What should have been - passenger incident on 3K696

[ermen]

What should have been done - passenger incident on 3K696

So, I took the 3K696 last Friday night from HKG to SIN and encountered my most "exciting" experience in my flying history.

Flight was pretty much full and the cabin crew were starting to ask passengers to check their bags into the hold at the end. Lady in 5C who arrived with the second wave of passengers (note that you are bused to the plane for 3K in HKG) did not have any place to put her bags in the overhead lockers. Did not actually know exactly what happened as the incident unfolded but she started to create a ruckus after all passengers had been seated ready for departure

• Woman insisted on keeping her hand luggage wit her (which I presume could not fit under the seat in front of her) and refused to comply with the cabin crew (CSM) instructions on stowage
• CSM said that was not possible due to safety regulations but 5C continued to ignore the CSM's request
• Captain came out to see what the delay was and the CSM relayed the incident to him. Apparently, 5C also refused to identify herself to the cabin crew when requested
• Captain said that they cannot have loose luggage flying around the cabin and to offload the woman if she refused to comply. CSM went back to 5C. She continued to refuse to identify herself (probably to prevent being offloaded?) and continued to defy the crew's instructions on luggage. From what I gathered, her tactic was to simply ignore the crew.
• CSM comes back and reports to the Captain who said that offloading is not a threat and they will get the airport police involved. Crew were starting to consult with the ground crew at the front of the plane on offloading procedures
• CSM goes back to the lady who continues to ignore everything. CSM reports back to the Captain
• Captain says to CSM to offer 5C the option of stowing her bags further behind the plane for landing and take-off and to give it back to her during cruise
• CSM relays this offer to 5C who apparently still refuses
• Plane was all seated and basically now around 20mins+ delayed. Passengers in the front knew what was going and started to shouting and hollering - "just offload her", "call the police" and "its a security issue that she refuses to identify herself and she could be a terrorist for all we know"
• Finally, Captain asks CSM to make announcement on the plane asking for a volunteer to give up their cabin storage space near 5C so she could store her bag. Someone does this and 5C is appeased. Some passengers in the front as still unhappy though and continue to urge the crew to call the police and offload her. We were around 30mins delayed already. From what I am aware, 5C still had not identified herself.
• Captain decides to address the plane from the front. He said something to this effect (professionally and factually) that he is responsible for the plane and that he made the decision not to offload as it will take another half hour or so He said he chose this option for the benefit of everyone to avoid further delays. He said that he knew that there were concerns that this woman could be a security risk but said that her bags had been scanned and cleared. Passengers start clapping.
  • I did have my unease that she could be a security risk but rationalised to myself that a prospective terrorist would want to keep a low profile at the beginning and draw less attention to themselves
• Plane takes off half hour behind schedule and upon arrival onto SIN, we were told that we could not embark immediately until cleared. Saw that the SIN police were waiting at the gate to deal with the woman in 5C. Captain had radioed ahead to alert the SIN authorities! Not sure what happened but hopefully she is charged or at least spent the night in the Changi slammer (too bad was not Kerobokan or somewhere like that)
• CSM was very professional and I was very impressed with how she handled this matter and other on this flight

Question:

• What do you think of this? Do you think that the Captain was justified in deciding to fly without offloading 5C given that she refused to i) identify herself when asked and ii) refused to comply with cabin safety requirement? Most interested in hearing everyone's, and even any pilots / cabin crew's take on this?

 

[Febs]

Re: What should have been done - passenger incident on 3K696

Sounds like, IMO:
- Captain made a judgement call that she wasn't so much a security risk, more so just a <...> moron
- Captain is trained to make those calls
- Captain prevented further delays
- Pax probably thought she was going to get away with it (I would have if I was on the plane, and probably would have been a bit annoyed)
- Doubt she'd get into too much trouble with the local authorities, but just the fact that they were called, and likely recorded her details/the incident should be enough to make her wake up and realise how stupid she was.

All up, a good result by the sounds of it.

 

[richie9x]

Re: What should have been done - passenger incident on 3K696

Sounds likes captain chose the best option for dealing with the situation.

The passenger might get charged with disobeying the instructions of the cabin crew. But at the very least I hope Jetstar ban them from further travel.

 

[get me outta here]

Re: What should have been done - passenger incident on 3K696

I thought they knew the names of the pax and thier seat nos(?)

 

[ermen]

Re: What should have been done - passenger incident on 3K696

I thought they knew the names of the pax and thier seat nos(?)

Sorry, typo - I can spell 'their' most of the time

Yeah I saw they had the manifest with them but maybe its a procedural thing that they need to positively identify the passenger they are going to offload? Not sure why this came up as an issue.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

Re: What should have been done - passenger incident on 3K696

3K doesn't have overhead bins for the first few rows so it's certainly a known problem.

Everything avoided by not flying Jetstar...

 

[Hvr]

Re: What should have been done - passenger incident on 3K696

Agree the Captain made the call and I reckon based on what was posted here they made the right call.

Wonder how much thinking this woman was doing, SIN is not a place where you want to be met by the police.

 

[yohy?!]

if i were on board i would have grabbed her bags and chucked them out the open door onto the tarmac so she then offloaded herself seems pretty representative of the pax on this route - it's half the price of CX and SQ so you get all sorts. . .

 

[amaroo]

Great story - thanks for posting.

IMO the captain did the right thing. Calling ahead for the SIN cops was brilliant.....the crew would still be laughing

 

[medhead]

I'm still learning AFF posts / edits, and may make faux 'paws' in which case I apolgise in anticiaption.

I am a bit perplexed that mentioning the pax list is considered OT as there was a lot of previous refs to the name or lack thereof to the difficult person in question.

sorry, I meant my post was off topic not yours. Also it took me ages to figure out editing, hence why I mentioned. Otherwise, I wouldn't have bothered over a "thier", the meaning was clear.


Sent from the Throne

 

[mella2007]

Thanks for sharing! I think the Captain did a terrific job and all the crew sounded like they were very professionals in their dealings.
I wonder if she identified herself to the police in SIN? LOL
Hoping that her travel plans were messed up in some way or she was punished in some way for the behaviour she caused.

 

[tuapekastar]

Agree the captain is 'the man' and respect his decision. It does grate though that she (initially) appeared to 'get away with it'. I hope her meeting with SIN authorities was less than cordial. And had I been seated next to her I may have had a few quiet (but not subtle) words (then again I hate confrontation so maybe I wouldn't have ).

 

[JohnK]

And I interpret the whole saga differently.

This is the future of air travel when the majority of airlines charge you to check-in bags and have strict carry on rules. So people try to take things on board and you have these type of issues.

There are times where I do have carry-on and may have valuable items in it. I am not going to allow someone to check-it nor am I going to let someone store it in an overhead away from me. And I am a troublesome passenger for refusing? I should be offloaded?

Avoid Jetstar is the best advice possible....

 

[mannej]

JohnK, this could have happened on any airline, not just Jetstar.

Would your advice be different if that was the case?

 

[eastwest101]

Re: What should have been done - passenger incident on 3K696

...was justified in deciding to fly without offloading 5C given that she refused to i) identify herself when asked and ii) refused to comply with cabin safety requirement? Most interested in hearing everyone's, and even any pilots / cabin crew's take on this?

Maybe a new one for FAQ is INTYWIA - "I'm not telling you who I am".

I agree with some of the posters that though the pax may have had their own reasons that failing to comply with crew directions and holding the "offloading" gun to the head of the crew - its time intensive to unload all luggage when a pax is offloaded - that the pax seems to have got away with a bit.

Maybe the response could be - "Well if you don't offload them then I am going to offload myself - so either way I am afraid that all the bags are coming out!". Maybe not a popular move but could prompt the crew to pull the trigger and offload them.

 

[spudwa]

Re: What should have been done - passenger incident on 3K696

Was she blonde ;-)

 

[Awesom Andy]

Re: What should have been done - passenger incident on 3K696

Not sure what the crew told the SIN police, but the result would have been likely to be much more severe for the pax than she was met with police in HKG. In this type of cases, I would imagine a large fine to be involved. 3K is also SIN-based, so much less administrative paperwork involved. I've been on 3K in recent months (including 3K696), and I generally find that, apart from the LCC model (and that horrible food), the service standard is approaching a 2nd-tier full service airline level.

 

[Aussie_flyer]

And I am a troublesome passenger for refusing? I should be offloaded?

Yes you are, and yes you should be.

would you also refuse to provide your name upon direction of the crew?

 

[anat0l]

I remember that a story went to air about a woman who was flying CX and she refused to have her handbag put into the lockers or under the seat in front of her (or maybe she was in a bulkhead - can't remember). She remained stubborn with the crew and, like the culprit in question in this thread, held up the flight from departing.

Eventually she was escorted off the flight by security or other authorised personnel.


So, it can happen on any airline.


Back to topic, the woman may have been lead off by authorities at SIN, but I'd think the most she would've got is a very stern talking to, then be let go. In spite of her not identifying herself and generally being an ***hole, unfortunately I think there is little that can be charged against her (apart from possibly disobeying crew instructions, and even then that's not automatically a criminal offense).

Well, at least that's how I judge it given how many incidents of pax being idiots and yet being given little more than a slap on the wrist before being let go.

Just goes to show that idiotic behaviour on aircraft continues to be rewarded, whilst good behaviour continues to be given little regard.

 

[yohy?!]

Re: What should have been done - passenger incident on 3K696

I've been on 3K in recent months (including 3K696), and I generally find that, apart from the LCC model (and that horrible food), the service standard is approaching a 2nd-tier full service airline level.

+1 the food is appalling but CC and hard product is totally fine (apart from the bus gate at HK which is only fun if you like plane spotting )

3K compared to JQ Domestic in Australia is like night and day - pity they can't make money.