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

Air Canada told to create nut-free buffer zones

Air Canada told to create nut-free buffer zones

Old Oct 21, 10, 10:22 pm
  #46  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: PHL, NYC, DC
Posts: 9,682
imagine if jane doe and fluffy travelled together and due to seating arrangements have to be separated apart? :P
global happy traveller is offline  
Old Oct 22, 10, 12:04 am
  #47  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 22,939
No nuts? What are they going to do with us FF types then?
Stranger is offline  
Old Oct 22, 10, 12:06 am
  #48  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: YVR
Programs: AC SE 2MM; UA MP Premier Silver; Marriott Bonvoy LT Titanium Elite; Radisson
Posts: 34,881
Call me cynical, but something tells me this new policy/rule/whatever isn't going to work very well... too many ifs/ands/buts... (or in this case, ifs/ands/nuts)
yyznomad is offline  
Old Oct 22, 10, 11:01 am
  #49  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: YYC
Programs: AC Basic, UA MP Gold, Marriott Gold Elite, SPG Gold, Amex Platinum
Posts: 3,004
Originally Posted by jarusoba View Post
What if the pax seated within the buffer zone refuses to oblige and there is no other seat available? Would s/he be offloaded or charged (with attempted murder)?

I think the adjacent pax should be informed and asked but if they don't want to oblige, then the pax with allergy should be the one who leaves. After all, it's the allergic pax who owns the problem, not the adjacent pax, nor the airline.
Originally Posted by yyznomad View Post
Call me cynical, but something tells me this new policy/rule/whatever isn't going to work very well... too many ifs/ands/buts... (or in this case, ifs/ands/nuts)
For pax that refuse to abide by nute free buffer zone, the rejected pax will be the individual who raises the biggest stink (think of it as an instigator rule). The pax will be offloaded but not charged with anything (although offloaded as disruptive passenger).

For the reasons I cited in my post above, I think this new allergy accomodation policy is very fair and based on science, not fear (imagine if our security experience was based not based on fear - there would be no need for TS&S forum).

I will respectfully submit to the FT community on this thread and forum, this thread could come back to haunt us frequent travellers if we debate the nuances of the practical applications of the new policy ( e.g. What if a pax refuses to abide by the buffer zone restrictions). The current buffer zone is very small and works to the regular flyers favour. The "Living with severe allergies" community is currently lobying to expand the buffer zone. Currently AC has 30 days to respond with a policy and then the complaintants (Huyer and Nugent) get 10 days to voice their objections. There is at least one more battle to be fought until this issue is resolved. So lets not give the other side some ammunition and develop an argument for expanding the buffer zone. In short what we (FT community) writes hear can be used against us.
WR Cage is offline  
Old Oct 22, 10, 11:06 am
  #50  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 231
I was not feel so serious about the 'nut' matter, but quite interesting!
hw807 is offline  
Old Oct 22, 10, 11:26 am
  #51  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC*SE, SPG Gold, HH D
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by jarusoba View Post
What if the pax seated within the buffer zone refuses to oblige and there is no other seat available? Would s/he be offloaded or charged (with attempted murder)?
I'd say the bigger issue will be passenger ignorance - the amount of products out there that contain peanuts or peanut by products that you wouldn't expect is, well, extremely high

A snickers bar is an obvious no-no, but what about that bag of plain m&ms? Surprise, those often contain peanuts too. For anyone who lives with a peanut allergy, they'll know to avoid product X because it has "peanut oil" on the label, the rest of us are lucky enough that we don't need to learn the ins and outs of dealing with it. Are we going to need to subject to an inspection of all our food items?

What if you're travelling with your kid and packed a PB&J sandwich for your fussy eater? Will AC provide you an alternative meal free of charge, or does the kid have to go hungry?

While we're on the topic, what about people like me with a shellfish allergy who get absolutely stomach sick at the smell of fish? Can we lose all the seafood dishes from the meals on board to avoid the risk of me puking on my seatmate?
phedre is offline  
Old Oct 22, 10, 11:43 am
  #52  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: PHL, NYC, DC
Posts: 9,682
Originally Posted by phedre View Post
I'd say the bigger issue will be passenger ignorance - the amount of products out there that contain peanuts or peanut by products that you wouldn't expect is, well, extremely high

A snickers bar is an obvious no-no, but what about that bag of plain m&ms? Surprise, those often contain peanuts too. For anyone who lives with a peanut allergy, they'll know to avoid product X because it has "peanut oil" on the label, the rest of us are lucky enough that we don't need to learn the ins and outs of dealing with it. Are we going to need to subject to an inspection of all our food items?

What if you're travelling with your kid and packed a PB&J sandwich for your fussy eater? Will AC provide you an alternative meal free of charge, or does the kid have to go hungry?

While we're on the topic, what about people like me with a shellfish allergy who get absolutely stomach sick at the smell of fish? Can we lose all the seafood dishes from the meals on board to avoid the risk of me puking on my seatmate?
AC would create a buffer when serving seafood on board

what if i bought nuts in my personal belongings..... and not consume them?! Will they get sick?
global happy traveller is offline  
Old Oct 22, 10, 11:49 am
  #53  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canada
Programs: AA LT Platinum, AX Cent so...Delta Plat, SPG Gold, etc..
Posts: 504
Originally Posted by Tangoer View Post
What if someone is obese AND has a peanut allergy? Will they be entitled to 4 seats? I think we need a goverment committee and a supreme court charter challenge (at taxpayers' expense) to ponder this weighty issue.

No wait, what if a person is obese, has a peanut allergy, and wears a full face covering and refuses to take it off for ID purposes? Are they entitied to 1, 2, 3, or 4 seats or none at all?

I think we need to introduce Sky Lawyers - kind of like Sky Marshals they are present on most flights and are able to solve such issues with lightening speed, countering any lawsuits and Charter challeneges on the spot. They will have the authority to immediately issue fines. It's for our freedom and well being.
This is the funniest post I have read all month. BTW - agreed that the nut allergy person should wear an N95 mask. If they require a buffer zone then they should pay for it.
dfyant is offline  
Old Oct 22, 10, 1:44 pm
  #54  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: YOW
Programs: AC, DL, AA
Posts: 22
It's kinda crazy that they still serve nuts period. Wouldn't this all be solved by serving nut free snacks and meals? (i'm probably being naive but . . . ????)

As well, are they also going to regulate people who bring homemade peanut butter sandwiches on the flights because no food is typically served in Y?



--edit--

lol, I guess other people have the same common sense mentality as me a few posts up.
Kerlo is offline  
Old Oct 27, 10, 8:16 pm
  #55  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: YYC
Programs: AC E50k, Hilton HHonors, Novotel Aclub
Posts: 111
On a YYC-YYZ flight in early Sept and tried buying cashews from the BOB. Initially FA says no, we have a pax on board with an allergy...then remembers that was her last flight so now it's all clear.

I clarified with her - we were row 12 on a A320 - if someone in row 30 has an allergy she can't sell the cashews? She said Yup, that's how it goes. No announcement had been made so would not have affected someone in row 29 who brought their own I guess. I understand sensitivity but it did seem strange...
corlanb is offline  
Old Jun 17, 11, 1:13 pm
  #56  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend and Moderator: Manufactured Spending
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: YEG
Posts: 55,361
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/...assengers.html

Air Canada is not required to ensure it serves passengers with severe nut allergies snacks and meals that do not contain traces of peanuts or nuts, the Canadian Transportation Agency has ruled.

The agency wrote on Thursday that it would "constitute undue hardship" for Air Canada to meet that requirement. The airline had argued there are no flight kitchens available to guarantee that the snacks wouldn't contain some traces of nuts.

"The Agency accepts that Air Canada cannot guarantee that snacks or meals served in the buffer zone will be entirely free of traces of peanuts or nuts because of the risk of cross-contamination," it wrote.

"Given this, the Agency agrees that persons with a disability due to a peanut or nut allergy may prefer to bring their own snacks or meals."
tcook052 is offline  
Old Aug 2, 11, 7:15 pm
  #57  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Programs: AC Elite
Posts: 63
Interesting posts however I must say I am a bit dissappointed by the comments since my daughter has allergies to nuts & shellfish. Before they had this policy if someone ate nuts next to my daughter we politely advised of our situation or asked to be moved. The smell of peanuts or peanut butter makes her feel ill. She carries an Epipen at all times & has not had an allergic reaction in over 8 years since she is very careful (she used to only want to fly Westjet since they were more accomodating to her) . She would never eat food served in an airplane nor a restaurant. She eats onlly foods she prepares herself & reads every label every time.

I see this as a common courtesy. You would give a seat up for a pregnant woman as would you not blow smoke around someone who may not want to be exposed to second hand smoke ( or has an allergy) The smoking ban has worked well everywhere as far as I can see so not sure why asking a few seats in front & back of an allergic person not to eat nuts for a few hours would be such an inconvenience.

Allergies to nuts is not just a sick feeling, it can cause your throat to swell and you can die. I am surprised at how most people have reacted to this post and hope over time most people understand and accomodate those with allergies.

Thank you to those who made these changes possible.
braysu is offline  
Old Aug 3, 11, 12:03 pm
  #58  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC Elite, SPG Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 123
Originally Posted by braysu View Post
Interesting posts however I must say I am a bit dissappointed by the comments since my daughter has allergies to nuts & shellfish. Before they had this policy if someone ate nuts next to my daughter we politely advised of our situation or asked to be moved. The smell of peanuts or peanut butter makes her feel ill. She carries an Epipen at all times & has not had an allergic reaction in over 8 years since she is very careful (she used to only want to fly Westjet since they were more accomodating to her) . She would never eat food served in an airplane nor a restaurant. She eats onlly foods she prepares herself & reads every label every time.

I see this as a common courtesy. You would give a seat up for a pregnant woman as would you not blow smoke around someone who may not want to be exposed to second hand smoke ( or has an allergy) The smoking ban has worked well everywhere as far as I can see so not sure why asking a few seats in front & back of an allergic person not to eat nuts for a few hours would be such an inconvenience.

Allergies to nuts is not just a sick feeling, it can cause your throat to swell and you can die. I am surprised at how most people have reacted to this post and hope over time most people understand and accomodate those with allergies.

Thank you to those who made these changes possible.
While I think we can all empathise with your daugters situation I think that you would agree that like the rest of us, you are not unbiased.

Much of the pushback (IMHO) is driven by the reality that people are alergic to pretty much everything, if we continue to restrict what the majority can consume in order to protect the small minority we'll be drinking water while in public and nothing else. I would also question your smoking analogy since smokers represent a shrinking minority (I think it's less than 15% of the Canadian population currently) while those not alergic to nuts are a significnant majority (~95% according to Ipsos Ried).

What is the right compremise? I don't know but subjecting a group of paying travelers to a rule which they are not forewarned about may not be fair, afterall with warning they could have chosen a different seat or flight.
HR_Traveler is offline  
Old Aug 3, 11, 12:10 pm
  #59  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,966
Originally Posted by braysu View Post
Interesting posts however I must say I am a bit dissappointed by the comments since my daughter has allergies to nuts & shellfish. Before they had this policy if someone ate nuts next to my daughter we politely advised of our situation or asked to be moved. The smell of peanuts or peanut butter makes her feel ill. She carries an Epipen at all times & has not had an allergic reaction in over 8 years since she is very careful (she used to only want to fly Westjet since they were more accomodating to her) . She would never eat food served in an airplane nor a restaurant. She eats onlly foods she prepares herself & reads every label every time.

I see this as a common courtesy. You would give a seat up for a pregnant woman as would you not blow smoke around someone who may not want to be exposed to second hand smoke ( or has an allergy) The smoking ban has worked well everywhere as far as I can see so not sure why asking a few seats in front & back of an allergic person not to eat nuts for a few hours would be such an inconvenience.

Allergies to nuts is not just a sick feeling, it can cause your throat to swell and you can die. I am surprised at how most people have reacted to this post and hope over time most people understand and accomodate those with allergies.

Thank you to those who made these changes possible.
Do you practice 'common courtesy' in return for demanding it from others? Do you advise the airline at the time of booking and ask the GA to announce it in the gate area several times? Do you expect an entire plane load of people, many of whom may have health issues and/or don't speak English or French, to not eat anything containing nuts, or made in a facility which may process nuts?

I'm not directing all of that at you specifically, but I can assure you that there are many people charging around demanding that others respect them, but who fail to respect others in return.

I have been on far too many AC flights in recent years of lengthy duration where there was a complete ban on eating nuts, BOB, and anything made in a facility which processes nuts. I have sat in the first few rows and witnessed passengers who demand this of the cabin crew.

Those people and their unreasonable expectations have made it very difficult for both other travellers, and other people with various allergies.

I applaud LH for not allowing someone with a nut allergy to fly. She failed to notify the airline in advance and demanded that on a 10 flight on an A340 nobody eat nuts and that no nuts be served.
exbayern is offline  
Old Aug 3, 11, 12:44 pm
  #60  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC Elite, SPG Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 123
Originally Posted by HR_Traveler View Post
While I think we can all empathise with your daugters situation
Originally Posted by exbayern View Post
Do you practice 'common courtesy' in return for demanding it from others?....
Perhaps I was wrong.
HR_Traveler is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread