canopus27

I suspect there's more to this story than the OP describes.

Of course it's feasible that the OP behaved exactly as written .... remaining calm all the time, never raising his voice, always polite, just a tragic victim really .... in which case I would agree that the problem was "one of those miserable FAs that used to distinguish AC".

Or, just possibly, the OP behaved a little more aggressively on board ... perhaps was loud, pushy, argumentative, condescending, and not listening to reasonable directions given by the cabin crew .... and then wrote a slightly cleaned up description of the events in his complaint.

This wouldn't be the first time that an "I'm an innocent victim" thread on FT was later supplemented with the perspectives of other people who were there ... and those cases have not always turned out well for the OP (anyone else remember this thread? AC569 Denied Boarding - Seeking Witnesses/Accounts (1/11 SFO-YVR)) ... but usually we're not so lucky, and without a witness we'll probably never know exactly which version of my two extremes above is closer to the truth.

I have my suspicions - but only people who were actually there really know.

james dean

Gee, I'd have to say I've observed the opposite. The FF people are the most reasonable with gate delays, flight delays, seat changes...maybe because they have seen it so many times and they understand airline flying has it's quirks and quarks.

purelywasted

A good reason to avoid code-shares, when stuff goes wrong, neither the carrier that issued the ticket nor the operating carrier are around/helpful in getting you re-booked on the next flight.

Surprised that the other passengers were unwilling to help a couple kids out. It sounds like something stronger went on between the Dad the FA. It would be interesting to hear an alternative perspective from another pax.

Still seems like the best policy is to fake an apology and write a letter from the safety of your home.

MasterGeek

YEG USER

DragonSoul

That's one reason I like SQ and its 'step' built into the seat frame.

FlyerTalker70

Then you step with your muddy spiked shoes on the seat, lift your luggage over your head and push it into the overhead bin

rbwpi

Another one post wonder.

yowspotter

If things went down as described...

The punishment doesn't fit the crime. Sure, the OP sounds like he was a jerk, but being a jerk isn't reason enough to get booted from the flight. That's a very serious consequence, and meanwhile the escalating FA gets away with being judge, jury, and executioner while suffering only a few ruffled feathers.

I don't detect any safety concern with keeping this pax on board, but even if one was legitimately perceived by the FA, how exactly would an apology mitigate that?

More than likely this situation involved a jerk who hurt an FA's feelings and/or embarrassed her publicly, so she exercised payback by escalating to the PIC feigning safety concerns in order to get him booted. This wreaks of vendetta, and this power tripping practice needs to stop. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Someone up thread asked if the pilot would boot someone for "no reason". The answer is yes. When you have a flight to get away and are disrupted during one of your busiest parts of the flight to deal with a situation you didn't witness, you defer to the crew's judgment and let customer service sort the mess out later.

yul36

You would if it was you in his position!

yul36

I don't get the impression the FA was in any danger. AC should take a hit, and since he lives in the US he should take to the courts to recoup his financial loss. As one previous poster mentioned. captain took the path of least resistance, rather than have a nattering whiny FA on his case for 9 hours. Who cares if a couple of kids get stranded.

FlyingNone

---
Code - for just get off my airplane, I really don't care what happens to you. Surely no one thinks he (the captain) was on the phone arranging for someone to hand-hold them through the problem? Nevertheless, airline staff need to learn how things work at their own airline - just (the captain) knowing and advising them that there was another flight going to Toronto that night was not going to get this man and his daughters on it. As well, he would have been better off communicating to his wife to take a breather (all of them) and just rebook him and his daughters for the next day. The wife made the agony worse by having them jerk back and forth to/from and through the airport - like it was a matter of life and death that they travel that very evening - instead of sometime the next day?? She probably would have found lower fares for them. Nothing like immediately hitting the panic button.
Overall, I do believe he was polite and just another victim of some power-tripping flight attendant who was surely afraid she would be reported for bad customer service. Better to heave-ho the guy immediately than stand in front of a supervisor two weeks later. That's the way it works, folks, from the staff perspective.......FEAR.

Britflyer18

Duke0Windsor

I'm honestly aghast that something like this even happened.

Assuming that the OP stated everything correctly and without twisting or distorting the facts, it is no wonder the ME3 are driving more traffic into their metal vs the north american carriers. If AC does not understand that customer service is a part and parcel of being in the airline business (and enable and insure their flight attendants for medical insurnace and provide them training accordingly) they will lose passengers who have the option of taking their money to other carriers who provide better service. If you've flown EK or EY or QR or SQ or TG or ..... you'll see cabin crew happily helping out passengers fit their bags in the overhead bins apart from belting them in their seats and serving them meals with a smile on their face.

It is worse that the PIC had to offload them without even so much as speaking to the passengers involved. It takes far greater paperwork to offload someone rather than intervene and sort out the situation. It is indeed sad that the PIC chose the overload of paperwork rather than spend that same amount of time to get the plane chocks off.

What followed after the offloading is nothing new, happens across carriers and sectors.

For everyone who believes that the OP was behaving in an entitled manner or high handed with his approach needs to understand that traveling with children is always complex and what precipitated the situation was that he was separated by a few passengers from his children to be able to provide them the necessary help. Its not like he was standing there telling the FA to load his bags in, he was asking for help, that is a big difference. It is simply anti-common-sense to not help a person who needs it. I have no sympathies for the FA or the airline in question and karma will take a full circle when they have to withdraw from slots because they can't fill up the plane and then start furloughing pilots and crew.

I always stand up for the airline staff because I know what they go through on a daily basis, but this just seems completely out of order and something that could've been resolved had there been even ONE crew member who was willing to take that step to resolve it, then and there.

Transpacificflyer

Whoa;
You packed it you stack it! Seriously? As I mentioned upthread, what of the disabled, the physically impaired, the elderly, and yes, even kids who cannot reach?

we aren’t insured to lift bags. Really? If this was an Ontario or Quebec crew I believe that they would come under their provincial workers comp programs. These programs have broad definitions of work and will cover injury arising within the scope of that employment, including a slip and fall while at a hotel resting between flights.
For example, this is what the ON WSIB states;
Guidelines: A worker who is an Ontario resident, and whose usual place of employment is in Ontario, is automatically covered for up to six months while temporarily working outside Ontario. A worker may be required to work part of the time in a jurisdiction other than Ontario. Where the worker is employed outside Ontario up to 6 months or more with an approved extension, and the employer is not carrying on an assessable business in that jurisdiction (see 15-01-11, Interjurisdictional Agreement), the worker's right to claim compensation for a work-related injury is limited to Ontario. If the employer operates an assessable business in other jurisdictions, the worker has a right to claim under the laws of either the jurisdiction where injured, or Ontario.

Are you saying that Air Canada does not participate in the provincial workers comp programs and instead insures its Employer's Liability exposure on its own? Even if that was the case, the Air Transport Regulations (SOR 88-58) still set out a requirement that the airline have liability insurance. That liability insurance provision says there is only an exclusion of the obligation to have insurance for employees if there is workers comp insurance in place.

In consideration of the above, the multiple claims made on the thread that the "FAs are not covered" is hokum. IMO, the workers just don't want to lift the bag or to help people.