Adam1222

If the daughter had taken individual agency and paid for her own ticket rather than relying on her mother's job to provide it, perhaps this argument would make sense.

It is well-known that if someone who uses your pass travel acts badly, it is held against you. You therefore have "individual agency" in deciding whether to allow others to use your pass and informing them of the conditions.

I Doubt there are actual PR concerns as the likelihood of anyone actually not flying AC because of this is de minimis. The people who rant about online probably have flown 2x in the past decade, have never been to Canada, and will book whatever flight is cheapest the next time they travel.
​​​​​​
​​​​​​Much more dangerous for the airline if they caved to the spoiled daughters public tantrums when they enforce the rules of pass travel for everyone else.

Finally, I think the AC union likely knows the terms of the contract better than the armchair lawyers here.

RangerNS

No we aren't. The complaints are still rooted in a gift.

If the employee is contrite and apologetic (as her union advised), I doubt more will be done to her privileges. We've not heard directly from her, or know anything about what is going on behind closed doors... or even if it was more than a 2 minute conversation and basically an automatic and regular response.

On the other hand, if the employee themselves is even internally fighting slightly, then there is no remorse, and no reason to believe they could in the future pick their guests to the required standard, and should have the privileges revoked for longer.

respectable_man

The difficulty is that equal punishment is almost always interpreted as comparable guilt, and it's not clear from the limited information that there is equal guilt. Mind you: we only have the daughter's "side" of the story here. AC management is not so irrational as to come down on a (unionized) employee without good reasons. Also while making examples is sometimes useful, it is also true that if the reasons for making the mother an example aren't clear, the situation can backfire.

hyho61

While it is wrong for the daughter to complain in social media, she is within her rights to complain to the airline. One should complain about the poor service even if it was a free ticket. Also for airline employees who are generally underpaid, this is part of the benefit. It is like McDonalds employees who get free food, it is expected, it is almost a right.

Airline industry attracts employees who would otherwise work for some one else if it was not for some of the perks. So this may be a privilege, but it is almost same as health benefits. Everyone in this forum is excusing the airline for providing poor service. So just because you travel free it is ok to lose your luggage or being yelled.

Ghoulish

Unionized AA employees are not "generally underpaid". Where does such a statement come from?

She does not have the right to demand compensation on a free ticket, and demonstrated she KNEW that by fraudulently representing herself as a paying customer in order to STEAL BY DECEPTION, which is the crux of the matter.

The airline would not engage publicly like this unless the facts were clear and stand legal scrutiny. This is not a mom & pop business. Every statement and action is reviewed by a large and competent legal department.

I think there's a tendency to allow disdain for the airlines make some sympathetic to an entitled fraud none of us would likely want to associate with.

What we seem to have here is another very stupid person unencumbered by ethics or morals. Like a brazen shoplifter, when caught she cries and screams until a sympathetic media portrays her as having the ultimate status one can wear in the US, "Victim".

yulred

Sure, we could add the “pour decourager les autres” angle to it, but if that was the intent all along, we might be in an even odder world in which AC might itself have planted the story.

To the extent that it’s a PR hit with the general population, that tends to be a slow burn that manifests itself not by people not flying, but by politicians looking for easy targets (read beefing up APPRs, as we’re seeing right now). That’s fed as much by incident 1 or incident 2, as it is by a general public malaise towards the sector. If the general public’s takeaway is that AC takes a heavy handed approach towards relatively minor inside baseball issues such as this, how aggressive will they be towards their consumers - which isn’t a question being asked in a vacuum (ongoing delays and troubles breed complaints; besides, did we ever figure out what happened with that YUL-LHR flight).

But that’s minor compared to the other part of the audience. We’re reliably informed that there is a worker shortage and that airlines are struggling to fill posts. If there’s truth to this, what message does this type of heavy-handedness - at least insofar as these perks might be seen as part of the compensation package - send to potential candidates?

So yes, there are some conceivable positives, but the timing is … odd.

Not that I disagree with the points you make, but would this really be a “public” tantrum if it was just an angry email that nobody in the media picked up? AC’s response, rather than the daughter’s actual complaint, has become the story now.

Thats the essence of the issue. If the employee apologizes or even does nothing, it’s not clear what AC can do. At this point, the employees already been punished. How the daughter behaves from here… short of establishing that the mother can control the adult daughter, it’s hard to see how AC can go and punish the mother some more for what the daughter chooses to do from here on.

So sure, if the mother keeps choosing an aggressive approach, she can be punished to the point of employment termination. But at this point (employee tried and punished), I don’t think the daughter’s actions can continue to count against the mother.

In that context, would it have made more sense to tell the mother that they would revoke her privileges if the daughter didn’t publicly recant - or pull back her complaint to the media - instead of going for the more punitive approach of just stripping the privileges straight off the bat? That’s the bit that has a hint of “own goal” about it.
​​​​

RangerNS

We don't know if the response from AC was a conclusive response, or minimal response pending the subjects retort.

Many punishments, or revoked privileges, are dolled out and pending response from the guilty. That framework is not rare at all.

Adam1222

"rights" do not exist in an abstract. If a condition of flying for free is you cannot complain, lie about bring a revenue passenger, and cc media, you do not have the "right" to do so without consequences. Pass travel certainly is a benefit, but it comes with conditions, just like all other benefits. A McDonald's fast food worker is not entitled to unlimited food whenever they want. And airline employees accept the bargain: travel for free but forfeit the "right" to lie and complain and involve the media. pretty good deal!

The idea that airlines awful passenger good is why this person felt entitled to complain.

yeeg

She should have used her Tik Tok page for the views.

YVR4Ever

Concerning the PR angle, I've read comments here and elsewhere, and I would estimate that 95% are strongly in favour of the airline's actions here. Most people recognize an entitled spoiled brat when they see one and have very little tolerance for that behaviour.

The one thing I've learned from this is that there is a code of conduct for non-rev travelers and that it includes a dress code. If reports are correct, that includes a prohibition on wearing sneakers or any other athletic wear. It makes me a bit nostalgic for the days when everyone dressed up at least a bit to take a flight. I'll likely be a bit more self conscious about what I'm wearing on my feet when I board, LOL.

PurdueFlyer

Since its August, we're about due for some "breaking news" media report about 4 buddy-pass riders who have been stuck on the floor of some major European hub for 4 days, because they didn't realize the buddy passes they bought from some guy on ebay weren't actually confirmed tickets. le horror!

then this Air Canada story will melt away and the matter will be forgotten. Well, not by the mother, who can't fly for free for the next 24 months, but I digress.

songsc

I have no comment on how AC handles any internal matters, not that my opinions matter.

And I am not sure what involving media can achieve. People bash AC all the time, but they will forget about most of the negative experiences once they want to travel again…

Bohemian1

Involving the media in this case was a truly great example of an self-entitled DYKWIA in action.

Unfortunately for her and her mother, they actually do know who they are.

TheViperOne

Many years ago I investigated major crimes for a living. It’s like everyone thinks you aren’t going to investigate what they are saying and just take what they say as gospel. And once called on their .... it’s always somehow your fault for verifying what they said? Same case here I’d wager.

On a side note. Please check your PMs

FlY2XS

This case notwithstanding, I've lost count of how many paid J customers I've seen wearing god awful looking and even more awfully priced designer running shoes or athletic wear on a flight! Maybe AC should revisit their policies. Heck, shopping in TO and NYC over the past week, it has become clear that the high end stores carry much more casual wear than they did 30 years ago and it now clearly overwhelms the formal wear.
I am still old school and tell my kids to dress properly but comfortably for flights, and apply the same rules to myself.