Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Unwarranted Assumption by FA in FC

 
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 1, 2009, 5:46 am
  #76  
Fontaine d'honneur du Flyertalk
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Morbihan, France
Programs: Reine des Muccis de Pucci; Foreign Elitist (according to others)
Posts: 19,213
Originally Posted by CALflyboi
IMO, they should have been allowed to use the FC lav. It's one thing if someone able bodied is turned away, but for elderly people, I usually let them come on up. Having dealt with elderly people in the past, I know many times when they have to go, they have to go! I believe it makes it easier for everyone just to let them come on up. Now, I know there are many elderly people who get along just dandy, and that's not what I'm talking about. We are told to deal with these on a case by case basis and to use our best judgement.
and apply common sense precisely. I read through this thread and was amazed at all the assumptions that were made. I thought that the original assumption - the FA's assumption apart - was why the OP thought that she made an assumption on the basis of the fact that he is hispanic. What has that got to do with anything. I'm sorry I simply do not understand.
Why should anything be infered from what she said. She should not have been without her glasses on duty - that is a no-no in that job on duty. She probably changed her tune when a minor mistake became an affair of state. I cannot say that I blame her for that.

I know that restroom issue plays out in every airline in the world. In my book the F lavatories are for the F passengers. If a child or an elderly person needs to use them - fine. If the aisles are blocked with carts - fine. What I do object to are queues down the aircraft in First Class.

I confess that I have been guilty of ageism. I refused Business Class Chamapgne to two young ladies as they were under-age. They were not - actually they were in their early 20s. I was mortified but they were absolutely delighted to be thought of as too young to drink (they certainly proved that they could not only drink but hold their drink as well).

What I wanted to know more than anything was - after all these exchanges - did the OP actually get time to use the lavatory?
PUCCI GALORE is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 7:19 am
  #77  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Finally back in Boston after escaping from New York
Posts: 13,644
Originally Posted by CALflyboi
IMO, they should have been allowed to use the FC lav. It's one thing if someone able bodied is turned away, but for elderly people, I usually let them come on up. Having dealt with elderly people in the past, I know many times when they have to go, they have to go! I believe it makes it easier for everyone just to let them come on up. Now, I know there are many elderly people who get along just dandy, and that's not what I'm talking about. We are told to deal with these on a case by case basis and to use our best judgement.
^^

C'mon, let's get serious here. There are those of you out there who would have rather had the poor guy stumble down the aisle? Let the guy use your freakin' bathroom.

Mike
mikeef is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 8:01 am
  #78  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: NYC and SFO
Programs: UA 1MM (former 1K, Delta Platinum))
Posts: 1,244
I got stopped trying to use the bathroom in first recently, as a casually dressed white guy in his 50's. I tried to take it with a grin, offering "you took my drink order..." A voice comes from around the corner, "No that was me..." Another young, hot black woman working FA in first (we're talking 1 in 100 hot, or better), what were the odds of that?

Boarding a plane is a whirlwind of stimuli, we all partially notice particulars of a person, it doesn't make it racism. I made a point of thanking the first FA for checking when she had doubts. We should all thank these efforts, I certainly appreciate them!
Syzygies is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 10:18 am
  #79  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: DCA
Programs: Kommissar Giga-Posting Direktor, PWP; Fasano Nouveau Aristocrat; CO Platinum; BD Gold; MR Gold
Posts: 18,733
Originally Posted by COEWRFA
Give it a rest it was a simple mistake. If I'm sorry was not enough then to bad. If you would of said to me, oh don't worry I won't write in a complaint. I would of rather you did, and hell I would of handed it in for you! I think some of you have your heads stuck in a time warp. Get over yourselves.
By the way, it is "would have," not "would of." Someone didn't pay attention in third grade grammar class.
CO 1E is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 12:02 pm
  #80  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: EWR
Programs: Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Gold (Current Platinum), United Mileage Plus, Avis Preferred
Posts: 850
Originally Posted by CO 1E
By the way, it is "would have," not "would of." Someone didn't pay attention in third grade grammar class.
I believe they were trying to abbreviate "would have" into "would've", but came up with "would of" instead.
JohnneeO is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 12:18 pm
  #81  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: NYC
Programs: AA ExecPlat; AF Gold; UA GS; Hyatt L. Globalist; Marriott Plat; Hilton Diamond; National EE
Posts: 6,182
Isn't there an FAA rule that requires coach passengers to use the lavatories in their cabin?
Buster CT1K is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 12:19 pm
  #82  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: DCA
Programs: Kommissar Giga-Posting Direktor, PWP; Fasano Nouveau Aristocrat; CO Platinum; BD Gold; MR Gold
Posts: 18,733
Originally Posted by Buster CT1K
Isn't there an FAA rule that requires coach passengers to use the lavatories in their cabin?
I believe that applies to international flights, or, at least, the annoucements made by the crew indicate such.
CO 1E is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 12:19 pm
  #83  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: DCA
Programs: Kommissar Giga-Posting Direktor, PWP; Fasano Nouveau Aristocrat; CO Platinum; BD Gold; MR Gold
Posts: 18,733
Originally Posted by JohnneeO
I believe they were trying to abbreviate "would have" into "would've", but came up with "would of" instead.
The result still is incorrect.
CO 1E is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 3:00 pm
  #84  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 42,298
Originally Posted by Buster CT1K
Isn't there an FAA rule that requires coach passengers to use the lavatories in their cabin?
It's a TSA rule - hence the dumbness of it. As mentioned, it only applies to international flights, because in TSA logic, terrorists only attack international flights via the F or C cabin. Of course no one ever pointed out to the TSA that most F and C cabins on wide-bodies have lavs at the rear as well as the front.

No matter - from a service perspective, the F lavs should be for F customers only. I don't get upgraded or buy F all the time, and while sitting in Y I've never felt the need to walk forward to use the F lav or store my bags in the F overheads. It puzzles me why others seem to think it's OK to do that.
bocastephen is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 8:30 pm
  #85  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wayne, NJ & Boca Raton, FL
Programs: Former COA Silver; AVIS Chairmans Club; AOPA
Posts: 303
Originally Posted by FWAAA
Elderly or infirm passengers who find themselves in coach should ensure that they're seated near the coach lavs. Problem solved.
I hope your tongue was deep in your cheek when you typed your message.

I'm a 66 year old who usually flies in FC. But when not flying in the front cabin, my Handicapped Motor Vehicle ID and my CO Elite status both entitle me to sit in the first several rows of coach. Once meal/beverage service begins, it becomes quite difficult for me to negotiate the length of the aisle to get to the rear loo.

My way of dealing with this situation is to alert a FC FA during or just after the boarding process that I may need to use the FC loo during the flight. I've never been rebuffed.
N9MD is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 8:44 pm
  #86  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wayne, NJ & Boca Raton, FL
Programs: Former COA Silver; AVIS Chairmans Club; AOPA
Posts: 303
FC Loo rule only applies to International Flights!

Originally Posted by bocastephen
It's a TSA rule - hence the dumbness of it. As mentioned, it only applies to international flights...
bocastephen is correct. Any loo prohibitions on domestic flights merely reflect each airline's policy.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/sky/2007/0...parity_aa.html
N9MD is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.