Thai Airways sues over passenger’s flight diversion criticism

[Highlandman]

2 hours ago, cardinalblue said:

The Thai culture avoids accountability...It is not an issue of whether right or wrong, but the culture doesn't like the idea that any customer can issue an opinion. It is only an opinion (doesn't mean fact) and any customer has the right to an opinion. The fall back position here is we will sue you for criticism and damaging our reputation. Prove to me it damaged your reputation...I would counter sue

 

It is a cultural thing as a way to protect itself from encouraging constructive criticism. It doesn't matter whether justified or not. It is a freedom of speech issue...Does Thailand encourage or restrict freedom  of speech by its actions? 

 

 

 

It heavily discourages freedom of speech. Yet Thai trolls on social media still like to make the claim that Thailand is a "free country" compared to Laos and Vietnam, when in fact, there's really not much difference between any of them. 

[cowellandrew]

reputation and that of its personnel

 

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[NorthernRyland]

Being serious I don't understand why an international airline would be so petty. Who cares what some random passenger says? In regards to regulations if it's rando-guy with a Facebook account vs an Airline I'm going to believe to the Airline did what was required to them.

 

Taking legal action against him makes them look so frekin' petty it's hard to fathom. In fact it makes them look guilty now and maybe the guy was right after all.

 

I can very vaguely remember having these feelings but I must have grown out of it by the time I was 10 or so. This is so embarrassing for a company run by adults to behave this way.  

[Highlandman]

6 hours ago, Burma Bill said:

 

 

If the passenger lives outside Thailand, possibly in Australia, surely it would be almost impossible for THAI to successfully sue the passenger? (unless the Thai authorities issue an Interpol Red Notice)

 

I stopped flying with THAI many years ago when I discovered a less expensive and better direct service between London (LHR) and Bangkok with EVA Air.

 

An Interpol notice to go after someone who criticized someone else. Lol. Never going to happen. Interpol officials would burst into fits of laughter. 

 

Anyway, good post. 

 

However, I read that this passenger plans on returning to Thailand, suggesting he lives there but of course I don't know.

[richard_smith237]

1 hour ago, it is what it is said:

when was it good? when was it competitively priced from the UK? i would have liked to fly thai, but it was always expensive, and i'm talking the last 20 odd years...

 

IMO, Thai Airways used to be a decent airline...   and that was about 20 years ago, planes decent, food decent, they were better than a lot of the competiton... The Middle Eastern Carriers upped their game and took over...  other carriers upped their game to compete. Thai Airways seemed to stand still.

 

IMO, they are still better than many regional carriers... so if flying to places such as India, Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Cambodia etc, and not wanting to use a budget carrier, then TG are the better airline to chose. 

If flying to Singapore, Japan and Korea, then Thai Airways are generally priced more competitively than the main airlines of those countries. 

 

When flying long haul, Thai Airways seem not to be priced so competitively...  I'd only fly them to the UK if they were a decent amount cheaper than Emirates... 

 

 

[BKKBike09]

3 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

The reason for the diversion was due to poor weather and range...   The SQ flight may have had more available range to safely hold for longer.

 

It took that TG flight a further 60 minutes flying time for the diversion to Sydney. So they must have had enough fuel for that + mandated safety margin. Meaning they had the endurance to stay in a hold for 30-40 minutes and then continue on to Melbourne (which is what both the SQ and QF flights that arrived at that hold at the same time as that TG flight elected to do).

 

So. Three flights faced the same conditions. Two stayed in a hold. The TG diverted.

[digger70]

Bloody childish from the airline .What would they think to gain by doin this . Sweet F all.

[still kicking]

So, if Thai had not diverted that flight and crashed in Melbourne who would you have blamed then?

[richard_smith237]

1 minute ago, BKKBike09 said:

It took that TG flight a further 60 minutes flying time for the diversion to Sydney. So they must have had enough fuel for that + mandated safety margin. Meaning they had the endurance to stay in a hold for 30-40 minutes and then continue on to Melbourne (which is what both the SQ and QF flights that arrived at that hold at the same time as that TG flight elected to do).

 

So. Three flights faced the same conditions. Two stayed in a hold. The TG diverted.

 

Thats 20/20 hindsight...    At some point a decision has to be made... Hold for longer not knowing if the visibility will improve. Or divert while there is still enough fuel (+mandated safety margin).

 

I'm sure there are procedures in place for this - As the SQ and QF flights held and then (as you point out) landed in Sydney, I can only assume they had sufficient fuel to hold +sufficient fuel to divert (+mandated safety margin) and the visibility improved so they could land within regulations. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[NoDisplayName]

Well, I can definitely positively proclaim that in future I shall not fly with an airline that may take legal action if I criticize their performance.

 

Good job!  **deleted.  self-censored.  comment might be regarded as criticism.  sorry.  forgive me.  I am but a worm.**

 

 

[leeedwards]

11 hours ago, bbko said:

So you won't book with them cause they are taking legal action and then talk about fragile egos? Oh the irony 😆

Obviously you're too stupid to understand the process of boycotting something for a valid reason.  Maybe you're the type who hasn't got the gonads to stand up against a transgression, a " Mai pen rai" useless type. It's not irony, it's called making a stand.

[richard_smith237]

5 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

Well, I can definitely positively proclaim that in future I shall not fly with an airline that may take legal action if I criticize their performance.

 

Good job!  **deleted.  self-censored.  comment might be regarded as criticism.  sorry.  forgive me.  I am but a worm.**

 

Indeed.... I'm flying them next week (Award seats)...  I hope nothing significant enough goes wrong such that I take to social media to complain and end up getting sued... 

 

What a perfect way for a business to highlight to its customers exactly how powerless and unvalued they are !!!... 

[Highlandman]

11 hours ago, Nordic summer said:

It was very disrespectful of this passenger to publicly voice his opinion, given that he/she/they most certainly don't have a clue as to what it takes to plan and execute such a flight in a responsible manner.

Myself having had the privilege of being a passenger of Thai Airlines, is left with a bad taste in my mouth just reading about it

 

Some(westerners) will say the airline displays an"fragile ego" by instigating this lawsuit, but please take a moment to compare the service and attention that you receive while traveling with Thai Airlines to ANY European company.

 

They work very hard to provide a pleasant experience for their passengers and I am sure they are very proud of their prowess, so it should come as no surprise that this company got upset about this passenger's outburst.

 

Lol. I flew SWISS to Europe just after the end of Covid restrictions and I am flying with them again on my upcoming trip to Europe.

 

Swiss is a more premium carrier, they offer better service, better departure timing ex BKK and my choice at the time of my last flight was also influenced by the fact that SWISS had not only dropped mask mandates but their staff's faces could be seen, meaning actual smiles and no issues understanding their questions.

 

By contrast, THAI, being a very authoritarian airline required their crew to continue wearing face masks for over a year following that SWISS flight I took! Even following the end of the THAI employee mask mandate on October 1, 2023, a large proportion of their crew continue to mask up, such as 2/5 staff on my THAI flight to Ho Chi Minh in December and 4/5 masked crew on the return flight a few days later.

 

I like to see smiley faces and having the faces of the cabin crew being hidden by masks, especially outside of a mandate strikes me as rather unfriendly.

 

I only flew THAI because they were slightly cheaper than Vietnam Airlines but next time I'll revert back to the latter.

[sirineou]

25 minutes ago, Highlandman said:

The THAI flight to Istanbul began on December 1, but you've been able to fly twice or thrice daily to Istanbul on Turkish Airlines for years.

I know and I have, But I like Thai air and would like to fly with them. 

As far as  speaking fluent thai like you ,First I dont know how you speak , di you have a sexy voice ? LOL

   I don't think it has anything to do with it, Perhaps you can argue the price if you know what the price should be , but if you don't know if it's a fair price or not. fluent Thai dont help you.

   But that's not why I mentioned it. I mentioned it to show that I also don't think things are perfect here. Some things here are bad , others are good. In other countries other ar bed and some are good. It has been the case in every country I have been, and I have been in many. 

what annoys me the automatic , knee-jerk reaction of Thai bashing. 

[FarangFB]

Nah, screw that. If I paid for a flight to a specific destination that's where I want to go. 

If bad weather is an excuse it better be a damn typhoon at least.

[Highlandman]

14 minutes ago, still kicking said:

So, if Thai had not diverted that flight and crashed in Melbourne who would you have blamed then?

 

I think the action THAI took by landing in Sydney was absolutely the correct one. What they've done wrong is created a media circus out of suing a passenger for making an opinion on Facebook.

[IamNoone88]

An absolute train wreck of PR for Thai.

[Highlandman]

2 minutes ago, sirineou said:

I know and I have, But I like Thai air and would like to fly with them. 

As far as  speaking fluent thai like you ,First I dont know how you speak , di you have a sexy voice ? LOL

   I don't think it has anything to do with it, Perhaps you can argue the price if you know what the price should be , but if you don't know if it's a fair price or not. fluent Thai dont help you.

   But that's not why I mentioned it. I mentioned it to show that I also don't think things are perfect here. Some things here are bad , others are good. In other countries other ar bed and some are good. It has been the case in every country I have been, and I have been in many. 

what annoys me the automatic , knee-jerk reaction of Thai bashing. 

 

No, it's just that I speak with a Thai like accent. However, you have not explained how or where you get ripped off because in 95% of settings, it's not an issue. I highly doubt Tops supermarket or Lotus's is going to rip you off for being a farang.

 

The vast majority of what is sold in Thailand doesn't require bargaining because prices are fixed. I think anyone with experience would know what a fair price is, only you seem to be so afraid of getting ripped off you have your wife do everything for you. 

 

Also no one is forced to buy anything if they don't like the price. You always have alternative options.

 

If you want to fly with THAI, good for you. Don't see what your fear of getting ripped off by Thais has to do with your decision to fly THAI.

[connda]

I'm speechless. 
🙄

[Expat Tom]

I have lived here many years and the best advice that I can give any expat is to NEVER post anything critical

of a Thai hotel, restaurant, the government, the airlines, a bank , a business or anything! Be very careful online with even small gestures like giving a "Thumbs Up". It is a fact that a Thai citizen was convicted of a crime for giving a like to an online article critical of the Crown just a few years ago. Living in any country that is not your native home does NOT require you to become part of the culture and ADOPT it as your own. It DOES require you at learn about the culture and ADAPT to it. Nothing good will come from criticizing anything here, especially online. Thailand is known as the "LOS-aka, Land of Smiles". It should  also be known as the "Land of Fragile Egos".

 

If living here and ADAPTING to the culture is too burdensome for you then it should be obvious that airplanes fly in both directions. Unless came by boat or some land route, you came here by plane and a plane will take you somewhere else if you become too disenchanted to remain. To quote a line from the Wizard of Oz...."You are not in Kansas anymore Dorthey".

[Showtime]

Talking about wimps.  You can't make this stuff up.  What is the airline thinking?

[orchis]

a case of lèse-ThaiAirways.

[khunjeff]

2 hours ago, sirineou said:

Thai smile. Is fabulous, I will fly no one else. 

 

Well, the company ceased to exist as of January 1st of this year, so I'm afraid you'll have to find a new favorite!

 

12 hours ago, ezzra said:

Well the ministry of Finance own more than 50% of Thai airways and any decisions made would be a government

one wouldn't It?...

 

"Thai Airways lost its state enterprise status on 22 May 2020 when the Finance Ministry sold off a 3.17% stake in Thai to the Vayupak 1 Fund, thus reducing its former majority shareholding to 47.86%."

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_Airways_International

[JohnAllan]

I haven't read the criticism ... but I seriously doubt any slander was involved.

 

As for Thai pursuing legal action ... not the BRIGHTEST decision it could have made!

[JohnAllan]

23 minutes ago, Showtime said:

Talking about wimps.  You can't make this stuff up.  What is the airline thinking?

The clue is in that word 'thinking'.

[steven100]

3 hours ago, findlay13 said:

I used Thai exclusively for about 15 years.They lost me when they "restructured" ,😉[they didn't go bankrupt.] but they kept $A2,400 of mine for 3 plus yrs. Sacked all the Brisbane crew and office staff that I knew and liked and STILL aren't flying to Brisbane .Fly  Thai Airlines If you want folks .UP 2 U.

 

yes ... they flew direct to Brisbane ... I used it 50 flights or more ...  2011 ... they started to go down hill, food, service, price, arrogance, obnoxious, ... I went to Singapore ....  I think the times were not as good but I managed.

TG can die ....    in my book

[steven100]

12 minutes ago, JohnAllan said:

I haven't read the criticism ... but I seriously doubt any slander was involved.

 

As for Thai pursuing legal action ... not the BRIGHTEST decision it could have made!

if this goes to international media ...  US ... YAHOO ...  it will be detrimental to them ....  they didn't think this through at all.

[steven100]

36 minutes ago, Showtime said:

Talking about wimps.  You can't make this stuff up.  What is the airline thinking?

uneducated Thais ... that's what.

[richard_smith237]

5 minutes ago, steven100 said:

uneducated Thais ... that's what.

 

Oh, they'll be educated,... those who are in the position to make the decision to sue for defamation will be highly educated...   But they have grown up in a insular business culture that nurtures an element of self-righteousness within an environment of kraeng-jai that contributes to a fragility and absense of maturity that is simply unable to handle criticism...  they lack the emotional tools to simply ignore criticism.

 

 

[steven100]

2 hours ago, Highlandman said:

Yes but not very likely to go to court in the context of a passenger giving his or her opinion of a flight. 

 

Defamation cases in the US are usually politically motivated and high profile. They're not fragile snowflakes like Thais/Thai corporations are, who will sue anyone making even a slightly negative remark.

 

this is correct .... they will sue if your comment is not positive and it's a complaint.