Sopwith

At no time have I ever agreed to their tariff. I have acquiesced to it because they have cleverly positioned themselves to unilaterally impose one-sided contract conditions on their customers without the customers' express consent, and usually without even the customers' knowledge. But that's another discussion which we have had before. I expect we may agree to disagree on that point. But I would reiterate that no right-minded customer would ever agree to the tariff if they actually knew what it says and had a viable choice. And no, opting not to travel is not a viable choice.

CZAMFlyer

The author specifically stated the opposite. The exchanges with the flight attendant(s) occurred during the settling-in process and when asked for the dinner order, which is placed at the beginning of the flight. I read nothing in the piece that suggested any other exchanges were noted. In the comments below the article, the author remarks: "They got Mr. Gupta calmed down and he was silent for the flight."

I sympathize with your reluctance to being photographed during travel - it's one of those unavoidable features that we submit to 'for our own safety'. But if you fly with Air Canada, you have agreed to their tariff in full. The company may have "cleverly positioned" themselves, but the tariff is legal, it's not "made up" and its terms are clear. And of course it's self-serving - that's its function. It also serves us as customers. Every person has a viable choice when it comes to travel, which is itself a privilege and not a right. We all opt to travel, and when choosing to use a company like Air Canada, we choose to play by their rules, as long as they fit within the broader laws of the land (which they do). I think we're skipping through minefields when we take photographs of the crew, not because of real or perceived legalities, but because they tend to get bent out of shape about such actions, and they generally hold all the cards while we're sitting on their airplane.

Stranger

The conditions of carriage are part of the contractual conditions when buying a ticket.

This said, conditions imposed by a strong party upon consumers might and often are dubious in view of contract laws; a big part of your lawyer's work is just plain intimidation, and suckers tend to swallow it all. But courts like to stay on the side of the consumer when there is a case like that. For instance, a clause allowing one party to cancel unilaterally the contract, i.e. to cancel your ticket and reimburse without your agreement would likely not stand in court, even if the CTA would have nothing against.

But I don't see it as unreasonable that AC might want to protect their employees from being photographed without their knowledge or acquiescence.

tcook052

You're right that the tantrum didn't extend over the whole flight as I thought however it carried on long enough that it wasn't a one-time loss of temper for someone having a bad day in which case I'd be more inclined to give them a little more understanding.

canadiancow

It carried on?

Or one person's allegations claim that it carried on?

This is where I have an issue with this whole thing. It's the blogger's word against... nothing.

Mr. Gupta may have a very different recollection of the events. The crew may have a third opinion.

We're discussing the statements of someone who wasn't really involved.

In my last few AC flights, I have subconsciously removed my mask when I was struggling to hear the FA. I have also shouted to ensure an FA could hear.

"I'M MISTER KENNEDY!" heard from three rows back might come across as DYKWIA, but it could be me trying to overcome the sound barrier in front of my mouth, as well as the loss of lip-reading.

I will give a neutral (or at least as neutral as you can be when AC flies you around the country, gives you hotel stays, etc., for free) third-party more credit than anyone at AC.

But I don't think attacking a named and photographed passenger over an unfounded allegation is appropriate for FT.

If I posted a photo of the bovine and said the bovine was behaving inappropriately, I'd be banned for a personal attack, and I don't really see why this is any different.

RangerNS

Contract law 1000, day 1, says there needs to be a negotiation for there to be a valid contract.

The rest of the class is about exceptions to that.

And a universally applied and regulatory approved tariff that reduces 500 hours of lawyer time per $500 exchange is going to be accepted by every court in the known universe.

You may need to lease an entire Jetz fo a year if you want any detailed contract changes.
​​​​​

Isotopist

ÀC228 tonight YVR to YYC. A Gentleman decided that the mask and cell phone rules don't apply to him when advised by the FA and so back to the gate for us. He's just been escorted off the plane. At least it was a short return.
Arrived YYC ~40 mins late, not too bad. I thought that the FA handied the situation calmly and with utmost professionalism as opposed to the gentlemen who was escorted off the flight.
I talked with the FA after and it seems it's getting worse. This was her second such incidents in 3 days.

The Lev

Flying YYZ-VIE on Tuesday I got up to go to the washroom midway through the flight. FA's had front washrooms blocked off, so had to queue up and took a few minutes. When I returned to my seat I found it occupied by some guy lying there nice and cozy under my duvet. I quietly mention to him that he's in my seat and get no response. A FA notices me standing there and comes up to me. I explain the situation and she starts tapping on the guy who wakes up but does not seem to speak English. She finally gets across to him that the gig is up and he needs to get out of my seat. He gets up and then she says "sire would you please pull your pants up". at that point I turn around to see him pulling his pants up from below his knees.

Mercifully on an otherwise very full flight there was an empty J seat so I got redirected to that seat. I went back to my original seat to pick up my stuff and looked down and happened to notice that he appeared to have peed on the seat while he was sleeping.

Not sure what would have happened if there had not been an open seat.

canadiancow

So he... he self-upgraded, into your seat... and... peed in it?

Another reason to pick row 1. It's furthest from Y.

The Lev

Correct... and I was in row 2.

Adam Smith

Thread over. @The Lev wins.

Bohemian1

Or loses, depending on how one looks at it.

yyztozag

That's probably the most outrageous/random unruly pax story I've ever heard. The guy came up from Y, passed the closed curtains, got in your seat and urinated on it? That warrants a ban on flying AC again.

yyznomad

Truth is certainly stranger than fiction.
You can't make this stuff up.
Geezuz.

Kishiwada

Took our first J class from YVR-YYC (yeah I know, but the eUps were going to expire) and while the trip out was uneventful, the trip home had the passenger in the seat behind my partner take her shoes off, stick both bare feet between the seat along the window, and spend the first 20 minutes of the trip wiggling her toes together right next to his ear. FA put the kibosh to it before departure, but still. Guh. He said next time he's going to bring a spray bottle of sanitizer and spritz the feet of anyone that does that to him again.