Yachtman

I would say that it is wholly unreasonable to provide personal details on a public forum without the CSM having the opportunity to provide her own perspective or context (and is probably bound by company policies that prevents him/her posting a response. Whilst you hide behind the anonymity of your pseudonym, you could just as easily be a troll or someone seeking to discredit an employee for your own reasons, which could potentially expose the owners of this forum to a civil claim of defamation. The name of the CSM benefits no-one in the public domain, but would be good for a formal complaint.

likethis

I think how I felt about this would depend greatly on my mood.

I might barely notice if in a good mood, think “good for them” if in a great mood, or “what the you know what” if in a good old cantankerous frame of mind.

I’m not sure I’d care enough to ask CSM, not least because I know I’d feel guilty if they actually acted on it - and knowing my luck it would cause the self-upgrader such stress to be downgraded they’d die of a heart attack and I’d be feeling like I’d caused it.

southlondonphil

True, but personal details of the CSM have not in fact been provided on a public forum, merely the identity of the service on which the CSM seemingly failed to challenge a fare cheat.

The only people likely to be able to personally identify the CSM from the flight detail are those who rostered her on the service in the first place, who already know, and have a legitimate right to, her personal information.

snaxmuppet

We should get involved IMO to help stop this kind of behaviour. I agree that it is not our place to tell someone to return to their original seat but we should be reporting it to the crew as an absolute minimum and if you feel comfortable asking them why they are there then why not.

This site is not about encouraging theft nor is it about helping people break the rules. It is about getting the most out of the system as it stands but within the rules. Self-upgrading (that is moving seats to a higher cabin class without the authority of the crew) is not good for anyone. BA lose revenue, if not for that flight but for future flights if people think they can just pay for one cabin and fly in another unchallenged. We lose out because we have more people in the higher cabin taking up CC resource. All in all it is not something any of us should be encouraging.

s0ssos

Not good for anyone? Surely you would accept that it is good for the self-upgrader?
And actually there is plenty of breaking the rules in FT. One specific subforum comes to mind.

Fatdickie

As has been mentioned, none of us including the OP know all the facts or the whole story.

there was a change in aircraft.
is this part of the reason the couple were split Up?

the man mentioned a crew member said it was ok to go and sit with his wife during the flight

he wasn't there on takeoff but in his allocated seating.


did he benefit from any higher class of meal or drinks?

did he return to his allocated seat for landing?

Scots_Al

... and part of the way in which one might legitimately manage situations like this is to avoid confrontation. We don’t know what had gone on prior to this (and the OP doesn’t know what exchanges took place in Y). Whilst no-one likes to see someone (else) getting something for free, confrontation avoidance may have been the best situational call for everyone on the flight.

snaxmuppet

It is a rather pedantic point but yes, good for the upgrader but only them IMO.

If rule-breaking is encouraged on the forum then I for one would not support it. I believe this forum should encourage getting the most from our flying experiences with BA but within the rules. Stretching the rules where they are open to interpretation is fine IMO and that is always at our individual discretion... blatently breaking them such as self-upgrading, blagging in to lounges etc is not OK IMO as it affects everyone else.

snaxmuppet

True, we don't know what went on before so we cannot pass judgement on that particular incident as we don't have all the facts. But we can comment on the practice of "self-upgrading" in general... if that person was given permission to move seats then they are not a self-upgrader are they.

I agree that confrontation avoidance may be prudent on the part of the CC in many situations but once the aircraft is at the gate then IMO some action should be taken. I would like to see bans handed out, or even prosecution in the most serious cases, to those that create confrontational situations in the air. It has the potential to be very serious... for example, if tempers flair and some crazy person decided to open an exit door in their anger. There is though a world of difference between being compliant and calming for the sake of the safety of the aircraft and just ignoring the rules for a quiet life. I am not saying that was the case here but it does happen.

Scots_Al

Agree 100%

likethis

Sorry to go off on a tangent, but I thought it was well on nigh impossible to open a door mid-flight, due to cabin pressure pushing it outward?

tuonopepper

Torn on this one, part of me thinks if they have the balls to try it and get away with it why not, life is all about taken or missed chance. The other part of me thinks it's bang out of order, pay for a class of travel sit in it....

What it does flag up though is if BA had an upgrade on board policy like Virgin did (do?), it would possibly not happen. Its exceptionally frustrating when you've been trying to upgrade the days and weeks before the flight with constant 'no avaikabikity', to then find the next cabin up is half empty.

Greenpen

I have never understood why doors cannot open because of the pressure. The doors open outwards so the higher cabin pressure will help rather than resist opening.

Scots_Al

They open inwards!

BertieBadger

Well, both really! They are "plug doors": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug_door

The open inward initially, and then via a suitable mechanism, can be swung outwards.