that judgement because I am not in the chain of command. Decision makers? Absolutely. That is the pressure that pays the bucks. But bad decisions will be judged.
Passenger confidence
What information was given to passengers regarding the diversion and an eyefull of waiting emergency vehicles ?
I'll bet the farm that the pilot didn't say they were diverting due to a conflict with crew.
Could a time come when passengers lose confidence in the purpose and accuracy of announcements from pilots, especially when diversions, delays or unusual activity is taking place?
I wonder if this will lead to passengers suing an airline, in this case one could argue that once the aircraft had landed passengers had a right to know that there had been a conflict among the crew? Is it unreasonable to expect that passengers and had a choice to disembark if they felt uncomfortable or troubled?
Perhaps this could be supported by the fact that the airline itself did not allow the pilot to fly his next sector.
Do we think it possible to loose the collective confidence of passengers?
Mickjoebill
I'll bet the farm that the pilot didn't say they were diverting due to a conflict with crew.
Could a time come when passengers lose confidence in the purpose and accuracy of announcements from pilots, especially when diversions, delays or unusual activity is taking place?
I wonder if this will lead to passengers suing an airline, in this case one could argue that once the aircraft had landed passengers had a right to know that there had been a conflict among the crew? Is it unreasonable to expect that passengers and had a choice to disembark if they felt uncomfortable or troubled?
Perhaps this could be supported by the fact that the airline itself did not allow the pilot to fly his next sector.
Do we think it possible to loose the collective confidence of passengers?
Mickjoebill
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Problem:
disruptive person onboard.
Solution:
diversion, offloading of said disruptive person.
Costs:
one hour delay on arrival plus handling cost at diversion airport.
Benefits:
safe and smooth remaining flight.
I would say much ado about nothing.
disruptive person onboard.
Solution:
diversion, offloading of said disruptive person.
Costs:
one hour delay on arrival plus handling cost at diversion airport.
Benefits:
safe and smooth remaining flight.
I would say much ado about nothing.
Unfortunately, Rainboe your well written, logical and cogent position simply cannot be accepted by our 'Cabin Captains'
The real Captains authority in the US has been diluted so much (with managements turning a blind eye) that the occasions when one chooses to exercise his or her ultimate authority, as this Captain did in removing a crewmember are analysed and second guessed beyond belief in the name of political correctness.
This is a great step backward, there needs to be, at all times a single person in charge of the Aircraft. That person, is by definition, company policy and global law the Captain.
Decisions need to be made all the time, if they are compromised or second guessed by everyone involved in the process eventually nothing will get done and Anarchy will ensue.
This is already happening here. I am still firmly on the side of this Captain based on my personal experience of some horrifically unprofessional, obnoxious
and uncooperative Flight Attendants I have encountered in 23 years in the business. They simply do not have the credibility for me to give them the benefit of the doubt.
They are the disgrace of the industry and completely poisonous as mentors to the younger Flight Attendants. Their seniority 'excuses' any behaviour.
It is a gloomy paradox that on those most important, highest revenue long haul routes there are usually one or more of these dinosaurs spreading their misery.
The flight attendants that remain professional while exposed to this behaviour are the true professionals. Fortunately they are still the majority.
I only wish we had the ability to eject these idiots while still airborne.
The real Captains authority in the US has been diluted so much (with managements turning a blind eye) that the occasions when one chooses to exercise his or her ultimate authority, as this Captain did in removing a crewmember are analysed and second guessed beyond belief in the name of political correctness.
This is a great step backward, there needs to be, at all times a single person in charge of the Aircraft. That person, is by definition, company policy and global law the Captain.
Decisions need to be made all the time, if they are compromised or second guessed by everyone involved in the process eventually nothing will get done and Anarchy will ensue.
This is already happening here. I am still firmly on the side of this Captain based on my personal experience of some horrifically unprofessional, obnoxious
and uncooperative Flight Attendants I have encountered in 23 years in the business. They simply do not have the credibility for me to give them the benefit of the doubt.
They are the disgrace of the industry and completely poisonous as mentors to the younger Flight Attendants. Their seniority 'excuses' any behaviour.
It is a gloomy paradox that on those most important, highest revenue long haul routes there are usually one or more of these dinosaurs spreading their misery.
The flight attendants that remain professional while exposed to this behaviour are the true professionals. Fortunately they are still the majority.
I only wish we had the ability to eject these idiots while still airborne.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: West of nowhere
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Problem:
disruptive person onboard.
Solution:
diversion, offloading of said disruptive person.
Costs:
one hour delay on arrival plus handling cost at diversion airport.
Benefits:
safe and smooth remaining flight.
I would say much ado about nothing
disruptive person onboard.
Solution:
diversion, offloading of said disruptive person.
Costs:
one hour delay on arrival plus handling cost at diversion airport.
Benefits:
safe and smooth remaining flight.
I would say much ado about nothing
I suspect the employer doesn't share your point of view.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have not read anywhere near every post in the 14 pages that make up this thread, but I think we could save a lot of bandwidth and a lot of future embarrassment if the moderators dumped every post on the thread except for the first post and Judd's post #251.
Well said, Judd. You sound like the epitome of the consumately professional flight attendant who (and oh, how I know this next comment will be misunderstood and leapt upon by all too many!!) knows her place in the chain of command on board an airliner. It would be a pleasure to work with you, (and judging from your post leading another current thread, very comforting to be up front with you running the cabin in an emergency).
How in the world can some of you pronounce judgement on something like this on the scant information you have to hand? It's the same attitude that lead to the burning of young women as witches in places like Salem.
Well said, Judd. You sound like the epitome of the consumately professional flight attendant who (and oh, how I know this next comment will be misunderstood and leapt upon by all too many!!) knows her place in the chain of command on board an airliner. It would be a pleasure to work with you, (and judging from your post leading another current thread, very comforting to be up front with you running the cabin in an emergency).
How in the world can some of you pronounce judgement on something like this on the scant information you have to hand? It's the same attitude that lead to the burning of young women as witches in places like Salem.
This is a great step backward, there needs to be, at all times a single person in charge of the Aircraft. That person, is by definition, company policy and global law the Captain.
In the old days how much of the captain's authority was underwritten by the glamour, mystery and prestige of being in charge of large jets?
Also, compared to today there were fewer passengers understanding the principles of flight and airline procedures?
In contrast most flights today are occupied by a greater percentage of more seasoned travelers who have a reasonable understanding of
a) basics of how the aircraft is configured and takes flight.
b) of how airlines operate and manage flights and crew
c) accidents and their aftermath, thanks to you tube and the net.
So it seems logical to assume that over time passengers will become more savvy and also more vocal if they smell a rat vis-a-vis cockpit announcements of the pull the wool variety.
If so, does it follow that CC will find it more problematic to take command of passengers in a true emergency?
Mickjoebill
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Problem:
disruptive person onboard.
Solution:
diversion, offloading of said disruptive person.
Costs:
one hour delay on arrival plus handling cost at diversion airport.
Benefits:
safe and smooth remaining flight.
I would say much ado about nothing.
disruptive person onboard.
Solution:
diversion, offloading of said disruptive person.
Costs:
one hour delay on arrival plus handling cost at diversion airport.
Benefits:
safe and smooth remaining flight.
I would say much ado about nothing.
Again, no way to run an airline.
'Problem:
disruptive person onboard.
Solution:
diversion, offloading of said disruptive person.
Costs:
one hour delay on arrival plus handling cost at diversion airport.
Benefits:
safe and smooth remaining flight.
I would say much ado about nothing. '
Agreed.
disruptive person onboard.
Solution:
diversion, offloading of said disruptive person.
Costs:
one hour delay on arrival plus handling cost at diversion airport.
Benefits:
safe and smooth remaining flight.
I would say much ado about nothing. '
Agreed.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 62
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Problem:
disruptive person onboard.
disruptive person onboard.
Solution:
diversion, offloading of said disruptive person.
diversion, offloading of said disruptive person.
Costs:
one hour delay on arrival plus handling cost at diversion airport.
one hour delay on arrival plus handling cost at diversion airport.
This diversion may also cost a Captain his job and may potentially blight the careers of the First Officers and the Cabin Crew.
Benefits:
safe and smooth remaining flight.
safe and smooth remaining flight.
I would say much ado about nothing. '
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The inconveniencing of a large number of people plus the reputational cost to UA.
Fact.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A salutary lession? You VILL Obey!
YouTube - Eric Cartman-Respect my Authority!!!!!
YouTube - Eric Cartman-Respect my Authority!!!!!
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the edge of insanity
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Light blue touchpaper and run
First of all thanks for a very entertaining but slightly disconcerting thread. It has kept me enthralled during some of the pauses in my hectic life as senior manager with one of those companies that build those things you fly (in). Damn, let it slip - you got it - I'm another non pilot. However, just to add my tuppence worth.......
There seems to be a lota about responsibility and authority but very little on respect.
I'm off for a bit of hols, so I won't be contributing more and probably not reading for a while, so please discuss amongst yourselves.
There seems to be a lota about responsibility and authority but very little on respect.
- FC (and CC and many others) are employed by airlines
- airlines are there to (try and) make money
- they make money by flying paying SLF around
- SLF expect safety and service (and low price)
- The FC and many others on the ground (including little ol' me) are responsible for ensuring the safety (which is relatively well regulated)
- The CC and other customer facing staff are the first line for service standards (in the eyes of the paying customers)
- Both have different but equal levels of responsibility in ensuring the success of the business
- Based on several of the contributions in this thread, if the relationship between managers and team members in my industry were the same as what appears to be on board an aircraft, then I think we would have greater difficulty in building a good aircraft.
I'm off for a bit of hols, so I won't be contributing more and probably not reading for a while, so please discuss amongst yourselves.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sweden
Age: 63
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and the ultimate dispuption of the few (many) old hags left in the cabin will be sure to keep it dead
I fully understand were the "Self loading cargo" comes from.
And you want to be taken as serious commanders?
i rest my case,,i go play with my kids,,
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: West of nowhere
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While it’s true that all the facts of the case aren’t known and there have been ill-informed comments from those outside the industry, some pilots have also questioned the Captain’s actions and said there must have been a more sensible way to handle the situation. (There have been illogical and questionable comments on both sides.) Yes, the Captain should not be pronounced “guilty” at this stage. But what is known has raised questions about management/leadership ability and common-sense—not who has legal authority to make decisions.
Furthermore, the gate swings both ways. Some of the accusations made against Based on Facts are equally unsubstantiated and a rush to judgment. I hope that the facts of the case do come out in a way that is credible. If I am wrong in suspecting that the Captain didn’t handle things appropriately, I will be the first to say I was wrong and hopefully learn from the situation. If it turns out that Based on Facts presented the facts accurately, I doubt that any apologies will come his/her way.
It is also too bad that some of the “dirty laundry” between some pilots and some cabin crew is being aired in public. 411A, judging by the way your fellow pilots react to you on other threads, those who don’t see things your way, are in good company. You often don’t seem to be in sync with others in your industry. Fact.
Furthermore, the gate swings both ways. Some of the accusations made against Based on Facts are equally unsubstantiated and a rush to judgment. I hope that the facts of the case do come out in a way that is credible. If I am wrong in suspecting that the Captain didn’t handle things appropriately, I will be the first to say I was wrong and hopefully learn from the situation. If it turns out that Based on Facts presented the facts accurately, I doubt that any apologies will come his/her way.
It is also too bad that some of the “dirty laundry” between some pilots and some cabin crew is being aired in public. 411A, judging by the way your fellow pilots react to you on other threads, those who don’t see things your way, are in good company. You often don’t seem to be in sync with others in your industry. Fact.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Problem:
disruptive person onboard.
Solution:
diversion, offloading of said disruptive person.
disruptive person onboard.
Solution:
diversion, offloading of said disruptive person.
Innocent until proven guilty is fine as long as it's also applied to the purser.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The situation here is not a disruptive passenger, but a disruptive flight crewmember. With the number of furloughed pilots, it is quite possible that one of the F/Os may have flowed back to the right seat… thus capable of assuming the duties of PIC, and continue to ORD.
The entire situation was a perfect made for TV soap opera.
The entire situation was a perfect made for TV soap opera.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- The Captn informed the Purser that he wanted the crew decs.
- The Purser, instead of complying, asked if she could supply them at a later time, more convenient to her.
- The Captn informed the Purser that he wanted the crew decs immediately.
- Instead of delivering them in the normal fashion, the Purser pushed them under the cockpit door.
BoF seems to think that the above scenario clearly puts the Captn in the wrong, and the Purser in the right.
Reading it with my CSD/Sr Purser half-spectacles on, I disagree with BoF.
If the Captan wants the crew decs right now, it´s the Purser´s job to supply the crew decs right now. Chain of command, easy peasy.
As per BoF, it takes 30 secs to fill them out. On an 11 hour flight, the Purser has the time to both fill them out, go through the procedure of getting into the cockpit and hand them to the Captn without this in any way shape or form impacting negatively on the service to the pax.
Yes it is inconvenient, yes it seems to the Purser unreasonable and illogical but as Purser, that´s what you have to deal with.
He´s the Captn, you´re the Purser, and as long as a request from the Captn doesn´t put people´s lives in danger, you deal with a Captn´s request promptly and courteously.
Captain wants crew dec now, but Purser can't do that due to SOP about a colleague covering the cockpit door.
Purser thinks laterally, and pushes them under the door - addresses both issues. Unfortunately due to a lack of communication/understanding between them the result of this is that the Captain thinks the Purser is being insubordinate by doing this, whilst the Purser wonders what he's making a fuss about. Result: situation escalates and you get a multi-page Pprune thread!
Only a theory of course, as like everyone else on here (almost?) I wasn't there.....
