Alec Baldwin: Booted from plane

ClearedForOption said:
tv_jagd_auf_roter3_0.jpg

"Mr. Baldwin, some things in here don't react well to electronics."
Click to expand...

Damn! You stole my thunder. LOL!

Seriously, respect the FAs whose job it is to keep the flight safe. If some jerk actor can defy the rules that everyone else has to comply with, then other passengers can decide they don't have to secure their tray tables during landing, they can converge around the forward lavatory, etc., etc.

This guy is enormously privileged to make millions of dollars to act. Is it that difficult to comply with the rules for a few hours? Grow up, Alec!!!!
 
Is this the same Alec Baldwin that yelled at his daughter into a voice mail system several years ago? I fully support the flight crew on this one.

Joe
 
In his defense, myself and some of my friends here have dealt with Mr. Baldwin on several occasions, he often flies here to/from BUR. He is always a gentlemen, very quick to thank the agents and never offended by any attention he gets. He could be hidden in a lounge, but he is often just sitting among the rest of the passengers signing autographs and taking photos as they come along, with a smile. Anyone can have a bad day, may have been an important call. We actually did him special favors not because he was a celebrity, but because he was nicer to us than most frequent fliers are.
 
ChasenSFO said:
In his defense, myself and some of my friends here have dealt with Mr. Baldwin on several occasions, he often flies here to/from BUR. He is always a gentlemen, very quick to thank the agents and never offended by any attention he gets. He could be hidden in a lounge, but he is often just sitting among the rest of the passengers signing autographs and taking photos as they come along, with a smile. Anyone can have a bad day, may have been an important call. We actually did him special favors not because he was a celebrity, but because he was nicer to us than most frequent fliers are.
Click to expand...
He was playing a video game he acknowledged as "being addicted to". Not a good excuse.
 
rframe said:
Not that he's right in being uncooperative, but I wonder how long the iPad crowd will tolerate not playing Angry Birds for the first 10 minutes of flight when they find out Captain America and FO Freddy have iPads on their laps?
Click to expand...

Well:

#1: Because we said so.
#2: Please see #1

Options:
a. Your own private jet
b. If you cannot afford "option a", refer to #1.
 
Doug Taylor said:
Well:

#1: Because we said so.
#2: Please see #1

Options:
a. Your own private jet
b. If you cannot afford "option a", refer to #1.
Click to expand...

#1 reason all the customers with money are leaving 121, shocking customer service. Doug do you really want to loose the customers with money? This was discussed with a check airman and a captain over dinner and we all agreed it was good for charter. IMHO this is a large component of the "race to the bottom" at the airlines. The customers with money bailed and all that is left are the "greyhound" types.

And what is up with all the butt hurt 911 groups and airline employees? Demand an apology? Even greyhound got in on it. Wow really because 9 out of 10 people are thinking exactly what Alec said after they get the rectal from the TSA, and it just gets worse from there. Air lining to one of our aircraft is hands down the worst part if my job. I actually thank employees for treating me so poorly because they help the charter business in the long run.

I make a huge effort to be nice during my 121 experience. I try and make the TSA agents laugh (worked at OAK on Tuesday) I tip the FAs and try to be generally respectful. Occasionally I am treated with some dignity but usually not.
 
Stupid or not, bottom line is, I'd he can't follow directions as to turning your phone off how can I expect him to do as I say when the shia hits the fan? I have zero tolerance for passengers who feel they can do as they please...I don't care if it joe blow or Eva mendes herself.

On a side note, I think if you have to be removed from a 121 flight for any reason besides W&B then you should have a 1 year ban on flying on another us airliner. See how fast that will fix them.
 
Here's the trick. The Feds want the electronic devices off. Turn off the damned devices.

If we're getting a cabin inspection and we cowtow to popularity and say "What the hell! Angry birds for all!" the cabin crew gets fined or suspended. If the cabin crew reports that a passenger is non-compliant, they need to comply or will be removed from the aircraft. We don't have the resources to negotiate will hundreds of individual people and tolerate 100's of different levels of compliance.

Once word of a non complaint passenger hits the cockpit and the skipper sends me back, I have question with only one correct answer or they will be removed. I don't have time to hear the life story of why "Words With Friends" is more important than complying with the FAA's rules and the flight attendant's instruction to turn off the device.

99% of the passengers arrive on time, comply with FAA directives and follow uniformed crew member instructions. I am not going to make those passengers late or risk a violation for a damned electronic device that a single adult knows fully well what the rules are.

If you follow the rules and are compliant with requests, let's go for a airplane ride. If you don't think you're privy to the rules, well, we'll take you back to the gate and you can find another flight.

It's that simple.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that I'm in the customer service business. I'm jovial, friendly, work the crowd and if you don't believe me, ask ScreamingEmu's parents! :). However i will not jeopardize the safety, security or promptness of the flight because of a single, non-compliant passenger.

If you can't follow the FAA's rules, by all means, that passenger is more than welcome to charter a private jet. Because if we have to land short in Gander because of their inability to behave like an adult, my employer will bill that passenger for diversion costs and it's probably just a lot "cheaper" to charter your own jet and let the crew and more adult passengers enjoy our service.
 
Doug Taylor said:
Here's the trick. The Feds want the electronic devices off. Turn off the damned devices.

If we're getting a cabin inspection and we cowtow to popularity and say "What the hell! Angry birds for all!" the cabin crew gets fined or suspended. If the cabin crew reports that a passenger is non-compliant, they need to comply or will be removed from the aircraft. We don't have the resources to negotiate will hundreds of individual people and tolerate 100's of different levels of compliance.

Once word of a non complaint passenger hits the cockpit and the skipper sends me back, I have question with only one correct answer or they will be removed. I don't have time to hear the life story of why "Words With Friends" is more important than complying with the FAA's rules and the flight attendant's instruction to turn off the device.

99% of the passengers arrive on time, comply with FAA directives and follow uniformed crew member instructions. I am not going to make those passengers late or risk a violation for a damned electronic device that a single adult knows fully well what the rules are.

If you follow the rules and are compliant with requests, let's go for a airplane ride. If you don't think you're privy to the rules, well, we'll take you back to the gate and you can find another flight.

It's that simple.
Click to expand...

Alec Baldwin for FAA Administrator! Now!
 
Doug Taylor said:
Well:
#1: Because we said so.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but how long do you think public pressure will accept that? I appreciate what flight attendants do and the authority of the flight crew, but their power is granted to them by the public through the FAA and through their companies... when people start to question the legitimacy of their policies, things may change, that's all I'm saying.
 
rframe said:
Yeah, but how long do you think public pressure will accept that? I appreciate what flight attendants do and the authority of the flight crew, but their power is granted to them by the public through the FAA and through their companies... when people start to question the legitimacy of their policies, things may change, that's all I'm saying.
Click to expand...

Not my battle.

I, personally, don't have a problem with PED's for the most part, but the question is of passenger compliance with flight crew instructions. If you cannot follow instructions from a uniformed crew member, you cannot fly on the jet.

If you tell me to take my dirty shoes off your mother's coffee table and I give you the finger, I expect you to kick my ass and throw me out.
 
Anderson Cooper giggling, oh my god.

rframe said:
Yeah, but how long do you think public pressure will accept that? I appreciate what flight attendants do and the authority of the flight crew, but their power is granted to them by the public through the FAA and through their companies... when people start to question the legitimacy of their policies, things may change, that's all I'm saying.
Click to expand...
Unless and until the FAA tells us something otherwise, you're turning the phone, iPad, Kindle, whatever it is, off.

Besides the highly remote possibility interfering with the navigation and communications systems, you shouldn't have something in your lap if the words "This is the Captain, evacuate, evacuate" are broadcast over the PA. It's only a handful of minutes to 10,000' anyway, what is so bloody important that you can't wait?

Flight attendants have, and will, have their certificates violated by the FAA for non-compliance (especially of the intentional kind) with FAA regulations just like everyone else. You don't have to be mean about it—I'm told, and have seen, simply standing there and smiling until you achieve compliance actually works really well. It's a simple request, that is made for your safety. (You want to get there alive and intact, right?) And if they don't do it, they're out of a job.

Yeah, but how long do you think public pressure will accept that? I appreciate what flight attendants do and the authority of the flight crew, but their power is granted to them by the public through the FAA and through their companies... when people start to question the legitimacy of their policies, things may change, that's all I'm saying.
Click to expand...
The appropriate venue to challenge those policies is not in the cabin of an airplane.
 
People argue that the "turn off electronic devices" rule is stupid, that electronics don't cause any interference and that because "they know better", they should be allowed to do whatever. Well, it's not that electronics DO cause interference, it's that they can. There is no possible way to determine ALL the variables of how many devices, in what seating locations, on what airplanes WILL cause problems [if any]. Who's going to pay for all that testing, just so Joe Blow can play Angry Birds or so little Suzy Sunshine can call her BFF from FL270? Because of this unknown factor, the FAA requires all electronics to be turned off. It's that simple. We [the F/As] aren't asking you to turn it off to be a bitch or to be authoritative, but to simply do our jobs in making sure the pax comply with Federal Law. I always asked people very nicely to turn their things off, fasten their seat belts or properly stow their luggage, but their compliance WAS required by law, and if they didn't comply they didn't ride with us. I'm sorry Mr. Baldwin (or anyone else) is offended at having to comply with federal law. But if you want to fly on an airline, you have to follow the posted rules. That doesn't mean that the F/As should be nasty about asking for compliance, but THEY will get in trouble if they don't!

And I agree with the above post that the appropriate place to challenge "the rules" isn't in a airliner cabin. The policies come from the government, challenge it there.
 
No matter how many times Ive heard a pax safety brief, I still drop whatever Im doing.......newspaper, book, whatever......and pay attention to the brief being given. Mainly because I'm respectful enough to pay attention to the FA when they're trying to do their job and need my attention, whether it be the safety brief or anything else, such as the exit row confirmation. And thats whether they do the brief in person, or use a video. That's part and parcel from it being a legal requirement.

They are the cabin crew, Im in their cabin, therefore I follow their instructions. They have a job to do and I respect that. It doesn't get any simpler than that.
 
BigWaveDave said:
This was discussed with a check airman and a captain over dinner and we all agreed it was good for charter.
Click to expand...

You guys may want to check the regs. I think the prohibition on electronic devices is regulatory, and therefore applies to you every bit as much as a 121 airline. Do I think it's kind of silly? Yes. Do I brief it? Yes. It's the law.
 
MQAAord said:
People argue that the "turn off electronic devices" rule is stupid, that electronics don't cause any interference and that because "they know better", they should be allowed to do whatever. Well, it's not that electronics DO cause interference, it's that they can. There is no possible way to determine ALL the variables of how many devices, in what seating locations, on what airplanes WILL cause problems [if any]. Who's going to pay for all that testing, just so Joe Blow can play Angry Birds or so little Suzy Sunshine can call her BFF from FL270? Because of this unknown factor, the FAA requires all electronics to be turned off. It's that simple. We [the F/As] aren't asking you to turn it off to be a bitch or to be authoritative, but to simply do our jobs in making sure the pax comply with Federal Law. I always asked people very nicely to turn their things off, fasten their seat belts or properly stow their luggage, but their compliance WAS required by law, and if they didn't comply they didn't ride with us. I'm sorry Mr. Baldwin (or anyone else) is offended at having to comply with federal law. But if you want to fly on an airline, you have to follow the posted rules. That doesn't mean that the F/As should be nasty about asking for compliance, but THEY will get in trouble if they don't!

And I agree with the above post that the appropriate place to challenge "the rules" isn't in a airliner cabin. The policies come from the government, challenge it there.
Click to expand...

But the FAs are nasty about it. The example the captain I am flying with gave was: the announcement that the cabin door is closed is made, the announcement is made you need to turn off your devices and while your turning off your device a very rude FA is standing over you "TURN YOUR PHONE OFF SIR!"

I believe that it wasn't the fact they asked him to turn it off it was the WAY they asked. This will never come out in the light but it has happened to me many times and my co workers as well.
 
BigWaveDave said:
But the FAs are nasty about it. The example the captain I am flying with gave was: the announcement that the cabin door is closed is made, the announcement is made you need to turn off your devices and while your turning off your device a very rude FA is standing over you "TURN YOUR PHONE OFF SIR!"

I believe that it wasn't the fact they asked him to turn it off it was the WAY they asked. This will never come out in the light but it has happened to me many times and my co workers as well.
Click to expand...

I always asked nicely, with a "please" with the request and a "thank you" when complied with. I can't speak for all, but I was always polite & professional about it. When I was an instructor I trained my new-hires to do the same.
 
Of course you'd expect them to be polite about it. The first three times. If the behavior I've seen in the cabin is any indication, the F/As generally show admirable restraint.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top