Air Rage
Posted on Wednesday, June 13, 2007I see that a man had to be removed from a flight between Mexico and Manchester because he became abusive to fellow passengers, engaged in threatening behaviour, was intoxicated and failed to follow the cabin crew’s directions. The plane landed at Shannon, and the man is due to appear before an Irish court soon.
Had to be removed. Not was removed. Had to be. In somebody’s opinion.
Abusive.
Now there’s a loaded word for you. Abusive. I’d like to know in whose opinion he was abusive. Would it be, for instance, in the opinion of the bottom-of-the-barrel cabin crew, recruited by the airline on the minimum wage, who can’t get a job anywhere else and enjoy their small bit of power?
Ah now, come on. That’s not fair.
Isn’t it?
Well then, let me ask you, who exactly decides what constitutes abusive behaviour? After all, the judge wasn’t up there and before you say it, of course I understand that aircraft security is paramount. But still, let me ask you this: why does the opinion of somebody who can’t find a waitressing job anywhere else suddenly become important just because that job takes place 40,000 feet up in the sky?
Stumble it!
June 13th, 2007
OOOoh..you’ve got me hoppin’ now Bock.I was a flightie for five years and if you think it’s a waitressing job I’ll be happy to set you straight.
June 13th, 2007
Simple…because the airline is so keen to both keep their profits high and make their prices seem low, not only do they pay the “flightie”s minimum wage, they also neglect to shell out for a proper security guard.
Being an international flight there may have been a marshall on board - however he probably couldn’t reveal himself over a scuffle like this one, which is another irony of the whole thing.
June 13th, 2007
The funny thing is, his wife - they had married while in Mexico - opted to remain on the flight.
June 13th, 2007
Devin: In that case, you perhaps haven’t experienced the staff on some our so-called “low-cost” airlines such as Ryanair. Maybe you worked for an airline that wasn’t trying to shave every last penny off its overheads by paying minimum wage.
Mr Pagano: Exactly my point.
Mr Sneeze: Indeed. For all I know, maybe he was being an arsehole, but that wouldn’t be the point of the post. What I’m talking about is the quality of legal test once the plane lands.
June 13th, 2007
Ask the Captain, thats what hes for, oh and if someone aboard wants to be married, of course its a waiting job, tea? coffee? continental breakfast? just no tips.
June 13th, 2007
Probably got a dodgy worm in his mescal! It could happen to a bishop.
June 13th, 2007
The airline might just have wanted some free publicity on how safety-minded they are. Or the flight attendant wanted on telly. Or the Mexicunian regretted his wedding and deemed being held at an airport in disgrace, as preferable to a 10 hour flight with Little Miss Right-After-9-Tequillas.
June 13th, 2007
Bock
I have indeed suffered the tender mercies of European L.C.C’s and I concede the point.
However the decision to divert a plane rests on the captain and there a lot of consequences for such an act.He/she would not make that choice lightly and if ,as you say,the cabin crew weren’t exactly First XI then they may not have too high an opinion of the flighties ability to handle a run of the mill drunken bollix.The threshold was the failure to follow cabin crew’s directions.That’s law..pure and simple.
Sorry to bang on about this but if you want to see what a flighties real job is just go to the Air and Scare posts at my place.
June 13th, 2007
I read about a guy with air rage a while back. I think he was Polish? He drank a huge amount of booze, became violent, and then was trying to smash out windows in the plane. Now that’s when you have to land and drag the fucker off to jail.
June 13th, 2007
Eh.. a ten hour flight? So who sells em the booze? And then the pilot, like any good vintner (once they’ve got your money) calls the bouncers and says, You’re upsetting me clientele so you’re barred!
June 13th, 2007
Old Knudsen and Hangar Queen have it right I think. It’s up to the captain. Obviously they shouldn’t have let him drink too much…but what is too much? He probably thought he was just getting started. Great way to start a marriage anyway.
June 13th, 2007
“why does the opinion of somebody who can’t find a waitressing job anywhere else suddenly become important just because that job takes place 40,000 feet up in the sky?”
Because 40,000 feet up is bloody dangerous. If/when you’re dealing with somebody drunk!
June 13th, 2007
Surely the nearer you are to God the better you have to behave yourself?
It’s just common divine courtesy! Right?
June 14th, 2007
Aw Bock I think that’s very unfair on the staff involved, and any airline staff.
And it probably wasn’t a low cost airline if he was going from Mexico to Manchester. There are plonkers in every walk of life not just Low Cost Carriers!
June 15th, 2007
Well, it got a bit of a row going anyway, and that’s the main thing.
June 16th, 2007
I was on that plane, watson should never have been allowed on the plane he was drunk when he got on. and drank a further 2 litres of vodka on the plane, he was very abusive and the abuse was aimed directly to my family, He threatened mroe than once to hit my sister-in-law, he spat at his wife and hit her twice in front of us all , as well as being rude to the staff and other people on the plane. He had been abusive the whole to weeks of his holiday (unfortunately we were in the same hotel and same corridor) he was taken away on more than on occassion by secruity. His is a waste of living space. I pity his poor children who sat quivering in the corner watching everything! what hope have they got of a decent upbringing.