Don't take off your shoes on Virgin.

[clifford]

I think it is pretty impressive that the FA was so knowledgeable regarding safety matters down to such a fine detail

Just a rabid b....h like many of your FA's IMHO.

That's why DJ will never be anything other than an LCC.

 

[Major]

Just a rabid b....h like many of your FA's IMHO.

That's why DJ will never be anything other than an LCC.

What a disgraceful statement.

This FA was simply doing his/her job.

FA's are constantly dealing with Joe Public and I don't envy them one bit. There are many posts on this forum of FA's providing outstanding service to their passengers.

They put up with loudmouths, drunks, screaming children, distraught mothers and, in your case petulent, businessmen.

The vast majority do a great job.

 

[LiamR]

That's why DJ will never be anything other than an LCC.

Without trying to make this personal, let me ask you what makes you say that?

Sorry, I'm going to bite here. Virgin have had a remarkable change in the last 12 months, it would be completely close minded and bias of you to turn around and say Virgin Australia is a Low Cost Carrier.

Every FA is required to have a knowledge of CASA regulations, don't think Qantas wouldn't do the exact same thing.

 

[pshepvic]

Even if it's not CASA regulations, or even airline policy, in my mind it is quite revolting for anyone to wander around without shoes, at any age. It's not hard to put a pair of shoes on a child when you leave the house. It's civilised, and good on the FA for doing something about it, irrespective of any rules.

Personally I think even thongs, sandals and any other open shoes should be banned from aircraft. 1. Because I don't want to smell other people's stinky feet, and 2. There is clearly a safety issue. Sure, shoes might not help you survive a crash (as some have suggested) but they might just be what you need to survive on the ground afterwards.

 

[straitman]

Just a rabid b....h like many of your FA's IMHO.

That's why DJ will never be anything other than an LCC.

clifford,

A personal comment only.

If you cannot say something constructive then please say nothing!

If you read the post above yours you will see where the regulations sit. Whether it was QF or DJ is irrelevant as the FA was simply obeying the rules as specified by the regulator. Using your own logic then QF is also a LCC.

 

[samh004]

I don’t understand the fuss, we’ve been complaining only Qantas gets these beat up articles for ages now, and finally Virgin does something that warrants a bad article and we’re up in arms?

I say bring it on… what’s next?

 

[kpc]

After the SQ006 tragedy, SQ insist that all passengers wear their shoes on take off...I have seen many Pax kick off their shoes on boarding SQ, and then being politely told to put them back on again. Have not seen it enforced on other airlines, tho..:idea:

 

[NM]

I have worn shoes on 100% of my flights (which over many years is quite a large sample as it would be for many members here). And I have landed safely 100% of the time. So I logically conclude that wearing shoes must be the safest way to travel.

 

[straitman]

I have worn shoes on 100% of my flights (which over many years is quite a large sample as it would be for many members here). And I have landed safely 100% of the time. So I logically conclude that wearing shoes must be the safest way to travel.

I can think of some interesting extrapolations of that logic :!: