Jump to content

Thai Airways flight delay drama: Couple tell their side of the story


rooster59

Recommended Posts

Thai Airways flight delay drama: Couple tell their side of the story

 

aHR0cHM6Ly9zLmlzYW5vb2suY29tL25zLzAvdWQvMTUwOS83NTQ3NDEwL25ld3MwMS5qcGc=.jpg

Image: Sanook

 

A married couple compelled to give up their expensive seats on a Thai Airways plane from Zurich have gone online to tell their side of the story.
 
Flight TG 971 was delayed more than two hours bound for Bangkok after four off duty pilots insisted it was their right to select seats ahead of fare paying passengers. 
 
The pilots known as "dead heads" were bound for the Thai capital to take up their duties on other flights. 
 
But they insisted on travelling in business class where the husband and wife had their seats. 
 
The pilot of the plane agreed with his colleagues and insisted that the couple move. 
 
The couple went on social media to slam Thai Airways for the way they handled everything. They said that they eventually gave up their seats for the sake of other passengers on the flight. 
 
If they hadn't the delay would have just gone on and on. 
 
They called the situation "strange".
 
Other empty seats were reportedly available in business class but the pilots insisted on theirs. 
 
Thai Airways have promised a full investigation with senior executives scurrying to limit damage from the story that has caused much negative comment online for the national carrier. 
 
Source: Sanook
 
 
thai+visa_news.jpg
-- © Copyright Thai Visa News 2018-10-20
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, zzaa09 said:

Their rights

What of the paying passengers rights? 

 

These types of disrespectful customer unfriendly procedures and policies don't gain in popularity when attempting to secure and regain their [Thai Airways] faltering status. 

 

Imagine the situation if the said pilots were important Thai monks.

Monks/Abbots fly free on TG [another mindless policy]

If it was their full right to pick the chairs they wanted than the couple better read their rights as well....

 

So from now on we know that at Thai Air the passenger has less rights on his seat than the deadhead pilots have.

 

Is that the same at other airlines?

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

Regardless of said policy [towards any carrier], it's simply not a decent service-oriented business model. 

Unethical practice, comes to mind. 

I agree but IF those pilots have the right to claim those seats than they should have gotten them...Which they did.

 

Now let's see if they will keep those rights (if they ever had them before).

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

t could have been a lot worse if the stand-off went longer with the aircraft's own flight crew running up against the maximum on-duty hours clock and having to stand down and the flight canceled

If that plane had 5 hours delay in the EU ALL passengers could claim 5-600 euro for the delay...

 

Now i wonder what this couple will get to compensate them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Thian said:

I agree but IF those pilots have the right to claim those seats than they should have gotten them...Which they did.

 

Now let's see if they will keep those rights (if they ever had them before).

Ok. Fair enough.

What the respective airlines should do in these cases is to set aside said seats for the pilots in transit, well knowing of their travel plans anyway - instead of the overbooking practice, in which most international carriers are guilty of. 

 

A little simple business foresight might be applied in situations of this sort. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

Ok. Fair enough.

What the respective airlines should do in these cases is to set aside said seats for the pilots in transit, well knowing of their travel plans anyway - instead of the overbooking practice, in which most international carriers are guilty of. 

 

A little simple business foresight might be applied in situations of this sort. 

In this case they should have offered those passengers 10.000 euro each if they would move to business.....if they refused make it 15k each...That would have been much cheaper than the damage they have now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

Ok. Fair enough.

What the respective airlines should do in these cases is to set aside said seats for the pilots in transit, well knowing of their travel plans anyway - instead of the overbooking practice, in which most international carriers are guilty of. 

 

A little simple business foresight might be applied in situations of this sort. 

That's true. But sometimes the very nature of the deadhead is to address a more recent and unexpected event like a pilot calling off sick, or a Chief Officer going over the clock due to a previous, unrelated disruption elsewhere on the network. Regardless, in this instance, the original passengers should have been requested to move before boarding. Other alternatives on overbooked flights is to downgrade Business Class pax to Coach (with compensation) with the knock-on effect of the Coach pax with the most restricted (cheapest) ticket getting pitched since their compo will be much less than that of the BC pax.

 

Thai Airways Zurich ground staff cockup.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Thian said:

In this case they should have offered those passengers 10.000 euro each if they would move to business.....if they refused make it 15k each...That would have been much cheaper than the damage they have now.

Sure.

But you're still missing the big picture.....if any.

 

I guess there is a place for corporate/establishment defenders and apologists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, djayz said:

What difference does that make?

 

Putting staff before paying customers/passengers is simply disgraceful! If it weren't for paying customers, these clowns wouldn't even have a job. 

It's not about placing staff before paying customer. It's about ensuring customer safety and resting flight deck crew in compliance with laws. The trolley dolly's take the bus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, melvinmelvin said:

agree,

but somehow I doubt that TG is mentally capable to figure that out

 

have been in similar situations myself a couple of times,

my response is; show them my ticket, and say, look here - you refund the cost of the ticket here and now and I walk off,

no - not office later or tomorrow, cash here and now and I am off

I never got any cash

 

Kan Air paid me and Mrs Nan our compensation for a canceled flight (had to depart Chiang Mai one day early) in hard cash at the 6 AM check-in. Took pictures for their website, gave us traveling bags with neck pillows, lounge passes and other fripperies.

 

They eventually went broke I hear.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Yes it is. Most carriers place deadheading flight crew at the front of the bus, usually in the quietest seats, ie. front row, away from the galley. They have to get sleep in order to comply with the industry's strict rest-hours v flying time protocols.

 

This should have been handled better by the Zurich ground staff and they had the responsibility of having these passengers relocated before they boarded.

 

As its stands, the couple were relocated to other available seats in Business Class so if they argued the toss for two hours before moving, then maybe they just added to the situation that was totally mismanaged by Thai ground staff.

 

It could have been a lot worse if the stand-off went longer with the aircraft's own flight crew running up against the maximum on-duty hours clock and having to stand down and the flight canceled. I experienced similar with a very delayed departure from Houston to Rio where a couple of 'technicals' resulted in the flight crew going off the clock and a further delay while others, probably 'deadheads' were flown in.

Quite correct.

 

in *most* cases staff traveling as must-ride NRPS’ are of a higher or highest priority — and that includes over and above a full/fare F class pax.  Unsavory to the visual?  Yes, absolutely, but that’s how it is.

 

in many cases where the carriers contractual obligations to a passenger intersect with that of a carriers contractual obligations to a staff member, usually the staffs right take precedent.

 

one thing I think that is also worth noting is that a specific seat assignment is rarely ever a contractually guaranteed element of travel and in most all cases a carrier retains the right and is free to change that seat assignment at any time, without advance notice to the passenger and with no requirement for compensation*

(so long as the new seat is still in the same ticketed cabin, otherwise it would be an IDG) 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.











×
×
  • Create New...