Australian air rage attacks increasing

[NM]

From news.com.au:

THE number of air rage incidents over Australian skies is on the rise despite there being fewer passengers, new statistics have revealed.

The Office of Transport Security recorded 279 reports of altercations between passengers and other "unruly behaviour" in 2008, up 64 from 2007.

 

[Mal]

That's quite a few.

I thought most ended up in the paper. Obviously many are missed.

Rather than there being a general increase, I suspect that more are being reported. Traditional 'yobbo' behaviour which was sometimes overlooked now becomes reported etc. There are also additional stresses at various check-ins etc due to staff cuts which could also influence the figures.

Wonder how many people are 'banned' from flying on Qantas? Jetstar? Virgin Blue? Tiger? for bad behaviour.

 

[phil wratten]

My wife & I were flying Brisbane / LAX Dec 06 and witnessed first hand an 'X' well known sporting identity carrying on like a prize goose in the upper deck of business class. The QANTAS staff handled the situation admirably. So did the 4 burly police officers and 2 plain clothes gentlemen when they escorted the rude clown off the plane at LAX.

Passenegers, irrrespective of the class they fly, (and flight crew) should not be subjected to the rudeness of others. This prize gooze should have been sent straight back to Australia and allowed only to leave Australia aboard his own private jet, thereby not subjecting others to his extreme rudeness. It would be easy to fix the problem. Step out of line once and be banned for life...

As I said, the QANTAS flight crew did an excellent job!

 

[straitman]

phil wratten,

Thanks and welcome to AFF.

The prize goose as you call him is obviously much more important than the rest of us and probably thought the 4 burly police officers and 2 plain clothes gentlemen were his private escort which he deserved in any case.

 

[pauly7]

That's quite a few.

I thought most ended up in the paper. Obviously many are missed.

Rather than there being a general increase, I suspect that more are being reported. Traditional 'yobbo' behaviour which was sometimes overlooked now becomes reported etc. There are also additional stresses at various check-ins etc due to staff cuts which could also influence the figures.

Wonder how many people are 'banned' from flying on Qantas? Jetstar? Virgin Blue? Tiger? for bad behaviour.

Would be interesting also to see it as a % of total pax carried by each airline...

I would hazard a guess that Tiger, DJ and JQ would top that one!

 

[medhead]

As a percentage the number is not even worth reporting in total.

I have no idea what the total number of passengers of the given period. But I know that QF claim they gave out 3 million classic awards. 279 out of 3 million is 0.0093%. What percentage of QF seats would be classic awards - maybe 1% that gives 0.000093%. That's all I need to know that it's not even worth factoring in the other airlines. For such a small group out of such a large population, I doubt that a stsatistically significant difference can be detected between the airlines.

 

[atalooseend]

Give an Aussie free alcohol in a confined space with lots of people and look what happens

 

[JohnK]

True but there are some wise Aussies who appreciate the 'free alcohol' they are given regularly yet continue to behave themselves.

 

[serfty]

... 'free alcohol' ...

In this context, the word is complimentary - (nothing Qantas provides {other than to the hoi polloi} is ever free).

 

[anat0l]

The more interesting aspect of the article is how we should address the issue of air rage. Is it anyone's fault, for a start? Or no one's fault?

• Should passengers be expected to be civil because "it's the right thing to do", irrespective of the conditions?
• Is the tight-a*sed nature of travel these days (cost cutting, fuel costs, surcharges and taxes galore) fuelling a discontent culture amongst passengers, hence it's not their fault but the airlines' fault?
• Is it the fault of FAs since they're not being paid enough to be sufficiently radiant when they do their jobs, hence not supporting a culture of the past where travel was enjoyable?

Having worked in service industry before, I'm biased to support the first point, but reading the article and some associated articles from other sources (where people also leave comments), it seems the opinion is very much divided.

We live in a society where the nature of air travel has changed significantly. When I was small, air travel was a luxury and even in Economy, still had that feel as such. Now air travel is rather commonplace, and by many people's measures (at least in AU domestic) service levels have decreased, not increased nor the same.

However, why should that make us, or allow us to act, any less human (let alone less than human)? Especially FAs etc. who work at the coal face of a system (defective or otherwise), it's not fair to vent on them.

 

[2muchplastic]

The more interesting aspect of the article is how we should address the issue of air rage. Is it anyone's fault, for a start? Or no one's fault?

I think that society (deep and meaningful post starts here) in general is at fault and not the airlines. Society has, in my opinion, come to expect more for less and are prepared to take whatever they can get and complain about what they don't get, or more importantly, not getting what they're not even entitled to.

• Should passengers be expected to be civil because "it's the right thing to do", irrespective of the conditions?

Absolutely. A bit of civility goes a long way, and costs nothing. But it seems it is a precious and rare commodity these days.

• Is the tight-a*sed nature of travel these days (cost cutting, fuel costs, surcharges and taxes galore) fuelling a discontent culture amongst passengers, hence it's not their fault but the airlines' fault?

It's been mentioned on here before that it's no coincidence that the rise in air-rage incidents is similar to the increase in passenger numbers on LCCs.
Is it due to the cut price style of service on LCCs? Not in my opinion. Take as an example the rise in low-cost vehicle servicing as opposed to full price manufacturer franchise servicing. Do you hear of people going to their local Bob Jane T-marts and punching the mechanic on the nose just because they didn't get the free air freshener that they were entitled to?
Probably not.
But with Low Cost Carriers, you are opening up a travel service to a group of people that, not only should not be allowed a passport, but preferably should be culled at birth:

Students.​

QF009 excepted of course. And there endeth the almost serious part of the post.​

If you look back through history, I believe you'll find that the majority of the significant negative events of the world were caused by students.
The death of the dinosaurs, as an example, was just a jolly jape for Oxford University rag week.
In years gone by, the average student managed to make it home in the evening with the start of a monumental hangover, clutching the remains of a cheap hot dog and wearing little more than a traffic cone.
Now, they fly. And all they can afford from their 4 shifts at Mcdonalds each week is a Red e-deal on QF, which they believe entitles them to a four course meal and as much alcohol as they can persuade the FA to give them. And when they don't get their 23rd drink in a two and a half hour flight, they really kick off....​

 

[munitalP]

But with Low Cost Carriers, you are opening up a travel service to a group of people that, not only should not be allowed a passport, but preferably should be culled at birth:

Students.​

Mr!

 

[JohnK]

In this context, the word is complimentary - (nothing Qantas provides {other than to the hoi polloi} is ever free).

Technically the word is complimentary but in my opinion if I pay $63 for a one-way BNE-SYD flight and get 2-3 beers on the flight then the beers are free.