Businessman sues BA 'for treating men like perverts'

Bazzy · 16-01-2010 04:15PM

I suppose I Wouldnt complain if there was no seats left in standard class and they had to bump me into first class!

m@cc@ · 16-01-2010 04:21PM

But it's the Daily Mail, how reliable is the story?

Tomorrows story: Scientists discover disease only present in foreigners which causes house prices to fall.

inforfun · 16-01-2010 04:26PM

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I agree, all screaming kids with smelly nappies should be placed in a designated area at the back of the plane so the rest of us can enjoy the flight in peace.

Not far away enough.
As more and more people travel with hand luggage only, there should be lots of space left in the cargo holds.

Biggins · 16-01-2010 04:38PM

m@cc@ wrote: »

But it's the Daily Mail, how reliable is the story?

Regardless of the Mail, the man is still taking them to court for the stated reasons.
Thats on official record.

By the way, they have being doing this for four years now as reported in 2006: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-414550/Revealed-How-BA-bans-men-sitting-children-dont-know.html

m@cc@ · 16-01-2010 04:44PM

Biggins wrote: »

Regardless of the Mail, the man is still taking them to court for the stated reasons.
Thats on official record.

Yeah, but it's sounds dubious even in itself. Until he wins the case, I wouldn't pay it much attention.

Biggins · 16-01-2010 04:50PM

m@cc@ wrote: »

Yeah, but it's sounds dubious even in itself. Until he wins the case, I wouldn't pay it much attention.

Well they had 4 years to deny - and so far they haven't.

And adding insult to injury:

British Airways adds a "fly next to your children" fee
British Airways has broken new exciting new ground in the race to make flying as awful as possible: they have announced a fee (ranging from £10-60 per passenger) for advance seat selection, explaining that this will be the only way that families and other groups travelling together can be assured that they'll be sitting next to each other. I wonder what happens if you don't pay it while flying with a two-year-old in her own seat; do they seat her at the other end of the plane from you and explain to the strangers on either side of her that they're responsible for her well-being for the duration?

Source: http://www.boingboing.net/2009/09/25/british-airways-adds.html

alexlyons · 16-01-2010 05:03PM

what happened to innocent until proven guilty??

m@cc@ · 16-01-2010 05:11PM

Biggins wrote: »

Source: http://www.boingboing.net/2009/09/25/british-airways-adds.html

That's just more gutter journalism. I've never flown with BA but they're far from the only airline to charge for seat selection and the rest of the paragraph is about a 'what if' scenario that is highly unlikely to ever happen since two seats booked together are more than likely to be seated together unless the flight is fully booked at the time after they book.

Biggins · 16-01-2010 05:13PM

m@cc@ wrote: »

That's just more gutter journalism. I've never flown with BA but they're far from the only airline to charge for seat selection and the rest of the paragraph is about a 'what if' scenario that is highly unlikely to ever happen since two seats booked together are more than likely to be seated together unless the flight is fully booked at the time after they book.

True again, but the charges still applies.
As in both cases, especially the first, the underlying body of the case resides uncontested by the airline and the policy still applies even after 4+ years of doing it.

The current person suing has a hell of a case.
I'm just amazed he's the first.

Its one thing or another with B.A.
They keep screwing up. Anyone remember the farce over a staff member wearing a tiny cross?

m@cc@ · 16-01-2010 05:15PM

Biggins wrote: »

True again, but the charges still applies.

Which you know about before you book.

Biggins · 16-01-2010 05:18PM

m@cc@ wrote: »

Which you know about before you book.

Aye, but they don't tell you your going to be shifted on the plane if also your sitting besides someone else's child!
Its case of "listen mate, move your arse or else..."

m@cc@ · 16-01-2010 05:27PM

Biggins wrote: »

Aye, but they don't tell you your going to be shifted on the plane if also your sitting besides someone else's child!
Its case of "listen mate, move your arse or else..."

True enough.

On another note, it is unfortunate that a guy suing for being treated for being a pervert should be photographed standing with his hand in his pocket like that.

bnt · 16-01-2010 05:32PM

I've been sat next to kids on BA before, and when I flew to the USA last August I moved twice before takeoff to accommodate other passengers. I ended up next to a 17-yo American girl flying by herself, we had a nice chat, and ... that's all.

Craziest case was a flight from Lyon to Amsterdam a few years ago: window seat with a toddler and his dad. The toddler really wanted to see out the window, so I ended up holding him steady as he trampled all over my lap. Ow.

PS: if you volunteer to move for other passengers, and the flight attendant notices, they appreciate it. I got a glass of champagne, and it may have helped me get the upgrade on the way back from the USA.

phasers · 16-01-2010 06:30PM

Does this mean women don't get moved?

Unfair.

Children should be banned from flying imo, or at least be kept in carriers like pets

Samba · 16-01-2010 06:34PM

ejmaztec wrote: »

Do all of the priests have to sit at the back in hand-cuffs like the passengers on Con-Air?

Nahhh.

They just have to wear chastity belts.

opinion guy · 16-01-2010 06:38PM

Well see once on a flight sombody's snot-nosed drooling teenage brat felt free to keep falling asleep on my shoulder (with his dad on the other side of me saying nothing). it took several well timed shoulder bumps to learn him it wasn't ok and he should use his dad's shoulder instead (i mean you'd think once was clue enough no ?). this would not have arisen under BA's new rule.

So yeah some part of me feels its sexist and discrimantory.....but it just can't help seeing how practical it is for me too avoiding situations like above.

OutlawPete · 16-01-2010 06:40PM

AARRRGH wrote: »

What's also annoying is BA is run by an Irish man! ****ing tool.

I would have said that he was more of a donkey tw*t boy than a tool.

How a brainless baboon like him can be given such an important job is beyond me.

I wouldn't leave him in charge of a f**king toaster to be fair.

WindSock · 16-01-2010 07:12PM

AARRRGH wrote: »

I find this very offensive actually.

What kind of sick **** would implement a rule like this?

Imagine they did this to women, there would be outrage. But as usual, it's ok to treat men like crap.

Oh shut up ffs. They DO do it to women.

Women have to sit beside the little brats. Because women are all ever so caring and good with kids. There have been complaints from women before over this but you obviously haven't heard about it. So less of you IF crap, please.

GLUEY · 16-01-2010 07:13PM

therecklessone wrote: »

Does anyone else find it ironic that it's the hysteria generated by the likes of the Daily Mail surrounding sexual offences that feeds these sort of nonsense rules?

True. I can not stand tabloids. Broadsheets are bad enough but tabloids are generally just for brain deads.

Captain_Generic · 16-01-2010 07:16PM

All the kids should just be thrown in a ball pit in the bowels of the plane, then they can supervise themselves and cry all they want

OutlawPete · 16-01-2010 07:18PM

WindSock wrote: »

Oh shut up ffs. They DO do it to women.

Women have to sit beside the little brats. Because women are all ever so caring and good with kids. There have been complaints from women before over this but you obviously haven't heard about it. So less of you IF crap, please.

He has a right to express his opinion.

It is "offensive" in the extreme and if it happens to women then it is a rare occurrence, whereas with men it has almost become the rule.

TLL'rs are the first one's to complain about feeling "uneasy" posting in AH and then here we have a moderator telling someone to shut the f**k up just because they disagree with another's opinion.

TheScribbler · 16-01-2010 07:24PM

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

A business man is suing British Airways over their new policy that forbids stranger male passengers from sitting next to children even if their parents are present.

He was promptly asked to change his seat after he sat down beside a child even though he was with his missus and the child was accompanied.

"Mirko Fischer has accused the airline of branding all men as potential sex offenders and says innocent travelers are being publicly humiliated!

He is now taking this to court.

I don't think O'Leary would be interested in following suit looking at the feedback.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1243625/Businessman-Mirko-Fischer-sues-British-Airwars-treating-men-like-perverts.html

I have long since failed to understand the logic behind many of the PC initiatives that are being rolled out in the name of security, equality and safety. It seems to matter not a jot that it often destroys the societal infrastructure and network that it is supposed to protect. I give up

TheScribbler · 16-01-2010 07:27PM

opinion guy wrote: »

Wait this rule means if i'm unlucky enough to have someone's snot-nosed brat sittign besides me, the kind aircraft folk will find me another seat free from screaming younglings ??? I fail to see the problem.

did not read article

It is obviously ok to have a three year old terrorist kicking me in the back for the duration of a flight from NY to London

Biggins · 16-01-2010 07:48PM

As a parent of four kids, I find it very offensive that a company can without knowing me, automatically treat me rudely, stigmatise me, possibly publicly humiliate me and segregate me visually to rest of passengers on a plane - without the slightest bit of fcuking evidence or knowledge.
...and that is what happened to the man now suing them.

They have being doing this now for four years.
Acting like thugs without the slightest bit of kop on.

For those that say its a possible mountain made out of a molehill, etc, think of a similar comparison when your possibly stopped at outside a bar door by an idiot security goon - not let in (in front of your mates), or when inside, thrown out in error along with the actual trouble makers or victimised in so many ways by assholes who are given a bit of power and let it go to their fcuking heads!

Leucifer · 16-01-2010 08:01PM

What a load of ****e.

OutlawPete · 16-01-2010 08:04PM

opinion guy wrote: »

Wait this rule means if i'm unlucky enough to have someone's snot-nosed brat sittign besides me, the kind aircraft folk will find me another seat free from screaming younglings ??? I fail to see the problem.

did not read article

Well, if you read the article you might.

Do you really think it is okay for companies to treat men like they are pedophiles for no reason?

Now, just to be clear here - I am NOT asking you about the benefits of being discriminated against as you clearly think that there is.

No Brats near you, that suits you - I get it, but do you honestly think that this prevailing attitude towards men is fine and you see no problem with it in society whatsoever?

GLaDOS · 16-01-2010 08:14PM

I'm usually against the suing culture that seems to becoming more prevalent in society, but I agree with this guy and he's giving the money to charity so at least he's doing it for a reason and not just to make a quick buck.

Stupid, discriminating and humiliating rule.

Biggins · 16-01-2010 08:18PM

Its ridiculous.
I now can't wait outside my five year old daughters school to pick her up when she finishes class.
My wife has to collect her now!
Now don't get me wrong - I can understand the fear of men hanging around outside a school quite clearly (I have 3 daughters).
...BUT by the same stigmatisation applied automatically to the man on the plane without any foundation or basis - as soon as I am sighted approaching the school - even with legitimate reason - I'm automatically "classed" by some teachers that actually know who I am and asked to say in one place and stared at by all like the "enemy".

We have gone TOO far with the political correctness.
Too fcuking far! :mad:

MaybeLogic · 16-01-2010 08:23PM

Biggins wrote: »

Its ridiculous.
I now can't wait outside my five year old daughters school to pick her up when she finishes class.
My wife has to collect her now!
Now don't get me wrong - I can understand the fear of men hanging around outside a school quite clearly (I have 3 daughters).
...BUT by the same stigmatisation applied automatically to the man on the plane without any foundation or basis - as soon as I am sighted approaching the school - even with legitimate reason - I'm automatically "classed" by some teachers that actually know who I am and asked to say in one place and stared at by all like the "enemy".

We have gone TOO far with the political correctness.
Too fcuking far! :mad:

Schools do that??
How often do paedophiles hang around schools?
Hardly often enough ,I would have thought,to warrant excluding a whole subset of society.

(subsitute men for blacks or jews or some other social group and there'd be uproar)

AARRRGH · 16-01-2010 08:24PM

WindSock wrote: »

Oh shut up ffs. They DO do it to women.

Women have to sit beside the little brats. Because women are all ever so caring and good with kids. There have been complaints from women before over this but you obviously haven't heard about it. So less of you IF crap, please.

Eh, what?

You think having to sit next to your child is equivalent to being considered a paedophile?

God almighty boards.ie gets dumber by the day.

Businessman sues BA 'for treating men like perverts'

Comments