Planenutz From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1267 posts, RR: 12 Posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 6169 times:
It looks like ebookers.com exceeded the number of physically challenged passengers allowed on a given flight. Iberia opted to remove all of them. Really unfortunate situation.
StearmanNut From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 352 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 6002 times:
This doesn't look good. I'm assuming it occurred in the EU someplace.
If wishes were horses, a Tail Dragger I would fly...
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12333 posts, RR: 12 Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5968 times:
I bet this wouldn't happen in within the USA/Canada due to strict anti-discrimination laws as to the handicapped. Probably many flights have f/a's with English sign langage ability. However, I do understand the issue for Iberia here, that in case of an emergency for such a large, unaccompiened group, without someone who could do sign in English. If they had been properly notified, perhaps Iberia could have provided appropiate f/a staffing.
Ezycrew From Spain, joined Oct 2001, 460 posts, RR: 4 Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5963 times:
I fly Iberia every week from GVA to MAD, since a little more than a year and a half now. As a non-rev, I always shut up when I see things go totally wrong. And these past few months I've noticed ALOT of incompetence at IB, especially on the ground (and not only in MAD), and as well as in the air.
There are some very good people working for IB, but I can now say with confidence that MOST of IB's staff are total ignorants, who can barely read a ticket, and lack etiquette and professional knowledge.
Sad, because it really doesn't represent the wonderful country that Spain is, and the kindness of the Spaniards.
Skymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5893 times:
Sorry, but well done Iberia! It seems like this was NOT their fault - if ebookers booked them in contravention of the airline's policy, it was ebookers' fault. At least Iberia made an assessment of the situation and stood by their rules, unlike a certain Irish-based low cost who seems to throw the rule book out of the window faced with broadly similar challenges (like too many passengers)!!!
I'm all for airlines providing adequate facilities for disabled people (whatever that entails), but 23 unaccompanied deaf passengers without adequate supporting staff are a safety hazzard to themselves and to the rest of the passengers if they can't hear (and therefore understand) the safety brief - there simply aren't enough airline staff on an airliner to help that many people if things go pear shaped and they don't know what to do. If there had been an accident and those deaf passengers hadn't understood the safety brief and something unfornate had happened to them, there'd be absolute public dirision of Iberia for letting so many deaf passengers on board in such circumstances.
PA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1950 posts, RR: 26 Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5892 times:
The newspaper headline should have read: "The hearing-challenged fall victim to the customer service-challenged".
I like the quote: ... Iberia defended its actions, saying it was only following regulations, although the UK Civil Aviation Authority says it has no such regulation.
This is unfortunately not surprising. Customer service is not one of Iberia's strongest assets. It's just a shame they could not have been more tactful.
Horus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 62 Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5857 times:
I have to say that at face value it would seem like Iberia are in the wrong here, but I'm sure the airline did it for safety reasons. God forbid if that aircraft was involved in a serious accident, what would have happened if those kids were given no professional assistance during an emergency evacuation and some were injured/killed. People would then turn around and blame Iberia.
Ezycrew From Spain, joined Oct 2001, 460 posts, RR: 4 Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5846 times:
Skymonster
If it was IB's regulation no to accept them, why did they allow them o/b in the first place? That's the big problem with IB : it's never consistent.
I can understand that it must have been humiliating for these people to be offloaded in front of the other passengers. And knowing IB very well, I am sure they didn't do it with tact!
Crosswind From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 2572 posts, RR: 59 Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5844 times:
Iberia defended its actions, saying it was only following regulations, although the UK Civil Aviation Authority says it has no such regulation.
A classic case of 2+2=5
Since Iberia are a Spanish airline, they operate under Spanish CAA rules, and their procedures have to be authorised by the Spanish CAA. The fact that there is no UK CAA rule is irrelevant, it doesb't mean that Iberia were in the wrong, or that no such rule exists.
I would second Skymonster's sentiments, if there are regulations set down by the Spanish CAA which limit the number of deaf passengers not accompanied by hearing escorts, then the airline was quite correct to remove these passengers from the flight. I don't think you can place too much blame on the crew - this should however have been picked up at check-in, preventing the embarrasment onboard the aircraft.
Whether this is discriminatory or not, and whether the airline agrees with the rules or not, Iberia are legally obliged to follow the rules - there won't be any leeway on this matter. The Captain has overall responsibility for the safety of his passengers, and as the Ryanair case has clearly demonstrated, the Captain will be held personally responsible if he knowingly contravenes safety regulations.
PA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1950 posts, RR: 26 Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5818 times:
Would you like to bet that the Spanish CAA doesn't have any rules regarding this either? My bet is that IB doesn't even have any written company rules regarding this. Knowing IB, it was probably an overreaction and, quite typically of IB, trying to blame it on "the rules".
I'm not saying that booking 23 hearing impaired passengers on a flight with no escort is a wise idea, but I really question Iberia's handling of the situation.
Gabrielz From United States of America, joined May 2004, 64 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5787 times:
Plus, I'd add: the safety briefing document presumes that the person cannot speak the native language of the carrier - they are designed to be universally understood (think: little man drawings). Other than being seated in the exit row, there is no reason why a large group of people who don't speak English/Spanish are a safety hazard aboard a commercial airline. The deaf are in no way uniquely risky to an airline - and I think this is just disgusting.
LongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4281 posts, RR: 36 Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5750 times:
Having 23 deaf passengers on an aircraft without an escort, would appear to be no more dangerous than 23 passengers who speak, say, Ukrainian, without an interpreter. Are there any regulations restricting the number of passengers who do not speak the language of the crew without an interpreter?
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
SafetyDude From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 16 Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5729 times:
I have to say that I agree with Iberia's decision, due to safety measures. Also, I find it quite striking that none of the 23 travelers or their families thought about have an escort for such a large group.
the safety briefing document presumes that the person cannot speak the native language of the carrier - they are designed to be universally understood (think: little man drawings). Other than being seated in the exit row, there is no reason why a large group of people who don't speak English/Spanish are a safety hazard aboard a commercial airline. The deaf are in no way uniquely risky to an airline - and I think this is just disgusting.
In the event of an emergency, orders might have to be given out, and it is imperative that passengers can understand these orders - regardless of where they are seated - as it for their safety as well as other passengers and the crew.
Having 23 deaf passengers on an aircraft without an escort, would appear to be no more dangerous than 23 passengers who speak, say, Ukrainian, without an interpreter. Are there any regulations restricting the number of passengers who do not speak the language of the crew without an interpreter?
I believe that there was a similar situation on "Airport" where a group of athletes were traveling through LHR and during boarding, they could not find their interpreter and could almost not fly because he was there to translate.
On most airlines, there is usually a mixed crew of English and the ethnicity of where the flight is going to or from.
Also, the part about how IB was following procedures and yet the UK did not have such, could be because Iberia had to follow Spanish procedures.
1.3.1 General
Subject to the rules and conditions of this Resolution, Members shall participate in interline transactions concerning the carriage of incapacitated passengers. Members shall ensure that each interline Member participating in the transportation has specifically agreed to participate in the carriage of such Passenger.
1.3.2 Exceptions
Notwithstanding 1.3.1, Members:
1.3.2.1 may refuse to carry or continue to carry persons:
1.3.2.1(a) whose carriage because of their physical or medical conditions, on the basis of established facts, could pose a threat to the safety of other passengers and their property, the aircraft or the crew; and/or
1.3.2.1(b) who refuse to, or do not submit themselves to the specific conditions of carriage required by the Member(s)’ regulations;
1.3.2.2 may refuse to engage in interline transactions for carriage, or to commence/continue interline transportation of incapacitated persons:
1.3.2.2(a) whose conduct, status, mental or physical condition is determined by the Member to be such as to render them incapable of assisting in their evacuation of the aircraft (e.g.persons travelling in a stretcher or incubator, persons with severe mobility impairment, persons with severe hearing and vision impairment) unless they are accompanied by an escort who will be responsible for them and their needs on enplaning and deplaning during flight, and during emergency evacuation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As I said above, the buck stops with the crew. If you were the Captain of this flight, would you take personal responsibility for the safety of a group of 23 deaf students travelling without an escort who would be able to convey safety commands of the crew during an emergency. Would you put your career on the line?
The travel group should have enquired about any special requirements, the travel agent should have informed the airline, and the check in people should have flagged up the issue before boarding.
Sllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6 Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5669 times:
I don't know Spanish aviaton regs.
But here in the US, airlines under Part 121 effectively write their own regulations. The FAA then approves it. Obviously, much is lifted from Part 121 but there are specific differences.
That approved Operations Manual is the law for that airline. If a US airline has something that says "any flight with more than 20 people who do not speak Tagalog must have an interpreter" (and hopefully, a reasonable definition of how that's determined) than that is the law for that specific airline.
Bullpitt From Spain, joined Mar 2004, 871 posts, RR: 9 Reply 15, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5586 times:
As usual some of those people on this forum are talking through their A**hol*. In the article at no point does it say that IB personnel were rude, some people here just assume without facts. All they did was to follow regulations. Again if IB does things correctly it's bad and if they had not done it they would claim that's typical of IB and that we're not a serious airline. Lets remember that the ones who F***ed up where ebookers (By the way an ENGLISH company who are one of the worst in the trade) As for those who claim its the same been deaf and not to speak another language, Use your brains before you engage your mouth. Hey why don't we let 20 or 30 blind people on the plane to accompany the deaf guys. In case of an emergency wont that be fun.
These are my principles but if you don't like them I have others
GuyBetsy1 From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 832 posts, RR: 6 Reply 16, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5563 times:
The group booked through e-bookers.com on the internet.
Sure it's easy to book on line....
No, I don't need any assistance...
That is until they see you at the airport and see that you DO need special assistance...
Better to go to a travel agency and deal with it , I say.. at least with a grioup of 23 persons, they would have been eligible for 2 free tickets and that would be the hearing people escorting them.
SafetyDude From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 16 Reply 17, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5528 times:
As usual some of those people on this forum are talking through their A**hol*. In the article at no point does it say that IB personnel were rude, some people here just assume without facts. All they did was to follow regulations. Again if IB does things correctly it's bad and if they had not done it they would claim that's typical of IB and that we're not a serious airline. Lets remember that the ones who F***ed up where ebookers
I agree - although I am not sure who is really talking out of their...
I find it very difficult to imagine any FA being rude to, and telling, 23 deaf passengers to get off the plane.
PA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1950 posts, RR: 26 Reply 18, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5505 times:
Nobody said they were rude. They were just tactless in letting the group board and confronting the group on board the aircraft. It could have been handled so much more professionally if they had taken the group aside discreetly in the boarding area. It is no secret that Iberia has a prior reputation for poor customer service. Whether that played a role in this situation or not isn't clear, but given their past performance, chances are it did.
NoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7796 posts, RR: 13 Reply 19, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5459 times:
Deaf people don't need to be accompanied by hearing escorts for crying out loud!
They're youngsters, right, but they are certainly old enough to travel alone if their parents allow them to do.
And WTF do some people say about safety instructions? You can read those safety instructions on those little safety cards in front of you. Since when do you need your ears to read and understand safety instructions?
I bet the majority of YOU doesn't bother to listen to the F/As during the demonstration.
Ok, now you can come an say "Imagine there was an accident ..." Well, if that really happens than it's more than likely that 80% of those who boarded with no handicap at all, turn into blind, deaf people acting in panic. The rest need a wheelchair and/or does neither speak English nor Spanish. So why bother?
Nobody said they were rude.
I do say they're rude.
Forcing people the leave the plane because they are deaf is extremly rude.
SafetyDude From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 16 Reply 20, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5422 times:
Nobody said they were rude
I know that I was responding to a previous post that mentioned of how someone else made a comment about being rude.
And WTF do some people say about safety instructions? [...] Since when do you need your ears to read and understand safety instructions?
Allow me to quote myself: In the event of an emergency, orders might have to be given out, and it is imperative that passengers can understand these orders - regardless of where they are seated - as it for their safety as well as other passengers and the crew.
I bet the majority of YOU doesn't bother to listen to the F/As during the demonstration.
I bet the majority of us could assist in an emergency situation, if needed.
NoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7796 posts, RR: 13 Reply 21, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5416 times:
Obviously you haven't read my post entirely, or you refuse to respond to some arguments. You can never make sure that all people aboard can understand and follow orders given by the F/As, even if no panic is spread among the passengers.
I bet the majority of us could assist in an emergency situation, if needed.
Access-Air From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1939 posts, RR: 15 Reply 22, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5394 times:
NoUFO...Get a clue!!!!
I agree with what IB did.....I would certainly not want to babysit 23 deaf people on a flight and possibly have to assist them to get out of the plane in case of an emergency.....The same situation would exist if someone who wass blind was to sit in ALL the emergency exit locations, and INSIST they could operate the exit......How safe would that be??
People, People, People.... quit this "universal-victim-my-rights-are-being-violated-bullcrap"..I am so tired of it... Had these E-Bookers had the sense enuff to consider they might need a few Signing translators to accompany them, it might not have happened...They didnt so they got bumped.....Whoop-dee-doo, life goes on.....
Get over it...
IBERIA747 From Spain, joined Aug 2003, 1825 posts, RR: 62 Reply 23, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5368 times:
"People, People, People.... quit this "universal-victim-my-rights-are-being-violated-bullcrap"..I am so tired of it..."
I think the same and I couldn´t agree more with you...but I won´t discuss it here as it may get things completely off-topic.
On regards to people´s comments about what Iberia did...we will never have all people thinking the same way. In my case, I know it must have been an embarrassing situation for both passengers and crew, but if the airline (or airline´s country) regulations demand to do it then nothing can be done against it.
Someone should have prevented this when making the reservations.
By188b From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 701 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (8 years 10 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5320 times:
Why did IB check-in staff let them check-in in the first place?
The group must have been so embarassed when they ordered off the aircraft.
next flights : BD LHR-TXL J, FR SXF-STN Y, SN BRU-LHR Y, MA LHR-BUD Y, BA BUD-LHR J, BA LCY-SNN-JFK J, BA JFK-LHR J, BA
25 SafetyDude: You can never make sure that all people aboard can understand and follow orders given by the F/As, even if no panic is spread among the passengers. Th
26 FlyboyOz: No more arguement! I do agree with what IB had done to deaf people. I can imagine that IB cabin crew cannot handle 23 deaf passengers because there ar
27 Smcmac32msn: Having 23 deaf passengers on an aircraft without an escort, would appear to be no more dangerous than 23 passengers who speak, say, Ukrainian, without
28 Qantasclub: What else would you expect from Iberia, an airline SEVERLY lacking in the area of customer service. They honestly have no idea. I have flown them in
29 Ushermittwoch: Wow, I have to (partly) agree with IBERIA747! IB was following international safety rules and probably some internal ones as well but I can't be bothe
30 AirframeAS: Okay....Since Im deaf and have worked for 3 airlines in the U.S., I'm definately going to comment on this since this totally pisses me off ....so Im g
31 Collegestud: OK.. I agree with AirframeAS. I am also deaf. Iberia has not right to remove deaf passengers. Thats the disgusted discrimination. I think British deaf
32 NoUFO: Access-Air, you don't need to babysit 23 or 46 deaf people. Being deaf doesn't mean they are mentally retarded. If you have a certain member in mind -
33 BDLGUY: Okay Guys, But Let me tell you guys something. Believe me, I am hearing impaired. Back in the Summer of 1993, I flew on North American Airlines MD-83
34 767Lover: I don't think it is unreasonable for an airline to take measures -- no matter how drastic or politically incorrect -- to ensure safe carriage of passe
35 SafetyDude: What else would you expect from Iberia, an airline SEVERLY lacking in the area of customer service. They honestly have no idea. I have flown them in J
36 NoUFO: what everyone needs to do is understand that there are huge differences between one disabled passengers and twenty-three disabled passengers. On a LH
37 Omshanti: I Precisely have to agree with SKYMONSTER.....and would like to pose a question to all of you. Lets say God forbid, something did happen, What are the
38 NoUFO: And the general response of the public after hearing that safety did not preside in manner that is required. For the 7th time: Deaf people do not pos
39 JGPH1A: Re: It could have been handled so much more professionally if they had taken the group aside discreetly in the boarding area I strongly suspect that n
40 SIN_SQ: Arguing that 23 deaf people need "escort" is really a joke. I am also disappointed that there are still people who insist that Iberia is correct to ki
41 767Lover: 23 people who speak a foreign language will know, by way of noise, urgent commands being shouted, etc. that there is an emergency. If they are asleep
42 SafetyDude: On a LH 747 flight from Bejing to Frankfurt you will more than likely find 23 passengers who will have a hard time to understand orders given by the c
43 Big777jet: First of all, Deaf/hard of hearing people are not stupid or dumb. I bet deaf people know what to do with emergency escape. I'm sure some deaf have flo
44 NoUFO: If 23 deaf people are sound asleep on a flight, they won't hear anything, won't know there is an emergency, and will be dependent on people stopping t
45 SafetyDude: First of all, Deaf/hard of hearing people are not stupid or dumb. I bet deaf people know what to do with emergency escape. I'm sure some deaf have flo
46 Ushermittwoch: NoUFO, you might want to re-read post #13.
47 Big777jet: NoUFO- You mentioned: If 23 deaf people are sound asleep on a flight, they won't hear anything, won't know there is an emergency, and will be dependen
48 767Lover: Big777jet, I was the one who said that about the sleeping pax, not NoUFO. And please re-read my post...I never said anything about deaf people being d
49 Gabrielz: This argument has reached an impasse, afaict - and, as with so many other debates on a.net, I think it's disappointing. Not because people disagree, b
50 767Lover: Has anyone provided one valid reason why Iberia would willfully discriminate against those passengers just for the sport of it?
51 NoUFO: Ushermittwoch, I did. 1.3.2.2(a) whose conduct, status, mental or physical condition is determined by the Member to be such as to render them incapabl
52 SIN_SQ: It is very amusing that some people are arguing over the "large" number of disabled people abroad the plane. If it is not possible for 23 deaf people
53 SafetyDude: This argument has reached an impasse, afaict - and, as with so many other debates on a.net, I think it's disappointing. Not because people disagree, b
54 Compuz1: All of you who are on the side of IB should be ashamed of yourselves. I AM deaf. On average, I fly internationally every 2 or 3 weeks. I cannot believ
55 767Lover: You mean the big group of 23 independent deaf people has to be split into small groups (2 or 8 or whatever number is) and be seperated on different pl
56 SafetyDude: All of you who are on the side of IB should be ashamed of yourselves. I AM deaf. On average, I fly internationally every 2 or 3 weeks. I cannot believ
57 NoUFO: SafetyDude, really PLEASE at least read what I have said before you blame others for not doing so. Something else that I found to be a problem was tha
58 Bullpitt: Look Compuz1 THIS is not about ONE deaf person, its about 23 all in one flight and about ebookers not advising the airline that they would be on that
59 Samurai 777: I'm hard of hearing and I will say that I find that what these 23 deaf passengers went through was disgusting as hell. And keeping in mind that I've s
60 SafetyDude: If it is not possible for 23 deaf people to be together on the plane due to safety reasons, it applies the same rules to ships, buses and trains for t
61 777236ER: AENA have regulations, Iberia follow them. Simple as. I fail to see the problem. Were 23 people in wheelchairs, for example, to turn up to a flight in
62 SIN_SQ: "Sin_SQ: Of course not. This issue stemmed from the fact that this group did not have what IB considered to be "proper" escorts, i.e., people who coul
63 SafetyDude: SafetyDude, really PLEASE at least read what I have said before you blame others for not doing so. Arghl, could please be so kind reading reply #51? T
64 SafetyDude: I completely agree with that. I would like to add - to avoid confusion - that a "proper escort" would be needed for such a large group, and not just o
65 Ushermittwoch: "It is necessary to inform the travel agent or airline of the special needs of the passenger when making the reservation or purchasing the ticket." Ta
66 NoUFO: Bullpit: Look Compuz1 THIS is not about ONE deaf person, its about 23 all in one flight So what? Please read reply #51 SafetyDude, you are ignoring ma
67 SafetyDude: t was determined that the UK and US did not have such a regulation. However, that is completely useless because Iberia from Spain! Why the article men
68 Ushermittwoch: http://www.aena.es/csee/Satellite?pagename=Home&lang=EN_GB I wonder why the other link doesn't work.
69 SafetyDude: Where are we supposed to look on that page? -Will
70 NoUFO: SafetyDude, this will most likely be my last response. Either you are too dumb to understand or language skills fail me, I really don't know. If the U
71 777236ER: Aena, however, is Spanish, they have no saying in England where the group booked their flight. They do, however, have authority over Iberia. Regardles
72 SafetyDude: Sorry, Iberia referred to a regulation which was simply non-existent. Thus they were embarassing themselves. The fact that there was no such rule does
73 SafetyDude: 1.3.2.1 may refuse to carry or continue to carry persons: 1.3.2.1(a) whose carriage because of their physical or medical conditions, on the basis of e
74 NoUFO: 777236ER, quick and dirty: Please read reply #51.
75 SafetyDude: NoUfo, now, now, you promised. "Quick and dirty": Safety supersedes all regulations. Please read reply #35, 56, 60, and 63. -Will
76 Ushermittwoch: DP = disabled people. S-Dude, if you go to the bottom left part of the page and click on "Passenger rights" followed by "Special needs passengers" and
77 777236ER: 1.3.2.2(a) whose conduct, status, mental or physical condition is determined by the Member to be such as to render them incapable of assisting in thei
78 SafetyDude: Ushermittwoch, thanks. There is also this rule: 1.3.2.1 may refuse to carry or continue to carry persons: 1.3.2.1(a) whose carriage because of their p
79 IBERIA747: "they have no saying in England where the group booked their flight" First of all, every airline has to comply with the reulations of THEIR OWN COUNTR
80 NoUFO: Ok, I'm back for a couple of minutes: Ushermittwoch: DP = disabled people. NoUFO, is this too hard to understand? "It is also the responsibility of DP
81 SafetyDude: And what exactly are the travel needs of deaf people? An ozone mask? Additional seat pitch? None of all that. They need exactly as the same as a group
82 777236ER: Hereby you just repeat what I called a wild assumption. How do deaf people - sorry: a group of foreigners not speaking Spanish and only little English
83 Compuz1: You know what? I'm sure glad I live in the USA. We have anti-discrimination laws. I'm sorry, 23 non-English/Spanish whatever speaking tourists should
84 Sacflyer: Come on guys, A group of 23 unescorted teenagers on an international flight from the same school. I don't care if they are deaf or not! Why weren't th
85 SafetyDude: Compuz1,please understand that close to 80 replies have addressed an issue regarding safety. I have NEVER notified an airline of my disability and the
86 777236ER: We have laws to protect our citizens AND foreigners from this kind of humiliation! Humiliation or not, I wouldn't want to be stuck in the middle of 23
87 FlyboyOz: This is not discrimination but safety is priority to save people's life. Qantas inflight safety demonsatrion said "Safety is priority"! "the differenc
88 SafetyDude: That is very interesting about the computers, thank you. -Will
89 Kyril: Hi all! I was confronted once to this "problem". On a flight from Paris CDG to Geneva on Air France, a group of 15 or 20 students checked-in on the sa
90 FlyboyOz: Ahh! I forgot to mention about AF. I know that there is a AF's law for the AF cabin crew to look after deaf people on the plane. That is why AF is the
91 NoUFO: Compuz1: You know what? I'm sure glad I live in the USA. We have anti-discrimination laws. That's nothing special. It is called Disability Discriminat
92 SafetyDude: NoUfo: This time around, please read what I say so that you do not have to post another message saying that I am avoiding you, when I am not. I asked
93 Access-Air: Thank you FlyBoyOz.....maybeYOUR explanation can help NoUFO understand where I am coming from and why such an action by IB was in the best interest of
94 SafetyDude: Well said, Access-Air. I hope that this topic can end soon. -Will
95 SIN_SQ: If 23 deaf teenagers cannot be accepted on the flight, how about 23 deaf independent adults? 23 deaf adults also pose threat to the safety of the plan
96 SafetyDude: If 23 deaf teenagers cannot be accepted on the flight, how about 23 deaf independent adults? 23 deaf adults also pose threat to the safety of the plan
97 Smcmac32msn: Buses and trains do not have the same rules as aviation. In aviation, more people can get hurt in a single accident then in a bus or train accident Ex
98 NoUFO: SafetyDude, All that you have said is that I use "wild assumptions" and you have never really told me what these said "wild assumptions" are. I have s
99 FlyboyOz: NoUFO...There is no excuse about being deaf in the hearing world. Deaf people should learn to communicate and talk with hearing people. They should le
100 AirframeAS: It seems to me that the MAJORITY of you are very ignorant when it comes to deaf people, in general life and when flying. Do some research before you m
101 Compuz1: I would like to thank a select few people on this board who although aren't deaf or hard of hearing, are sticking by our side. I was especially insult
102 777236ER: Beg pardon? What safety information? Those printed on safety cards? In that case: Deaf people are not dumb and they don't need their ears to follow sa
103 AirframeAS: 23 deaf people wouldn't hear any PA briefing to, say, brace, evacuate, not to evacuate or even not to evacuate by one door. We dont need to hear that.
104 777236ER: We dont need to hear that. When other pax do something, we follow suit. Simple as that. Nuff said! But there's 23 of them. Hence if you're all seated
105 AirframeAS: But there's 23 of them. Hence if you're all seated in one place you won't know what to do. This statement says it all. Unfortunately, Mr. 777236ER thi
106 777236ER: Unfortunately, Mr. 777236ER thinks that deaf pax are just plain dumb, stupid and retarded No, not at all. But that doesn't give way to the fact that d
107 SafetyDude: Excuse me? How so? I understand that the biggest bus holds what, about 100 people (double-deckers in London), but a train can hold 200-300 people, dep
108 NoUFO: Let us look at two examples of a crash. Let us say that a car crashes and some people in other cars die, let us 15. Now, look at 9-11. Thousands of pe
109 777236ER: That's crazy! Have you ever seen a safety demonstration? all you need to understand them is an IQ > 10. And to be able to hear. F/As have to show deaf
110 NoUFO: And to be able to hear. F/As have to show deaf people where the safety cards are - ten minutes wasted. What a crap, really. You need either ears OR ey
111 SafetyDude: I understand this is completely of the track. Don't even think of mixing terror attacks with a "usual" emergency case. Those are two examples of an em
112 777236ER: What a crap, really. You need either ears OR eyes. That's why the IATA says that people who are both blind AND deaf may need an escort. And IATA also
113 Kyril: Compuz1 Please accept my excuses if my uses of the word valid disturbed you. I used it in English as the words "valide" and "invalide" in French stric
114 NoUFO: Me:: I understand this is completely of the track. Don't even think of mixing terror attacks with a "usual" emergency case. S-D: Those are two example
115 Smcmac32msn: Given that everyone has to be TOLD where the safety information is, it would require F/As going round to all of them showing them. Hmmm..... 23 deaf p
116 Smcmac32msn: We dont need to hear that. When other pax do something, we follow suit. Simple as that. Nuff said! The problem is that the FA may need to give many co
117 Big777jet: Please lock the thread. I'm tired of this problem with deaf. Deaf are not dumb! It made me so mad! Stop talking about this. Airlines or staff are idio
118 SafetyDude: Sorry, I'm imcapable of thinking equally stupid, so I'll refrain from responding to this gibberish. Thinking? What has happened is history. In case of
119 SafetyDude: Whats the difference between 1 and 23? They would all see one person doing it, and the 22 others follow suit...... Do you really think these kids didn
120 Smcmac32msn: A group of twenty-three should have been accompanied. So that would make, what 24 or 25? Now what do they do? And by the way, if somebody decides to c
121 Smcmac32msn: If you read the very original post, you would have known that the deaf passengers were unaccompanied. On AA's safety videos, they have a person in the
122 Samurai 777: Smcmac32msn, The deaf passengers were likely using British Sign Language (BSL), not ASL. ASL is American Sign Language and is spoken by the deaf commu
123 SafetyDude: So that would make, what 24 or 25? Now what do they do? They but another ticket. It is, after all, for their safety. Here's my advanced reply to it...
124 SafetyDude: The deaf passengers were likely using British Sign Language (BSL), not ASL. ASL is American Sign Language and is spoken by the deaf community in Canad
125 Smcmac32msn: Samurai 777 - THANKS for the info.... now I'll know for next time. Don't worry about it. You learn something new every day! I still think that they sh
126 SafetyDude: I still think that they should have asked for somebody over the PA to speak BSL (thanks Samurai) to these kids. Not only would the chances have been s
127 Compuz1: And to be able to hear. F/As have to show deaf people where the safety cards are - ten minutes wasted. ---Everyone knows where they are, whether in fi
128 Smcmac32msn: WILL - What situations don't they cover on the cards or in the safety brief? That would make all of us unfit to fly without an "escort" because we don
129 NoUFO: Are you not aware of the difference between tourists and deaf people? One more time: Deaf people face exactly the same problems tourists do when they
130 Kyril: ARGH!!! Can we stop talking about what happened being good or wrong? Can we ask FA's from everywhere HOW that situation should be handled. By coutries
131 SafetyDude: ---My nephew is from Tel Aviv. He speaks NO ENGLISH WHATSOEVER! Try Africans, many of them don't speak English. That's hypocrisy that you assume that
132 767Lover: I think you all will find the following newspaper articles interesting: http://www.deaflaw.org/newspaper_articles_related_to_la.htm/ I quote portions
133 Jmc757: It seems that this very unfortunate situation has been caused by a number of failures, perhaps the biggest being the fact that Iberia did not know the
134 SafetyDude: It seems that this very unfortunate situation has been caused by a number of failures, perhaps the biggest being the fact that Iberia did not know the
135 NoUFO: 767lover, again, special needs for deaf people are exactly the same as they are for other passengers who lack language skills to understand announceme
136 Ibe1238: Before writing, most of you should have to read a little bit. I'm not going to post here our internal rules about DP but I post AENA's. **************
137 SafetyDude: again, special needs for deaf people are exactly the same as they are for other passengers who lack language skills to understand announcements being
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1267 posts, 
From Spain, joined Oct 2001, 460 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, 
From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4281 posts, 
From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7796 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
