Not permitted to fly - BAN from airline!
#121
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: YUL
Programs: AC SE (*A Gold), Bonvoy Platinum Elite, Hilton Gold, Amex Platinum / AP Reserve, NEXUS, Global Entry
Posts: 5,691
I’m all for people taking responsibility for their actions, but placing the onus squarely on one party is nonsensical and ignores reality.
Last edited by tcook052; Aug 14, 2018 at 3:43 pm Reason: fix quote
#122
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: YVR
Programs: Air Canada Super Elite 2+ Million Miles
Posts: 2,478
I disagree on the bolded bit. Airlines publish both recommended and minimum check-in times. Check-in time is exactly that, the time by which someone must be checked in; not the time someone needs to join the queue for check-in. It is the recommended time that has a buffer built in. Had someone joined the queue by the recommended check-in time and still not made it to the front of the line, IMHO they'd have a case, not if they simply join the queue by the minimum time.
AC's website is pretty clear on this:
https://www.aircanada.com/ca/en/aco/...ing-times.html
There are 2 columns "when should you check in" and "check-in / baggage drop-off ends"
Clicking on the information button in the header of each column states the following:
Policy is that you must have BP in hand and deposited your checked bags prior to cut-off; not simply joining the queue. I can understand why people may have different opinions on this, but that isn't the policy that AC enforces.
Furthermore, IIRC someone posted on here a long time ago that the reason for the strict adherence for the 1 hr cut-off on transborder flights into the US is that airlines are required to submit a list to DHS of people checked-in for a flight, and that this list must be submitted 60 minutes prior to departure. I have no idea if that is true (otherwise there would be issues with people standing by for earlier flights, etc.), or if other countries have similar requirements for international flights.
AC's website is pretty clear on this:
https://www.aircanada.com/ca/en/aco/...ing-times.html
There are 2 columns "when should you check in" and "check-in / baggage drop-off ends"
Clicking on the information button in the header of each column states the following:
Policy is that you must have BP in hand and deposited your checked bags prior to cut-off; not simply joining the queue. I can understand why people may have different opinions on this, but that isn't the policy that AC enforces.
Furthermore, IIRC someone posted on here a long time ago that the reason for the strict adherence for the 1 hr cut-off on transborder flights into the US is that airlines are required to submit a list to DHS of people checked-in for a flight, and that this list must be submitted 60 minutes prior to departure. I have no idea if that is true (otherwise there would be issues with people standing by for earlier flights, etc.), or if other countries have similar requirements for international flights.
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/fi...actsheet_3.pdf
#123
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: PHL
Programs: AA EXP, HH Diamond, Owner of 2,000 TWA shares
Posts: 812
I don't advocate using foul language to any airline representative. I'm not saying the OPs husband is in the clear. I will say that I spend enough time at airports to know that, for the most part, airline customers are just a clot in their race to get home. Airlines should hold their representatives to the same high standards that they expect from their customers.
Last edited by Uncle Nonny; Aug 14, 2018 at 4:14 pm
#124
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: YSB & YAM, Northern Ontario, Canada
Programs: Aeroplan, IHG Gold Elite, Marriott Rewards
Posts: 1,100
Simple:
1: Arrive at the airport on time - with a very large spare time cushion of minutes; 3 hrs ahead for international is my normal;
2: Keep husband/wife/spouse/companion/partner under control from erratic irrational behaviour;
3: Keep children under control and in hand;
4: Keep my wits about me and myself under control to avoid over-reacting to the failure of any of the above.
Oh I amost forgot; find someone else to blame rather than the AC check-in clerk or gate agent for the failure of any of the above.
Be glad my child was prevented from getting seriously injured!
Nuff said!
1: Arrive at the airport on time - with a very large spare time cushion of minutes; 3 hrs ahead for international is my normal;
2: Keep husband/wife/spouse/companion/partner under control from erratic irrational behaviour;
3: Keep children under control and in hand;
4: Keep my wits about me and myself under control to avoid over-reacting to the failure of any of the above.
Oh I amost forgot; find someone else to blame rather than the AC check-in clerk or gate agent for the failure of any of the above.
Be glad my child was prevented from getting seriously injured!
Nuff said!
Last edited by TemboOne; Aug 14, 2018 at 3:55 pm
#125
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: YVR
Programs: Bottom feeder Star Gold
Posts: 2,652
I disagree on the bolded bit. Airlines publish both recommended and minimum check-in times. Check-in time is exactly that, the time by which someone must be checked in; not the time someone needs to join the queue for check-in. It is the recommended time that has a buffer built in. Had someone joined the queue by the recommended check-in time and still not made it to the front of the line, IMHO they'd have a case, not if they simply join the queue by the minimum time.
I've saved my place in line and strolled up to the check-in counter before, when it appears the deadline may be shaved too closely. Just to let them know "hey I'm here" and get a sense of whether there's an opportunity to leapfrog forward. Generally the response has been "it's ok, we'll process you" and despite reaching the desk well after the cutoff time, they have honoured their word.
It perhaps helped that I stifled any curse words.
#126
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: YEG
Posts: 3,925
"Recommended" is a meaningless, unenforceable term. Arriving at the check-in area prior to the deadline is still within the legal check-in timeframe. I'm not sure your experience in very busy and or chaotic airports, but check-in (and lineups in general) amongst certain places/cultures can be fraught with all manner of delays, no matter how well-planned your preparation. It's entirely feasible to arrive at the queue at T-120min and still be short of the front desk 90 min later. At what point does the airline take responsibility for its own processes? Going by your rationale, it seems there's a murky line between the 'recommended' and the 'minimum' times...but where is it actually drawn?
I've saved my place in line and strolled up to the check-in counter before, when it appears the deadline may be shaved too closely. Just to let them know "hey I'm here" and get a sense of whether there's an opportunity to leapfrog forward. Generally the response has been "it's ok, we'll process you" and despite reaching the desk well after the cutoff time, they have honoured their word.
It perhaps helped that I stifled any curse words.
I've saved my place in line and strolled up to the check-in counter before, when it appears the deadline may be shaved too closely. Just to let them know "hey I'm here" and get a sense of whether there's an opportunity to leapfrog forward. Generally the response has been "it's ok, we'll process you" and despite reaching the desk well after the cutoff time, they have honoured their word.
It perhaps helped that I stifled any curse words.
I don't necessarily agree with the policy as written, but it is published and is what AC's agents will default to. I was posting the links so that others in the same situation can be aware of what they're up against in a similar situation, regardless of what any of us might think is right/wrong.
#127
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: YVR
Programs: Air Canada Super Elite 2+ Million Miles
Posts: 2,478
Well, I agree cut-offs do matter as OTP very high on my criteria.
But for OP, and many of us too, who possibly have routinely experienced the nonsense practice of airlines calling queued travelers to front of line for processing.
So some will say so what is wrong with getting folks going when airline queue mgmt fails:
1. Trains the traveler moved forward why should I come early
2. Trains everyone else in the queue watching all this why should I come early if airline willing to make exceptions
Consequence, everyone comes later thereby vastly increasing peak processing requirements, and I’ll spare doing the math here on how even small change in input rate can exacerbate queue delays.
and let’s remember, OP pointed out that why were some passengers advanced and NOT their family.
AC own worse enemy when ops mgmt gets behind queueing theory and best practice.
But for OP, and many of us too, who possibly have routinely experienced the nonsense practice of airlines calling queued travelers to front of line for processing.
So some will say so what is wrong with getting folks going when airline queue mgmt fails:
1. Trains the traveler moved forward why should I come early
2. Trains everyone else in the queue watching all this why should I come early if airline willing to make exceptions
Consequence, everyone comes later thereby vastly increasing peak processing requirements, and I’ll spare doing the math here on how even small change in input rate can exacerbate queue delays.
and let’s remember, OP pointed out that why were some passengers advanced and NOT their family.
AC own worse enemy when ops mgmt gets behind queueing theory and best practice.
#128
Moderator: British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: Battleaxe Alliance
Posts: 22,127
Some circles would deemed your logic to be discriminatory and prejudicial by associating persons with family connection as guilty. How is that different from racial, religion or gender etc discrimination. Your father beats up your mother and you are guilty, nice morality.
Anyone is quite welcome to consider that logic discriminatory and prejudicial. I won't change my mind about it no matter how aggressively or unpleasantly they word their response.
Perhaps I should call it guilty by 'failure to do the right thing' rather than 'association' though.
====
Besides that, are the OP and the OP's children actually banned, or is it just the OP's husband that is banned (if anyone is in fact banned at all), but the OP and the OP's family could not fly the next day in any case by virtue of AC's favour being withdrawn?
In other words, they no-showed for the original flight by virtue of being late to check in, but AC did them a favour by allowing them to standby for a later flight, but they withdrew that favour when the OP's husband got abusive and cancelled the tickets for the whole family (which would have been the result in the first place for no-showing unless it was an expensive flex ticket that allowed no-shows, but for the favour by AC), or is anyone actually banned from flying AC?
Last edited by LTN Phobia; Aug 14, 2018 at 11:24 pm
#130
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: YVR
Programs: Air Canada Super Elite 2+ Million Miles
Posts: 2,478
I would absolutely deem myself guilty (legally and morally) if I knew about someone in my travelling party (for instance) behaving inappropriately and I did not intervene or insist that the person make amends for whatever he or she has done/said if it was no longer ongoing.
Anyone is quite welcome to consider that logic discriminatory and prejudicial. I won't change my mind about it no matter how aggressively or unpleasantly they word their response.
Perhaps I should call it guilty by 'failure to do the right thing' rather than 'association' though.
Anyone is quite welcome to consider that logic discriminatory and prejudicial. I won't change my mind about it no matter how aggressively or unpleasantly they word their response.
Perhaps I should call it guilty by 'failure to do the right thing' rather than 'association' though.
My emphathy for OPS just went up big time, and for the children - easy to say here you would intervene, yet, OP is getting story about what really happened from Spouse as was not physically present to altercation.
More internal family dynamics going on here than meet’s the eye - and unwillingness to criticize spouse in this public forum obvious. Yet, plenty of family abuse stories of a bullying spouse sound painfully too familiar.
Failure to intervene for many is de facto response to avoid what sadly might come later...
OP, if you need help, get it please, if even for sake of your children.
#131
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, BA Gold, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,302
Having just re-read all three OP posts and in NO way has OP admitted to admonishing spouse, to the contrary lauding as this is first time ever for giving public abuse and offering character witness to boot.
My emphathy for OPS just went up big time, and for the children - easy to say here you would intervene, yet, OP is getting story about what really happened from Spouse as was not physically present to altercation.
More internal family dynamics going on here than meet’s the eye - and unwillingness to criticize spouse in this public forum obvious. Yet, plenty of family abuse stories of a bullying spouse sound painfully too familiar.
Failure to intervene for many is de facto response to avoid what sadly might come later...
OP, if you need help, get it please, if even for sake of your children.
Can we get back to the F in FT?
#132
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: YVR
Programs: Air Canada Super Elite 2+ Million Miles
Posts: 2,478
Thus, Lots of other varied perspectives evident on this Thread about what OP should or shouldn’t have done like @LTN Phobia , but instead you choose solely to target mine?
I must say thanks for reinforcing my point about possible bullying.
have a great day 😄
#133
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: AA Gold, OW Ruby, IHG PLT, JB Mosiac, Delta Silver, VA Silver, AK MVP, Hyatt Gold, Marriott Silver
Posts: 151
Yes, it was absolutely prejudiced. Most employers are extraordinarily prejudiced toward those who get into heated arguments and curse at their staff. I'd have punted you too.
Maybe if you'd acted like adults when there were "major weather issues" you wouldn't have caused yourself to lose 3 days and an important family event.
Your legal position? I don't know because I'm not a lawyer. Your moral position? Indefensible. You got what you deserved.
Maybe if you'd acted like adults when there were "major weather issues" you wouldn't have caused yourself to lose 3 days and an important family event.
Your legal position? I don't know because I'm not a lawyer. Your moral position? Indefensible. You got what you deserved.
Guilt by association? Guess the next time your seat mate acts up you should be punished too. After all, you're guilty by sitting next to them.
#134
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 679
#135
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 69
Weather issues are beyond the airline's control and cause a lot of stress. Planes are so packed full that it can take a few days to get all of the inconvenienced passengers taken care of. None of this is the Gate Agent's or Ticket Agent's fault. In 35 plus years of flying I have seen some agents with very poor customer service skills, but once a passenger personalizes the situation, by yelling or cursing, the battle is over. Let this be a lesson to 1. be mindful of the airline employee's level of stress from a delay situation and 2. If the airline employee begins pushing your buttons, never react with anger or swearing. If you are being mistreated and it is intentional, ask for a supervisor. If it is something beyond the employees control (weather, even equipment or crew issues) be understanding. If you are the calm, inconvenienced passenger you stand a chance of being taken care of, if you lose your self control, it is a lost cause.
Last edited by MitchR; Aug 15, 2018 at 7:37 am Reason: typo