Fun at Qantas check in

[2infinity]

Pretty much everyone has a smart phone these days. If you encounter some poor customer service, pause, get out your phone in front of them and open up the voice record or even the video record, then continue the interaction. See if that changes their perspective.

 

[33kft]

Pretty much everyone has a smart phone these days. If you encounter some poor customer service, pause, get out your phone in front of them and open up the voice record or even the video record, then continue the interaction. See if that changes their perspective.

Not sure I agree with this, I think it's unfair. There are some customers that carry on like a spoilt child that should have the favour returned but of course, companies could never respond in kind.

 

[2infinity]

Not sure I agree with this, I think it's unfair. There are some customers that carry on like a spoilt child that should have the favour returned but of course, companies could never respond in kind.

Every time you call a company's call centre, you are being recorded. There is CCTV camera's pretty much everywhere you go nowadays, that goes at airport check-in. The relevant companies have access to this footage. What they do with it is up to them and what the companies moral stance is. Are you telling me you've never seen footage released for the nightly news. Don't go to China or you might get caught up in their social credits scheme. Everyone should watch this! Leave no dark corner

I'm quite sure the passenger that was forcibly removed from the United plane United Flight 3411appreciated that someone recorded the event, because companies would flatly deny that anything happened if there wasn't evidence to prove it.

It's not fair that people act like porkchops to other people whether they are customers or staff. But life is not fair and it's better to have evidence to back up your story.

 

[33kft]

There's nothing socially acceptable about sticking a camera in someone's face when you don't get your way. Each to their own but I consider it an aggressive move and I suspect it'll get you removed from an airport by police pretty quickly if you overplay your hand. If someone's treating you poorly, make a complaint. If complaints are being ignored, take your business elsewhere. Picking a fight is never good advice.

 

[2infinity]

There's nothing socially acceptable about sticking a camera in someone's face when you don't get your way. Each to their own but I consider it an aggressive move and I suspect it'll get you removed from an airport by police pretty quickly if you overplay your hand. If someone's treating you poorly, make a complaint. If complaints are being ignored, take your business elsewhere. Picking a fight is never good advice.

I totally disagree with what you think socially acceptable is. All that is required for something to be socially acceptable is for society as a main to tolerate the behaviour. People are using their smart phones more and more. Videos are being taken more and more and being shared socially more and more on a plethora of platforms. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, Reddit, Pinterest, Tumblr, WhatsApp, Email, MMS and no doubt many others. I'm sorry, but taking video footage and sharing the footage is very socially acceptable. However, at a personal level, I can sure appreciate that nobody wants to be recorded without consent. This is why I suggested voice record as an option, as it's less confrontational. Just remember the original poster is talking about an incident where poor and aggressive service was shown to him, the customer. I wasn't there and I don't believe there is any footage, that we have access to, to verify the voracity of his side of the story. We can only go by what we are being told.

Using a recording device is just an option. Nobody has to use it. I'm not sure about other states or other countries, but in Queensland, as long as you're a party to a conversation, you can legally record it covertly, so if you took this option, you would not be showing any aggression but you would still have your evidence to verify your side of the story.

I think it highly unlikely you would be escorted from the airport by police because you are recording a conversation. Provided you are being courteous, if the police did become involved, worst that would happen is they ask you to stop recording. Of course you would follow the lawful directions of the police. You've still done nothing wrong to warrant removal, but guess what, now that the police are there, about 50 other people are now recording too. Police are always seeking video footage off the public for incidents they are investigating. Just watch the news and you'll hear it on a lot of stories.

Just because you are recording an interaction doesn't mean you have to exhibit actual behaviours that would get you escorted from an airport. The recording is your evidence for when you make a complaint.

 

[drron]

But it can end badly.
"American Airlines’ policy, states:

“Use of still and video cameras, film or digital, is permitted only for recording personal events. Photography or video recording of airline personnel, equipment, or procedures is strictly prohibited.”

And.
"A different scenario, and the kind the airline is concerned about, might be you recording an argument with a counter agent or flight attendant for the purpose of filing a dispute or legal claim. Although personal to some, this interaction is likely to fall under the “do not record per the conditions” section of your agreement. Should you continue to record, the airline agent would be within the agreed-upon bounds to deny you the benefit of travel. Even though this display might be public, you have still agreed to the terms of your particular contract and should not be shocked when those terms are enforced. An onlooker recording the same interaction would be subject to the terms only if he or she was a passenger of that particular airline.

While it may seem unfair, the airlines can and do enforce these terms. It should not come as a surprise when a public relations fiasco puts the airlines on alert to protect themselves, their employees and their passengers."

What Can You Legally Film on Airplanes and in Airports? - The Points Guy

This article seeks to answer the difficult question that many passengers have, “What can you legally film on airplanes and in airport?”

thepointsguy.com

So don't do it in America and think carefully anywhere else.

 

[Daver6]

But it can end badly.
"American Airlines’ policy, states:


And.
"A different scenario, and the kind the airline is concerned about, might be you recording an argument with a counter agent or flight attendant for the purpose of filing a dispute or legal claim. Although personal to some, this interaction is likely to fall under the “do not record per the conditions” section of your agreement. Should you continue to record, the airline agent would be within the agreed-upon bounds to deny you the benefit of travel. Even though this display might be public, you have still agreed to the terms of your particular contract and should not be shocked when those terms are enforced. An onlooker recording the same interaction would be subject to the terms only if he or she was a passenger of that particular airline.

While it may seem unfair, the airlines can and do enforce these terms. It should not come as a surprise when a public relations fiasco puts the airlines on alert to protect themselves, their employees and their passengers."

What Can You Legally Film on Airplanes and in Airports? - The Points Guy

This article seeks to answer the difficult question that many passengers have, “What can you legally film on airplanes and in airport?”

thepointsguy.com

So don't do it in America and think carefully anywhere else.

So audio only recording is fine?

 

[2infinity]

What Can You Legally Film on Airplanes and in Airports? - The Points Guy

This article seeks to answer the difficult question that many passengers have, “What can you legally film on airplanes and in airport?”

thepointsguy.com

From that article, and I quote "In the event that this happens again, airlines are trying to make sure that there is no leaked footage which can be more damaging than any potential lawsuit." EXACTLY WHY YOU WANT TO RECORD IT.

I imagine what would have happened if there was no recording.
JOURNALIST: I understand that you forcibly removed a passenger from one of your planes for refusing to relinquish their seat and this happened after they had boarded and were comfortably seated.
UNITED: No, no, no, of course not. That isn't what happened at all. A passenger was boarded incorrectly and security was called to ensure his safety during de-boarding. We are doing the best we can to ensure he gets to his final destination with as minimal delay as possible.
No further media coverage, no viral video, NO COMPENSATION

Surely you wouldn't want to fly with an airline that treats you in such a poor manner that you feel you need to take the measure of recording the interaction like poor David Dao Duy Anh. Conditions of carriage be damned.

I had a quick glimpse at Qantas' conditions of carriage, because that is who we are talking about, and I didn't see anything about taking video footage. It was only a quick glimpse though.

At any rate, those conditions of carriage do not mention audio recordings.

Most of you have jobs and a good percentage of you have worked or still work for large corporations. If a customer/passenger/client etc made a complaint about your behaviour to them, what's the response? A standard letter saying thanks for contacting us. We will look into the matters you have raised. And that's about the extent of it. Now if you have some evidence to back up your version of events, you get a different response. If you're situation goes viral, it'll be different again.

 

[drron]

As far as I could see QF don't have a policy on filming.Certainly a search brought up nothing.However that could mean a staff member makes up their own version.
And with the OP's situation it was no comparison to the United case you quote.At check in you are at the mercy of the staff.If a staff member has lost it filming them could well exacerbate the problem.Hopefully there are other witnesses.

 

[Hvr]

As far as I could see QF don't have a policy on filming.Certainly a search brought up nothing.However that could mean a staff member makes up their own version.

Given that check in areas are in the airport under federal government regulation maybe there are regulations that apply from that jurisdiction?

And let's not forget that Home Affairs would have a say in what is allowed to be recorded at airports. Purely for national security of course.