MULTIPLE PLT CABIN ATTENDANT RPT; B727; SJU-IAD. CABIN ATTENDANT DIDN'T DO PROPER COMPLIANCE CHK. CAR SEAT FORWARD OF EXIT ROW; IRATE PAX REFUSED TO MOVE. FE LEFT COCKPIT TO DEAL WITH THEM.

Date: 2000-09 · Aircraft: B727 Undifferentiated or Other Model · Phase: cruise

Anomalies: deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-far|flight-deck-cabin-aircraft-event-other-unknown|flight-deck-cabin-aircraft-event-passenger-misconduct

Synopsis

MULTIPLE PLT CABIN ATTENDANT RPT; B727; SJU-IAD. CABIN ATTENDANT DIDN'T DO PROPER COMPLIANCE CHK. CAR SEAT FORWARD OF EXIT ROW; IRATE PAX REFUSED TO MOVE. FE LEFT COCKPIT TO DEAL WITH THEM.

Narrative

THE PAX WAS ADVISED THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO BE RESEATED (FAMILY OF 3 -- INFANT IN CAR SEAT) BECAUSE THE CAR SEAT WAS FORWARD OF A WINDOW EXIT ROW. THIS WAS NOT NOTICED BEFORE TKOF. HE BECAME ABUSIVE AND SAID HE WOULD RATHER CRASH THAN HAVE TO WAKE HIS CHILD AND MOVE. THEN HE SAID HE WOULD NOT MOVE UNLESS WE MOVED HIS BAGS. I ADVISED THE PURSER -- SHE ADVISED THE CAPT. THE PURSER WENT TO SPEAK WITH THE PAX AND HE BECAME VERY ANGRY AND THEY VERBALLY EXPRESSED THEMSELVES. THE FE HAD TO LEAVE COCKPIT TO COME OUT AND SPEAK WITH THE PAX. WE NEED TO BE MORE AWARE OF COMPLIANCE CHKS. ALL FLT ATTENDANTS WORKING IN COACH -- NOT JUST THE PURSER. IF THIS SIT COULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN CARE OF BEFORE DEP; PERHAPS IT COULD HAVE BEEN CORRECTED WITHOUT THIS PAX BECOMING ABUSIVE. I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT THE COACH FLT ATTENDANTS DID NOT NOTICE THIS DURING COMPLIANCE CHKS; SAFETY DEMO; OR FIRST BEVERAGE SVC. I SAW IT AS SOON AS I APCHED THAT ROW FOR THE SECOND SVC AS I WAS WORKING FIRST CLASS FOR THE FIRST SVC. THIS HAS TAUGHT ME HOW IMPORTANT OUR SAFETY CHKS ARE!

More incidents for this aircraft family →

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.