Lack of curtains separating Business and Economy on 737

[MEL_Traveller]

I don't usually use the toilets at the front unless the cart is out and that is not often. People need to be understanding that will happen every now and then. And unless they are loitering and queueing in business it's not a big deal.

We've had this discussion before. As a platinum you know the service pattern on board. You know when the carts will come out. Just like catching public transport, most people will go to the toilet before leaving home so they don't have get off the bus or train at an intermediate stop to find the conveniences. Same applies to a plane. Why wait until the carts come out before you decide you need to go?

And permission from the crew? What if they place their trust in you that you have a genuine emergency to use the bathroom rather than just waiting till the carts come out so you don't have to walk as far?

It may not be a big deal... to you. And that's understandable. You're the one getting the benefit of your rule. It's probably a bit biased.

A question for those who insist they have the right to use the forward lav. What do you do when flying on almost any other airline in another country where using the forward lav is usually off limits?

 

[BAM1748]

No smoking - not a rule, just a sign
Police only past this point - not a rule, just a sign
Authorised personnel only - not a rule, just a sign
No trespassing - not a rule, just a sign
First Class check in - not a rule, just a sign
Do not use mobile phones - not a rule just a sign
Priority Boarding line - not a rule, just a sign
Employees only - not a rule, just a sign
Business Class passengers only beyond this point - not a rule, just a sign

Good grief, what have you been smoking?

All those depend on context. Like no trespassing, you can only be be prosecuted if you refuse to leave after being asked, not for walking on the property.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

All those depend on context. Like no trespassing, you can only be be prosecuted if you refuse to leave after being asked, not for walking on the property.

Is that correct? I thought there were some different types. For example one is where you are lawfully on the land but refuse to leave when asked. Another is if you are unlawfully on the land, then you could be trespassing regardless of whether you are asked to leave or not.

 

[FrustratedQP]

All those depend on context. Like no trespassing, you can only be be prosecuted if you refuse to leave after being asked, not for walking on the property.

Well what about in the context of a written instruction on an aeroplane such as “ Business class passengers only past this point”

Are you seriously only going to obey an instruction if the penalty is prosecution?

Are you that type of person?

Some people have to have a good look at themselves!

 

[durbrain]

Well what about in the context of a written instruction on an aeroplane such as “ Business class passengers only past this point”

Are you seriously only going to obey an instruction if the penalty is prosecution?

Are you that type of person?

Some people have to have a good look at themselves!

This is exactly what the entitled ‘it’s all about me’ brigade believe. As long as they don’t get in trouble, it’s fine in their eyes.

Seems like there’s 3 types of ppl that are happy to abuse the J toilet:
1. Entitled degenerates who just don’t give a cough
2. Lazy degenerates who refuse to plan around cart time.
3. The catastrophically incontinent. (I have a bit of sympathy for this minority but maybe they should be wearing diapers).

Next thing you know these muppets will be self serving themselves food from the J carts because “there’s no rule saying I can’t”.

 

[JohnK]

Yes, perhaps you should.

Don't take your issues out on me. You need to take them out on the CSMs/cabin crew that invite passengers to use the front toilet.

I'd be silly if I refused the offer unless I want to go for a walk and also grab another drink.

 

[FrustratedQP]

Don't take your issues out on me. You need to take them out on the CSMs/cabin crew that invite passengers to use the front toilet.

I'd be silly if I refused the offer unless I want to go for a walk and also grab another drink.

You can’t deny the rules are the rules. I’ve already quoted the conditions of travel.

I’ve never seen or heard a CSM or cabin crew invite Y pax to use the front toilet, I’ve only ever seen them allow it when a Y pax has put them in an awkward position by either asking to use it or by making it obvious that they want to.

I most probably won’t continue contributing my thoughts with this issue as I have put it as plainly as I can, I will, however say one last thing. If you want to set the example to your child that the rules only apply to those that are silly enough to abide by them, so be it.

 

[durbrain]

I’ve never seen or heard a CSM or cabin crew invite Y pax to use the front toilet, I’ve only ever seen them allow it when a Y pax has put them in an awkward position by either asking to use it or by making it obvious that they want to.

When semi continent, lazy adults with poor planning abilities scuttle up to the cart moaning about toilet time with a simultaneously indignant and constipated look, it’s understandable why the CSM would take the easy route. Sometimes it’s not worth the effort to say no and bratty children milk this to their advantage.

Of course JohnK would say the CSM spontaneously ‘invites’ him to the front in recognition of his Qantas royalty status. Funny how that never happens to the rest of us!

 

[Anna]

Like no trespassing, you can only be be prosecuted if you refuse to leave after being asked, not for walking on the property.

Actually you can't be prosecuted for trespassing, but you can be sued for damages. Trespass is a civil wrong, not a crime, despite what all those wrongly-worded signs say.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Actually you can't be prosecuted for trespassing, but you can be sued for damages. Trespass is a civil wrong, not a crime, despite what all those wrongly-worded signs say.

I think this too depends on the context. If you knowingly and unlawfully trespass on a property - for example a government defense site, it might well be a crime.

 

[BAM1748]

I can put up as many signs as I want at my own house, but they mean nothing in reality.

 

[durbrain]

I can put up as many sogns as I want at my own house, but they mean nothing in reality.

Sure. And if your sign is reasonable (like “please remove shoes before entering”) and people choose to ignore it, just because you can’t prosecute them doesn’t mean they aren’t selfish asshats.

 

[Daver6]

What is evident in this thread is that there are those who believe it is ok to use the J toilets (under certain circumstances) and those who believe that Y pax shouldn't under any circumstances and some who are in between. The views of people aren't going to be swayed.

The obvious solution is that those who fly J and have a major issue with it, need to take it up with the airline if they wish to affect change.

Recently flying the good old 737 from SIN to PER, I was fortunate enough to be in 1D. I needed to go to the bathroom but it was in use, so I just waited in my seat. As the pax exits and walks past me another person jumped up (from Y) and beat me to it. Initially I was slightly annoyed...then took a deep breath, another sip of my drink and waited in my comfy seat. Was it ideal? No. Was I aware of the person's circumstances and why they felt the need to go to the J toilet? No. The world didn't end for me either.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

The obvious solution is that those who fly J and have a major issue with it, need to take it up with the airline if they wish to affect change.

Multi-pronged campaign!

Writing to the airline is one avenue. Going direct to those who 'do it' is another. Influence their behaviour and they set the example for others on the plane too. Like a butterfly flapping its wings in a distant land.

 

[Daver6]

Going direct to those who 'do it' is another.

Given the number of posts on this forum where people will complain about someone talking on the phone loudly in the lounge or feet on bulkhead, but won't actually say something to the offender (but will post a whinge about it here), I see zero change of this working

 

[sjk]

When I was working I would see a strong correlation between people who think they can use whatever toilet they like (which really doesn't happen that much on JAL) and people who think it's fine to deliberately bump a seat just because someone has reclined and people who ignore the seat belt sign and people who can't stow their luggage properly and people who ignore the safety demonstrations and I worry about what they'd be like to deal with in the event of an emergency. We're not there to look pretty, we're there to get everyone to our destination safely, and it's that much easier when people just behave with common sense and decency rather than as selfish 'contrarians'.

 

[juddles]

At the end of the day, it "should" be clear that J bathrooms are for J pax. But there is always a human connection, or reality. If you are a hostie, how do you deal between protecting the sanctity of J, but are confronted by a Y pax "with needs". I am just happy I do not have that job.

 

[sjk]

At the end of the day, it "should" be clear that J bathrooms are for J pax. But there is always a human connection, or reality. If you are a hostie, how do you deal between protecting the sanctity of J, but are confronted by a Y pax "with needs". I am just happy I do not have that job.

Not surprisingly, with common sense and on a case-by-case basis. It's the "I'll use whatever toilet I want" brigade I take issue with, not the mother with a leaking breast.

 

[BAM1748]

1st world problem for sure.

Time for a siesta I think.

I'm in a row 4 seat tomorrow morning, I might just use the nearest toilet if needed as after all, there is no real reason not to.

 

[durbrain]

​

When I was working I would see a strong correlation between people who think they can use whatever toilet they like (which really doesn't happen that much on JAL) and people who think it's fine to deliberately bump a seat just because someone has reclined and people who ignore the seat belt sign and people who can't stow their luggage properly and people who ignore the safety demonstrations and I worry about what they'd be like to deal with in the event of an emergency. We're not there to look pretty, we're there to get everyone to our destination safely, and it's that much easier when people just behave with common sense and decency rather than as selfish 'contrarians'.

Absolutely. It's a shame that the selfish actions of some people unnecessarily soil the experience for others. And my sympathies that you have to put up with these and still face them with a smile.