Napping AC FO bumps controls.

[mark_]

This goes back a little bit but I'm wondering if this was discussed or if anybody knows more about this.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/pregnant- ... -1.1240385

Mark.

[Sidebar]

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repor ... 1f0012.asp

[mark_]

Thanks Sidebar...that clears things up.

M.

[crazyaviator]

From the first article:

When she contacted Air Canada, the airline offered a ticket refund. After almost a year of negotiations, the company agreed to cover some physiotherapy bills and days of missed work for a total of $3,500 and 75,000 Aeroplan points. This amount, Jarigina-Sahoo said, won’t cover her continuing medical expenses.

Air Canada said it was "fair and equitable" and required her to sign a document releasing the airline from any future lawsuit.

But after learning that the incident was caused by pilot error and not turbulence, Jarigina-Sahoo said she was shocked.

"It made me angry because I felt like it has all been covered up and nobody spoke the truth, nobody really cared about those passengers who flew."

Lying bastards !! Typical of pilots to cover up their failures but the sad part is that it wasnt "an act of God" but a screw up and the Airline should have come clean and compensated the injured!!

[phillyfan]

Keep you seat belt on while seated. Pretty sure she was told that. Maybe being bounced off the ceiling will help her listen in the future?

[crazyaviator]

I agree that its wise to belt up when seated and when i lay down, im still able to get the belt around my body. This issue was not turbulence, it was pilot error. Do cops multi-task when other drivers cant ? do flight attendants wander about the cabin when the seat belts sign is on ?
Maybe all pax and attendants should be issued pampers and lockable belts just in case the pilots F__k up ?
If your sitting down and the belt sign is on and you dont belt up, you should be liable for your injuries UNLESS the pilots screw up. Can a pax take a leak when the belt sign is on or do they go in their pants?

[Aviatard]

You're required to wear your seat belt when instructed by the crew. She didn't. That's her fault. She shouldn't get a dime from Air Canada.

[Rookie50]

You're required to wear your seat belt when instructed by the crew. She didn't. That's her fault. She shouldn't get a dime from Air Canada.

You're kidding, right?

What relevance does the sign being on have to what actually occurred?

What is AC's responsibility for withholding information?

If I was a judge I wouldn't look too kindly on AC for that, seatbelt on or not.

The pilot made a gross error which directly resulted in multiple injuries, and this information was withheld for over a year.

The company is liable. Black letter law. If I was a lawyer, which I'm not., I'd love to discuss it with a jury.

[Aviatard]

What relevance does the sign being on have to what actually occurred?

What is AC's responsibility for withholding information?

The relevance is that she didn't obey the direction to wear her seat-belt. Consequently she was thrown from her seat and injured. At some point you have to take responsibility for your own actions, or lack thereof. Considering she made a big deal out of being pregnant and worrying about her baby, I don't know why she made such a careless choice. It's a clear cause and effect.

[Vern]

The report said that many of the passengers were sleeping. Do flight attendants go around and wake up passengers when they can't visibly see their seatbelt fastened? Maybe she was sleeping when the seatbelt sign came on and was asleep when it happened.

I agree that she probably needs to take some responsibility for not following the crews instructions but this is just a possible scenario.

[Rookie50]

What relevance does the sign being on have to what actually occurred?

What is AC's responsibility for withholding information?

The relevance is that she didn't obey the direction to wear her seat-belt. Consequently she was thrown from her seat and injured. At some point you have to take responsibility for your own actions, or lack thereof. Considering she made a big deal out of being pregnant and worrying about her baby, I don't know why she made such a careless choice. It's a clear cause and effect.

I agree with following directions. I am also far from the one to endorse lawsuits against companies for too hot coffee. I'm big on personal responsibilty.

However -- speaking from a legal point of view ---

If I don't wear my seat belt, (which I continuously do both as pilot and passenger on any aircraft) it does not exempt the company from liability due to incompetence of its agents. In short, the company must also take responsibilty for its conduct, training, and the conduct of its agents. And, personally I think witholding the actual cause of the excursion for a year is reprehensible, without consequence.

By your standard, assuming the AC Halifax accident is shown to be human error in some form, (a reasonable assumption -- although we don't know whose) -- any injures to passengers not wearing their belts, or having their trays in the wrong position at the moment of the accident, would also not be the fault of the company.

It's an unreasonable standard which does not hold companies to account. Mistakes by clients do not exempt companies from exercising a proper duty of care in services provided.

[Gannet167]

If the seat belt sign was on for landing in Halifax and a passenger was not wearing it, they carry a portion of the blame for their injuries. What amount is something for the courts, precedence, insurance industry norms etc. but if you're not following the direction of the crew and get injured, at least some of the blame is yours. You probably wont get as much money as the passenger with the same injuries who was wearing a seat belt, nor should you.

Granted, passengers will need to get up and use the washroom. That's an acceptable risk that has to be managed as people can't hold their bladders forever, nor should they empty them at their seat. However, for takeoff and landing you need to be in your seat with your belt fastened - as this is a critical phase of flight and there is greater risk.

People forget that they're in a metal tube, travelling at nearly 1000 km/h, miles above the surface of the earth. I get a kick out of how passengers take off their belts as soon as possible whenever they can, as if it's an act of defiance. They remove them just because they think they can. Personally, I loosen mine a little but wear it all the time that I possibly can. I know how little it takes at speed to generate significant G loads, either due to flight controls or turbulence. The travelling public are just so ignorant, entitled and molly coddled by regulation and a litigious culture, there's no notion of personal responsibility or common sense.

Air Canada certainly has some of this situation to own, but a passenger so stupid as to sit in a plane an not wear a seat belt - yeah she also owns some of the end result herself.

Louis CK said it well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFsOUbZ0Lr0

[Rookie50]

If the seat belt sign was on for landing in Halifax and a passenger was not wearing it, they carry a portion of the blame for their injuries. What amount is something for the courts, precedence, insurance industry norms etc. but if you're not following the direction of the crew and get injured, at least some of the blame is yours. You probably wont get as much money as the passenger with the same injuries who was wearing a seat belt, nor should you.

Granted, passengers will need to get up and use the washroom. That's an acceptable risk that has to be managed as people can't hold their bladders forever, nor should they empty them at their seat. However, for takeoff and landing you need to be in your seat with your belt fastened - as this is a critical phase of flight and there is greater risk.

People forget that they're in a metal tube, travelling at nearly 1000 km/h, miles above the surface of the earth. I get a kick out of how passengers take off their belts as soon as possible whenever they can, as if it's an act of defiance. They remove them just because they think they can. Personally, I loosen mine a little but wear it all the time that I possibly can. I know how little it takes at speed to generate significant G loads, either due to flight controls or turbulence. The travelling public are just so ignorant, entitled and molly coddled by regulation and a litigious culture, there's no notion of personal responsibility or common sense.

Air Canada certainly has some of this situation to own, but a passenger so stupid as to sit in a plane an not wear a seat belt - yeah she also owns some of the end result herself.

Louis CK said it well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFsOUbZ0Lr0

The key distinction I think can be agreed on is "some". And I agree with that -- but not "all".

If that was the case by extension companies would be (automatically) absolved from all responsibilty in all accidents, road rail or air, regardless of seriousness or cause, simply because the passenger was stupid. That's an irrational argument , which is my point.

[Gannet167]

I agree.

[crazyaviator]

By your standard, assuming the AC Halifax accident is shown to be human error in some form, (a reasonable assumption -- although we don't know whose) -- any injures to passengers not wearing their belts, or having their trays in the wrong position at the moment of the accident, would also not be the fault of the company.

I was going to say the same thing good one !!

Another example,,, Pilot screws up everyone dies,, do the ones wearing belts get a bigger compensation for their families??

[crazyaviator]

Another example : A pregnant woman has to go to the washroom, seatbelt light has been on for 2 hours already. she either 1) goes in her knickers or 2) asks permission to go potty or 3) gets up and goes to the loo all by herself ( which is legal BTW )
the pilot mucks up and she is hurt,,,,what to do ?
OR
Turbulence happens big time and she is injured,,,,,, what to do ?

[pelmet]

Wouldn't it be cool to have a thousand hours flight time logged in your logbook while sleeping. Maybe someday.

Anyways......If I were deciding to sleep while in the pilots seat(not that I ever have).....I would put the seat fully aft. Sometimes people make sudden movements while asleep.

[photofly]

Wouldn't it be cool to have a thousand hours flight time logged in your logbook while sleeping. Maybe someday.

Anyways......If I were deciding to sleep while in the pilots seat(not that I ever have).....I would put the seat fully aft. Sometimes people make sudden movements while asleep.

I thought that was already a requirement of the crew rest programme.

[Donald]

Do flight attendants go around and wake up passengers when they can't visibly see their seatbelt fastened?

Yes, they are supposed to.

[mbav8r]

Bottom line and something a jury should consider, if she was wearing her seatbelt, as instructed and signage on, would she have been injured. No, or at least very unlikely as it appears the only injuries were to people not wearing them!
The FO was acting on what he perceived to be threat, which could happen anytime just like turbulence.
I personally feel that the seatbelt sign should always be on and maybe we could change the no smoking sign to a turbulence indication of some sort because the announcement of "it is recommended that you wear you belt at all times when seated" does not seem to resonate with pax. You don't take off your seatbelt in your car once you're cruising down the highway, anything could happen beyond your control and is the reason I wear mine at all times, regardless of the sign.

Passengers had been briefed to always wear their seatbelts when seated. Although the seatbelt sign was on and an announcement was made regarding potential turbulence, several passengers were injured during the event because they were not wearing their seatbelt. Some passengers may not be aware of the inherent risks in not wearing a seatbelt at all times when seated.