Bundy Bear
Established Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2004
- Posts
- 4,114
I'm siding with the pax on this. They paid cash for the ticket - at least $15k round trip and it's not like no large passengers ever fly ex USA.
It Sounds more like they had a series of poor experiences with QF that day and pjs was what tipped them over.
If they wanted to 'suck it up' then they would have flown Business or UA.
I am starting to agree with the passengers, if you are flying F then you would expect a near faultless flying experience, so their is no F PJ, what else has been left off the plane.
If I pay an airline an obscene amount of money so that I can sleep in a nice seat in a nice set of pj´s, and upon boarding they tell me that they couldnt organise the pj´s, I would be pissed off at them.
If you buy an F ticket you would expect the full F product, which includes the pj´s. The failure to provide that full service is the fault of the airline. The reaction of the pax will depend on how that failure is handled, and the particular sensitivities of the pax. If a couple were on their honeymoon and wanted everything perfect, and the airline staff were dismissive of their disappointmennt, then the situation could understandably deteriorate quickly.
This is most certainly an example of a ¨first world problem¨. But so would complaining about a Y+ seat not reclining on a 14hr flight, or a 6 hr delay in takeoff.
Agree here.
And while I am at it - I cannot believe that the pilot was so unprofessional. Can anyone please explain why his description of the cause for delay was necessary or desirable ?
I think the pilot has made an error of judgement here, he should have said 2 passengers aren't flying with us tonight, and we need to remove their bags which will cause a delay. In the heat of the moment you probably say things that you shouldn't have said.
The thread will stop when members stop posting and then will auto close 18 months after the last post.
You all now know how to stop the thread going on too long.
And add 15 minutes.