Flight Crew Harassment

[Flyer1015]

This behavior on the part of the crew makes no sense to me. Why punish the 99% of the passengers who didn't say a word for the boorishness of one?

Because IF something happens (accident/incident), then 99% of the passengers will say, "hey, there was this one passenger who said the pilots were drunk! they had to be!"

Imagine the headache that would ensue, the lawsuits, etc.

Not worth it. If I'm ever accused of being drunk by a passenger, I'm removing myself from flight and getting tested. Clear my good name, and then we'll go flying.

 

[Goodstick]

What ticket prices going up? It is working the other way.

With the price of gas "bus" tickets are as expensive if not more than airline tickets. Greyhound raised their fares to reflect current costs to do business.

IMAGINE THAT! (are you reading this airline execs?)

Why would you get down on "bus people"?.. when you voluntarily work in an industry that charges less for their product than it costs them to produce? (except for freight operators)

Who's the dummy? (you'll have time during your next upcoming furlough to contemplate that question).

Bus tickets costing more then plane tickets I would hope is not the norm. But it wouldn't surprise me with current airline managers.
By the way, I don't think I have to worry about a furlough although I may get a 50% paycut. More reason to not take any crap from trailer trash passengers.

 

[FishandFly]

I'm surprised that many of you have stated that you close your ears to anything/everything that the passengers say to you at the gate.

While I would put up with clapping or sarcastic cheering, personalized comments from individuals to any of the flight crew would be basis for the person not coming along. If it's a group too large to identify individuals, the riot can stay at the gate. If they are stupid enough to cause a problem at the gate, they'll likely give the FA's problems enroute.

 

[McNugget]

Maybe the Embry-Riddle guys are on to something???

It's hard to hear a passenger's comment when your ipod earbuds are in; whether it be walking through the terminal, or sitting on the flightdeck during boarding. imp:

I agree. And to top it off. You have those ASA Riddle Diddles. God, they are the worse.

 

[N2264J]

Here, here. I pray for the day when it costs $700 to go from MIA to LGA and not $199. The sooner the better.

And when that happens, you'll be able to handle the reduced capacity with a 50 seat CRJ.

This has actually happened to me a couple of times a few years ago. Remember when there were about five different instances over a two year period of pilots fired? (America West were two). I just ignore the comments and press on. These people wouldn't be getting on the plane if they actually thought you were drunk.

Holding the customers in contempt for an off handed attempt at humor is counterproductive. It seems to me the people who worry most about "clearing their name" may be quietly living in fear about a personal problem.

 

[JT8D]

It seems to me the people who worry most about "clearing their name" may be quietly living in fear about a personal problem.

Touché.

 

[radarlove]

It does not need to be a DOT test. It literally can be a Breathalyzer, and if that pegs you get the DOT and get to check the reasonable suspicion box. That is how our lawyers explained it to me.
Ask the HIMS guys too, I know that they will agree.
Most airports are equipped to deal with this after the MCO incident a few years ago. Going to the clinic for a calibrated Breathalyzer is no longer required since most airport police stations now have them.
FWIW

Sounds like "your lawyers" didn't spend much (any?) time studying the DOT drug testing program. Advising you to go around the program that was put in place with all sorts of protections against using testing as "punishment" is insane in my view.

Local law enforcement can get involved, as we all now know, but dragging them into the issue, simply to get rid of the protections the DOT program gives pilots and force a test when one isn't allowed doesn't sound like a good idea.

However, you go ahead and do it. I'm not, I'll just simply give a hard look and continue to say, "We don't joke about that."

The pilot's unions spent a lot of time back in 1989 and 1990 ensuring that as the inevitable Reagan-era big brother drug and alcohol testing finally hit the line pilots, that there were lots of protections and procedures to keep it fair.

25 years later, we have bright sparks trying to throw all of those out the door to prove a personal point against a boor.

If your company lawyers are telling you to do something outside of the regulations (Part 121, appendix I and J) you, and your union, should think really hard about the end results of this. Are your company lawyers on your side, or do they have a different interest at stake? I know the answer.