|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sector7G
Joined: 24 May 2008
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:19 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Sector7G wrote: |
I know that, you know that, and the Korean transport ministry knows that. I would think that the pilot knows that too. So, if she can't give orders, then she can't, uh, give orders, meaning he did it on his own. That's what I was basing my opinion on. Anyway, I am inclined to believe he will play the good company soldier, and say it was his choice.
| Quote: |
On Monday, South Korea’s transport ministry said it was investigating the airline for possible breaches of aviation safety regulations. As a rule, members of a plane’s cabin crew take orders only from the captain during a flight.
“We will see if [the incident] was in violation of the law. We must review related laws as this incident is unprecedented,” a ministry official told reporters. |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Cosmic Hum
Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hellofaniceguy wrote: |
koreans are not the first in many things in the world...given inventions, technology, patents, 5000 year old history...surly they could have invented/come up with glass, steel, forks, cars, planes, nuts, telecommunications, computers,....but they are the first to have an airplane turned around for such nonsense!
Name another person/airline that has been returned to the gate in the history of flying for a non-emergency situation. Yeah korea! Sparkling! You're the first! |
| Quote: |
| “We will see if [the incident] was in violation of the law. We must review related laws as this incident is unprecedented,” a ministry official told reporters. |
And there you have it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smithington
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Smithington wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| He also felt the pressure to get his passengers to their destination on schedule. If he had forced the VP off the plane, what do you think would have happened? |
For goodness sakes, drop this nonsense about kicking the VP off the plane. Stick to the facts of the story, man. No-one is advocating kicking her off the plane. |
Well if you are going to say "The pilot was wrong" YOU MUST THEN EXPLAIN WHAT HE SHOULD HAVE DONE INSTEAD.
|
Ignored her. At the very most he could have a different flight attendant serve her. Nothing more. No-one needed to be kicked off the flight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EZE
Joined: 05 May 2012
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tob55 wrote: |
Anyone else doing it would be considered hostile and a possible danger to the whole flight.
The woman should have been arrested in New York once the plane taxied back to the gate. IMHO  |
JFK and ICN are wasting way too much time detaining law-abiding passengers based on their ancestry and aren't spending enough time detaining passengers who cause genuine problems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Smithington wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Smithington wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| He also felt the pressure to get his passengers to their destination on schedule. If he had forced the VP off the plane, what do you think would have happened? |
For goodness sakes, drop this nonsense about kicking the VP off the plane. Stick to the facts of the story, man. No-one is advocating kicking her off the plane. |
Well if you are going to say "The pilot was wrong" YOU MUST THEN EXPLAIN WHAT HE SHOULD HAVE DONE INSTEAD.
|
Ignored her. At the very most he could have a different flight attendant serve her. Nothing more. No-one needed to be kicked off the flight. |
And if she continues making a ruckus? On the taxiway turn back? In midair? Whats to stop her from calling up HQ and getting the flight grounded? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smithington
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Smithington wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Smithington wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| He also felt the pressure to get his passengers to their destination on schedule. If he had forced the VP off the plane, what do you think would have happened? |
For goodness sakes, drop this nonsense about kicking the VP off the plane. Stick to the facts of the story, man. No-one is advocating kicking her off the plane. |
Well if you are going to say "The pilot was wrong" YOU MUST THEN EXPLAIN WHAT HE SHOULD HAVE DONE INSTEAD.
|
Ignored her. At the very most he could have a different flight attendant serve her. Nothing more. No-one needed to be kicked off the flight. |
And if she continues making a ruckus? On the taxiway turn back? In midair? Whats to stop her from calling up HQ and getting the flight grounded? |
If she kept making a ruckus then it should have been dealt with according to airline (or industry) policy. Sometimes people have to be kicked off a flight. But there is no evidence anyone here needed to be so treated. Certainly the flight attendant didn't. Nor do we have any information that Cho did, either. But if she got out of control then she would get the boot, and it would be justified. And the delay could be justified to the other passengers. Throwing a crew member off a plane because a passenger "might" start misbehaving is ludicrous. Think of the logical implications of such a policy. "That drunk guy in row ten really hates visible minorities. We better toss Kahn off the flight so as not to provoke him. Better to defuse it now than have the passenger cause a ruckus as we are taxiing down the runway, or in the air."  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shimokitazawa
Joined: 14 Dec 2007
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
| Quote: |
| “We will see if [the incident] was in violation of the law. We must review related laws as this incident is unprecedented,” a ministry official told reporters. |
And there you have it. |
Why are the US officials handing it off for the Koreans to deal with?
Simply because of who the offender is and the political complexities involved with dealing with people who are so wealthy and powerful? Yet again we see a double standard for those who are working Joes and those who are the so-called elite and powerful of society. Anyone else would have been led away in handcuffs and facing the relevant charges for disrupting the flight.
Anyways, this whole thing is just nuts. And to think, that poor flight attendant is probably working for peanuts!
Thanks folks, I'll be in town all week.
Last edited by Shimokitazawa on Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:28 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smithington
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shimokitazawa wrote: |
This whole thing is just nuts. And to think, that poor flight attendant is probably working for peanuts!
Thanks folks, I'll be in town all week. |
Not bad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harpeau
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Location: Coquitlam, BC
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Shimokitazawa wrote: |
| And to think, that poor flight attendant is probably working for peanuts! |
This flight attendant should get hazard pay for what he went through...plus a bonus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Smithington wrote: |
| If she kept making a ruckus then it should have been dealt with according to airline (or industry) policy. |
Airline policy? You recall that the lady in question was, at the time, in the senior leadership of that particular airline. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Smithington wrote: |
If she kept making a ruckus then it should have been dealt with according to airline (or industry) policy. Sometimes people have to be kicked off a flight. |
I think airline policy is that if someone is creating a serious disturbance, you have to land the plane and have them removed. This isn't the Starship Enterprise. You can't just throw them in the brig on the plane. There's no communications shield that blocks her from contacting the airline and getting the plane grounded.
So instead of resolving this thing by having the plane, which is in the path of no one, go forward 20 feet and dock with the boarding gate again, you'd take the chance of this brewing up while the plane is about ready to take off? Or in the air shortly after takeoff? Or even worse, it brews up while over Alaska?
| Quote: |
| Certainly the flight attendant didn't. Nor do we have any information that Cho did, either. |
Cho was insisting that the plane not depart. Unlike other people, she actually has the power to make this happen with a simple phone call.
| Quote: |
| And the delay could be justified to the other passengers. |
I'm sure they'd be thrilled if they had to land in the middle of Nunavut and sit on the tarmac for 2 hours while this was being dealt with because there was a fiasco. Or the flight getting grounded by the airline and them having to exact and potentially deal with TSA because there was an onboard incident. They'd certainly prefer that to having an 11 minute delay and one of the flight attendants getting off.
| Quote: |
| Throwing a crew member off a plane because a passenger "might" start misbehaving is ludicrous |
It's a bit different when the passenger has a direct line to the CEO of the airline and can issue a grounding of the flight from corporate headquarters.
| Quote: |
| Think of the logical implications of such a policy. "That drunk guy in row ten really hates visible minorities. We better toss Kahn off the flight so as not to provoke him. Better to defuse it now than have the passenger cause a ruckus as we are taxiing down the runway, or in the air." |
Turn it around- A passenger accuses a flight attendant of being racist and insists that the flight attendant be removed. You as the pilot KNOW the person is not racist, but what choice do you have?
A) Give in and get the plane moving. The passenger "wins" and "runs" the plane.
B) Refuse the passenger and run the risk they get belligerent, risking a lengthy delay.
C) Remove the passenger and run the risk of them screaming that your airline is racist.
There are 3 crappy choices out there, none of them good.
Sometimes the best thing might be to just have your employee get off and work the next flight and get the plane in the air and the 250 other people on their way.
It's easy to be a backseat pilot in this case, but its not as simple as you think it is, and there's a lot the pilot has to consider. Blaming him for an outcome that resulted in people getting there safely, 11 minutes late, seems a bit much.
It's not enough to say "He was wrong". You have to provide a clear and precisely detailed alternative course of action. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EZE
Joined: 05 May 2012
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 5:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The pilot has my sympathies. He was in a no-win situation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sector7G
Joined: 24 May 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 8:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wow - this is getting serious! I just highlighted a few things below, but the article has a lot more.
Korean Air headquarters raided in 'nut rage' probe
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2014/12/116_169747.html
"We made the raid immediately after the complaint as there is possibility of evidence fabrication," a prosecutor said.
Prosecutors also plan to secure the black box from the KE086 flight, as well as flight records.
Prosecutors are considering imposing an overseas travel ban on Cho.
Since Monday, an eight-member team from the ministry has been investigating the incident. They interviewed 10 people, including the chief flight attendant who was kicked off the plane, the pilot and other flight attendants on board.
"We planned to finish the inspection by Wednesday, but those people gave different accounts about what happened, such as whether Cho yelled or not," Lee said.
It is also alleged that the airline company inspected the phone message records of flight attendants in hopes of discovering the identity of a whistleblower, and there were concerns that those attendants may be pressured not to give testimony against Cho. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sector7G
Joined: 24 May 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Schadenfreude is pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others. Not the noblest of human emotions, but I guess it's part of human nature, especially when we feel it is deserved, as in the present case. Still, even if Cho is stripped from all her important positions, she is probably wealthy enough never to have to want for anything, at least material things. And that's good for her, for after all, she was only trying to make the skies a better place to be......from Jerry Springer's Final Thoughts, Dec. 11, 2014
Anyway, it's hard to imagine a much faster fall from grace. Think about it - one day she is heiress to an empire, and the next day she is the object of scorn and ridicule. If I were one of her family, I would not let her be alone and out of my sight for very long, if you know what I mean. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smithington
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CentralCali wrote: |
| Smithington wrote: |
| If she kept making a ruckus then it should have been dealt with according to airline (or industry) policy. |
Airline policy? You recall that the lady in question was, at the time, in the senior leadership of that particular airline. |
Why is there no 'face palm' emoticon? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
