Club Reps and Drunken Pax
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: here to eternity
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spot on, sky9.
As long as "Costa del Sex" holidays are sold on that basis to the lads and ladettes, they will get p!ssed up and party every moment that's available to them.
If the airlines emphasise to the Tour Operators that carriage of their oiks is dependent upon them being sober and respectable, and if they are loaded with Bacardi, p!ssed and objectionable at the airport they'll get left behind, perhaps some notice will be taken.
Perhaps any costs incurred by the airlines ought to be passed on to the Tour Operator rather than the individual, leaving the TO's to try to recoup their losses. That would get their attention pretty quickly!
For TightSlot's company, this seems to me (not accepting any LMC's) a daft policy.
The LMC is not the problem. How you deal with it might be. If you're trying to rejig paperwork, reset bugs, the FMC etc. etc. whilst taxying to keep to a slot, then the LMC is not the problem - YOU are. (Sorry, TS, not addressing this personally at you). The LMC should have been refused, or accepted and the slot allowed to go. Safety first, every time. That includes offloading drunk pax, taking whatever time it takes to get yourself sorted out before launching off, etc. etc.
To refuse any LMC is painting your crews into a corner. So all these pax were booked in, and appear on the loadsheet - can you accept an LMC to offload two plus their bags? No. You have to carry them. What nonsense.
As long as "Costa del Sex" holidays are sold on that basis to the lads and ladettes, they will get p!ssed up and party every moment that's available to them.
If the airlines emphasise to the Tour Operators that carriage of their oiks is dependent upon them being sober and respectable, and if they are loaded with Bacardi, p!ssed and objectionable at the airport they'll get left behind, perhaps some notice will be taken.
Perhaps any costs incurred by the airlines ought to be passed on to the Tour Operator rather than the individual, leaving the TO's to try to recoup their losses. That would get their attention pretty quickly!
For TightSlot's company, this seems to me (not accepting any LMC's) a daft policy.
The LMC is not the problem. How you deal with it might be. If you're trying to rejig paperwork, reset bugs, the FMC etc. etc. whilst taxying to keep to a slot, then the LMC is not the problem - YOU are. (Sorry, TS, not addressing this personally at you). The LMC should have been refused, or accepted and the slot allowed to go. Safety first, every time. That includes offloading drunk pax, taking whatever time it takes to get yourself sorted out before launching off, etc. etc.
To refuse any LMC is painting your crews into a corner. So all these pax were booked in, and appear on the loadsheet - can you accept an LMC to offload two plus their bags? No. You have to carry them. What nonsense.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: MAN
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some time back I was strapped next to a drunk on a flight from Houston to London, fairly drunk (staggering) when he boarded, completely unconscious and incontinent on arrival ~11 hours later. The change was thanks to his being served beers 2 at a time the whole way.
I remember the cabin crew member taking his pulse when she couldn't rouse him to put his seat belt on - she never really did get it fastened securely.
"We can well understand the annoyance and inconvenience caused to you. While it may have seemed that firmer action by our cabin staff could have alleviated the problem, there is always the danger of creating greater unpleasantness if request for drinks are refused. Intervention can sometimes inflame the situation."
BA Customer Relations, 3/4/1998. Have only flown with them when there was absolutely no other alternative since that day.
So please don't complain if passengers are drunk on your aeroplanes, emember that getting them as drunk as possible is a policy adopted by airlines to avoid greater unpleasantness.
Back to lurking now - I've learnt a lot of interesting things here.
I remember the cabin crew member taking his pulse when she couldn't rouse him to put his seat belt on - she never really did get it fastened securely.
"We can well understand the annoyance and inconvenience caused to you. While it may have seemed that firmer action by our cabin staff could have alleviated the problem, there is always the danger of creating greater unpleasantness if request for drinks are refused. Intervention can sometimes inflame the situation."
BA Customer Relations, 3/4/1998. Have only flown with them when there was absolutely no other alternative since that day.
So please don't complain if passengers are drunk on your aeroplanes, emember that getting them as drunk as possible is a policy adopted by airlines to avoid greater unpleasantness.
Back to lurking now - I've learnt a lot of interesting things here.
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SmugMonster – pleased to see you remain a bleeding heart liberal. Why the hell should the tour operators pay the price for the individual? Make the “oiks” accountable for their own actions and irresponsibility [sic] and pass the costs on to them.
I think you’ll find the “no LMC rule” is a DTLR requirement driven from the events of 911 and is an initiative to refuse any last minute additions. Really quite sensible if you take a moment or two to think about it, so don’t jump down TightSlot’s throat.
I think you’ll find the “no LMC rule” is a DTLR requirement driven from the events of 911 and is an initiative to refuse any last minute additions. Really quite sensible if you take a moment or two to think about it, so don’t jump down TightSlot’s throat.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you'll find it difficult to stop the sale of alcohol in the airport full-stop. . .They'll just bring their own or go to the pub before leaving for their flight!
Maybe a v limited bar on certain flights that are prone to trouble / and warning posted with their tickets in advance of their holiday reminding them that they WILL lose their holiday /and or their RIGHT to return home with all UK carriers if this goes unheeded.They WILL also be blacklisted for their valued holidays.
MAKE THE CURRENT UK LAW CLEAR IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS.
Maybe a v limited bar on certain flights that are prone to trouble / and warning posted with their tickets in advance of their holiday reminding them that they WILL lose their holiday /and or their RIGHT to return home with all UK carriers if this goes unheeded.They WILL also be blacklisted for their valued holidays.
MAKE THE CURRENT UK LAW CLEAR IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: here to eternity
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pat Pong - I don't know quite why you see the need to be insulting. Bleeding heart liberal? Where in my post do I show that?
(Nor do I quite see what problem you have with the word "Irresponsibility).
Further, I made it clear I was not having a go at any individual poster.
Finally, I still don't understand what refusal of LMC's has to do with the events of 11th. September. Of what relevance are LMC's?
So your post adds nothing. It is worthless.
To explain my point about the Tour Operators further, they sell their holidays on the basis that their oiks CAN behave like this. They sell them on the basis of sand, sex and sangria. They are, as well, the airlines' customers, not, generally, the passengers. Therefore it is with them that the immediate problem lies.
[ 17 February 2002: Message edited by: HugMonster ]</p>
(Nor do I quite see what problem you have with the word "Irresponsibility).
Further, I made it clear I was not having a go at any individual poster.
Finally, I still don't understand what refusal of LMC's has to do with the events of 11th. September. Of what relevance are LMC's?
So your post adds nothing. It is worthless.
To explain my point about the Tour Operators further, they sell their holidays on the basis that their oiks CAN behave like this. They sell them on the basis of sand, sex and sangria. They are, as well, the airlines' customers, not, generally, the passengers. Therefore it is with them that the immediate problem lies.
[ 17 February 2002: Message edited by: HugMonster ]</p>
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: HON121º/14 NM
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why can't the responsibility be placed on the individual passenger? Who's fault is it that he/she is pissed out of their tree? I don't think it is the fault of either the tour operator or the airline? The rules are well known and are pretty black and white. If a pissed and potentially disruptive passenger is offloaded it is they who should be responsible for their return travel and accomodation in the meantime. Why should their irresponsibility be passed on to other travellers (the gap in the bottom line will surely be plugged somewhere, but probably not by shareholders).
The fact that airlines will not support the captains and crews by not allowing them to accept LMCs is total rubbish. But the fact remains that Captain has sole authority onboard when the doors are closed, and is at liberty to excersize that authority.
I agree that banning alcohol sales airside would help no end, but suspect that anyone who wanted to beat the ban would find a way. And the attitude of most airport staff in that situation seems to be to move them on and get the problem out of the way. Can't say I blame them, but does make for bad feeling, and gives the airline a bad image.
I would suggest that the answer is better support of crews' decisions by management when they feel that a pasenger is not fit to travel, and the responsibility for being fit to travel being placed firmly and squarely on th eshoulders of the passenger. No one made them get legless did they?
The fact that airlines will not support the captains and crews by not allowing them to accept LMCs is total rubbish. But the fact remains that Captain has sole authority onboard when the doors are closed, and is at liberty to excersize that authority.
I agree that banning alcohol sales airside would help no end, but suspect that anyone who wanted to beat the ban would find a way. And the attitude of most airport staff in that situation seems to be to move them on and get the problem out of the way. Can't say I blame them, but does make for bad feeling, and gives the airline a bad image.
I would suggest that the answer is better support of crews' decisions by management when they feel that a pasenger is not fit to travel, and the responsibility for being fit to travel being placed firmly and squarely on th eshoulders of the passenger. No one made them get legless did they?
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: here to eternity
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Firestorm, I agree with you that the blame is on the individuals themselves and that, ultimately, they should pay any penalty. Not the airline, not the Tour Operator, not the other passengers or other users of that Tour Operator.
The TO's however, have a respnsibility to encourage responsible and acceptable behaviour among their customers. This is a responsibility which, up to now, not only have they not been fulfilling, but flouting in their encouragement of "drink till you bust" approaches to their holidays.
If the TO's were to do all they could to promote an acceptable standard of behaviour among their clients, then the oiks would have no excuse whatsoever. I wouldn't mind betting a quite considerable sum that the vast majority of punters on your average ProlsHols flight don't even realise that it's an offence to be drunk on board. The Tour Operators do. And do nothing about it. If they were on our side, we would have a much easier job of it.
(Edited for fat fingering)
[ 17 February 2002: Message edited by: HugMonster ]</p>
The TO's however, have a respnsibility to encourage responsible and acceptable behaviour among their customers. This is a responsibility which, up to now, not only have they not been fulfilling, but flouting in their encouragement of "drink till you bust" approaches to their holidays.
If the TO's were to do all they could to promote an acceptable standard of behaviour among their clients, then the oiks would have no excuse whatsoever. I wouldn't mind betting a quite considerable sum that the vast majority of punters on your average ProlsHols flight don't even realise that it's an offence to be drunk on board. The Tour Operators do. And do nothing about it. If they were on our side, we would have a much easier job of it.
(Edited for fat fingering)
[ 17 February 2002: Message edited by: HugMonster ]</p>
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: here to eternity
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LMC is a Last Minute Change to the loadsheet, usually requested of the captain by the flight dispatcher.
It is generally one of several situations - for example, an additional passenger who showed up late for check-in, but has no bags to delay him getting to the gate, or pax who have got lost somewhere in the terminal and not arrived at the gate by the time you need to close doors, or a late request to carry 20 bags of mail, or similar.
Since they are generally of little direct consequence to the total weight and even less to the CofG of most aircraft, they are generally dealt with in their own little slot on the (paper) loadsheet, rather than putting the details back into the computer and issuing an entirely new loadsheet.
It is generally one of several situations - for example, an additional passenger who showed up late for check-in, but has no bags to delay him getting to the gate, or pax who have got lost somewhere in the terminal and not arrived at the gate by the time you need to close doors, or a late request to carry 20 bags of mail, or similar.
Since they are generally of little direct consequence to the total weight and even less to the CofG of most aircraft, they are generally dealt with in their own little slot on the (paper) loadsheet, rather than putting the details back into the computer and issuing an entirely new loadsheet.
There are some ramp agents who seem to be on the ball with this one. Down in Ibiza last summer the agent came on and said that there were 2 pax. who she suspected had were too drunk to travel, there bags had been put to one side and would one of us like to go and size them up?. I asked the (twenty years experience) No.1 to go and talk to them told her that if she wasn't happy then neither was I. She wasn't and we left them behind, the point is that the agent did not try to palm them off on us at foot of the steps which is a big improvement. A shame is does not happen like that more often.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: North Weald, UK
Posts: 357
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As SLF myself, I would implore ground staff to leave any drunken pax behind. The thought of spending many hours with some foul-mouthed violent yob feels me with dread. I'd rather be tired, late and have a relaxed flight than be on time and stressed by some holigan sounding off.. . . .I love flying, but its nice to chose who is sitting nect to you. I'm filled with admiration for the cabin staff who have to deal with these people every day.
