RangerNS

If you ask.

Quoting the quoted quote "needed the seat for the child" isn't "has this seat assigned for the child". Or how big the child was. Maybe they mean "baby", who doesn't get a seat assignment at all, paid or free.

In any case, PAX decided to solve the own problem without engaging the crew. And when the crew did their job by attempting to resolve the inevitable follow on problem PAX refused to comply, and indeed, further involved themselves in tangental problems.

Air Canada has bilingual crew. There is little way to interpret someone reassigning their seats and attempting to "translate" as the root of the problem and an additional problem.

WildcatYXU

Since the mother had the aisle seat and Paun had the middle seat right beside her, I suspect the child was a lap child. There is no such thing as free seat assignment for lap children.

Sopwith

I have used the lav probably a dozen times before takeoff, always when I'm positioned so I don't have to go against the flow of traffic. Once or twice I've been told it's not allowed. This is another one of those made-up rules to suit the FA's convenience. What they want you to do when you board is sit down and shut up ASAP so they can get going on time.

WildcatYXU

Talking about lap children and arguing with FA's reminded me of my niece's experience on KL. It happened 8 years ago. She was traveling to the old country on KL with her son who was just under 2 years old. She doesn't like the lap child thing, so she booked a seat for him. After they boarded the MD-11 at YYZ and settled into their seats, the FA shows up ordering her to take the boy to her lap as they need the seat. She refused arguing she paid for the seat. The FA was insistent and eventually called the purser. When the purser arrived, my niece already had the paperwork proving she paid for the seat ready. She changed her tactic too and offered to sell the seat back for some crazy sum. The purser eventually gave up. The funny part is that KL later really liked the picture showing the MD-11 wing with KLM logo on the winglet she posted on FB.
I wonder how would this ACR crew handle her situation and if they'd order her out from the aircraft.

pewpew

on some routes (including TATL, as I experienced on a recent LHR-YYC) that's a charitable description of their language competency.

Stranger

WildcatYXU

You know Stranger, you may be right. And I'm perfectly willing to accept the idea that the travelers caused a disruption and they were rightfully removed from the flight. Now, I'm not sure what does the CoC and the law say about the unused fare. Is it forfeit? Is it not? But honestly, I don't care about this part of the story. The passengers screwed up and lost. End of the first episode.
What I have a problem with is episode two. AC bans the passengers and notifies them by letter. Sent to their home address while they are in Europe. (Honestly, this part alone is a definition of idiocy. Do we really want to fly with an outfit capable of this?) And then when the passengers purchase a ticket through AC's partner, they deny them boarding. And then AC simply says they have no way to flag customers in their system. If not, why there is no grace period on a ban where a customer is notified by snail mail and has no chance to know about it?
Whichever way I look at it, AC sold via their partner a service it was not intending to fulfill. I don't care they have no way to identify banned customers in their electronic booking environment. It is a technical problem and it is AC's problem. Therefore as I see it AC simply committed a fraud

KenHamer

It upsets tbe weight and balance calculations.

MSPeconomist

ffsim

Thanks for sharing. You'd have to assume that the francophone gentleman who didn't want to take his assigned seat would have something to add to the story...

That's a very unfavourable reading of the woman's comments. And the bolded bit is outright false: "Turns out, one of the men was in the wrong seat and my seat was his seat. So I said ok I will move but where, since there is a child in my seat." She offered to move -- once her mom came back from the lav -- and the man definitely didn't want his assigned seat: "the man who was supposed to be in my seat did not want to take his seat (the one I’m in) because it’s a middle seat"

The only pax in the reddit story refusing to comply is the gentleman in the wrong seat.

Still, I agree with the rest of your comments. She got involved in too much of the FA's business. I'd suggest that's down to a lack of experience rather than any malicious intent worthy of an outright ban.

RangerNS

I would like to live in a world with a mechanism for securely identifying someone, body and mind, accurate such that one actual person and one identity are always linked; where a real world sack of meat can be accurately identified when they allow it, and an online concept of a person be accurately tied to a particular sack of meat, when they allow it, while also maintaining the ability of physical and online anonymity, but that may not be even conceptually possible. It for sure doesn't actually exist in 2019.

Air Canada doesn't have the ability to ban "a name" from reserving something on their system without also banning several thousand John Smiths at any given moment. There is no unique identity required until check-in, and arguably, not even then.

The FAs and GAs (if there was any GA involvement) would likely not know the outcome of some sober (ha!) corporate security decision. Should the GAs have the ability and authority to ban PAX for "a few days"? Perhaps. Should they have told them if they did? For sure.

For comparison sake, and not that I've been kicked out of a bar since slightly before I was 19, you don't go back there. For sure not the same night.

RangerNS

But didn't move. Why did she have to wait for her mother? The FA or the man whose seat she took could easily have told ma where she went, assuming that ma could not have figured that out herself, or seen her daughter a few rows away.

"OK, I'll move" and then not moving, isn't complying.

agree to disagree.

Not quite sure how that is relevant. It wasn't a class in how to board an aircraft, it was actually boarding an aircraft. Now, I've seen confused passengers. Often. I've seen passages with zero self awareness. Often. And I've seen AC staff deal with them in ways ranging from extreme service-oriented graciousness to the more typical curt indifference of a power drunk hall monitor.

This situation sounds like a selfish noob obstinate busybody well deserved in her comeuppance.

Error 601

I don't know if there is a Canadianism for this, but in the US delivering legal or other important notices in a manner that guarantees the recipient can't act upon them is called "sewer service" and judges really don't like it.

ffsim

You can tell all that from a few lines of text? Impressive.

RangerNS

I can tell you what it sounds like after a few lines of (her own) text.