8 replies to this topic

[xUT]

3 held in Detroit over bathroom trips on plane

Quote

Frontier Flight 623, with 116 passengers on board, landed without incident in Detroit after the crew reported that two people were spending "an extraordinarily long time" in a bathroom, Frontier spokesman Peter Kowalchuck said.

What is it about bathroom time?
WTF?

[jimntx]

As flight attendants we are instructed to keep an eye on how long people stay in the lavs. It's a security issue. It's a smoking ban issue (yes people still disable the smoke alarms and smoke in flight). It's a passenger health issue. More than once over the past few years, a passenger has been found dead in a lav. And, when you have 188 passengers on a 757 and only 4 lavs on a 4 hour flight, you don't need anyone monopolizing a single lav.

[tech2101]

Maybe that chili-cheese dog from the bar before flight?

[jimntx]

As I said, the passenger might be dead in there.

[xUT]

jimntx, on 12 September 2011 - 04:34 PM, said:

As I said, the passenger might be dead in there.

If they were dead, how is that a security issue? Having two F-15's scrambled is ridiculous.

Hey, you're just following orders, we all understand that.

But really, what's the big deal?
If they were coach or business class and using the first class bathroom by the pilots door then there is certainly concern (but you wouldn't allow that to happen regardless). If they were first class using the first class bathroom then they have the right to use it or but up a barrier. Even the gooberment should not be allowed to regulate 'natures call'.

Was it racial profiling? Who knows as the 'media' is not giving details.

The 'whole' story here is unclear.

[jimntx]

xUT, on 12 September 2011 - 05:01 PM, said:

If they were dead, how is that a security issue? Having two F-15's scrambled is ridiculous.

Hey, you're just following orders, we all understand that.

But really, what's the big deal?
If they were coach or business class and using the first class bathroom by the pilots door then there is certainly concern (but you wouldn't allow that to happen regardless). If they were first class using the first class bathroom then they have the right to use it or but up a barrier. Even the gooberment should not be allowed to regulate 'natures call'.

Was it racial profiling? Who knows as the 'media' is not giving details.

The 'whole' story here is unclear.

My comment was a joke about the chili-cheese dog. You do recognize a joke when you see it, don't you? I think that there is not supposed to be cross-cabin traffic in any direction on International flights by regulation. In this case, it appeared to be a security issue because the passengers in question made multiple trips to the lav and were in there for an extended period of time. If you have ever been in an airplane lav near the end of a long flight, you do not want to stay in there any longer than necessary. Plus, it was near the 9/11 anniversary, and military intelligence had already announced that there was "chatter" about an attack on the U.S. during the anniversary period.

I bet you would really have your panties in a bunch if the crew had decided to ignore the multiple bathroom trips, and the plane had blown up. I can just hear your pronouncements against the crew not doing their jobs. As you said, the story is unclear and we don't know all the details. Yet, you have already decided that the crew over-reacted to the passengers' behavior.

[buscador]

jimntx, on 13 September 2011 - 08:53 AM, said:

My comment was a joke about the chili-cheese dog. You do recognize a joke when you see it, don't you? I think that there is not supposed to be cross-cabin traffic in any direction on International flights by regulation. In this case, it appeared to be a security issue because the passengers in question made multiple trips to the lav and were in there for an extended period of time. If you have ever been in an airplane lav near the end of a long flight, you do not want to stay in there any longer than necessary. Plus, it was near the 9/11 anniversary, and military intelligence had already announced that there was "chatter" about an attack on the U.S. during the anniversary period.

I bet you would really have your panties in a bunch if the crew had decided to ignore the multiple bathroom trips, and the plane had blown up. I can just hear your pronouncements against the crew not doing their jobs. As you said, the story is unclear and we don't know all the details. Yet, you have already decided that the crew over-reacted to the passengers' behavior.

wow,, lighten up...

[ggiby]

buscador, on 23 November 2011 - 04:03 PM, said:

wow,, lighten up...

you have to realize that crew members are the first line of defense... We are the eyes and
ears when in the line of duty... remember 911??? many of my flight crew members perished
on that sad day... so???? why would you question this? Most problems occur when someone
goes to the lav... are they assembling a bomb??? Are they doing drugs...???? What are they
doing in there??? It only takes someone max five minutes to do their business right???
if not they are in there doing something else.... so we have the right to question it..
it is our life... and our job to do the right thing...