Businessman sues BA 'for treating men like perverts'

oppenheimer1 · 16-01-2010 08:26PM

I think we're all getting too sensitive tbh, take a look at this clip from the BBC (It probably warrants its own thread!)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7643175.stm

kincsem · 16-01-2010 08:27PM

OT
I was flying London-Dublin on Aer Lingus. At boarding when I got to my seat there was a baby in it. Its mother decided she needed an extra seat. The aircraft was full. The cabin crew told her she had not paid for two seats and to take her baby off the seat. Result. There was a bit of moaning and muttering during the flight but I survived.

That BA rule is daft. Put the little people in a separate section if you want to keep them safe. Did BA have any incidents to back up the introduction of their rule? Doubt it.

TheZohanS · 16-01-2010 08:34PM

WindSock wrote: »

Oh shut up ffs.

Banned.

OutlawPete · 16-01-2010 08:36PM

Biggins wrote: »

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

For the love of God don't imply 'political correctness has gone too far' - you'll never hear the end of it

Men are seen today as second-class citizens with no real needs that need to be met.

It's just the way it is. We are 'just' men.

From around the time of Loretta Lynn and her "Just a man" line it's the way it has been heading.

opinion guy · 16-01-2010 08:52PM

OutlawPete wrote: »

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?

Ok I read that article. Can I have that 2 mins of life back please ?

Frankly its difficult to tell exactly what happened from the article. It just said the steward rose his voice. SOOOOOOOOOO hold on here. Frankly if the guy took that treatment and moved I think he was a bit of an idiot (or a least a pushover).

Me personally, if I were on my own and they asked me nicely I'd probably woulnd't care and would be glad to get sitting away from the snotty teenager. But if they were rude about it, so long as I wasn't dying with a hangover, I'd stand my ground in that situation. I'd insist they moved the kid if they had some stupid rule and I liked where I was sitting. In fact in that situation if my wife was pregnant beside me I'd ask the kid if he was ok to it ther, i'd ask his parents, i'd go so far as to publicly ask other passengers to be witnesses and ask if anyone was a solicitor and just threaten legal action to the hilt. I'd make a big show of writing down the stewards name, and the captain and the witnesses. Just generalyl meet obsterperousness with obstreperousness (is that a word ?). I'd push it as far as I could - especially if they were being aggressive towards me. Rules are one thing, aggression is another.

GLaDOS · 16-01-2010 08:55PM

opinion guy wrote: »

Ok I read that article. Can I have that 2 mins of life back please ?

Frankly its difficult to tell exactly what happened from the article. It just said the steward rose his voice. SOOOOOOOOOO hold on here. Frankly if the guy took that treatment and moved I think he was a bit of an idiot (or a least a pushover).

Me personally, if I were on my own and they asked me nicely I'd probably woulnd't care and would be glad to get sitting away from the snotty teenager. But if they were rude about it, so long as I wasn't dying with a hangover, I'd stand my ground in that situation. I'd insist they moved the kid if they had some stupid rule and I liked where I was sitting. In fact in that situation if my wife was pregnant beside me I'd ask the kid if he was ok to it ther, i'd ask his parents, i'd go so far as to publicly ask other passengers to be witnesses and ask if anyone was a solicitor and just threaten legal action to the hilt. I'd make a big show of writing down the stewards name, and the captain and the witnesses. Just generalyl meet obsterperousness with obstreperousness (is that a word ?). I'd push it as far as I could - especially if they were being aggressive towards me. Rules are one thing, aggression is another.

The plane refused to take off until he moved, there's not a lot he could do at the time. How is he a pushover if he's suing them? He's not letting it go.

opinion guy · 16-01-2010 09:17PM

ScienceNerd wrote: »

The plane refused to take off until he moved, there's not a lot he could do at the time. How is he a pushover if he's suing them? He's not letting it go.

See now would you go read it again and this time pay attention ?
It doesn't say the plane refused to move until he moved. It says the stewart threatened that would happen - implying the guy then moved seats under that threat without any further protest by him or without a hold up

Like I said if it was me on my own I'd be happy, if I was this guy I would say something along the lines of - "Excuse me ? How dare you speak to me in that tone of voice. Whats your name and who is your manager? I shall be making a written complaint about you once I return home. In the mean time I'd appreciate it if you would get the cabin manager as I wish to complain about a) you b) your policy and c) this smelly teenager you sat me beside keeps oogling my wife and I want him moved".

Wile E. Coyote · 16-01-2010 09:22PM

opinion guy wrote: »

See now would you go read it again and this time pay attention ?
It doesn't say the plane refused to move until he moved. It says the stewart threatened that would happen - implying the guy then moved seats under that threat without any further protest by him or without a hold up

I think you should read it again

If they find a man next to a child or teenager they will ask him to move to a different seat. The aircraft will not take off unless the passenger obeys.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1243625/Businessman-Mirko-Fischer-sues-British-Airwars-treating-men-like-perverts.html#ixzz0coCn18k7

opinion guy · 16-01-2010 09:24PM

Wile E. Coyote wrote: »

I think you should read it again

If they find a man next to a child or teenager they will ask him to move to a different seat. The aircraft will not take off unless the passenger obeys.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1243625/Businessman-Mirko-Fischer-sues-British-Airwars-treating-men-like-perverts.html#ixzz0coCn18k7

No you read it again

Mr Fischer refused, explaining that his wife was pregnant, at which point the steward raised his voice, causing several passengers to turn round in alarm. He warned that the aircraft could not take off unless Mr Fischer obeyed.
Mr Fischer eventually moved seats but .....

It doesn't say anything about a delay in taking off in this case

Really people English errors here....come on

GLaDOS · 16-01-2010 09:38PM

opinion guy wrote: »

It doesn't say anything about a delay in taking off in this case

Because he moved, if he hadn't, there would have been. Airlines don't fcuk about with security, if they think there's a problem they wont budge.

opinion guy · 16-01-2010 09:46PM

Right. So you agree with me then - there wasn't a delay. Just a threat. Thats all you have to say then - "you are right opinion guy"

He should have called their bluff if he felt so strongly about it. Fuck em- if they abusing you let them delay the flight
Yeah maybe they kick him and his wife off but frankly that would have made for a better case and if he really felt THAT strongly about it he could have asked to be put off the plane and flown with another airline and still sued them for discrimination after (I would if they pissed me and my hypothetical wife off sufficiently)

This isn't a security issue.

Edit: In fact if I were really annoyed about it and it was a big row already, thats exactly what i would do - demand to be let off the flight. Rather that then put up with more abusive ****e fromt he staff for the many hours of your flight. But like I said - all this is hypothetical, me on my own I'd we happy to get seated away from a kid

OutlawPete · 16-01-2010 10:06PM

opinion guy wrote: »

Frankly its difficult to tell exactly what happened from the article. It just said the steward rose his voice.

It doesn't matter what happened. Your missing the point.

It is BA POLICY to patrol the plane to make sure there are no children sitting beside MEN!!

What part of that do you not get?

THAT is what is offensive.

They are not patrolling looking for women despite the recent case in the UK were a bunch of women were molesting toddlers in Nursery Schools and sending photos to men.

No, thats just forgotten about and here we have BA with a POL|ICY to see men as being inherently evil because they are male.

kowloon · 16-01-2010 10:09PM

If the children were put in a separate section of the plane the problem would be solved; make it an unpressurised section and the hypoxia would shut them up aswell.

Biggins · 16-01-2010 10:46PM

Quote from FOUR years ago when the BA policy was first brought to attention (and another innocent passenger was bullied):

"To my amazement, the stewardess said BA had a rule that no unaccompanied child under 16 may be seated next to an adult male stranger - even if there's a woman on the other side.

"The discussion went on for several minutes but she refused to back down and said we could not take off until the problem was sorted out. I heard her muttering to a colleague that everyone would have to disembark.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-414550/Revealed-How-BA-bans-men-sitting-children-dont-know.html#ixzz0coXauoxp

I suspect there has been many, many innocent males been victimised by this one thug company, its jumped up agents, and its tolly-dollies who has taken the law into their own hands and gone beyond the bounds of decency, in the intervening years. Once again with a smitten of power going to their putrid heads.

Think of this man now that is standing for the return of basic human rights, when indeed you or someone you know is singled out for victimisation wrongly by such power driven morans - be it on a plane, at a bar door or a school yard when your waiting to pick up your own child.
The present man is not fighting BA for money, he's fighting them for return of his rights for himself, fellow passengers, perhaps his son some day ...and for you.
Human rights should not be drained away and allowed to die quietly in the night... and not with-held by any bloody profit making company with no legal police powers to do so.

WindSock · 18-01-2010 10:55AM

AARRRGH wrote: »

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.

Firstly, I apologise for the harshness of my tone, I had just recieved some bad news at the time and was angry.

What I meant to say in my post was that it is a policy that also effects women. Of course it is not labelling women as potential paedos and men certainly get a raw deal but it also sucks that women are lumped in with the child. I know I would be pissed off if my partner was moved and I were stuck sitting beside a kid while he was treated like a criminal. Of course this man has every right to stand up for himself and other men. I certainly would.

TomTom · 18-01-2010 01:18PM

It's getting a bit mad out there alright. There once was a joke in a movie asking who takes care of the white middle class male to which the person responds 'the government' but this is no longer the case.

I collected my niece from school a fair few times as my sister could not make it in time. It was never a problem until one day there was a substitute teacher the would not release the child to me. It was not a case of me turning up as a complete stranger as the child recognised me and called out my name to get my attention in the hall, I was talking away to some of the mothers there who know me (It's a small community), and I know most of the teachers there. I asked her to go check with another teacher but she refused to leave the child on her own so being sarcastic I asked would I get my wife to come up and collect the child and she said that would be ok. Lord I was fit to punch her. After explaining what she just did she eventually released the child. My name is on the list of approved people with the school to collect the child.

It's pure sexism but alas since I am male I would said I would be laughed at or told it's in the interest of the childs safety if I complained.

I am a parent and I hate when I am placed on a flight near a crying child it drives me mad but it's very hard for a parent to do anything about it if the child is very young and its ears poping is driving it mad. I am facing a 10 hour drive this weekend as opposed to flying with a child as its just not fair. (on the child first, other people 2nd) Not all people have this option though.

AARRRGH · 18-01-2010 02:25PM

WindSock wrote: »

Firstly, I apologise for the harshness of my tone, I had just recieved some bad news at the time and was angry.

What I meant to say in my post was that it is a policy that also effects women. Of course it is not labelling women as potential paedos and men certainly get a raw deal but it also sucks that women are lumped in with the child. I know I would be pissed off if my partner was moved and I were stuck sitting beside a kid while he was treated like a criminal. Of course this man has every right to stand up for himself and other men. I certainly would.

I still think you're being extremely sensitive if you think being forced to sit next to your own child is in any way comparable to being labeled a potential paedophile.

WindSock · 18-01-2010 03:33PM

AARRRGH wrote: »

I still think you're being extremely sensitive if you think being forced to sit next to your own child is in any way comparable to being labeled a potential paedophile.

Why would I have to be forced to sit beside my own child?

I said it is not comparable but the policy sucks for everyone.

AARRRGH · 18-01-2010 05:26PM

WindSock wrote: »

Why would I have to be forced to sit beside my own child?

I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect a parent to have to sit next to their own child.

Of course, it should not just apply to women, but the idea that you have to sit next to your own child sounds like common sense to me.

But not being allowed sit near a child because you're a man and therefore potentially a paedophile...?! FFS.

OutlawPete · 18-01-2010 05:31PM

AARRRGH wrote: »

But not being allowed sit near a child because you're a man and therefore potentially a paedophile...?! FFS.

Linky

Reflector · 18-01-2010 06:01PM

All gay men are seen as limp wristed fairies with a lisp and now all straight men are seen as potential rapists and abusers of children.

It is a ridiculous policy but ask yourself how many of you have preconceptions about other types of people that are completely unfounded. Society has created this kind of thing and we are all to blame.
We need to take a step back and be realistic as it is all this hysteria about everyone that'll allow the ones who are actually dangerous to go undetected.

kincsem · 18-01-2010 07:04PM

Biggins wrote: »

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.

If the child is of an age that can appreciate money (4yo+) I would send them to their new seat clutching £60 (extra pocket money) and teach them to wave the money, and extend the middle finger every time cabin crew pass their seat.

Little Acorn · 18-01-2010 07:34PM

Just noticed this thread today. Completely agree with that man for suing. If I was travelling with my boyfriend/brother/ male cousin or male friend and this happened I would be so fcuking angry!
Basically they're implying that my boyfriend(or other male etc.) is a potential paedophile without any evidence whatsoever to back up their bullshit presumptions.
I think this rule is so bloody ridiculous,but if they do insist on having them then why doesn't it apply to women also?
Women are known to have abused children aswell so I don't see why there is such a discrimination being shown here.
If they are so worried about child safety they should ask the child or parent of the child to move beside each other-the onus on that child's safety does not lie with some random stranger so he shouldn't have to be the one to move.
,or else if the child is unaccompanied they should have a designated area for those children.

If he wins,he is donating the money to NSPCC. I hope he wins bloody hundreds of thousands,and shows up whoever created this rule for the sexist,unfair clown that he/she really is.

Dardania · 18-01-2010 09:29PM

They tried it with Boris Johnson also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline_sex_discrimination_policy_controversy#British_Airways

Biggins · 18-01-2010 09:45PM

Dardania wrote: »

They tried it with Boris Johnson also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline_sex_discrimination_policy_controversy#British_Airways

He shoulda told them to get on their own bike! Silly sods.

I love the bit quoted "The company claimed that it was responding to a fear of sexual assaults."
I have a fear of being raped by half a dozen priests, where are they going to put me seated the next time a holy congregation is on the same plane as me heading to Rome!

Businessman sues BA 'for treating men like perverts'

Comments