Missing Passenger and Proper Procedure
 

On a recent flight from Las Vegas, seated in first class, a passenger boarded the aircraft stored his brief case in the overhead bin and sat down on the window seat. A few moments later, he used the rest room; returned to retrieve his brief case and left the aircraft. Towards the end of the boarding process, the flight attendant noticed he was gone; soon a supervisor was notified and quite a bit of discussion ensued. Suddenly the door was closed and we pushed back. I asked the flight attendant if the pilot knew of this situation - she ignored me but then called the pilot. Soon, everyone in first class was asked to identify their luggage. Once we had done so, the pilot started the engines and we left. I haven't been quite that concerned in a long time! When I complained to the airline, there was deafening silence on what happened and the proper procedures. Has anyone encountered this before? Was I wrong not to raise more concerns with the pilot?

There is no requirement for a carry-on check when someone offloads themselves. This was likely done to calm people down once it had been raised. To be frank, unless a crew member had eyes on the offloaded pax at all times and knew that the pax had never accessed any location other than in F, if it was necessary to identify hand luggage for F, it should have been done for the entire aircraft. But, it wasn't necessary.

Both checked and carry-on luggage are screened and, since 2003, bag matches have not been done on checked luggage either.

When the pax off-loaded, there were a series of steps involving both the Captain, the FA and the GA. Thus, the Captain was most certainly aware.

[QUOTE=Often1;23063825]There is no requirement for a carry-on check when someone offloads themselves. QUOTE]

Why?

In case they are up to no good, they offload their luggage from the hold, why would carry on be any different?

Did they check the loo in case he didn't put anything in there????

Since the mystery pax did board the plane, his bp must have been scanned. By a process of elimination (easier if he really was in fc), they should know his name. Does that make the plane more secure is a different story. [IF TSA is as vigilant as they want us to believe, what could he have placed in the [loo] restroom that would be a threat.]
Did pax have checked luggage?...knowing his identity could help.

There is no problem if he "didn't put something in the loo--only a potential problem if he DID.:D

[QUOTE=Annalisa12;23063910]If you had read my entire post, you would now know that the US stopped this silliness back in 2003, when it went to 100% bag screening (both checked and carry-on).

^ That's where my concern lies as well as personally, I would have no issues if everyone was asked to deplane, all bags (both carry-on and checked) removed and searched as opposed to pax being removed/flights delayed because someone was FWB. I'm no tin foil hat paranoid (and dare I say xenophobic) nut job like the majority of pax who cause a flight to be delayed, but in this case, imho, somebody dropped the ball

What exactly is the concern? The passenger and his luggage were screened. Who cares if he boarded, did not board, boarded and then deboarded, etc.

What is your rationale for this action?

Oh right and you believe they catch everything?!:rolleyes:

The point is: if he had never showed up at the gate, his bag would probably still have remained on Board - just without you knowing that

Why do I hear the announcement that "a few passengers haven't boarded so the delay is due to removing their luggage from the hold". If everything is screened 100% why do they need to hold my plane up and remove it?

Nothing is 100% safe.

I agree.

If they could catch everything, there would be no drug smuggling either. Nothing is 100%

In the US, this only applies to international flights (only they have positive bag match)