Husband, 10 & 12 year old daughters kicked off flight and abandoned in Rome
Aug 2, 2018, 8:04 am
#31
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: YVR
Programs: Air Canada Super Elite 2+ Million Miles
Posts: 2,478
Aug 2, 2018, 8:05 am
#32
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC SE MM, Bonvoy Plat, Hilton G,Nexus, Amex MR Plat,IHG Plat
Posts: 4,428
Fair enough, but other travelers do NOT know the details of FA duties, thresholds of engagement that warrants PIC engagement, and whether this behaviour was evident at check-in and/or Boarding gate that gets transmitted to FA.
At face value, OP demonstrates aggressiveness which is what many posts call out - and unless OP willing to sue good luck with compensation as EC 261 doesn’t apply here.
At face value, OP demonstrates aggressiveness which is what many posts call out - and unless OP willing to sue good luck with compensation as EC 261 doesn’t apply here.
Aug 2, 2018, 8:09 am
#33
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC 75k, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,154
Or her, it takes one google search. Social Media 101.
Aug 2, 2018, 8:10 am
#34
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: YVR
Programs: Air Canada Super Elite 2+ Million Miles
Posts: 2,478
👍🏻
Now we can agree, And unfortunately if your right about media, OP may very well get rewarded for bad behaviour, should the real story be more complex than posted.
Now we can agree, And unfortunately if your right about media, OP may very well get rewarded for bad behaviour, should the real story be more complex than posted.
Aug 2, 2018, 8:13 am
#35
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Halifax
Programs: AC SE100K, Marriott Lifetime Platinum Elite. NEXUS
Posts: 4,570
Past behavour is an indicator of future behavour. PAX arguing with the crew and putting the schedule at risk can only be viewed as suspicious, and far more difficult to deal with, wheels up, let alone west of Normandy.
PIC may have already had (apparently did already have) their mind made up when they came back. But gave PAX an opportunity for a humbling and sincere apology. An apology could easily be a lie, but a non-apology is for sure the truth. PAX had no interest that day in being a safe and responsible customer.
PIC may have already had (apparently did already have) their mind made up when they came back. But gave PAX an opportunity for a humbling and sincere apology. An apology could easily be a lie, but a non-apology is for sure the truth. PAX had no interest that day in being a safe and responsible customer.
Aug 2, 2018, 8:21 am
#36
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 581
Gradually over the past 10-15 years (if not longer) the Stewards and Stewardess have become more stroppy. There is absolutely no challenging them. If they say jump over a seat, they expect the answer to be yes sir/ma'am.
No matter how much they feed you the "primarily for safety" crap, their job is to primarily serve food, try and push duty free items, lottery tickets if on certain LCC, close and open doors.
Though in this case, it could be she didn't get any that day and hence the behaviour.
No matter how much they feed you the "primarily for safety" crap, their job is to primarily serve food, try and push duty free items, lottery tickets if on certain LCC, close and open doors.
Though in this case, it could be she didn't get any that day and hence the behaviour.
Aug 2, 2018, 8:23 am
#37
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: YVR
Programs: Air Canada Super Elite 2+ Million Miles
Posts: 2,478
Past behavour is an indicator of future behavour. PAX arguing with the crew and putting the schedule at risk can only be viewed as suspicious, and far more difficult to deal with, wheels up, let alone west of Normandy.
PIC may have already had (apparently did already have) their mind made up when they came back. But gave PAX an opportunity for a humbling and sincere apology. An apology could easily be a lie, but a non-apology is for sure the truth. PAX had no interest that day in being a safe and responsible customer.
PIC may have already had (apparently did already have) their mind made up when they came back. But gave PAX an opportunity for a humbling and sincere apology. An apology could easily be a lie, but a non-apology is for sure the truth. PAX had no interest that day in being a safe and responsible customer.
So let’s not presume flight was not delayed with baggage retrieval and engaging local ground ops & AC OPS HQ over this rare security based decision.
Aug 2, 2018, 8:27 am
#38
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC*SE 2MM
Posts: 16,655
Why not? Following your logic if you don't accept that there is some grains of truth in what the OP posted then of course AC was in the right. You are suggesting that the passenger was threatening, that the OP lied when he said the captain apologised fort taking the actions that he was taking and lied when he said AC would put them on the next flight to YYZ. You are free to believe that these are all lies. That may be the case, but I think it is more likely that there are some grains of truth in what the OP posted and if there are grains of truth, if I were in the OP's position I would be mightily pissed with AC.
Agree that trying to teach a FA about whay you think their job involves and what good customer service looks like is STOOPID but I wouldn't call it "suspicious". Not sure that a forced apology is any sort of guarantee that past behaviour will not re-start if that is a real concern.
Past behavour is an indicator of future behavour. PAX arguing with the crew and putting the schedule at risk can only be viewed as suspicious, and far more difficult to deal with, wheels up, let alone west of Normandy.
PIC may have already had (apparently did already have) their mind made up when they came back. But gave PAX an opportunity for a humbling and sincere apology. An apology could easily be a lie, but a non-apology is for sure the truth. PAX had no interest that day in being a safe and responsible customer.
PIC may have already had (apparently did already have) their mind made up when they came back. But gave PAX an opportunity for a humbling and sincere apology. An apology could easily be a lie, but a non-apology is for sure the truth. PAX had no interest that day in being a safe and responsible customer.
Last edited by The Lev; Aug 2, 2018 at 9:17 am
Aug 2, 2018, 8:30 am
#39
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC 75k, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,154
- I told her I work in customer service (I own 2 hair salons/spas) and that being a flight attendant was definitely a customer service job.
- She said no, it was safety. I said it was service
- I told her yes, that I thought it was ridiculous that she wouldn't help my daughter with her bag, and said that her job was safety, and a bag falling on the head of a 10 year old child didn't seem to be a safety concern.
- I said, "I don't need to apologize to you, the only person I need to apologize to are all the people who are waiting on this flight for this to be resolved".
Aug 2, 2018, 8:33 am
#40
Join Date: May 2003
Location: YEG
Programs: AC E50 MM, WJ Gold, Marriott Titanium Elite Lifetime
Posts: 3,082
Let's give the OP a bit of the benefit of the doubt before shooting him down.
Here's what very well could have happened... grumpy FA #1 tells captain that she is concerned for her personal safety and will not fly unless the captain orders the "threatening" passengers deplaned. This is in FCO - AC doesn't have spare FA's hanging around there so Captain faces the choice of tossing three passengers or delaying/cancelling the flight. Unfortunately for the OP's family that becomes a pretty straightforward decision - Captain apologises to the family and assures them they will be looked after and he is able to get his plane and the other ~250 passengers home.
Then the real failures start - somebody failed to make the necessary system changes that would allow the pax to be re-booked, so they end up left to their own devices. that may be an AC issue or it may be an LH issue - but it is an issue and AC as the "tossing" airline that committed to finding an alternate route home needs to own that.
Hopefully the OP can narrow the focus of his communication with the airline and get satisfactory resolution.
Here's what very well could have happened... grumpy FA #1 tells captain that she is concerned for her personal safety and will not fly unless the captain orders the "threatening" passengers deplaned. This is in FCO - AC doesn't have spare FA's hanging around there so Captain faces the choice of tossing three passengers or delaying/cancelling the flight. Unfortunately for the OP's family that becomes a pretty straightforward decision - Captain apologises to the family and assures them they will be looked after and he is able to get his plane and the other ~250 passengers home.
Then the real failures start - somebody failed to make the necessary system changes that would allow the pax to be re-booked, so they end up left to their own devices. that may be an AC issue or it may be an LH issue - but it is an issue and AC as the "tossing" airline that committed to finding an alternate route home needs to own that.
Hopefully the OP can narrow the focus of his communication with the airline and get satisfactory resolution.
Aug 2, 2018, 8:34 am
#41
Suspended
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Ontario, Canada
Programs: Aeroplan, IHG, Enterprise, Avios, Nexus
Posts: 8,355
It's a him and he's easy to find. Perhaps the information he provided is to entice the CBC or some other media outlet to call him up.
My opinion of the OP was set when he threatened to sick his wife on AC because she works for an INFLUENCER AGENCY. Then I cleaned the coffee off my keyboard. OMFG, not an INFLUENCER AGENCY!!!! The world quakes in terror.
My opinion of the OP was set when he threatened to sick his wife on AC because she works for an INFLUENCER AGENCY. Then I cleaned the coffee off my keyboard. OMFG, not an INFLUENCER AGENCY!!!! The world quakes in terror.
Aug 2, 2018, 8:36 am
#42
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Texas, USA
Programs: AAdvantage, HH, SPG Gold
Posts: 234
Too many people in this story with an inflated sense of their own importance from the OP to members of the flight crew. I guess it's naive to suggest that people should learn to get along.
Aug 2, 2018, 8:41 am
#43
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC 75k, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,154
It's a him and he's easy to find. Perhaps the information he provided is to entice the CBC or some other media outlet to call him up.
My opinion of the OP was set when he threatened to sick his wife on AC because she works for an INFLUENCER AGENCY. Then I cleaned the coffee off my keyboard. OMFG, not an INFLUENCER AGENCY!!!! The world quakes in terror.
My opinion of the OP was set when he threatened to sick his wife on AC because she works for an INFLUENCER AGENCY. Then I cleaned the coffee off my keyboard. OMFG, not an INFLUENCER AGENCY!!!! The world quakes in terror.
Aug 2, 2018, 8:44 am
#44
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: YVR
Programs: AC SE100K, Bonvoy Platinum Elite, IHG Gold, Hertz 5*
Posts: 2,132
It is infinitely better to seek peace than to prove oneself right.
Last edited by tcook052; Aug 2, 2018 at 1:27 pm Reason: cultural comments removed
Aug 2, 2018, 9:15 am
#45
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: YVR
Programs: Air Canada Super Elite 2+ Million Miles
Posts: 2,478
Learned long ago when LittleSkyBlueSea came long that everything I do and way I treat others in LSBS presence can generate enormous life-long complications. I’m definitely NOT a Pacifist by nature, but my respect for LSBS future meant a fundamental shift, hopefully for the better.
Cannot say anything about OP and his children, but get a grip remains valid in their presence.
Last edited by tcook052; Aug 2, 2018 at 1:28 pm Reason: edit quote