WaytoomuchEurope

Every now and again I like to tap into my wife's opinion on FA matters. She used to be an FA, but it was many years ago and for a now defunct airline that is so dismal I shouldn't name them. Canada3000 made Air Transat seem luxury...but I digress.

I asked her about what she felt the job was all about and whether she felt that putting bags up was part of it. I quote:

"The job is about safety first and foremost and that's what we spend months of our lives training for and what we're always told we're there for. Of course, you also get fired if your "lippy" isn't red enough or your shoes aren't patent-leathery enough, so the message is mixed from the employer anyway. I always felt a part of safety was keeping everyone happy and calm so I focused on having excellent customer service..."

The last sentence was the one that jumped out at me and I felt was an interesting point. Relating it back to this thread, it seems my wife may have ultimately viewed this PAX as a security/safety threat also, since he seemed impossible to please.

Anyway, just an anecdote/perspective from someone who used to be an FA for an "airline". (My GOD were they bad from what I hear from her)

Ace Cdn

I have never understood why people seem to think if they persist there is going to be a positive outcome.
Once the FA said I am not allowed to do it for safety reasons that should have been the end of it.
Why they felt the need to keep pushing the issue is beyond me. In cases like this constant harassment of the flight
crew is going to get you kicked off the plane.

FlyerTalker70

A lot of travellers forget that the main reason FAs are there is in the 0.0001% chance that a safety issue occurs on the flight and you have to evacuate the aircraft. Do you really want a FA with a sore back trying to dispense their duties (i.e. opening emergency exits, freeing stuck pax, etc.)? Sure they have other duties like serving drinks/meals and hawking their airline's CC but if the airlines are to believed, safety is paramount. It also doesn't help when pax insist on taking their carry on luggage with them when this unlikely event occurs and this whole experience demonstrates that pax still have a lot to learn about how to stay safe on this thin metal tubes.

Safe Travels,

James

mats184

Indeed. But how do you know the person sitting in an exit row seat does not experience back issues or is unable to perform his duties during an emergency? To be frank: why wouldn't the crew in that case just sit by the door ready to react to an emergency? Maybe during meal hours or providing a blanket/pillow in the overhead bin a cabin crew would injure his/her back?

If the person cannot get his suitcase from the overhead bin than it is promoting safety during an emergency evacuation, I would argue, as they would think, no it's too high up or heavy

But of course, people are required by law to follow instructions by crew and should not behave in a manner that compromise safety of the work place or the job satisfaction of the crew.

FlyerTalker70

In many cases they do! At least on UA, on the 777 aircrafts their jump seats are right beside the emergency exits. On the smaller equipment like the 737s and CRJs at least on FA is at a jump seat at the front of the plane near the exits there. I suspect in the event of an (heaven forbid) emergency it will be the FA (and the pilot) who make the calls on which doors to exit and likely open them themselves!

Safe Travels,

James

Often1

Parsing the minutiae of the carry-on issue is pointless. It is not why he was booted by the PIC. That was because he refused to obey a lawful crew member instruction on the ground. A reasonable inference that he will do so in the air. The consequences are worse up there because the aircraft isn't a bus which can just pull over to the side of the road.

Even if AC expressly required its FA's to heft passenger bags, OP's conduct as described by his daughter made the PIC's judgment quite justified.

LeisureMiler

Because the crew specifically asks them if they feel it will be a problem if they have to and well, if they lie, they are putting their lives and everyone else's at risk.

Your reasoning suggests you don't take the 0,0000001% chance of something happening seriously.

If ever you sit next to me and your luggage isn't fully under the seat in front of you and the FA doesn't notice, I'll tell you to put it in correctly and will escalate to the FA if you don't. I take that chance very seriously and will not want to stumble on your bag getting out of the plane.

I'll also gladly assist you in getting out in case of an emergency, or putting your luggage in the overhead bin if it's too heavy for you.

skybluesea

global happy traveller

the story sounds fishy to me.

is it just me or is that the general consensus thus far?

Badenoch

If you are going to parade your academic qualifications in a pallid attempt to impress total strangers on the Internet do at least make the effort to spell your area of study correctly. We will ignore the question why someone with a degree in "cont(r)act law" is working in purchasing for a medium sized company.

arttravel

From my experience at FCO, the screening security is very vigilant in preventing passengers from bringing on too much carry on luggage. I thought the term "shopping bags" may mean shopping in airport past security, such as tax free shopping.

There have been numerous occupational health studies on FA that mention the issues of lifting passenger carry ons into the overhead bin and how that should be limited.(see Griffiths and Powell, The occupational health and safety of flight attendants. Aviat Space Environ Med 2012; 83: 514 – 21 . p. 515 and follow the footnotes).

The 10 year old child was traveling with two people who were able to assist her. There is not a policy that mandates that the FA help the able bodied with lifting their overhead luggage.

After the OP asked, the FA said no, and the OP went on the "I paid for a service" and it went into the safety vs service bickering (in the words of the daughter) the OP was standing on the edge. Second FA comes, mentions risk of injury, OP says ok, ok, and continues to complain that no one helped his daughter, and continued to "bicker" (in the words of the daughter), that is when he lost any secure footing.

Refusing to accept that the FA were not required to put his daughter's bag up, when she was traveling with her older sister and father, and continuing to argue about it and the OP's lack of self control and judgment to let that go -- there may have been concern that this "bickering" would continue for the duration of the 8 plus hour trip.

As mentioned I have seen my share of short tempered flight attendants, but have also met enough people that have to have the last word .....

I had a LH gate agent tell me 20 minutes before boarding started that my tax free purchases (2 bags, one with alcohol and another with candy and such) put me over the carry on limit -- despite LH allowing a "reasonable" amount of tax free purchasing. Now I could have bickered about the definition of the term reasonable, but this was not a battle that was worth the repercussion of losing --( ie not boarding) and checking it in would not really harm me. The gate agent got a box and the one plastic bag without the alcohol went in it and was checked in.

I have seen people engage in hopeless arguments -- most realize that and back off. Last month a man got lost in the MUC airport trying to find the Schengen gates and accidentally ended up in passport control line to go to L gates -- non-Schengen. And there was no way to back up, He tried to use the empty line for the disabled and families and the police refused to look at the passport and told him to go into the proper line. Passenger started to argue that he was lost, flight would be boarding, and such but relented and went to normal non EU passport line. At least he did not argue about the customer service of the Bundespolizei -- but who knows, he may be searching for the right social media influencer in order to do so.

moondog

@op Seriously. Hit and run posts are quite rude; the very least you could do is return to this thread, and offer sincere thanks. Furthermore, if you actually fancy getting anywhere with your claim, our collective advice is of considerable value (e.g. many companies spend big bucks on this sort of feedback). It appears that you might have already dug your own grave by posting your daughter's video which directly contradicts your account, among other mistakes. That having been said, if you were to return to this thread, we might be able to assist.

I shall also add that the people here who have no interest in helping you are arguably of the highest value because they have done an excellent job of pinpointing the arguments that AC has against you. If you can't defend yourself against them, you might as well throw in the towel.

FlyerTalker70

Looks like we've got another acronym we can add to the FT glossary : DYKWIGPN : Do You Know When I'm Gonna Post Next

WaytoomuchEurope

This X 1,000,000

james dean

Originally Posted by mats184
It obviously should have been contract law.

..and we all obviously knew it was "contract law", just in case you didn't get it..