Walked on broken glass on plane

[MEL_Traveller]

Sorry, I feel you are the one who is saying "If the airline knows of dangers it could make an appropriate announcement at the beginning of the flight" and suggesting warnings regarding lockers, seat belt, shoes etc are required. I don't really need these warnings because I use my commonsense, know what I can and can't do for my own safety and importantly, when I do stuff up and get hurt for doing something which is outside the bounds of sense then I don't blame everyone else. Please save the requirement for warnings for real safety requirements

If we're talking about contributory negligence as mentioned at the beginning of the thread, the passenger ought to be aware of the actions they should (or shouldn't) be taking to protect their safety. The warnings about lockers and seats belts already exist - these aren't my suggestions, they're standard on just about every airline. Wearing shoes because of danger is one extra.

If you don't believe wearing shoes is a 'real' safety requirement (and therefore worthy of an announcement), why would any other passenger think differently?

 

[juddles]

I am with the crowd that says it is insanity to walk around in bare feet.

It is, in my humble opinion, a very probable situation that there could be broken glass on an airplane floor. An aircraft is a small metal tube where pax get served beverages in glasses that have to be perched on wobbly tables, and that tube flies through turbulence. That many glasses don't break every flight is a small miracle.

Pax such as the OP who insist on walking around in the dark in such an environment with bare feet are not being reasonable. And in cases such as this the OP is then responsible for soiling the cabin floor with copious amounts of his blood. That is a tad more dangerous than the urine on the toilet floor! And so much harder for the crew or cleaning staff to get rid of.

Anyway, having said all that, a few hours ago on a trans-pac flight I did myself go to the toilet mid flight just wearing socks

Edit: To the OP, I am not attacking you here - just voicing another viewpoint. I like your open and sensible attitude, please keep posting in AFF

 

[DC3]

... a few hours ago on a trans-pac flight I did myself go to the toilet mid flight just wearing socks ...

Just wearing socks. I hope that everyone else was asleep.

 

[eric2011]

If you don't believe wearing shoes is a 'real' safety requirement (and therefore worthy of an announcement), why would any other passenger think differently?

It is a real safety requirement, however owing to just plain common sense, doesn't need an announcement, as is the case with dozens of other things in day to day life where you instinctively know what is right and wrong

 

[get me outta here]

It is a pain putting shoes or slippers on to walk about the cabin, but I always do it no matter what.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

It is a real safety requirement, however owing to just plain common sense, doesn't need an announcement, as is the case with dozens of other things in day to day life where you instinctively know what is right and wrong

The point is that an airline does make an announcement about overhead lockers. A passenger opening an overhead locker without care might have their claim reduced because of contributory negligence. Same with seat belts. The passenger is made aware of the requirement and can take action accordingly (or if not, the airline can try and claim the passenger contributed to their injury).

Does this make a difference in the absence of any warning to wear shoes? Why would an airline only announce some of the dangers it feels are relevant?

 

[RooFlyer]

<snip>
It is, in my humble opinion, a very probable situation that there could be broken glass on an airplane floor. An aircraft is a small metal tube where pax get served beverages in glasses that have to be perched on wobbly tables, and that tube flies through turbulence. That many glasses don't break every flight is a small miracle.
<snip>

In all the flying I have done - over a thousand sectors etc etc - never once do I recall that thinking that stepping on broken glass in the aisle just left there was a risk I should look out for. And in the unlikely event of a glass breaking (as you point out), I would expect that the crew would pick up any pieces and the intra-flight cleaners anything else.
___

All this talk inter alia that its significantly the OPs fault for walking around unshod .. is pretty bizarre IMHO. No, I don't think I should be expected to anticipate broken glass LEFT in the aisle of an aircraft - nor should I anticipate faeces being there (maybe spilled out of a nappy), or vomit in my seat pocket left over from the previous occupant.

Or are there those who think I should?

I can cover my feet against glass, but do I have to wear gloves as well to anticipate the latter risk?

 

[Melburnian1]

eric2011 is on the right tram: it's simply commonsense to wear footwear when one steps out of one's seat or bed into the aisle, and later, into the lavatory.

Let's all take responsibility for our own actions.

Granted, the crew were lazy not to look for more broken glass, but airlines don't have to point out commonsense behaviours. We should intuitively know them.

 

[Milboo]

If the airline was successful in arguing contributory negligence it would only partially reduce the compensation. But I'm not sure that's the case here. I have never heard an airline give a warning that shoes should be worn to prevent injury, and they give out socks for comfort in all classes. I don't think it's reasonable for a passenger to expect or look for broken glass on the floor.

What is being overlooked is that as part of any negligence claim, there are a few hurdles to even get over before contributory negligence can be brought into the equation. Leaving aside questions of duty of care etc, what monetary loss was actually suffered in the circumstances?

As for the glass being left on the floor - maybe some was picked up but others missed after the incident, perhaps cabin crew were busy dealing with the passenger or another issue on board. Who knows!

If it were me, I would have appreciated the gesture of the wine, chalked it up to accidents happening and the airline not actually having done it deliberately and a reminder that one should never wear bare feet on the plane, especially when going to the bathroom!

 

[Cynicor]

I'm not a medical person but hopefully one of our doctors can advise if we had a small area of broken skin on our under foot if it a good idea to walk through urine and then allow it to sit on our skin to soak in for a few hours

As one of those doctors, I use the bathrooms in socks but not slippers/footwear. Urine is actually more sterile than most bodily fluids, and I think everyone is overly paranoid about cleanliness now. That said, I don't generally walk into puddles of urine, the J and F toilets are pretty good and most asian carriers seem to clean them almost inbetween uses!

 

[Danger]

A lot of the comments in this thread seem to about wearing footwear to the loo or not. Perhaps we can have a separate discussion on that.

I would have kept my shoes on! I would never use the bathroom on the plane without wearing shoes.

Given your contributory negligence I'd hope you would not expect compensation.

Respecting the fact you work in the law, what is the contributory negligence here?

I acknowledge that if a passenger went to the toilet when the seatbelt sign was on and slammed their head into a locker, they've contributed. Similarly, if a passenger takes her carry-on down a slide and bangs her chin on it when hitting the ground, contributory again. But not wearing footwear in the aisle of an aircraft? It's not a glass factory or a supermarket or a paddock. Do passengers therefore need to wear heat resistance pants in the event a hot drink is spilled on them? Or personally disinfect utensils.

I personally wouldn't consider glass on the floor of an aircraft as reasonably foreseeable.

I think the real issue here is the presence of broken glass in the aisle of an aircraft (apparently not being attended to), not what the OP happened to be wearing on his/her feet, isn't it?

Doesn't the presence of broken glass in the aisle of an aircraft, not being attended to, shock/appal/disappoint more, and is more worthy of comment, than the OP going to the loo in bare feet?

In all the flying I have done - over a thousand sectors etc etc - never once do I recall that thinking that stepping on broken glass in the aisle just left there was a risk I should look out for. And in the unlikely event of a glass breaking (as you point out), I would expect that the crew would pick up any pieces and the intra-flight cleaners anything else.
___

All this talk inter alia that its significantly the OPs fault for walking around unshod .. is pretty bizarre IMHO. No, I don't think I should be expected to anticipate broken glass LEFT in the aisle of an aircraft - nor should I anticipate faeces being there (maybe spilled out of a nappy), or vomit in my seat pocket left over from the previous occupant.

Or are there those who think I should?

I can cover my feet against glass, but do I have to wear gloves as well to anticipate the latter risk?

I'm with RooFlyer.

Neilmeister, I'm afraid the plane has left the gate on this one. It sounds like the incident was several months ago. At the time, if you were happy with the bottle of wine, then I wouldn't have taken any further action after that. I do agree with one or two others, though, that the biggest issue seems to be the nonchalant approach of some of the crew.

 

[Tortuga]

I always remember to use slippers (mainly for the urine on toilet floor reason) not broken glass in the aisles.. I think in this case it is unreasonable to expect broken glass as a potential hazard on the floor. I've never in my time flying seen a broken glass incident which tells me it's not that common. Unfortunately this is one of those incidents where everyone looks around pointing fingers and in the end nothing changes and you get no reasonable outcome. Hopefully a report was filed and investigation opened to find out how it happened and how to prevent it - unlikely though. In my line of work it would be filed as an incident.

 

[drron]

The only thing I would have done different to the OP would have been to report this to Customer service.It is not acceptable to have broken glass in the aisle just after take off.The attitude of the crew is unacceptable and there appears to have been a big fail in the cleaning of the aircraft.
All this talk of shoes is completely irrelevant to the situation.Just imagine a toddler wearing shoes running up the aisle,falling and gashing his/her face.Qantas would be facing a hefty legal bill.They should be aware of this.
As to urine there was an Indian PM who drank his own daily and lived to 99.
Madonna urinates on her feet to control athletes foot.
Sarah Miles also drinks her own urine.
I am much more worried by glass on the floor than urine.

 

[Milboo]

The only thing I would have done different to the OP would have been to report this to Customer service.It is not acceptable to have broken glass in the aisle just after take off.The attitude of the crew is unacceptable and there appears to have been a big fail in the cleaning of the aircraft.
All this talk of shoes is completely irrelevant to the situation.Just imagine a toddler wearing shoes running up the aisle,falling and gashing his/her face.Qantas would be facing a hefty legal bill.They should be aware of this.
As to urine there was an Indian PM who drank his own daily and lived to 99.
Madonna urinates on her feet to control athletes foot.
Sarah Miles also drinks her own urine.
I am much more worried by glass on the floor than urine.

QF would have a compelling argument that it was not reasonably foreseeable that there would be glass in the aisle. The crew would be entitled to rely on the aircraft having been cleaned prior to boarding and those cleaners having completed their job properly.

Unless it could be established that the QF crew operating the flight prior to the flight in question knew there was broken glass there and failed to clean it up, it having been brought to their attention.

Party must likely liable would be the cleaning crew given the point in time of the flight that this incident occurred.

 

[get me outta here]

Do the cleaners work for Qantas? Whoever is responsible for that glass actually being on the floor surely it's Qantas's responsibility one way or the other.

QF would have a compelling argument that it was not reasonably foreseeable that there would be glass in the aisle. The crew would be entitled to rely on the aircraft having been cleaned prior to boarding and those cleaners having completed their job properly.

Unless it could be established that the QF crew operating the flight prior to the flight in question knew there was broken glass there and failed to clean it up, it having been brought to their attention.

Party must likely liable would be the cleaning crew given the point in time of the flight that this incident occurred.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

QF would have a compelling argument that it was not reasonably foreseeable that there would be glass in the aisle. The crew would be entitled to rely on the aircraft having been cleaned prior to boarding and those cleaners having completed their job properly.

I was on a transit stop in SYD a couple years ago, we weren't allowed to leave the aircraft. Cleaners came on and did their thing. One of the cabin crew then went around and checked everything... calling the cleaners back to vacuum a bit here, refold a blanket there, change a couple of antimacassars. At least on some airlines crew appear responsible for a 'final check'. That seems right otherwise cleaning staff (especially if contractors) would have no checks and balances.

 

[Happy Trails]

As to urine there was an Indian PM who drank his own daily and lived to 99.

[FONT=&amp]When octogenarian Indian prime minister Moraji Desai arrived in Australia and was asked the reason for his longevity (he lived to be 99), he informed an open-mouthed press corps that it was due to his lifelong habit of drinking a glass of his own urine for breakfast. [/FONT][FONT=&amp]Asked to comment, Whitlam replied: “Well, I’ve heard of people getting on the piss early, but this is ridiculous.”

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/gough-whitlam/gough-whitlam-to-be-remembered-for-his-humour-says-barry-cohen/news-story/4cf391b8b0af89b8bc029cadfa0810bf[/FONT]

 

[DC3]

... As to urine there was an Indian PM who drank his own daily and lived to 99. Madonna urinates on her feet to control athletes foot ...

... as always, each to their own.

 

[drron]

QF would have a compelling argument that it was not reasonably foreseeable that there would be glass in the aisle. The crew would be entitled to rely on the aircraft having been cleaned prior to boarding and those cleaners having completed their job properly.

Unless it could be established that the QF crew operating the flight prior to the flight in question knew there was broken glass there and failed to clean it up, it having been brought to their attention.

Party must likely liable would be the cleaning crew given the point in time of the flight that this incident occurred.

Even if you are right it wouldn't matter.It would be a PR nightmare for QF.And if people believed they used a technicality to avoid compensation it would turn into a PR disaster.
But just change the cenario slightly.It was the OPs flight,he sustained a cut,told the crew but then did not go and find the other pieces....and then the toddler...

 

[theweaselsteve]

This talk of shoes etc is nonsense. There shouldn't be glass on the floor in the first place, and regardless of who's fault the glass was, QF should have to take responsibility for it. If airlines give out slippers/socks before flights, then passengers would likely think they were acceptable footwear throughout the flight. Would slippers or socks have prevented the outcome? No.