“Our primary concern is your safety”

Back to Forum
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 53 total)

  • MartynSinclair
    Participant

    It isn’t rocket science, but then again is this such a major issue?

    When I came out to Dubai the briefing was please keep masks on unless eating and drinking. Most people seemed to be sticking with it- although quality of wearing was occasionally iffy I have seen worse in the supermarket on a Saturday.

    I must confess if it really troubled me that much then I would probably just have stayed at home.

    This thread was never about the effectiveness or our individual thoughts about face coverings. My understanding that it has been ‘mandated’ by Government that face coverings are to be worn in shops & public places, including the transport system. So whether to wear a face covering or not is really not up for discussion (currently).

    As you have quite rightly state Simon, people need to make their own risk assessment and decide whether to travel or not, based on Government rules and policies. Passengers who keep to the rules regarding face coverings, should not be made to feel uncomfortable / unsafe etc by those selfish individuals who decide, it doesn’t apply to them. I am sure if a smoker lit a cigarette on an aeroplane, cabin crew would quite rightly be down on them like a ‘ton of bricks’.

    As far as I understand, face coverings are required to be worn (shops and public transport being a couple of examples) – we can all have our own thoughts on the matter, but the fact remains, these are the rules & for those that DON’T LIKE THE RULES, stay at home. For those who accept face coverings (and the rules) it is only fair that firms enforce and respect the requirement.

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    SimonS1
    Participant

    It isn’t rocket science, but then again is this such a major issue?

    When I came out to Dubai the briefing was please keep masks on unless eating and drinking. Most people seemed to be sticking with it- although quality of wearing was occasionally iffy I have seen worse in the supermarket on a Saturday.

    I must confess if it really troubled me that much then I would probably just have stayed at home.

    This thread was never about the effectiveness or our individual thoughts about face coverings. My understanding that it has been ‘mandated’ by Government that face coverings are to be worn in shops & public places, including the transport system. So whether to wear a face covering or not is really not up for discussion (currently).

    As you have quite rightly state Simon, people need to make their own risk assessment and decide whether to travel or not, based on Government rules and policies. Passengers who keep to the rules regarding face coverings, should not be made to feel uncomfortable / unsafe etc by those selfish individuals who decide, it doesn’t apply to them. I am sure if a smoker lit a cigarette on an aeroplane, cabin crew would quite rightly be down on them like a ‘ton of bricks’.

    As far as I understand, face coverings are required to be worn (shops and public transport being a couple of examples) – we can all have our own thoughts on the matter, but the fact remains, these are the rules & for those that DON’T LIKE THE RULES, stay at home. For those who accept face coverings (and the rules) it is only fair that firms enforce and respect the requirement.

    I don’t disagree with the policy angles Martyn. The Government requirements are as they are. Of course there are many exemptions also, particularly in the area of disabilities where travellers are entitled to their privacy and cabin crew have no right to harass them or in fact demand any details.

    However I am still unclear what you would actually do in such a situation.

    So let me ask you this. You are a member of cabin crew. You have asked a couple of passengers seated in 26A and 26C twice to wear a mask. On each occasion as soon as you have moved off down the cabin they remove it again. What would you actually do? I’m talking about tangible actions, not the motherhood and apple pie stuff.

    The Government mandated penalty where an offence is committed is a £100 fine reduced to £50 if paid within 14 days. No airline in the world is going to call the Police or divert the plane for that bearing in mind the burden of proof etc etc.


    MartynSinclair
    Participant

    However I am still unclear what you would actually do in such a situation.

    So let me ask you this. You are a member of cabin crew. You have asked a couple of passengers seated in 26A and 26C twice to wear a mask. On each occasion as soon as you have moved off down the cabin they remove it again. What would you actually do? I’m talking about tangible actions, not the motherhood and apple pie stuff.

    The Government mandated penalty where an offence is committed is a £100 fine reduced to £50 if paid within 14 days. No airline in the world is going to call the Police or divert the plane for that bearing in mind the burden of proof etc etc.

    You have this habit Simon of always asking what posters would do, in certain situations. It is NOT up to the passengers to enforce “Our primary concern is your safety”.

    The problem is those who are meant to enforce or even educate passengers, take the non confrontational route and ignore. I was gobsmacked a year or so ago when cabin crew on BA explained to me whilst they announce mobile phones should be switched off, they did not have the authority to DEMAND passengers stop making calls during the safety briefing.

    From posters comments though, passengers generally adhere to cabin crew instructions when directly asked. Passengers remove masks or wear them incorrectly, because crew ‘generally’ don’t have the authority by their managers (or simply cant be bothered) to enforce the rules.

    I cant imagine cabin crew ignoring a smoker or even a vaper have a puff…

    Perhaps the American way of advising passengers they will be banned from future flights if they do not adhere to the rules may work – but what is likely to work, is cabin crew explaining to passengers the current rules and Government mandates..

    Have a great weekend and hope your trip is going / went well..

    Bottom line Simon, passengers risk access based on the rules and it is fair to assume the service providers enforce the rules.. irrespective of any personal thoughts about what has been mandated.


    SimonS1
    Participant

    However I am still unclear what you would actually do in such a situation.

    So let me ask you this. You are a member of cabin crew. You have asked a couple of passengers seated in 26A and 26C twice to wear a mask. On each occasion as soon as you have moved off down the cabin they remove it again. What would you actually do? I’m talking about tangible actions, not the motherhood and apple pie stuff.

    The Government mandated penalty where an offence is committed is a £100 fine reduced to £50 if paid within 14 days. No airline in the world is going to call the Police or divert the plane for that bearing in mind the burden of proof etc etc.

    You have this habit Simon of always asking what posters would do, in certain situations. It is NOT up to the passengers to enforce “Our primary concern is your safety”.

    The problem is those who are meant to enforce or even educate passengers, take the non confrontational route and ignore. I was gobsmacked a year or so ago when cabin crew on BA explained to me whilst they announce mobile phones should be switched off, they did not have the authority to DEMAND passengers stop making calls during the safety briefing.

    From posters comments though, passengers generally adhere to cabin crew instructions when directly asked. Passengers remove masks or wear them incorrectly, because crew ‘generally’ don’t have the authority by their managers (or simply cant be bothered) to enforce the rules.

    I cant imagine cabin crew ignoring a smoker or even a vaper have a puff…

    Perhaps the American way of advising passengers they will be banned from future flights if they do not adhere to the rules may work – but what is likely to work, is cabin crew explaining to passengers the current rules and Government mandates..

    Have a great weekend and hope your trip is going / went well..

    Bottom line Simon, passengers risk access based on the rules and it is fair to assume the service providers enforce the rules.. irrespective of any personal thoughts about what has been mandated.

    Of course, but equally you have to recognise that at 33,000 feet the enforcement options are actually quite few. The nice words, explanations, this is the law stuff is all well and good but if you don’t get the co-operation you need then it becomes a difficult situation, as it is hardly a case of ‘the train will stop and you will be ejected at Milton Keynes.

    In life it is easy to be a keyboard warrior to to express dis-satisfaction, always much harder to explain what you would actually do in a difficult situation.


    MartynSinclair
    Participant

    Of course, but equally you have to recognise that at 33,000 feet the enforcement options are actually quite few. The nice words, explanations, this is the law stuff is all well and good but if you don’t get the co-operation you need then it becomes a difficult situation, as it is hardly a case of ‘the train will stop and you will be ejected at Milton Keynes.

    Clearly you have no faith in giving staff/crew the mandate to be authoritative or indeed believe solutions to challenges at 36,000 are possible, without threats of diversion. I believe otherwise… and professionally managed training has shown this to be the case in the past.

    Problems can only be solved by facing the issue. Turning your back on them (i.e. ignoring them), does not make them go away!!


    SimonS1
    Participant

    Of course, but equally you have to recognise that at 33,000 feet the enforcement options are actually quite few. The nice words, explanations, this is the law stuff is all well and good but if you don’t get the co-operation you need then it becomes a difficult situation, as it is hardly a case of ‘the train will stop and you will be ejected at Milton Keynes.

    Clearly you have no faith in giving staff/crew the mandate to be authoritative or indeed believe solutions to challenges at 36,000 are possible, without threats of diversion. I believe otherwise… and professionally managed training has shown this to be the case in the past.

    Problems can only be solved by facing the issue. Turning your back on them (i.e. ignoring them), does not make them go away!!

    Being authoritative does not always give a solution. These days cabin crew are often less experienced (cheaper) and with no real life experience.

    I gave you a fairly obvious scenario and asked what you would do….the fact that you have no answer other than the standard line of ‘be authoritative’ indicates the challenge. If appropriate words don’t work the next step is….?


    MartynSinclair
    Participant

    I gave you a fairly obvious scenario and asked what you would do….the fact that you have no answer other than the standard line of ‘be authoritative’ indicates the challenge. If appropriate words don’t work the next step is….?

    I can honestly say that even “west coast DYKWIA types” and “city boys in nappies” have all behaved themselves on board, when asked / or told to do so… even 4 legged friends are easily manageable, … with the help of a few treats… & professionally trained flight deck and cabin crew.

    If according to your view, the choice of cabin crew with no life experiences or less flight experience is the problem (perhaps on the airlines you choose to fly) – that could be the reason why your expectations on passenger behaviours & crew authority differ from my view.

    Trust me SimonS1, words do generally work, it’s how you ‘tell ’em’ that counts..


    SimonS1
    Participant

    This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.

    I gave you a fairly obvious scenario and asked what you would do….the fact that you have no answer other than the standard line of ‘be authoritative’ indicates the challenge. If appropriate words don’t work the next step is….?

    I can honestly say that even “west coast DYKWIA types” and “city boys in nappies” have all behaved themselves on board, when asked / or told to do so… even 4 legged friends are easily manageable, … with the help of a few treats… & professionally trained flight deck and cabin crew.

    If according to your view, the choice of cabin crew with no life experiences or less flight experience is the problem (perhaps on the airlines you choose to fly) – that could be the reason why your expectations on passenger behaviours & crew authority differ from my view.

    Trust me SimonS1, words do generally work, it’s how you ‘tell ’em’ that counts..

    Of course there is a world of difference between “west coast DYKWIA types” and “city boys in nappies” and the people you get on a packed Easyjet flight to Lisbon. Or on a 777 from Dubai to Mumbai (carefully said to avoid a PC ‘distraction’ from the usual suspects).

    I’m half way to London now, it was announced three times on departure, I still see plenty of ‘under-chinners’ and the crew flighting a losing battle.


    MartynSinclair
    Participant

    ’m half way to London now, it was announced three times on departure, I still see plenty of ‘under-chinners’ and the crew flighting a losing battle.

    Perfect opportunity SimonS1 – ask the crew or onboard manager why the airline is not enforcing their own requirements – perhaps it is indeed voluntary or you may just have an inexperienced crew….

    Good to see the onboard wifi is working… enjoy the flight…


    SimonS1
    Participant

    ’m half way to London now, it was announced three times on departure, I still see plenty of ‘under-chinners’ and the crew flighting a losing battle.

    Perfect opportunity SimonS1 – ask the crew or onboard manager why the airline is not enforcing their own requirements – perhaps it is indeed voluntary or you may just have an inexperienced crew….

    Good to see the onboard wifi is working… enjoy the flight…

    I did. In fact they have been through a couple of times so far reminding people. However response from the galley was basically “when people keep taking them off, what can we do?”.

    The wifi is good, good enough to work on, but $15.99 is a bit steep. They have put prices up since the covid saga started….I was paying $7.99 before.


    anyonebutba
    Participant

    So while the crew can’t enforce the wearing of masks they can request it, and if that request is denied….

    It is the bit after that that is missing.

    It could indeed be an offence under the Air Navigation Order, but what do you think the sanction would be?

    The flight is diverted for an offload (highly unlikely given costs) or the airline spends time prosecuting the offender (highly unlikely, as it could result in a very protracted case) or the airline calls the Police to deliver the fixed penalty of £100 reduced to £50 if paid quickly (also highly unlikely, as they have other things to do) or a ban from the airline (which may be of little consequence if you don’t travel regularly).

    So unless the passenger is seriously disruptive the reality is nothing will happen.

    as EX crew it is indeed a criminal offence to disobey the commands of the Cabin Crew, and as such in most countries the captain is well within his rights to have to offender arrested upon arrival. ordinarily the charge is disruptive passenger.

    the rules are VERY clear!

    https://www.caa.co.uk/Passengers/On-board/Disruptive-passengers/

    3 users thanked author for this post.

    SimonS1
    Participant

    So while the crew can’t enforce the wearing of masks they can request it, and if that request is denied….

    It is the bit after that that is missing.

    It could indeed be an offence under the Air Navigation Order, but what do you think the sanction would be?

    The flight is diverted for an offload (highly unlikely given costs) or the airline spends time prosecuting the offender (highly unlikely, as it could result in a very protracted case) or the airline calls the Police to deliver the fixed penalty of £100 reduced to £50 if paid quickly (also highly unlikely, as they have other things to do) or a ban from the airline (which may be of little consequence if you don’t travel regularly).

    So unless the passenger is seriously disruptive the reality is nothing will happen.

    as EX crew it is indeed a criminal offence to disobey the commands of the Cabin Crew, and as such in most countries the captain is well within his rights to have to offender arrested upon arrival. ordinarily the charge is disruptive passenger.

    the rules are VERY clear!

    https://www.caa.co.uk/Passengers/On-board/Disruptive-passengers/

    The rules are very clear, as are the challenges of enforcing them. Good luck to the Police if every captain flying into UK reports passengers not wearing masks properly.


    bigglesgirl72
    Participant

    A primary responsibility of any airline is the safety of its passengers.
    This given any passenger that endangers the safety of any other person on that aircraft is breaching the airlines primary responsibility and should be dealt with as appropriate both by the airline and the relevant authority.
    It is proved well beyond any doubt that masks offer considerable protection to all and as such it absolutely astounds me that there are still otherwise intelligent people twittering on incessantly about personal freedoms,’liberties shot to hell’ and such.
    Question -does this lunatic fringe also refuse to wear a seat belt and if not why not – given that this is a far greater curtailment of personal freedom than is wearing a mask.

    I suspect that the requirement to wear a mask on the instruction of the airline is already enforceable by existing laws and regulations.

    The trouble is that it doesn’t appear to be “proved well beyond any doubt that masks offer considerable protection”.

    Many of the articles I have read from people who appear to be experts use language such as minimal, minute, small etc protection, and the WHO were pressurised into changing their position despite the science not changing. So wearing a mask is either very slightly increasing the chances of not getting/giving the virus to/from someone, or an indication of respect for others.

    There are many studies coming out now saying that wearing a mask can reduce the viral load that asymptomatic people give out to others and that wearing a mask can save you, yes the selfish ones amongst us, this means YOU, from getting a worse dose of the virus.
    So wearing a mask can stop YOU getting more sick. That should resonate with some people a little better I think!


    fatbear
    Participant

    bigglesgirl72

    If you are shouting at me in the believe that I do not wear a facemask then perhaps you should have read what was actually said between me and cwoodward. Nowhere do I say I refuse to wear a mask, and in a subsequent post to one quoted I mention that I do wear one. The discussion was over the use of the word “considerable”, not there is no benefit in wearing a mask.

    Anyway, this is my last contribution to this thread.

    Welcome to the forum………


    canucklad
    Participant

    Anyway, this is my last contribution to this thread.

    Sad to see you leaving fatbear ….. Most fellow contributors have a different viewpoint to me on the whole mask thing, some have been quite forthright in their responses , however as this crisis ebbs and flows , and sadly IMO , now drifting into a global catastrophic economic meltdown I’ll stick up for my viewpoint.

    I’d love to get back to a situation on the forum, where we’re sharing tips on flights, hotels and business travel in general — alas ( fox in chicken coop comment coming up) its becoming clear that we either shut up shop totally (Global) or allow herd immunity to grow ( Swedish model) if we wish for some sort of economic recovery this year /early next year.

    Mask’s , social distancing and phased easing seems to just prolong the spread , consequently business uncertainty and society unease is just deepening the creeping recession and consequential job losses .

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 53 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Business Traveller September / October 2020 edition
Business Traveller September / October 2020 edition
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below
Polls