Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

United GRU-ORD Divert to MIA to Offload Purser

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

United GRU-ORD Divert to MIA to Offload Purser

Old 18th Jul 2009, 03:43
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...anyway, where is 414A when you need some forthright opinion on Captaincy styles?
411A is right here, with his considered opinion.

Seems to me the UAL Captain was just a tad, over the top.

In over thirty years of airline flying, I have off-loaded an entire cabin crew (except the cabin supervisor) only one time.
At RUH, the cabin supervisor told me that the CC were being totally uncooperative.
They were offloaded, pronto, and replaced by those on standby at the RUH station.
I submitted my report, the cabin supervisor submitted hers...the malcontent CC were terminated, forthwith.
411A is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 09:08
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Something started between them earlier in the trip and then niggle, niggle, niggle, pause, explode
I witnessed that when I was a Tyro some 30 years ago when I was doing my observation flights. It was between the PIC and the Sr. F/A. Day one was all was fun and games, and by day 4 all was a nightmare from Elm Sreet!
captjns is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 09:45
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 62
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
An angry Captain is likely to be a distracted Captain. In the short term if removing the source of the inritation allowed him to focus on the flight and safely complete it then so be it.
Cacophonix is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 10:39
  #24 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Bartender
The ORD-GRU-ORD trip was the Captain's first trip back to the line after extended sick leave. The Captain has been removed from the remainder of his flying schedule. The Purser who was removed, has NOT been removed from the remainder of her flying schedule.

Draw your own conclusions...
This really says it all. He had other options. I suspect he was still probably not fit to operate. All very unfortunate. Hopefully he will get eventually get back to 'normal'.
BOAC is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 10:40
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
An angry Captain is likely to be a distracted Captain. In the short term if removing the source of the inritation allowed him to focus on the flight and safely complete it then so be it.
Perhaps he was the source of his own irritation. Still no reason to divert a jet. If the Skipper was stalwartly felt the Purser to be inadequate and or noncompliant, as PIC of the entire crew, he should have given one of the F/As an infield promotion. Then he and those F/Os present during the incident prepare an in-flight incident report to be submitted to the C/P and C/FA for review and disciplinary actions.

In the long run probably a better alternative than to diverting a flight for a nonemergency, and inconveniencing passengers, remainder of the crew, and having an aircraft out of sequence for further use.
captjns is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 12:43
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: in a cigar lounge smoking a Partagas P2
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Still no reason to divert a jet. If the Skipper was stalwartly felt the Purser to be inadequate and or noncompliant, as PIC of the entire crew, he should have given one of the F/As an infield promotion. Then he and those F/Os present during the incident prepare an in-flight incident report to be submitted to the C/P and C/FA for review and disciplinary actions.
Would have been the proper way to manage the issue - exercise your PIC power, put her/him on Dead Head status, write a report, drink coffee with cookies later at HQ.

Avoids headlines and fuss.
foxcharliep2 is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 16:20
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Texas
Age: 68
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Difference?

I think there is a lot more to this story than what has surfaced here. I have a couple of friends at UAL and so far they say there isn't much to be said. So I take what I read here with a grain of salt.

I only ask that what is the difference if you land a jet (doesn't matter if it is a Domestic or International Flight) because of some a passenger creating a problem or a Cabin Staff doing the same? The passenger more than likely will probably go to jail.

The Captain on this Flight had to make this decision. I am sure he talked to both of his First Officer's about what his intention was. I have seen Cabin Staff shenanigan's on many of flights over the years. I have left Flight Attendants behind, I have demoted the Purser to the back of the aircraft. I will do what is necessary to have a safe trip with as little tension as possible. They work for me, I don't work for them. It isn't a popularity contest in any form or fashion. It's a benevolent dictatorship.

I do remember many years ago after our Flight Attendant strike that there was a lot of Cat Fighting going on all the time. So and so wouldn't do this and that. Tensions were always high for a long time. It was mostly between the Cabin Staff but occasionally the Cockpit Crew would get involved.

This isn't the first time this has happened, it certainly will not be the last. I know it has happened at the airline I work for and probably every other one as well. Give it some time until the facts come out.
Captain Bob is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 16:41
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I only ask that what is the difference if you land a jet (doesn't matter if it is a Domestic or International Flight) because of some a passenger creating a problem or a Cabin Staff doing the same?....

The Captain on this Flight had to make this decision. I am sure he talked to both of his First Officer's about what his intention was. I have seen Cabin Staff shenanigan's on many of flights over the years. I have left Flight Attendants behind, I have demoted the Purser to the back of the aircraft. I will do what is necessary to have a safe trip with as little tension as possible. They work for me, I don't work for them.
...ehrrrm

1. We are talking about a diversion of a major US carrier. Cabin Staff "creating a problem" must be very serious (Revolution a la Bounty /Terrorists?)

2. "I am sure he talked to both of his First Officer's about what his intention was."

I'm sure he did, as well. I'm not sure they agreed....

3. "They work for me, I don't work for them."

What is this? You both work for a big Airliner. You both should work as a team, not as a dictator...

regards

hetfield

Captain of a major EU Airline
hetfield is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 16:47
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Texas
Age: 68
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes I am well aware Hetfield. I know the differences very well. However there seems be a difference on what we do and how we do it. The only thing I can say is that you are the Captain of your aircraft and I am the Captain of mine. I don't subscribe to the Team Concept. There can only be one Captain on the Aircraft, period.

Respectfully,

Bob
Captain Bob is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 16:54
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The million dollar question is:

"What behaviour of a purser would justify a diversion of an airliner"?

- sickness
- creating a "safety problem"
- .........


tell me.........................
hetfield is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 17:00
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't subscribe to the Team Concept. There can only be one Captain on the Aircraft, period.
Yup, I would agree.

And further, the regulatory authorities also agree...just one is in charge, and that person is the designated Captain.
This does not mean, of course, that the Captain should not expect nor solicit the opinions of other crew members, however, the final decision rests with the Commander/Captain....not withstanding all the latest mumbo-jumbo CRM/team concept nonsense.
411A is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 17:04
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: varies..a lot
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Capt Bob,

As an FO I fully agree with you! There can only be ONE captain per flight, the buck stops with you on ALL matters, good or bad, bar one, safety! If a captain makes a bad call related to safety then the FO had got to do something, on all other matters, advice can be given by crew members but the flight is NOT run by a commitee!
That's why you earn the big bucks!!!!!
powdermonkey is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 17:24
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: US
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The below regulatory guidance is clear enough, regarding crewmember compliance with the Capain's instructions.

I'm wondering why he didn't have the FBI meet the aircraft. One would think that, crewmember or passenger, noncompliance with flight crewmember instructions (ESPECIALLY the Captain) is a federal offense.

hmmmm......

KC135777


FAR 121.535 Responsibility for operational control: Flag operations.

(d) Each pilot in command of an aircraft is, during flight time, in command of the aircraft and crew and is responsible for the safety of the passengers, crewmembers, cargo, and airplane.

(e) Each pilot in command has full control and authority in the operation of the aircraft, without limitation, over other crewmembers and their duties during flight time, whether or not he holds valid certificates authorizing him to perform the duties of those crewmembers.
KC135777 is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 17:55
  #34 (permalink)  

I Have Control
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: North-West England
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The trouble with cabin crew is that they do not understand their place in the work hierarchy. In general, they consider themselves as equals of pilots. In human terms outside of work, yes. In professional terms, in the workplace, absolutely not. (Any more than doctors and nurses, lawyers and clerks, managers and secretaries, etc.)

The required qualifications, and level and duration of training required to achieve purser or wide-body pilot are in no way comparable. Not even close.

In this instance, the Captain was exercising his professional duties.
RoyHudd is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 18:19
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: europe
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"The trouble with cabin crew is that they do not understand their place in the work hierarchy. In general, they consider themselves as equals of pilots. In human terms outside of work, yes. In professional terms, in the workplace, absolutely not. (Any more than doctors and nurses, lawyers and clerks, managers and secretaries, etc.)

The required qualifications, and level and duration of training required to achieve purser or wide-body pilot are in no way comparable. Not even close.

In this instance, the Captain was exercising his professional duties
"


Try posting this point of view in the cabin crew section if you like to get some real discussion going...
silverware is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 19:12
  #36 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Let's get this in perspective.

UNLESS there is a risk to the safety of the aeroplane, there is no need to divert. IF you have more than the minimum crew, the obvious solution is to stand down the 'offending', instantly 'promote' as necessary to fill the gap, and then throw the book at the offending on landing IF REQUIRED. There must have been an SFA that could have taken over. This 'I am the Captain and I'm in charge' stuff is not relevant as this has been presented to us. There is no 'threat' to the perceived status of the Captain by doing this.

After the diversion, with FTL issues to consider, possible tech problems on turn-round, possible delays, passenger inconvenience, costs etc etc, where are you when you get airborne? 1 crew-member short. It sounds to me as if 2 heads needed banging together. What a waste of everybody's time and effort. I take it this was after a lay-over?

To add to the 'steak sandwich' story, many years ago, early 90's, I was listening (as a BA 'poor relation') to BA company freq in CPH to hear Rodney from Golden runways declare "WELL - I'm not leaving until we get the cheeseboard".
BOAC is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 19:28
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Alabama
Age: 58
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As a SLF I do wonder what all this fuss is coming out.
If the PIC decided to off load a purser the only reason is that he/she was a threat to the aircraft.
Any other reasons have no commercial standing.
I do no think that the issue is if the PIC has the right to offload the purser, the issue is if diverting was the right choice.
IMHO it was not, and in this case I would raise the question if the PIC was fit for duty. His/Her decision making was not up to the task.
I have seen passengers restrained on the plane, and the PIC did not divert to offload them, so if this purser was so unruly why was not restrained? I am sure that all aircrafts carry the necessary means to restrain any unruly person.
FSLF
FrequentSLF is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 19:37
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Dublin
Posts: 1,806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
OMG the holier then though opinions of some of you "professionals" is shocking and actually terrifying! The vast majority of industry experts if they were to read this would probably give up flying for ever for the fear of ending up on a flight with a power hungry pilot!
apaddyinuk is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 20:14
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: in a cigar lounge smoking a Partagas P2
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Captain Bob
I don't subscribe to the Team Concept. There can only be one Captain on the Aircraft, period.
Too bad you don’t subscribe to the first part – agree on the second part.


411A
not withstanding all the latest mumbo-jumbo CRM/team concept nonsense

No surprise CRM is nonsense to you ….what else is new ??
foxcharliep2 is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2009, 21:00
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
OMG the holier then though opinions of some of you "professionals" is shocking and actually terrifying! The vast majority of industry experts if they were to read this would probably give up flying for ever for the fear ....
They are welcome to their personal opinions, because....they are not in Command of an airliner.
We are, they ain't. A simple concept to understand.

No surprise CRM is nonsense to you ….what else is new ??
Not much else.
You are advised to stay firmly ground bound, if you don't like my arrangements.
Makes no difference to me, whatsoever, nor my present airline company.
411A is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.