Locking the J toilet door

[justinbrett]

Whatever the difference is, it has been litigated from the start of this thread.
Again my personal opinion is that all Loos on an aircraft should be available to all passengers regardless of the ticket price.

So just for clarity-
-All loos available to all pax regardless of cabin (whether that be J in 737s to F in A380s)
-Pax do not need a reason to preference the alternative loos
-Pax must ask FA permission prior to entering a higher cabin

Is that your position?

 

[TheRealTMA]

View attachment 435644

With a 200% Tariff for Y passengers.

 

[Zulu0929]

With a 200% Tariff for Y passengers.

That Trumps all the other comments!!!!!

 

[Flyerwin]

With a 200% Tariff for Y passengers.

Do you mean Tesla Model Y passengers?

 

[Quickstatus]

So just for clarity-

Particular 2 is moot due to particular 1, but yes.

It is actually not far from current practices as per my experiences. As always the CC is the final arbiter

 

[TheRealTMA]

Do you mean Tesla Model Y passengers?

Only with a heartfelt salute as they pass the y/J boundary .

 

[justinbrett]

Particular 2 is moot due to particular 1, but yes.

It is actually not far from current practices as per my experiences. As always the CC is the final arbiter

Do you help yourself to the snacks on offer while passing the galleys in the higher cabin?

Really it's no different than asking for a J meal/drink in Y. Sure you're asking and you might receive but you're asking for something above your entitlement, and can put the FA in a difficult position, most of whom want to avoid conflict. If every pax started doing this imagine how annoyed the FAs would get being asked if a pax can go to the toilet every 5 minutes.

If you don't have a valid reason why would you waste their time and not just use the loo in your own cabin? What do you do if no FA around - press the call bell or just help yourself?

I could see the logic if there's a compelling reason, but this just sounds ridiculous.

And on topic, do you have a problem with the J toilets being locked, considering you agree you have to ask permission first? So shouldn't be a problem?

 

[muppet]

I travel mostly QF J … IMHO … it’s a dunny. Who cares?

 

[anat0l]

I travel mostly QF J … IMHO … it’s a dunny. Who cares?

Given what you've read here, that's a bad question and even worse if it was intended to be rhetorical indifference (although, that may just be your position you're taking).

 

[Quickstatus]

Do you help yourself to the snacks on offer while passing the galleys in the higher cabin?

Again, straw man arguments do not progress the debate. This is about toilets

can put the FA in a difficult position, most of whom want to avoid conflict.

This is also moot if the loos are available for all.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Again, straw man arguments do not progress the debate. This is about toilets


This is also moot if the loos are available for all.

If it’s about toilets, and how things *shuold be* - rather than hiw they are now - it wouod require a cabin reconfiguration. WCs wouod need to be placed centrally on the plane, or between cabins.

That’s not always the best use of space, and would potentially eat up passenger seats.

The area immediately behind the coughpit on narrow-body aircraft can’t be used for seating, but you can slot in a WC. If you were to move that to row 3, you’d lose at least 3 passenger seats. Airlines aren’t going to be too happy with that.

Same for the WCs on the a380. Moving them from the front of the J and F cabins would eat up seats in the main cabin. From a financial point, airlines are probably going to be reluctant to do that.

 

[justinbrett]

Again, straw man arguments do not progress the debate. This is about toilets


This is also moot if the loos are available for all.

So you’ve changed your position again, and now saying you want pax to be able to enter a higher cabin to use the loo and not get permission from a FA?

You still haven’t answered the basic question. Why? Why the drama? Why not just use the loo in your cabin?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

So you’ve changed your position again, and now saying you want pax to be able to enter a higher cabin to use the loo and not get permission from a FA?

You still haven’t answered the basic question. Why? Why the drama? Why not just use the loo in your cabin?

I think Quickstatus is acknowledging the current restrictions, but is saying that in an ideal world, all WCs should be available to all pax.

Which might have been their argument from the beginning? ‘all WCs’ is a future state aspiration rather than a belief that it is a current entitlement.

 

[FrustratedQP]

Not everyone is blessed with the same bladder control. When you get to your 70s, 80s and beyond, when you gotta go, you gotta go. Your turn will come! One can not always plan ahead and when the aisle is blocked some consideration to the older generation, which appears to be lacking these days, would be appreciated.

When one finds themselves in that position as in all circumstances a little forward planning is needed. I see two options available without even thinking about it.

1. Put yourself at the back of the plane, close to the toilets with no chance of the trolley blocking you or at the very least only for a short time.
2. Pay for a J seat and use the dedicated J loo which should be available if it is only being used by J ticketed pax.

 

[Quickstatus]

So you’ve changed your position again,

It remains steadfastly the same

Why? Why the drama? Why not just use the loo in your cabin?

Because toilets like food and air are a human need. I can't see the drama. Use loos in your own cabin it's likely closer - but if a a vacant one is available in another cabin and the loos are full in my cabin I should be allowed to use it.

 

[JackMiles]

Again, straw man arguments do not progress the debate. This is about toilets

I don't see how this is a straw man argument. It is an argument from analogy, which is very common in philosophical enquiry (particular the phil of ethics), and is intended to tease out the principles supporting given positions. I get that this is just an online forum intended for informal and collegial interactions, and we're all getting a bit serious about this now, but if you want to talk about progressing the debate, I don't think you're doing so when you dismiss a reply (on faulty grounds, no less, IMO) instead of engaging with it.
We would all do well, in any case, to keep in mind Al Swearengen's directive to "advance the conversation or shut the f.... up".

 

[justinbrett]

It remains steadfastly the same

No because you were saying you agreed pax need to ask for permission to enter another cabin and now you're saying they should just be able to enter without asking.

The use of the toilet is not my issue, it's pax tramping up and down aisles in cabins they are not permitted to be in, and/or bothering FAs because they feel they're entitled to something more. You brushed my question off about J snacks but what's to stop someone from helping themselves on the way back? These galleys are often left unattended.

For what it's worth I've flown a lot of long haul Y and I can't remember having to wait excessively for a loo, except in the final hour prior to landing; whereas I do remember flying J/F having to wait extended periods because pax want to get changed into/out of PJs and are perhaps more likely to spend longer periods grooming prior to a meeting etc.

And you still haven't answered my question about locking the 737 J loos which is the subject of this thread.

 

[RooFlyer]

And you still haven't answered my question about locking the 737 J loos which is the subject of this thread.

I don’t believe there is an actual requirement to do so here.

 

[justinbrett]

I don’t believe there is an actual requirement to do so here.

No but one can draw focus to that omission as part of a debate. Also a subtle hint to get back on topic.

 

[Quickstatus]

saying they should just be able to enter without asking.

LOL. I never said that.

And you still haven't answered my question about locking the 737 J loos which is the subject of this thread.

Per my original comment - loos should be available. It is easy to see then that if vacant they should not be locked.

For what it's worth I've flown a lot of long haul Y and I can't remember having to wait excessively for a loo,

Excellent but what does that have to do with locking the loos?.

an argument from analogy

can indeed be a straw man argument because I have not argued that snacks should be freely available from any cabin nor have I argued that a vacant J seat should be freely available to anyone who wants it. The thread is about the availability of loos