davistev

Touchy subject but here goes. On a recent flight I found myself surrounded by teenage kids on a plane. As a male I felt uncomfortable as I know of numerous incidents where male teachers have been falsely accused of ,,,,?????????,

I did not want to be put in a situation where a single kid can ruin my life.

Geeze. What has this world come to to even have to think like this?

I did not say anything but that is silly as I always like to chat to the person next to me.

anyway - more of a rant than anything. BTW: The airline changed my seat at the last minute to seat me next to the students.

I ended up sitting still and quiet the whole flight. Uneventful - but ---

Dave Noble

Why should you feel uncomfortable ?

The number of false allegations is extremely low , so no reason to expect that than for any other passenger to make some accusation

trooper

As someone who works with children I'll be interested to see what happens if I'm ever asked to move simply because I am "a male sitting next to a child". I'll produce my Working with the Vulnerable card..issued by my State government after police checks etc....... and see what happens....

Dave Noble

When the airline realises , my understanding is that it will just rebook the passenger into another seat , so unlikely ever to get to point where you are sat next to a child 11 or under to be able to show such a card

DragonSoul

This female might have moved because... well... teenaged kids. It's sad, though, that you have to even think about this.

trooper

That would make sense...however the "stories" going around (and I won't vouch for their accuracy) are of men being told to move AFTER boarding and getting settled.....

og

If I was moved to a better seat, I’d keep a low profile and be reasonably happy (I think). But if I was moved to a worse seat, then I’d be very unhappy. There would have to be very good reason to force a seat move. It’s just “not on” for a random change because “man sits next to unknown child” - and if so, then there should be some advertised policy saying to expect such a move.

Dave Noble

I suspect that these are just the ones where the airline failed to handle in advance

BearX220

This is documented on BA, where the apparent policy is that a UM cannot be seated next to an adult male pax. (Don't know about other carriers.) Tragic that males are automatically suspect in this day and age despite (A) very, almost infinitesimally low incident rate, and (B) predators actually coming in all shapes, sizes and genders. But there you are.

In OP's situation I would probably request reseating not only to avoid suspicion but to achieve more peace and quiet.

DownUnderFlyer

[mod hat] I will close this thread unless this turn to a Qantas related discussion soon. No more posts which aren't even remotely connected to the airlines of this forum. [/mod hat]

Platy

Some 5 years ago I was flying QF BNE-CNS and had picked a seat in the back row /aisle on the assumption that there is often greater chance of an unoccupied adjacent seat. Just before I boarded at the gate there was a PA call for me to go to the service desk. Without any explanation I was handed a boarding pass to another aisle seat. I asked why I was being moved and was told that I was not permitted to sit next to unaccompanied children.

This is straight out discrimination against a solo male traveller. You are presumed to be someone who cannot be trusted near children, even though there are several cabin crew based at the rear of the aircraft only a few metres away. The experience was so demeaning that I would have walked to the other end of the terminal and rebooked onto VA had I not checked in a bag.

I spoke to the cabin crew and they were great - moved me to an aisle seat to the front of the cabin after take off where there was an unoccupied adjacent seat and provided excellent in flight service with a few beers to enjoy the flight.

The service agent had been entirely unhelpful - she had the option to seat me in an aisle seat with an adjacent spare seat (as the cabin crew had done) and made no effort.

IIRC there was a case where a male passenger successfully sued BA in a UK county court for discrimination and BA has subsequently ceased offering a service for unaccompanied minors. In that case the passenger was travelling with his wife!

It is sad state of affairs that you are presumed to be a pedophile simply because of your gender.

But perhaps not surprising when society fails to weed out child abusers in its midst (for example, Broken Rites estimates 1 in 5 Catholic priests are child abusers hiding under the cloak of "religious freedom": for instance in one case Father Michael McArdle reportedly confessing 1500 times and never reported to the Police).

Dave Noble

Where the agent went wrong was to state that that was the reason. The agent should have just said that it was an operational issue

QF maintains the right to relocate passengers ( even after boarding )

I don't agree with the policy and it also doesn't have any good basis

Until an affected person takes the issue to court and gets it ruled to be illegal discrimination, I doubt that it will end

someone may have sued BA but I believe that the only reason for ceasing to offer the service was cost/profitability

allegations regarding religion has a home at Omni/PR rather than here surely

I do not see it as a presumption by the airline that the person is a pAedophile , but done to appease the many people who do think it is an issue and ignore the actual statistics

m0hamed

As above BA was notorious for this, however look at the bright side - if you are asked to move iterate "I would be glad to move to better seat in a higher cabin."

Platy

...so potentially an attempt to hide discrimination under the excuse of "operational issue" ?! Not sure that would wash if a discrimination case was brought against the airline.

And a logical absurdity. If the airline want to claim the policy is there to appease customers' (parents / guardians) perceptions (as you suggest and VA has stated) then the policy has no value unless overtly admitted to and openly applied by the airline.

In any case, surely such perceptions are fuelled (at least in part) by the reality of datasets (such as those generated by the Royal Commission), which indicate that folk should have a genuine concern about the incidence of child abuse. Genuine problems, not idle allegations, that provide the context to the debate.

PS. Reportedly staff on a BA flight once tried to separate Boris Johnson from his own children! Priceless.

Dave Noble

Whether you would be glad for an upgrade, the airline can move you regardless