LTN Phobia

BA should just stop carrying UMs. It must cost them a bit of money to have staff look after them, and they probably don't gain much revenue from them, and they open themselves to litigation.

If they change the policy to 'anyone next to them', and something bad happens to a UM, they could be sued for "negligence", and if they don't change the policy, they could be sued for discrimination.

Just don't carry them, like some other airlines don't. Make minors totally parents' responsibility (which they really should be in the first place, in my view) and unless the parents are sitting next to them or within 1 row of them in the same cabin (i.e. close supervision), don't carry minors.

adrianjc32

There were Uncles too, but very few. The job just seemed to attract female applicants. Even in the terminal when BA looks for staff to work in that area it tends to be female staff that want to work in that part of the business. The correct job title is Skyflyer Ground Escort, it was changed some years ago.

hsmall

Before they do that could we actually see whether there is any actual evidence of any misbehaviour by anyone towards UMs on any airline anywhere. I assume there is some. We could then maybe see whether there is some way of mitigating any known issues (obviously supervise-able seats, CRB checks for "uncles and aunties", I don't know) which would enable the service to continue. There is a tendency when confronted with irritating parts of the equality legislation to refuse to adapt but simply to withdraw from providing the service in a fit of pique that you can't carry on discriminating (cf. catholic adoption agencies in the UK). I think BA is bigger than that.

hsmall

The fact there are uncles (which pleases me) chips away further at the policy of moving single men away from UMs.

Tumbleweed666

I think thats exactly what he said, there was an implication from the crew members behaviour that he was 'suspect' and thats why he should move.

colmc

It would appear that other airlines without this discriminatory policy don't seem to be getting sued left, right and centre. I'm sure we'd here about in on FT if they were.

HIDDY

I suspect he was a bit of a DYKWIA who didn't like being asked to move to his assigned seat by a BA staff member.....no matter the reason.

We can safely say that'll be the end of BA carrying UM's.

hsmall

You are somewhat out of touch Hiddy! I blame it on your advancing age and living in a very socially conservative country

Oh and by the way you still haven't told us what "minority" you were blaming for daring to challenge BA's discriminatory rules??

FrancisA

In the case of EZ, they would have no need for this policy as there are no unaccompanied 12-year olds on EZ. To quote their policy on easyjet.com: "easyJet does not accept unaccompanied minors under the age of 14 for travel. Children under 14 years of age cannot travel unless accompanied by a person aged 16 years or older who will take responsibility for the minor."

This story concerns a 12-year old! I do wish journalists would check even the most basic facts before giving companies airtime and free publicity!

gelplanes

What happened to me happend a long time ago. I no longer blame the airline or even the woman who did it to me. I only blame myself for being too scared to speak up at the time of the incident.

I hope it never happens to another child, but sadly, this isn't a perfect world. There are both male and female sexual predators out there... on a plane or on the ground. It can be a man, a woman, or even a couple(yes it does happen), regardless of their age, social status, looks, or even the way they dress. IMHO, the best defense is to teach children how not to get into a situation where adults can take advantage of them... and in the unfortunate cases where someting did happen, the children should know that it's okay to report it to report it to parents/teachers/police/etc.....

hsmall

.....

ajax

..............

squeeler

Well I beg to differ. What was this guy's loss? His feelings were hurt, that is all. Nobody was injured, there was no damage to anyone's reputation (it would never have got into the public domain without the court case), there no financial loss suffered. Just hurt feelings. I think it is inappropriate to use the legal system for pique.

I have various thoughts about the person who brought the case, but the over-riding one is pity.

ajax

Would you have said the same thing about Rosa Parks?

Dave Noble

The case is not about money but serves to show that the discrimination policy that BA undertakes is contrary to law. Hopefully will serve to cause BA and others to revoke illegal policies