USA_flyer

There is no excuse for shouting unless there is an immediate threat to life. We all come across situations that make us uncomfortable but we handle them without over reacting, especially in a service environment.

In the OPs shoes I'd have done the exact same thing.

KeaneJohn

If you’ve already checked in for a flight you need to be offloaded I believe before an FTV can be issued.

md125

Of course I would. I also drive a car, in spite of the fact that it is possible that someone might die. In fact, the odds of that are greater than me infecting someone and them having a bad outcome if we're both vaccinated and I test negative.

Given that it's kinda everywhere right now, every flight is going to have positive COVID cases, and we're still traveling. If the OP tested negative, they were putting properly masked people in no more danger than anyone else in the airport and significantly less than anyone getting behind the wheel of a car. And if the danger is what you suggest it is, no one ought to be getting on a plane.

This whole thread is pretty silly. The OP tested negative literally right there.
* The reason there is no rule for folks who test negative to isolate if jabbed is because they are in fact at no greater risk of passing on COVID as the population at large.
* If there is such a tremendous risk, there would be no flights, or even grocery store visits, without tests on the spot.
* Lastly, in order to avoid the situation - which must be common, my own son tested positive the day before we were supposed to fly last week - BA ought to have a pamphlet "So you tested positive, here's what to do next"

Anyone in their right mind who is already willing to get on a plane and tested negative is also willing to try and ensure that they don't lose 20K quid. I can't believe this is even a question.

orbitmic

See post 25. In any case, I thought you couldn’t olci unless you had got cleared by VeriFLY (which can only happen if you have uploaded a negative Covid test).

That's a good point, but to my knowledge, BA staff cannot normally handle BA Holidays bookings anyway, so technically, the BA staff at the airport then should not have helped according to BA procedures in that case! By contrast, when you are on a BA Holiday, you normally receive details of the duty officer's contacts just before your trip (phone and/or mail) to contact in case of problems, and that is usually an effective way to contact them in case of problems (I had to do so a couple of times in the past due to missed connections, though that was pre-covid).

orbitmic

with respect, the first point is a very bold interpretation of the legislation. First, there are many countries where close contacts of infected patients need to isolate for a period of time even if jabbed. In fact that was the initial phrasing of the rule in England a few weeks ago and the reason it changed is not that suddenly government felt that they did not represent any risk any more, but that given infection numbers, this would have a massive disruptive effect on millions so vaccination obviously reduces the risk of infection, on balance there was a case to not mandate self isolation. Note that even in that case, the NHS strongly encourages you to test daily for 7 days after the notification of exposure because government considers the risk of contact infection is not just the same as any random person on the street.

point 2 is hyperbole and with respect, an over optimistic vision of what public health aims for. Risk is a sliding scale and public policy is a permanent attempt to arbitrate between national safety and other priorities (life, economy, freedom). To stick to English-centric examples, do you think that every time people meet together, the first 6 will be covid free but not the 7th? Or the first two household will be safe but not the third? There was no magic behind the rule of 6, it was merely a cursor intended to keep the infection numbers within a certain range.

« Infection numbers » is also the operative concept here. Crudely, Public health doesn’t care if mr x infects mrs y, or even if mr z ends up in icu or dies. Public health is not about the safety of individuals but a discipline that focuses on aggregate level management, which happens not to be conceived as the mere aggregation of individual situations.

Regarding the third point, people keep mentioning such a pamphlet at the airport, but really, for whom? The whole point is that you are supposed to get tested before you travel, so you are not supposed to even be at the airport to see such a pamphlet.

BA has a detailed section on travel and Covid 19, which specifies requirements, procedures, etc…

That page precisely has a section entitled “if you’re unable to travel?” (Note: the pedant in me has no clue why there is a question mark with that phrasing but never mind)…

and guess what - the very first sentence of that section is “if you’re unable to travel, please don’t come to the airport”.

And that, to me, remains the crux here. Passengers are supposed to be tested before travelling, and should really try to do it as early as allowed in case the result is the one we all want to avoid. I know there are places where this is hard to achieve, but frankly, London is not one of them. This is not an obligation and people can ignore it, but the acknowledge that the ensuing stress is self inflicted and not something the rest of the world - airline employees included - will necessarily have to bend over backwards to alleviate beyond the procedures that already exist and which, in this case, involve web or phone.

orbitmic

Yes, but the rest of us in the plane did not provide that information! And my point was that whilst I may well be wrong about that, I personally doubt that T&T would bother to go back to BA, ask them to check records for this specific plane - or Virgin train for a train, etc - when they have - literally, over 100,000 of you whose case to look into each day.

Ladyfliestheredwhiteandblues

And yet there appear to be numerous test facilities at the airport, bookable by anyone so it is to be expected that some passengers will turn up not knowing their status. If this is to be avoided then those facilities need to be restricted.

I would have taken an LFT at home and then taken the official test at the airport but there is no guarantee that my status would not have changed in the interim. I’m thankful I have no need to travel at the moment and, with the current conditions, no desire.

I stand by my earlier assertion that with the very transmissible variant currently doing the rounds we will see much more of this. Thankfully it does look to be much milder so only the really vulnerable need be concerned.

Never Stansted

So we’re two full years into a pandemic, OP is (presumably) vaccinated, masked and has a (very!) recent negative test. Current variant is highly transmissible but according to the evidence milder.

It is not the OP’s responsibility to isolate under the law and it is not a recommendation under guidance. This ‘make up your own guidance’ advice is very strange and I doubt many employers would be sympathetic to it. The guidance has been decided upon for various reasons including maintaining a stable workforce and stopping the economy collapsing, so in fact you could argue that they have a responsibility to go about their normal business.

The staff member’s response was odd. Given prevalence rates and the nature of their job it is implausible that they haven’t been exposed to Covid on numerous occasions. Perhaps they have personal reasons to be especially concerned by it, but that is a matter for themselves and their employer, not the OP.

If the staff member is unwilling to deal courteously and professionally with someone who has every right to be interacting with them and is simply asking them to do their job, they should ask BA to be moved to non-passenger facing duties. As it is, as someone based in London, one in ten people the staff member encounters in their day to day life is likely positive right now. Do they wander round the city yelling just in case?

flyertalker00133

This thread has turned what I thought were even more learned/reasonable members absolutely crackers.

A freshly negative individual with no need to isolate following all laws (who was free to head to a football match or nightclub directly after) was shouted at for asking a reasonable question in an airport.

Madness.

Whatever seemingly reasonable or extreme additional steps you might take if you’re a contact is a personal choice, irrelevant and not something to project onto anyone else. Getting into the reasonability of a question is quite bizarre unless it was printed in 200pt font above their head. Do we do the same to everyone that hasn’t checked in online?

Having had it already, triple jabbed and with vaccines available at least here for everyone else I would just carry on about with life as normal if a close contact tests positive (continuing to test) going to work and restaurants and bars - this is life now - and make sure I give anyone that has told me they’re avoiding as much risk as possible the choice of whether I see them or not. I would not assume to put an airport worker in that category, but if they asked if another colleague could serve me I’d happily wait.

If you’re working in a busy airport you’ve already priced in a lot of exposure and you have no right to scream/demand anyone to do anything other than what the law requires. Of course anyone can ask someone nicely to do something reasonable if you’re a bit more cautious like stand behind a screen or give a bit more distance.

If 2 years into pandemic an airport worker is getting hysterical and in a really confused state over a low/no risk passenger I think maybe they need some support and a couple of days (paid) time off for their health and to check up on the risks/rules etc.

lost_in_translation

This thread is the most ridiculously absurd overreaction to something someone did in the heat of the moment I’ve seen on FT for a long time. Frankly, it’s exactly why I’m glad I live in the U.K. where people aren’t being locked up just for being near someone with COVID and I hope all the people attacking the OP never get anywhere near political power.

The ONS currently estimates almost one in ten people in London have COVID. ONE IN TEN - let that sink in. LHR right now will be full of people flying domestic routes, flying to places not requiring a pre-departure test etc, who have COVID and don’t know it yet. The same applies to every facet of life in London currently, such as visiting the supermarket, getting the Tube, etc.

The OP has just tested negative and, assuming they are walking around masked and without symptoms, having also been fully vaxxed, they have every right now to go to speak to an agent. We have very limited information here about how much time the OP has spent with those who tested positive in the days before the flight.

I agree the OP should not fly, should maintain social distancing, arrange a PCR test and then head directly home, but to suggest they are morally repugnant for seeking out an agent to help with a genuine issue here is completely ridiculous.

If the check in agent was so worried about the risk of COVID they think it’s OK to shout at someone who just tested negative they should be locking themselves in their home for the next month, frankly.

zen100

Correct - the OP had no automatic right to get an FTV, because it was a BAH booking. That closes at 3 weeks (now 4 weeks for new bookings).

If that was my £20K on the line, and I tested negative, then I would want to be speaking with someone. Trying to get hold of BAH later on the phone could take days - by which time, you'd be flagged as a no-show - £20K lost. If BA/BAH would actually answer the phone, then there would be no need to speak to someone in person.

The OP could have called the BA Holidays Duty Office, who would probably have called back quickly and sorted it out - but they were not to know that.

This can't be a one-off case. Agree with others that the testing provider and BA should have a "What to do next?" advice.

KARFA

no you don’t, see my other post shortly after the one you quote. Just go to the FTV form directly and submit it. I have don’t it myself several times whilst checked in.

zen100

Was that for flight-only though. This was a BAH booking, which can't be done on the day, or at least not according to the T&Cs.

Even if the form does let through BAH bookings on the day, the OP wouldn't know that.

KARFA

it wasn’t for a BAH booking. As noted by others there is an issue with requesting FTVs for BAH bookings within 3 weeks of the trip as well which I hadn’t picked up on so I am not sure it would have worked in the OP’s case for that reason.

xenole

I would personally see what my options were if I were already the airport by trying to talk to a person.
If I were at home and received news of myself, or travelling companions testing positive, then I would either go online, assuming I knew what to do, or ring the gold line for any options.