10 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

no,

no thai bash, i don't do thai bash

 

keeping customers safe ????????????? are you drunk or smth?

 

OK, I'll acquiesce on the Thai bash accusation. It's probably difficult not to keep mentioning TG somewhat disparagingly when the subject matter is indeed a TG flight, even if some others try and use the broader 'the Thai's are hopeless' brush of critical argument.

 

Yes sir, safety. Seating flight crew who need to be completely rested in order to legally qualify to fly another flight shortly after deplaning from this fight is all about customer safety. More precisely, the safety of the customers on that other flight. It would appear that possibly your criteria is more fixated on if the champagne is up to snuff.

 

You may be conflating this business of industry-standard safe management of operational expediency with some anecdotal tale of fare-paying passengers getting bumped off a TG flight so that a monk could fly free? No?

5 minutes ago, Lingba said:

...this incident is now all over the international news headlines...

Citation needed.

19 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

If it's not mentioned specifically, then it can be assumed it was included in the spiel about "operational excellence and complete customer satisfaction"?

 

They don't do assumptions on safety in the airline business... most businesses that want to be a success for that matter.

Whatever rows your boat and is convenient for you.

 

 

rubbish
its about selling products and not delivering
because they suddenly fancy giving the product to someone else - fraud
 
not many business lines can deliver that kind of rubbish
 
 

Sadly it isn't fraud. It's in the T&Cs of most airlines. It's more about how it was (mis)handled.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

12 hours ago, NanLaew said:

OK, I'll acquiesce on the Thai bash accusation. It's probably difficult not to keep mentioning TG somewhat disparagingly when the subject matter is indeed a TG flight, even if some others try and use the broader 'the Thai's are hopeless' brush of critical argument.

 

Yes sir, safety. Seating flight crew who need to be completely rested in order to legally qualify to fly another flight shortly after deplaning from this fight is all about customer safety. More precisely, the safety of the customers on that other flight. It would appear that possibly your criteria is more fixated on if the champagne is up to snuff.

 

You may be conflating this business of industry-standard safe management of operational expediency with some anecdotal tale of fare-paying passengers getting bumped off a TG flight so that a monk could fly free? No?

I understand zilch about your safety mumble.

If TG needs rested drivers in BKK they can hire some,

they can send the drivers in zurich with another plane

they can charter a plane and send the drivers to bkk

but you do not <deleted> around with bought and paid tickets

 

if tg is not capable of adhering to rules without cheating pax

maybe tg should consider window cleaning or rice farming in stead of flying planes

 

 

 

Edited October 21, 20187 yr by metisdead
Profanity edited out.

3 hours ago, NanLaew said:

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.

First of all, please explain to us why staff, who are not even on duty, can't rest in the unoccupied seats? Why must they disrupt/move passengers who have already been ASSIGNED seats? 

Secondly, how does a group of employees playing up and insisting on having particular seats ensure customer safety? Complete and utter nonsense. If they must rest, then they should rest in unoccupied seats. 

3 hours ago, ravip said:

or to help redistribute the weight balance of the aircraft, especially on smaller planes.

Is that not FATTIST?

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

after deplaning from this fight

you mean 'getting off' the flight. Deplaning???? Do you 'deship ' when you disembark the QE2, or 'decar' when you get out of the Mini?

Edited October 20, 20187 yr by wgdanson

As much as I like to bash Thai, usually deservedly, the facts are a little different.

The original a/c between BKK-ZRH should have been a 777-300ER with no F seats. Instead a B747-400 was sustituted. As a result the flight crew from the previous flight {B777} were not certified to take the flight to BKK. Thai has a result put extra pilots out of BKK to bring the 747 back. The B777 pilots stayed in ZRH for the next flight. For flights to Europe 4 pilots per flight is the rule.

It is the industry norm that in these situations the pilots have the right to the top seats. So the 4 B747 pilots should have had the F seats. The fault lies with staff at ZRH, who might not have been Thai staff upgrading some C class and also with Thai BKK for not letting ZRH about the need to keep 4 F seats free..

A friend who is a retired BA captain  told me he had the situation once on flight out of SYD. 2 pilots were returning to the UK as passengers and should have had F seats. They were given C and they complained. The checkin had been handled by Qantas and the passengers who had been upgraded to F were QF passengers {code shared flight}. In the end to keep the flight on schedule the upgraded passengers were put back into C at Singapore and the BA pilots went into F there for the LHR leg.

As people have said this has been handled poorly by Thai which is about the norm with them these days. Used to be a great airline 30 years ago.

1 hour ago, melvinmelvin said:

I understand zilch about your safety mumble.

And there you have it.

 

I rest my case M'lud.

 

24 minutes ago, djayz said:

First of all, please explain to us why staff, who are not even on duty, can't rest in the unoccupied seats? Why must they disrupt/move passengers who have already been ASSIGNED seats? 

Secondly, how does a group of employees playing up and insisting on having particular seats ensure customer safety? Complete and utter nonsense. If they must rest, then they should rest in unoccupied seats. 

Covered in an earlier post that you haven't bothered to catch up on.

 

But if I must clarify, deadheading flight crew get the quietest seats at the front of the bus, typically front bulkhead and away from the galley. Standard industry practice. They can't get 6 or 8 hours sleep shoehorned in between the regular hoi poloi with their small bladders, fidgeting and yacking.

 

And once again, the assigned seat is never, ever guaranteed. It's in the terms and conditions of carriage. Read them sometime. If it's all too much for some folks, take a bus or a boat.

 

11 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

you mean 'getting off' the flight. Deplaning???? Do you 'deship ' when you disembark the QE2, or 'decar' when you get out of the Mini?

deplane

/diːˈpleɪn/

verb

 North American

verb: deplane; 3rd person present: deplanes; past tense: deplaned; past participle: deplaned; gerund or present participle: deplaning

1. disembark from an aircraft.

   "we landed and deplaned"

 

3 minutes ago, tso310 said:

As much as I like to bash Thai, usually deservedly, the facts are a little different.

The original a/c between BKK-ZRH should have been a 777-300ER with no F seats. Instead a B747-400 was sustituted. As a result the flight crew from the previous flight {B777} were not certified to take the flight to BKK. Thai has a result put extra pilots out of BKK to bring the 747 back. The B777 pilots stayed in ZRH for the next flight. For flights to Europe 4 pilots per flight is the rule.

It is the industry norm that in these situations the pilots have the right to the top seats. So the 4 B747 pilots should have had the F seats. The fault lies with staff at ZRH, who might not have been Thai staff upgrading some C class and also with Thai BKK for not letting ZRH about the need to keep 4 F seats free..

A friend who is a retired BA captain  told me he had the situation once on flight out of SYD. 2 pilots were returning to the UK as passengers and should have had F seats. They were given C and they complained. The checkin had been handled by Qantas and the passengers who had been upgraded to F were QF passengers {code shared flight}. In the end to keep the flight on schedule the upgraded passengers were put back into C at Singapore and the BA pilots went into F there for the LHR leg.

As people have said this has been handled poorly by Thai which is about the norm with them these days. Used to be a great airline 30 years ago.

Ooooohhhh.... melvinmelvin's not gonna like that.

 

Well, maybe the last paragraph.

 

Maybe.

 

PS. Queue the THAI pilots aren't certified qualified to fly their own planes debate obfuscation.

Nobody on the delayed flight held a first class ticket as the aircraft from which they were transferred did not have a first class section.

 

The deadhead crew arrived to find the premium sleeper first class seats had been allocated to those holding business class tickets (and who continued to receive business class service) therefore nobody was going to lose out from their purchase if they were bumped back to the business class section.

 

Whatever it was that prevented this being sorted through logic and reason it does not surprise me that it occurred on a Thai Airways flight.

 

4 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

It would be expecting too much from such reporters to find that there is no first class on this flight

There was a first class on that flight, because of a change of aircraft. First class seats, with BC service.

 

Big mess. A captain overruling the decisions of the flight manager and holding a plane hostage to please his mates. I hope Thai management shows some balls here.

An off topic troll post has been removed.

10 hours ago, arithai12 said:

There was a first class on that flight, because of a change of aircraft. First class seats, with BC service.

You are right. So I also didn't check carefully enough

An exception that there is 1st class on this route.

AND another twist from a German news source:

the two 1st class passengers were actually upgraded from business class resulting in 1st being full.

After that (!) they found the need to place their "deadheads" in 1st.

Even if the two were "only" upgraded still very unprofessional.

14 hours 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.

They didn't move to business they moved to different seats. There is no first class on this flight. So the passengers were being just as silly as the deadheads

15 hours ago, Thian said:

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?

Clearly you did not read about the passenger who was physically dragged off the plane in the USA some months ago.

Yes, the airline has the right to take the seats for its own pilots - otherwise you would have other planes sitting on tarmac elsewhere waiting for pilots. This has to do with pilots being in the right place with the right amount of rest time - it is the law.

However, it should be fairly easy for airlines to work out when they are likely to have deadheads going on a particular route and to accommodate them accordingly without waiting for the plane to fill up and then having to take the passengers and their luggage off. If the airline cannot tell that they are going to have deadheads two hours before, then they should not be flying planes as their management systems are terrible.

By all accounts the pilot’s handling of the situation is under investigation. By stating that he wouldn’t take-off until the situation was resolved and then hide in the cockpit doesn’t exactly demonstrate admirable leadership qualities 

All of this type of service for people who are generally paying 50% more than with pretty much any other carrier. That’s why I’m going with ANA next time. 

4 minutes ago, Khunbilly said:

All of this type of service for people who are generally paying 50% more than with pretty much any other carrier. That’s why I’m going with ANA next time. 

The unfortunate passengers were Thai, it would never happen to a farang!!!!!

Umm, does anyone here actually use Thai for their international journeys?

I stopped about 10 years ago and won't go near their poorly maintained fleet

or clownishly trained pilots.

 

 

Considering its THAI  this is my two bobs worth...

 

the passengers were flying on free tickets as thousands of HI-SO family members do.

the pilots were from  very HI-SO families and with greater influence will always sit in the same seats for good luck or simply because they have the power to do as they please.

 

 

11 minutes ago, JimmyTheMook said:

Umm, does anyone here actually use Thai for their international journeys?

I stopped about 10 years ago and won't go near their poorly maintained fleet

or clownishly trained pilots.

 

 

I'm in the middle of booking a trip back to Australia for xmas, the Thai prices are really expensive, even a sale/promotion fare to Australia is 20% more than the normal qantas fare.

I flew Thai for many years and held a gold card. Their services started going down and prices started to increase were they were no longer competitive. 

The government stick their nos s in to much. The CEO's are just yes sir no sir puppets, they cannot run it. And so many free flyers. 

They need to get an international CEO who will insist they run the company. 

It will never change, sorry to say.

I never, EVER fly on Thai Airways. Poor service.  Badly maintained aircraft.  End of story.  

Thai Airways - as smooth as sandpaper!

15 hours ago, OJAS said:

What if there wasn't another airline flying from ZRH to BKK at around the same time?

 

And do you really believe that chartering a plane at short notice is as easy as pulling a rabbit out of a hat?

 

And what does he think is going to happen to ticket prices if airlines are chartering jets every time they need to move staff??  ????   Genius.

17 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

It would be expecting too much from such reporters to find that there is no first class on this flight

I think they changed planes from a 777 to a 747...747 has 1st class 777 doesn't.Its quite probable that some business class passengers were upgraded to 1st for that flight. Just like another TV respondent said.." if it was me the plane would still be on the tarmac...lol

1 hour ago, JimmyTheMook said:

Umm, does anyone here actually use Thai for their international journeys?

I stopped about 10 years ago and won't go near their poorly maintained fleet

or clownishly trained pilots.

 

 

...not if I'm booking my flight.   There are too many decent airlines, providing exceptionally fair services, without the juvenile "hello kitty selfies", holier than thou attitudes and humorous price points.  Smile, bob and weave, no bashing...just an appreciation for straight up no bs, and my support of deserving products/services (TA is not).  

Edited October 21, 20187 yr by CanuckThai

14 hours ago, Lingba said:

Congratulations to Thai Airways as this incident is now all over the international news headlines....

No it isn't.