Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Air Canada | Aeroplan
Reload this Page >

Nut-free zone ordered on Air Canada

Nut-free zone ordered on Air Canada

Old Jan 17, 10, 7:33 pm
  #91  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 270
Well, not to worry. The Agency is on the case:

Canadian Transportation Agency: Ongoing Allergy Cases - Update
CD_YOW is offline  
Old Jan 18, 10, 12:42 am
  #92  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 8
Graet news - thanks for the update on the pet issue. NOW let's hope they get it 'right' this time...
OuttaYOW is offline  
Old Jan 18, 10, 8:14 am
  #93  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Left
Programs: FT
Posts: 7,285
Originally Posted by CD_YOW View Post
Well, not to worry. The Agency is on the case:

Canadian Transportation Agency: Ongoing Allergy Cases - Update
...

i was wondering why, with the logic the agency has applied, seafood & shellfish are not also banned along with eggs, sesame seeds, milk, soy, wheat and suflphites....

guess this explains it...they have not gotten around to it yet....
mkjr is offline  
Old Jan 19, 10, 6:38 am
  #94  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Not 'up in the air' until the insanity passes
Programs: AA, UA, DL, CO, Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott, ex-TSA Elite rectal exam club member
Posts: 89
odor free

hopefully, they will institute fart free flights. and forbid stinking hockey gear too!
John Q. Public is offline  
Old Jan 19, 10, 8:50 am
  #95  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Left
Programs: FT
Posts: 7,285
Originally Posted by John Q. Public View Post
hopefully, they will institute fart free flights. and forbid stinking hockey gear too!
and smelly cloths of people who smoke...eewww...
mkjr is offline  
Old Feb 13, 10, 8:52 am
  #96  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend and Moderator: Manufactured Spending
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: YEG
Posts: 55,364
http://www.montrealgazette.com/healt...878/story.html

Air Canada has submitted a proposal for accommodating passengers with serious nut allergies to a federal agency, but refused to publicly divulge any details.

The Canadian Transportation Agency had given Air Canada until the close of business yesterday to tell it how the airline proposed to handle passengers with serious nut allergies.

Peter Fitzpatrick, a spokesman for Air Canada, said yesterday in an email statement to Canwest News Service that the proposal being submitted was "confidential."

"It would not be appropriate to publicize it (the proposal) for a couple reasons," Fitzpatrick said. "One is that the CTA and other interested parties need time to review and respond. Second, this submission is being made as part of an ongoing process to accommodate people with nut allergies, so it may not be final."

It was not clear if and when the agency would release the Air Canada submission.
tcook052 is offline  
Old Feb 13, 10, 12:07 pm
  #97  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto YYZ UA-1K 1MM,QFgold
Programs: Royal Ambassador/ SPG Platinum 75/Marriott gold
Posts: 14,283
the world is laughing at us..... fat people and nuts fly free.
why fly is offline  
Old Feb 13, 10, 12:24 pm
  #98  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 39,722
Originally Posted by OuttaYOW View Post
Bottom line is, IMO, pets have no place being in the cabin with the paying passengers period. As for the other irritants mentioned above, well we could all think of other practices/situations we would like see banned from the cabin; but that's life, unless you fly your own plane and can call the shots
Pets have every right to be in the passenger cabin, if they're in an approved carrier and not disturbing others. I'd rather have someone's cute little doggie sitting beside me than someone's child anywhere near me or some of the smelly, farting, burping gasbags I've had to sit near. Some of my favorite flights were made so by the presence of a charming little dog, and I encouraged the owner to place the bag on their lap during cruise and let little muffin poke its head out.

I'd rather see children put in an approved carrier and placed under the seat.

So let me get this straight - first the government orders the airlines to provide, free of charge, an extra seat to accomadate grossly obese customers, and now they are banning the presence of nuts?

If someone tried to pull a stunt like this down here, they'd be laughed at. US airlines already have a policy to deal with this: if you can't fit in your own seat, you BUY an extra seat or don't fly. If you can't tolerate the presence of nuts, perfurme, animals or other 'scents' around you, there is always Netjets....or a 'Staycation'.
bocastephen is offline  
Old Feb 16, 10, 6:45 pm
  #99  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend and Moderator: Manufactured Spending
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: YEG
Posts: 55,364
http://www.montrealgazette.com/healt...544/story.html


OTTAWA — Air Canada says nut-free buffer zones as small as one large seat and as large as three rows will be adequate to accommodate passengers with nut allergies.


In a newly released submission to the government agency overseeing airline consumer complaints, Canada's largest airline says the "pod-like seats" in its international wide body aircraft Executive First seats, positioned in a herringbone fashion, provide "sufficient isolation as to reduce to nil the risk of contact for the passenger with nut allergies."


And the appropriate buffer zone in business class is a single bank of seats where the passenger with nut allergies is sitting; a row in first class is made up of two large seats.

In economy class, Air Canada proposes the buffer zone should include the seats immediately adjacent to the passenger in addition to the row of seats immediately behind and in front. The airline says that seats separated by an aisle "would be exposed to minimal if any risk of contact that would lead to accidental exposure."

The Canadian Transportation Agency released Air Canada's submission on Tuesday. The agency had given the airline a month to come up with a plan to create a "buffer zone" for each aircraft type when passengers with nut allergies warn them ahead of time.

In its submission, Air Canada says it can implement these buffer zones, provided passengers give the airline 48 hours notice.

The agency issued the directive in response to applications by two passengers, who argued that Air Canada lacked a formal policy to deal with travellers with peanut or nut allergies; both suffer from potentially life-threatening nut allergies.

The agency ruled that the passengers in question, Sophia Huyer and Melanie Nugent, are considered persons with a disability, so the airline must lift any obstacles to their mobility through a formal policy.

After considering feedback from the complainants, the agency will now determine whether Air Canada's proposal is adequate.


<snip>

Huyer called Air Canada's proposals "laughable."
tcook052 is offline  
Old Feb 16, 10, 9:01 pm
  #100  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Programs: AC *E/PC Gold /BW Diamond/Hertz Gold Plus/SPG Gold/Marriot Silver/ TUMI Alpha
Posts: 1,470
Originally Posted by bocastephen View Post
Pets have every right to be in the passenger cabin, if they're in an approved carrier and not disturbing others. I'd rather have someone's cute little doggie sitting beside me than someone's child anywhere near me or some of the smelly, farting, burping gasbags I've had to sit near. Some of my favorite flights were made so by the presence of a charming little dog, and I encouraged the owner to place the bag on their lap during cruise and let little muffin poke its head out.

I'd rather see children put in an approved carrier and placed under the seat.

So let me get this straight - first the government orders the airlines to provide, free of charge, an extra seat to accomadate grossly obese customers, and now they are banning the presence of nuts?

If someone tried to pull a stunt like this down here, they'd be laughed at. US airlines already have a policy to deal with this: if you can't fit in your own seat, you BUY an extra seat or don't fly. If you can't tolerate the presence of nuts, perfurme, animals or other 'scents' around you, there is always Netjets....or a 'Staycation'.
I'd rather see YOU put in an approved carrier and placed under the seat

I have no problems with Pets in approved carry on bag stowed UNDERNEATH in the cargo hold.
morphius909 is offline  
Old Feb 16, 10, 11:49 pm
  #101  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 39,722
Originally Posted by morphius909 View Post
I'd rather see YOU put in an approved carrier and placed under the seat

I have no problems with Pets in approved carry on bag stowed UNDERNEATH in the cargo hold.
If you don't like pets in approved containers in the passenger cabin, stay home and don't fly. If you don't like nuts or perfume, stay home and don't fly. It's just that simple.

As long as the airline permits pets in the cabin, I support the right of anyone to bring aboard their pet.

Air Canada's proposal is laughable, but not for the reasons suspected by Huyer - no one is going to tell me I cannot eat nuts on my flight because I had the misfortune of sitting next to someone who called in 48hr before departure and claimed an allergy.
bocastephen is offline  
Old Feb 17, 10, 2:11 am
  #102  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 22,939
Originally Posted by bocastephen View Post
If you don't like pets in approved containers in the passenger cabin, stay home and don't fly. If you don't like nuts or perfume, stay home and don't fly. It's just that simple.

.
Totally agree on pets and nuts. Perfurmes however is another story. First, I* would rat5her see people showering, rather than trying to hide BO behind perfume. Second, in any event, apart from marketing nonsense on building up a bimbo image, perfume is entirely useless and totally avoidable. At essentially no cost. Plus, if one really wants to hide one's BO behind perfume, it's always possible to do that at destination.
Stranger is offline  
Old Feb 18, 10, 2:34 pm
  #103  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: YYC
Programs: AA, UA Plat
Posts: 44
Does a person have to show medical proof a nut allergy to get in the "Buffer Zone" or is their word suffice?
Billionare is offline  
Old Feb 18, 10, 3:03 pm
  #104  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Mississauga Ontario
Posts: 3,981
Originally Posted by Billionare View Post
Does a person have to show medical proof a nut allergy to get in the "Buffer Zone" or is their word suffice?
Do I have to take my dog to a vet too?

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/air-c...-i-do-now.html
InTheAirGuy is offline  
Old Feb 18, 10, 7:14 pm
  #105  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Burlington ON, Canada
Posts: 14
Great. Now all I have to do to guarantee that the cattle-class seats next to me are empty is to claim to have a nut allergy. Since I fly AC twice a week, this will be even better than sitting in Business Class at no extra cost

Cheers
tilt is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread