I'm an employee of NZ so I may be biased - but the fact NZ took a $50,000 loss by cancelling this flight to ensure their employees received proper follow-up care and attention makes me damned proud to work for them!
FA4UA From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 812 posts, RR: 19
Reply 1, posted (11 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 9938 times:
WOW! That was absolutely the right thing for NZ to do with that crew! I would be hard pressed to believe that any of the American carriers would have been that kind unless the Unions stepped in and threw a fit.
You have to treat your crews well if you want a successful business! NZ showed class and compassion in this incident! Something that those 13 crew will likely never forget!
The debate continues... Starwood or Hyatt... which is better
IHadAPheo From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 6028 posts, RR: 55
Reply 7, posted (11 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 9480 times:
This effort shows that NZ is a class act all around , first from the crew having had the horrific event happen to them and that they tried to provide aid to the person was outsanding, Second the way that AZ's managment treated their employee's was first class as well (no pun intended)
Pray hard but pray with care For the tears that you are crying now Are just your answered prayers
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13470 posts, RR: 17
Reply 9, posted (11 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 9253 times:
AirNZ did the right thing. (per the article, the crew was on the way to LAX and a person commited suicide by jumping from a freeway overpass and landing on/near their van). Obiously they were in no condition to work and they didn't have enought crew to cover for them so Air NZ made the only real decision without disruption to future flights. One question I have is what did they do with the passangers who were supposed to be on that flight? Put them on UA, Qantas or other airline flights or for the next day's flight?
Nwfltattendant From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 341 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (11 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 9189 times:
Kudos to NZ management for making that decision. The human mind can play some real wacko games after an incident.... I bet the pilots loved that takeoff....hehehe....a 747-400 with NOBODY on it.... wheeee..... can you say climb rate !
Kevin752 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 736 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (11 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 9155 times:
Air New Zealand is a great airline and I know that they would do something nice like that. Their F/a's are great and provide great service on their flights. NZ has a lot of class and I wish that I could fly with them again.
DIJKKIJK From France, joined Jul 2003, 1877 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (11 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 8193 times:
Sorry everyone, but I don't agree one bit.
I wonder what those crew members would have done if one of their passengers was seriously hurt or sick on board, or if their plane crashed and they had to help badly injured passengers get to safety.
Would they be shocked and disturbed, like they were when they saw the badly hurt (dead?) suicide victim?
I agree that it is disturbing to see someone commit suicide, but it is an eventuality like any other, say a plane crashing and cabin crew are supposed to be trained to face such disasters with presence of mind and maturity. They should not lose control and get sick like wussies when such events occur.
The crew in question should be grounded and put through retraining!
[Edited 2004-02-25 21:38:17]
Never argue with idiots. They will bring you down to their level, and beat you with experience.
PA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2044 posts, RR: 22
Reply 18, posted (11 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 8040 times:
You must live in a very dark world. Although the crew was on the way to the airport, the incident did not occur during the course of their professional duties. Comparing anticipated reactions on and off the aircraft is not a valid measurement. I think what NZ did shows integrity and class.
Jmy007 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 598 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (11 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 8021 times:
I respectfully disagree with DIJKKIJK,
If I was on my way to work, weather be here in an office, or a 14 hour trans pacific flight, and on my way to work, a guy jump off a bridge, landed on my car, that I was in, I don't think I would be in the best of conditions that day for work.
If I had to face 300 or so people that night, and be there for 12 hour flight, I think the security, safety, service, would certainly be compromised.
Would you want to still fly, knowing what the cabin crew just went through.
luckly ANZ has several flights from LAX to be reacommidate on.
In my mind, ANZ is not a heartless company, , and knowing that, that would influence my decision on selling the airline to clients, friends and family.
Cookies are the Gateway pastry. They lead to Éclairs and Bear Claws.
Rongotai From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 477 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (11 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7944 times:
Your comment is almost uncomprehensibly stupid. As someone who works in the field of aviation safety I can tell you that it is extraordinarily dangerous to assume that training dehumanises flight crew such that they are not affected by any events of this nature, whether it be on board or elsewhere. It is exactly the reverse of what you say - any staff member who does NOT have a normal human emotional response to such incidents should be regarded as a potential problem.
Any intelligent airline stands down a crew member who has to deal with such an incident. It has nothing to do with being a 'wuss'. It is just good risk management. This crew (I hope ) had no choice in the matter. They were there - the flight crew were not. The crew members to be concerned about would be those who wanted to continue with their duty and pushed to do so.
I would imagine that most of them as professionals would have said something like 'I'm feeling shocked, but I'll be OK', and would then be stood down by their manager, and they would not have protested. If any of them got hysterical or excessively distressed at the scene - warning sign. If any of them assertively said that they wanted to keep working - bigger warning sign.
If it is true that there are airlines that would NOT have stood down a crew in such circumstances, then I would have big questions about their management practices and I would not want to fly with them. My response is neither to believe that the crew weak, nor that Air NZ were especially compassionate. I would just say ' sound management - just what I would expect as a safety professional'.
Rongotai From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 477 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (11 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7849 times:
More to Dijkdijk
I have just noticed that you are from the Netherlands. Your national passenger rail company, NSR, experiences about 50 people a year killed by trains - either as suicides or by accident. NS SOP's require the machinist (driver) to remain in the cab in such circumstances, and that the conductor deals with the mess on the track. Afterwards both driver and conductor are required by regulation to be stood down for two days, and are entitled to more days if necessary through their employment contract. The company also makes counsellors available on request.
I trust that KLM practices are similar. If you are, in fact, a KLM employee, or are reflecting a KLM attitude, then I will certainly never fly by them again.
AznCsa4qf744er From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (11 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7726 times:
This message is for DIJKKIJK
If you read the article it said the crew did help the person jumping off the freeway bridge. They said nothing about those crew walking away from the sense. The following statement was copied from the article.
Mr Sims said the crew went to assist but the person was dead and they were "faced with a horrific scene".
We are only human, it normal to react like this. Put yourself in their shoes, would you be able to work a 12hrs flight if you just witness a dead like that? I think not....
NO! The crew would not be considered or grounded and put through retraining. They are not their to deal with these kind of situation. They are their to help and assist. It's the aftermath that hurt.
However, I do agree that the flight shouldn't have cancelled. The crew could been placed on a later NZ flight. As NZ5 could have been delayed while back-up crew are called to work. That could of save the company USD50,000.