Jetstar bans wheelchair-bound pair from flight

[Slats7]

More bad PR for Jestar. It's good to see no news still using B717 picture though!


BUDGET airline Jetstar has been criticised after two disabled passengers were not allowed to board a flight. Tanya Black and Dan Buckingham, who are television presenters of New Zealand disability show Atttitude - were told that they were not allowed on the plane without their carers, the Dominion Post reported.

This is despite the fact that the pair, who were due to fly from Auckland to Wellington, were accompanied by an able-bodied colleague.

Read more: Jetstar bans wheelchair-bound pair from flight | News.com.au

[samh004]

Probably comes down to them not reading the conditions and just assuming JQ would look after them because they’re radio TV presenters.

It seems in every case where a disabled pax has been denied boarding it's been because they didn't notify the airline or follow the correct procedures.

So another media beat up.

[Nigelinoz]

Probably comes down to them not reading the conditions and just assuming JQ would look after them because they're radio presenters.

It seems in every case where a disabled pax has been denied boarding it's been because they didn't notify the airline or follow the correct procedures.

So another media beat up.

Not important but they aren't radio presenters,they are TV presenters and I think it's very presumptuous of you to make assumptions about their views,certainly there have been cases of celebrities throwing their weight around and coming the old 'DYKWIA"line but we have no proof that applies in this case,also why do you assume they didn't read the terms and conditions?and the Jetstar terms and conditions only state

Jetstar requires that a passenger is able to meet certain requirements to travel as an independent traveller. The requirements are:

• the passenger is able to self-toilet, if required, during the course of the flight;
• the passenger can eat or drink during the course of the flight without assistance;
• the passenger can administer medication themselves during the course of the flight, if required;
• the passenger is able to communicate in such a way as to understand the safety instructions of the crew; and
• the passenger is able to evacuate from an aircraft unassisted in the event of an emergency by use of slide or steps.

If a passenger does not meet all of these requirements, the passenger will need to travel with an Accompanying Passenger/Carer.
*Accompanying Passenger means a paying passenger who, in our reasonable opinion, is an independent traveller and is able to and will provide the appropriate assistance, supervision, or both, as is required for the particular passenger they are accompanying including assisting with all of the following if required by the passenger:

They claim that they were later told they could get on the plane if they did not go to the media.

However the pair, fed-up with their treatment by the airline, declined.

Jetstar said it will be apologising to the pair and refunding their air fares.

In this case they had an able bodied person with them so why the problem? and also if it's true (guess we will never know) that they were told they could fly if they didn't go to the media then that is very poor PR imo.
Sorry Sam I think you are wrong in claiming this is a beat up,seems to me that Jetstar made an error,that's why they apologised surely.
Cheers'
N'oz

[samh004]

Not important but they aren't radio presenters,they are TV presenters and I think it's very presumptuous of you to make assumptions about their views,certainly there have been cases of celebrities throwing their weight around and coming the old 'DYKWIA"line but we have no proof that applies in this case,also why do you assume they didn't read the terms and conditions?and the Jetstar terms and conditions only state In this case they had an able bodied person with them so why the problem? and also if it's true (guess we will never know) that they were told they could fly if they didn't go to the media then that is very poor PR imo.

Sorry Sam I think you are wrong in claiming this is a beat up,seems to me that Jetstar made an error,that's why they apologised surely.
Cheers'
N'oz

I note it says "the passenger will need to travel with an Accompanying Passenger/Carer", however there were two of them, so my logic would dictate that they needed 2 carers, not the 1 (regardless of the fact the person travelling with them was not a carer.

The fact they’re apologising and refunding them is just PR, but this sort of stuff happens all the time on LCC’s like Jetstar (mostly Jetstar), probably due to poor training and ignorance, but I would have read that condition as needing a carer each, you, and them evidently, read it another way.

And considering the amount of times JQ gets in the news for not being friends to disabled pax, why would they bother trying to fly with them? If you know there’s likely to be a problem… booking on them is an odd thing to do.

[medhead]

I note it says "the passenger will need to travel with an Accompanying Passenger/Carer", however there were two of them, so my logic would dictate that they needed 2 carers, not the 1 (regardless of the fact the person travelling with them was not a carer.

The fact they’re apologising and refunding them is just PR, but this sort of stuff happens all the time on LCC’s like Jetstar (mostly Jetstar), probably due to poor training and ignorance, but I would have read that condition as needing a carer each, you, and them evidently, read it another way.

I find your logic strange. Admittedly, I'm on iphone and can't see the full quotes from the T&C but the bit you quoted doesn't say the magic word "each". So it seems you are just assuming that they each need an extra passenger. I don't think that is a safe assumption.

[Nigelinoz]

The article does say that

A spokesperson for the airline said that the concern was over how they would get to the toilet.

and IMO that is a legitimate question because there was apparently only one able bodied person with a female and a male passenger and that could have presented a potentially embarassing situation if the passenger of the opposite gender to the carer needed to use the toilet during the flight however the passengers themselves obviously didn't see it as an issue and if that was the main problem why didn't Jetstar just tell the passengers that when they checked in instead of causing needless hassle to their customers.
I will defend airlines of any brand when I think they need to be defended,but I'm afraid in this case I think Jetstar handled the issue badly.
Cheers
N'oz

[medhead]

I'm sorry but potential embarrassment is really no concern for the airline, that is something between the people travelling. By making the disabled passengers get they own carer jetstar have put responsibility for such considerations onto the passengers. IMO jetstar have waived their right to determine who is an appropriate carer. (provided the T&C are met)

[Nigelinoz]

I'm sorry but potential embarrassment is really no concern for the airline, that is something between the people travelling. By making the disabled passengers get they own carer jetstar have put responsibility for such considerations onto the passengers. IMO jetstar have waived their right to determine who is an appropriate carer. (provided the T&C are met)

I agree but then it again comes down to the T & C's and whether Jetstar requires a carer per passenger or not,and if their T &C's are ambiguous about it then I fail to see why they initially denied boarding considering that the passengers had a carer,albeit only one,with them? assuming that the passengers had met the T&C's as currently displayed on the Jetstar website.
Cheers
N'oz

[samh004]

I find your logic strange. Admittedly, I'm on iphone and can't see the full quotes from the T&C but the bit you quoted doesn't say the magic word "each". So it seems you are just assuming that they each need an extra passenger. I don't think that is a safe assumption.

That is true, it doesn’t say each, but then where do you draw the line and say an additional carer is needed, at 3 pax? 4 pax? 35 pax?

I’d just assume a carer each makes the most sense.

[Nigelinoz]

The T&C's do actually say

Accompanying Passenger means a paying passenger who, in our reasonable opinion, is an independent traveller and is able to and will provide the appropriate assistance, supervision, or both, as is required for the particular passenger they are accompanying

which could be taken to mean an accompanying passenger/carer is required per traveller who may require assistance,however even if that is the interpretation that Jetstar puts on it I still see no reason for keeping them waiting for 20 minutes then deciding that they would be allowed to fly provided they didn't go to the media(If that really happened)it's just messy customer service I reckon.
Cheers
N'oz
Edited to add: Just been reading the original story here-
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post...ed-pair-flying

They were eventually told that the captain had a problem with them flying without a carer each.
Jetstar reportedly said it would let them fly if they found a fourth, able-bodied person to act as a carer – despite the fact that it would be another passenger chosen at random. A carer's job theoretically involves taking them to the toilet if needed.
The pair told The Dominion Post the airline eventually said it would let them fly only if they agreed not to go to the media, but they felt dehumanised, humiliated and frustrated, and decided to fly with Air New Zealand.

and it does appear that they do require one carer per disabled traveller.