new2here

This is kind of an issue that airlines really don’t want to have to address head on.

In some airports, given how the gates are set up, they would have better ability to monitor and enforce this.

For example, in BKK for international departures, you usually walk down one floor to the gate area and they gate area is self-contained and with no way to add/subtract baggage and only one way to enter.  So, they could do an efforcenaent check right there as you enter the gate holding area.

But again, not all airports are logistically and structurally set up this way.. but i suspect the larger issue is that carriers don’t want to deploy more staffing to just baggage matters.. preferring to do a more cursory check at the check-in counter and taking a harder stance on checked bags.

I have empathy for those hit with this.. but.. (as a non-UK national) it SEEMS like this issues was known in advance .. and if so, then I have to acknowledge this fact (ie it was known to people in advance) and that’s something quite different as opposed to say the government instituting a brand NEW rule that adversely impacted retirees.. 

I remember standing on the outdoor observation deck at NRT and watching all the 747s.. many -200 at that time and some -400s.. it literally was a “heavy heaven” .. not only passenger but cargo.. from Flying Tigers to the oldest -100 from UPS, stand up there long enough and you’d see them all in NRT. 

This is, in part, why you hear reports of more occurrences of denied entry by Korean Immigration… rightly or wrongly, the price to be paid for the “sins” of these folks are being paid by the ones who attempt to enter for legitimate reason- but due to past immigration failures, they now come under heighten scrutiny. 

While I am emphatic to those who seek better economic circumstances, I have to acknowledge that - for the most part (and yes, this is a broad statement) - those who come from TH to KR and work illegally aren’t not doing so based on a complete destitute or total lack of any employment opportunity situation at home, but rather seek KR due to its higher pay levels.. Therefore I don’t hold out a lot of empathy in THIS kind of case.

On 4/21/2024 at 9:27 PM, GammaGlobulin said:

 

One other MAJOR problem here that I have noticed:

 

a.  A few shoppers seem unable to quickly calculate the "unit" cost of purchases in the supermarkets.

b.  For example: 

 

1.  Shopper goes into the store and sees two bottles of  Cuckoo Man Soy Sauce, each a different volume.

2. The first bottle of Cuckoo Man is 385 ml. in volume, and the price is Bt.42.00.

3. The second bottle of Cuckoo Man is 700 ml. in volume, and the price is Bt.69.00.

4. Shopper wonders: Which bottle is cheaper?  And, how much cheaper is the cheaper bottle? (based on price-per-milliliter...)

5.  How many shoppers have you seen making these calculations?  (Maybe you don't see them doing it, because the average shopper in Thailand is able to do lightning-fast calculations of this type....In Their Heads!)

 

6. So, what should be done? 

 

The answer is that ALL retail stores should be compelled to show clearly:

 

Price per gram

Price per milliliter

 

Why?

Because consumers deserve more transparency.

And, because manufacturers and retailers love to be transparent.

 

 

 

 

 

THIS is what I think is a better solution. I don’t think it’s the job or position of the “state” to label something shrinkflation or not.  Yes, it exists.. but.. there could also be other conditions that go into that - so I think a public entity labeling something with the clearly negative-bias “shrinkflation” label is a good public policy.

I think giving consumers the unbiased and factually driven data - to make informed objective buying decisions is the better way to go. 

if i recall correctly, a Thai ID is physically inserted into the ATM, then once read a OTP is sent to the phone registered to that ID

A THAI credit card from SELECTED thai banks will also work; I recall that Kasikorn and UOB are credit cards that currently work. i also know that perhaps strangely enough at BBL, their own BBL-issued CREDIT cards don’t work ..

So there’s really 3 options: OTP using Thai ID card, Thai credit card from selected thai banks, ATM card from thai bank.   clearly #1 isn’t going to be an option for a non-Thai, #2 works for nob-Thais IF they have a CREDIT card from one of the eligible banks, so the best solution is the ATM card 

14 hours ago, rexpotter said:

yes, but when you remove some unnecessary BS it is not altering the passport.

Naturally the exact definition of “alter” can vary from person to person.  IMHO, when it comes to passports - I personally take the narrow definition .. that being any change constitutes “altering” .. and that would include the addition, deletion of any stamp, mark or other official act made within the passport itself… 

1 hour ago, klauskunkel said:

When I got a new Passport (US) about 8 years ago, the passport number also changed. Does this still occur? If that's the case, then you will need to update all the places that are linked to the old number (bank accounts, maybe sim cards, etc.)

yes. US passport numbers always change .. So, yes, you’ll need to update all kinds of places that have or use it actually as a sort of data point or personal identifier.

Bank (for all accounts deposit as well as any credit accounts like credit cards), SSO, Revenue Office, Drivers License (Land Transport), National Credit Bureau (if you have a credit file), D-ticket (if you buy SRT tickets online), some loyalty programs (ie store frequent shopper programs) and any airlines your regularly fly and book with online. 

15 hours ago, JimTripper said:

I tried fudging with the pages and stickers one time and caught out on it. What I did was double up old expired visa stickers to make room. The old stickers were still there, just hidden under each other. The officer peeled off each one, reattached it and had to line up the stamps (they like to stamp on the edge of the sticker so it catches both the sticker and the page).

 

They could not legally do a penalty since the passport is your home countries property, but they can give you a hard time and tweak your current visa there for their location.

I’ve seen people do this, notably with the older cambodia “sticker” visas - which apparently after some time, the adhesive wears down and the sticker can be removed somewhat easily 

The only risk - and I cede it’s probably small, but a risk none the less - is that for US passports (and I would reasonably think others as well) it is a violation of law for a person to “… alters any passport…” as per 18 USC 1543.    and I think you could make a compelling case that the willful “peeling off” of a previously applied stamp would constitute “altering”.

While a foreign official has no jurisdiction to address the matter as such, they can however refuse to accept the passport — ostensibly under the premise that it’s an altered passport - thus not valid.

We hear sporadic reports of people being denied aircraft boarding due to passports having “novelty” stamps, again, rendering them altered and now invalid.

example: 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/travel/15131117/passport-stamp-warning-novelty-souvenir-ban/

The part about 5MM compensation… Truth be told, that number looks to be a bit rich… 

5MM works out to be about USD142,000 .. if we assume a MW has a working lifespan of say 20 years.. simple straight* math says that’s 7,100 pa or about 591 monthly .. translated into baht (at 1USD=36THB) 21,700 and assuming a straight 20 work days per moth. that’s around 1,063 daily .. Given the current minimum daily wage right now sits a touch over 350 per day, 5MM (again, on a fixed or constant dollar value and using basic math) seems to be rather inflated as far as compensation for >lost economic value< only of the deceased.

but again this is speaking ONLY to the value of the deceased future earned income loss and not emotional value to the survivors nor claims of a punitive nature.

(not taking into account time value of money not assumed rates of inflation)

On 3/22/2024 at 4:15 PM, Callmeishmael said:

It doesn't help getting an AI to issue the tickets, the Tuk Tuk & Taxi drivers still won't pay the fines.  There doesn't seem to be any consequence for breaking the laws or not paying fines, so until the police actually start doing their jobs, nothing will change.

I’ve said many times in similar threads.. You start with education (some may legitimately not know XYZ is against the law), step 2 is light enforcement (ie basic fines), step 3 is “the hammer” - you seize, confiscate forfeit to the “state” the vehicles and auction it off with proceeds to the state, of repeat offenders 

same for repeat offenders of illegal clubs, gambling venues and drunk drivers ..

you seize and forfeit any assets used in the commission or derived from the crime in question. 

Once you start seizing and auctioning off tuk tuks of repeat offenders I’m sure you’ll see some meaningful change. 

5 minutes ago, Chongalulu said:

They could use the aircraft they had available on more profitable routes and during COVID Thailand kept messing around with allowing passenger flights then not,not what an airline wants. Also they switched their hub to onward routes to Australia etc. from Bangkok to Singapore who obviously were better organised and more competitive. As a single point destination 3 flights per week from Gatwick is all it merits 

 absolutely agreed.  Coming out of C19 the rebound in demand was far faster than anyone would have thought.. and that came on the heels of carriers doing sweeping manpower reductions and aircraft storage - as C19 began to really bite - and the resumption of service meant unwinding furloughed crew and aircraft — both of which take substantial time to complete … so there was a pretty big capacity shortage initially

.. so the carriers had to deploy where the demand was the greatest .. and the reality was that Asia - as a whole - was far slower to fully reopen than other parts.

Thailand has long been a high volume, but low margin destination and with nominal onward connection traffic .. so it would make sense that it might be one of the last / later destinations that BA would look to either open or restart. 

17 hours ago, Korat Kiwi said:

These stories cease to amaze me.  It appears that no two Immigration Offices operate the same. 

 

They may all have the same rule books but interpretation is wild and varies from immigration officer to immigration officer. 

 

Why so many hurdles? Is it the unofficial push for customers to  use agents, so staff can indirectly begin to get a reasonable salary? 

 

No wonder people are getting miffed with this bureaucracy. 

to a large extent i agree.  Thai immigration law is written nationally and not provincially .. so what the law is in province A is the same as B and so on..

That said, I DO think that in totality it’s wise to allow some level of discretion or flexibility to allow each office, officer and case to be adjudicated based on the most relevant matters …. While i can certainly see a strong upside for saying “no discretion” and strict and literal adherence to national law, I DO think that leaving some minor wiggle room to allow for special circumstances to exist is wise.: because you’re bound to run not unique case that unfortunately fall outside of the literally law, and without allowing for discretion, might otherwise be a denial.

But.. of course the tricky part is how does one police that discretion so that it’s bot abuses or taken too far. 

3 hours ago, hotchilli said:

Re-assigned not sacked?

I do think that they should have the same basic right - that is to the presumption of innocence and not be sacked until their guilt is proven..

that said, what often concerns me here is that given how centralized governmental entities are, I think it’s hard - very hard - for a true, unbiased, independent investigation to be done.. even from a public perception basis alone, you can’t really have entity A investigate allegations of malfeasance within entity A.. and even if you call on entity B, given their rather close ties to all the other entities, I’d question if there’s sufficient independence for them to report back what they’ve found without fear or favor. 

On 2/24/2024 at 1:13 PM, richard_smith237 said:

 

Is not tipping being a cheap charlie ?

 

If you tip in Japan its considered an insult. 

Why don't businesses (i.e. US) pay their staff a decent rate so tipping is not needed ?? - isn't that being a cheap charlie ?

 

I want to ask all the 'big tippers'... ?? Do they tip their hotel staff in the breakfast buffet?...  do they tip the flight attendant on the way over here ?

 

We just arrived in Bangkok after holiday.. we had 90 kgs of baggage (and I was injured), 2x baggage handlers helped us, they each got 100 baht - which I thought reasonable. 

 

 

Personally, I don't like the practice of tipping at all as I struggle to know where to draw the line ? 

Tip the taxi driver ? the bus driver ? the Pilot ?

In most cases over here its obvious though.

 

So is a tip suggesting that 'I get paid more than you so you should be happy with my scraps' ?

Its a very grey area that is often complicated. 

 

On the surface of it I prefer the simplicity of a non tipping culture, but a tipping culture also has more people around to help with the small things.

 

 

 

I agree…. to me, this is where “tipping” kind of got “lost in translation” if you will. 

The US, in many cases, uses tips as a part of the staff basic/minimum wage — ie they’re paid less (under the otherwise legal minimum) per hour with the expectation that tips, when added to the basic wage, then totals equal to or above the mandated minimum wage. 

where as in other parts of the world, staff are paid full wage by the employer and tips remain a wholly supplemental component.

I also agree that what also gets a bit muddy is the whole “tipping for what?” question.

Its fair, to me, to ask if tipping is appropriate if you received the basics - nothing great or in your opinion, above basic - but you did get what you paid for - no more, no less.. is a tip to be expected or given.. fair question.

i also agree that, socially speaking, the question of what/where/when is an acceptable or appropriate time to give or even accept a tip, is something that’s less then clear as well.   I do think that many of your classic tipping scenarios (ie your table wait staff etc) are well established .. but where is that line drawn?  fair question again. 

2 hours ago, Frankie baby said:

Looks like a ban on the way for battery power banks. The aviation top brass will be scrutinising this incident.  

That’s what I was thinking too .. my guess is that as in-seat power is becoming more the norm, that in the not too far future there may be an outright ban on these kinds of power banks be that in checked baggage (as it is now for many carriers) but also in cabin..

True, in-seat power tends to be much more common on larger aircraft (ie more long haul sectors) and less common on short haul fleet types.. but I do think that we might also see it becoming the standard across all fleet types.. and when/if it does become the norm, THEN i could see an outright ban on outside power banks being implemented. 

I’m of two minds.. I agree that legitimate “whistle blowing” is a good thing as it can often uncover misdeeds that otherwise wouldn’t be uncovered or take much longer to discover and potentially cause much more harm.. and legitimate whistle blowing should continue to be legally protected…

On the other hand, I am ALSO of the mindset that deliberate disclose of legitimate state secrets - and yes, I do believe that state entities can and do have legitimate secrets that deserve legal protection- should be a crime and punished severely.

So, I guess where is the line between the two - when does otherwise legitimate whistleblowing become espionage or disclosure of protected state secrets?

6 hours ago, webfact said:

Thai Airways has taken legal action against a passenger who criticised the airline’s decision to divert a Bangkok-Melbourne flight to Sydney due to adverse weather conditions. The airline asserts that the crew followed international safety and security standards and seeks to protect its reputation and that of its personnel.

 

Thai Airways has addressed the uproar caused by a passenger’s complaints about a captain’s decision to change a flight’s landing destination from Melbourne to Sydney. Yesterday (February 1), the airline announced it was pursuing legal steps to defend its rights and those of its employees affected by the incident on flight TG 465 on January 28. The airline reiterated its adherence to safety and security standards and emphasized the significance of not misleading the public.

 

The passenger’s post, which criticised the pilot’s actions on the January 28, flight from Bangkok to Melbourne and led to an alternate landing in Sydney due to weather at Melbourne Airport, has sparked widespread discussion. Many have voiced support for Thai Airways’ decision to take legal action against the passenger, praising the airline for setting a positive precedent in a society increasingly filled with disrespect, reported KhaoSod.

 

One comment read, “It’s justified and a thank you to Thai Airways for setting a good example for society. Insulting and slandering are not honest criticism. Remember this, or better yet, tattoo it on your forehead so you see it every time you look in the mirror!”

 

by Nattapong Westwood

TOP FILE PHOTO: A Thai Airways Boeing 777-300ER plane takes off from Bangkok's Suvarnabhumi Airport February 23, 2015. REUTERS/Chaiwat Subprasom/File Photo/File Photo

 

Full story: The Thaiger 2024-02-02

 

- Cigna offers a range of visa-compliant plans that meet the minimum requirement of medical treatment, including COVID-19, up to THB 3m. For more information on all expat health insurance plans click here.

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

 

• Covers content
• Not interested
• Inappropriate
• Seen too often

• Covers content
• Not interested
• Inappropriate
• Seen too often

5 hours ago, smutcakes said:

I am of the view that opening any kind of bank account is going to get more and more difficult with the relentless KYC requirements.

 

It costs nothing to keep an account open so why not just leave it open, you never know when you might need it. At the very least no harm could come of it. I am actually the complete opposite to you- i have 2 Bangkok Bank accounts and 2 Krungsri- Now i solely use the Krungrsi ones, but maintain some funds in BB to keep the credit card, not that i ever use it, but its there in an emergency. Actually last week i had to send off payment details for Govt payment, and a day later Krungsri called me to cancel my card due to an unauthorized transaction.

 

Luckily i still had the BB credit card so i could immediately replace the details for the payment.

 

Sorry for the long winded blurb. Personally i just dont see the reason in not keeping them- costs nothing or next to nothing and with online APP banking its very easy to manage.

I wholly agree.. I also don’t think we will ever really see any “easing” so to speak.. KYC and related laws and BoT regulations I suspect will only increase .. who knows how it when, but I don’t see an easing coming.

Given that for most banks the requirements for keeping the account open are very very simple and usually fee-free as well, if it were me, I’d make the reasonable effort to keep them open if possible.

2 hours ago, sqwakvfr said:

Last time I flew TG to the US was back in 2013.  They were flying a B777-300 ER and the routing was BKK-ICN-LAX.  The stop in ICN was about 2 hours.  I do not see TG ever flying to the US again.  

Agreed. They don’t have enough “market” in the US via LAX (or SFO/SEA if they were to even go that way) to really sustain themselves - especially when one notes ALL the other one-stop options that currently exist, such as TPE/HKG/ICN/NRT/HND/SIN/PEK/PVG and i’m sure a few others.  TG is much better off flying with their strengths; that being long-haul Euro traffic, intra-Asia and regional flying, plus the domestic market. 

On 1/20/2024 at 6:38 AM, sqwakvfr said:

Last time I flew BKK to LAX nonstop was back in 2008.  It was on Thai Airways on an A350-400.  The plane was half empty because of the amount fuel needed to fly almost 9,000 miles nonstop.   I believe Air Canada is planning a Vancouver to BKK in the near future.  

Those BKK-LAX/JFK non-stops were a good idea.. but largely fell victim to timing .. once fuel skyrocketed, that A340-500 quad-jet just become impossible to operate profitably on those kinds of “long, thin” routes.. 

The other issue is that as I’ve noted earlier US-TH traffic is skewed to the leisure end of the spectrum.. making any kind of ultra long haul US-TH non-stop very difficult to operate without consistently filling the premium end of the cabin.

once TG went back to the single-stop routing (be that via JP or KR) on the 777s, they then ran smack dab into some of the most competitive and seat-saturated (lots of available seats) markets, with more than a handful of both Asian carriers flying this same US west coast JP/KR market, as well as US carriers too.. making it hard for them to compete and gain any real marketshare.

MH tried the same thing; KUL-NRT-LAX and they too couldn’t make it work long-term either. They could fill that -400 easily.. but they filled it largely only in Y and with few true paid C/J seats.. 

I think that one big “strike” against TG is something that’s out of their direct control. Unlike SIN, BKK/DMK really has little true international connection traffic.. domestic, sure.. but as is common, domestic has to operated by a Thai carrier, and most every domestic route is covered equally or more by a LCC..  So anyone choosing to fly TG, is pretty much locked into terminating in TH.  SQ by comparison, carries much more connection traffic beyond SIN.. and the north asian carriers like OZ/KE or JL/NH carry a massive amount - taking a lot of pricing pressure off their US-JP/KR sales quotas… all to the detriment of TG when it comes to flying to/from the US.