WestJet allows stranger to walk five-year-old girl off fligh

[THEICEMAN]

This is not good for P.R.

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/posting. ... topic&f=49

OTTAWA (CBC) - The parents of a five-year-old girl travelling alone are furious with WestJet for breaking its own guidelines and allowing a stranger to accompany the child off a flight.

Sara-Maude St-Louis, 5, was taking her first plane ride Thursday from Edmonton, where she lives with her mother, to Montreal to see her father. The parents paid a special fee to ensure someone from the airline would look after her.

Her mother and stepfather took Sara-Maude to the gate under the impression that WestJet staff members would check on her during the flight and then escort the little girl off the plane when she arrived at her destination, which is the company's policy for unaccompanied minors.

Instead, nobody checked on her at all, said her father Steve St-Louis. He's furious with the airline and says Sara-Maude could have been kidnapped or hurt if not for a Good Samaritan who sat next to her.

Pierre Cataford, a father of four from Montreal, played games and drew pictures with Sara-Maude during the long flight.

The girl was wearing a large VIP tag around her neck, but Cataford told CBC News that he did not see flight attendants check on her.

When the plane landed in Montreal, Cataford said he waited for someone to escort Sara-Maude but no one came, so he walked the five-year-old off the plane as crew members waved goodbye to them.

Sara-Maude's father said he was shocked to see a stranger walking into the arrivals area with his daughter.

"She was alone. Nobody came to see her. Nobody asked if she was okay. I mean it was terrifying. It was unbelievable," St-Louis said from his home in Pontiac, Que.

WestJet confirmed it's investigating the incident and issued a statement Friday: "The situation is of utmost concern for WestJet and we are taking this matter very seriously. We have apologized to the parents of the child and are doing all that we can to ensure that this does not happen in the future."

No federal rules for unaccompanied minors

Canada does not have a policy that makes it mandatory for airlines to look after children who travel alone.

"Canadian laws are set out that way as we speak right now and they give all the flexibility to air carriers to establish their own rules," said Jadrino Huot of the Canadian Transportation Agency.

The agency said it asked Air Canada to clarify its policy on unaccompanied minors last month after a 13-year-old girl was not escorted by airline staff to meet her mother in Toronto's Pearson International Airport.

Sara-Maude's parents say they plan to sue WestJet.

The airline is flying Sara-Maude's mother and stepfather to Montreal to pick her up at the end of the month, and the parents said they won't let the girl fly alone again until she's much older.

[altiplano]

/

[Dust Devil]

Westjet dropped the ball but the real test will be what they will do to fix the problem. my guess it will be dealt with.

[5400AirportRdSouth]

Not that it excuses WJ for an obvious fumble, but I suspect when the FA's see the girl happily talking, playing games and drawing pictures with a man, the assumption would be that that's her father and she is not in fact an UM.

I'm wondering if they still make them wear the big pouch round their necks with their doc's and what not, identifying them at a glance as UM?

Regardless, it should have been noted on the pax manifest, and the FA in charge should have been notified by the gate agent.

I remember it as being a chain-of-custody deal with the paperwork in the pouch and everyone had to sign off as accepting the UM and then passing them off to the next person in line.

I'm sure several people at WJ are examining their procedures in pretty close detail right about now.

[Guido]

The girl was wearing a large VIP tag around her neck, but Cataford told CBC News that he did not see flight attendants check on her.

Yepper... they still do, it would seem.

I know AC does that chain of custody thing as well, there was always somebody - even on flights with no FA, a pilot would walk the kids right to the terminal to the parents.

[SYT_YYZ]

This was a ball dropped ya..
Also, I know from my company's policies (I escort UM's all the time, check them in, take em through customs, help them find bags and frop em off... etc) that this likely wouldnt have happened..
Firstly we wont let a um be seated next to a male passenger. (I know this sounds 'sexist' maybe.. and in this case it was a nice man she sat beside) but it is simply policy and as a soon to be mum frankly I would prefure my little girl sit next to a woman than a man on a flight.
Also.. once checked in and given a UM VIP form to wear, we have a strict 'who is responsible for this child' system. we all have to sign the form as the child is passed off and brief the next party about any special info - ie allergies, medical conditions, or just first flight anxiety. So when she goes tot he gate.. the gate agent introduces themselves to the child, signs the form and they are on the hook for the child's safety until the next pass off (to the in-charge FA) again an introduction is made, and the form is signed. this process continues until the child is met by the parents and the form is signed the the parent who must present photo identification. This way at NO time can anyone say "i didnt know there was a UM" or "I didnt know they were left in my charge"

When the system is as strict as it is, and adhering to policy in this area is strongly enforced, there is little room for error. At no time should there be any confusion. I applaude my company on its effectivness in this area, and management for stepping in even, when there isnt a body around to accept a child at the next point of transfer. I would not hesitate to send my child with my company at anytime because I think they truly understand that children they agree to accept are the most precious cargo they will ever carry.

[2milefinal]

Why did the man who was helping her not say something to the FAs?
I mean really, I am sitting beside a 5 yr old (and she seams to be alone) and notice that FAs are not taking care of her, I am not just gong to start being their uncle.

I always hated taking UMs onboard and I wouldnt send my 5yr old on any airline. JMO

[Driving Rain]

My 9 year old Granddaughter came unaccompanied by Westjet Vancouver to Winnipeg in mid November. A male FA brought her to me, he checked my ID and had me sign a form letter. I booked online paid the extra $ 50.00 and phoned the 1-800 number to confirm. I couldn't be happier with the service they provided.

[2R]

He took a big risk walking off an airplane with a child that was not his .Was he looking to get tasered ???

[2milefinal]

I always hated taking UMs onboard and I wouldnt send my 5yr old on any airline. JMO

Just to clarify. I have nothing against any of the airlines when it comes to the UM thing. Its just me thinking that putting a 5yr old on to a flight to go across the country is to young. Then again I might be a little over-protective.

[invertedattitude]

Why is there two threads on this, please use the freakin search function, there's on in the WestJet forums.

[2milefinal]

thanks for the info.

[altiplano]

/

[invertedattitude]

So should you look through every forum every time you want to post something? Lots of people don't look in the WJ forum.

"search"

I didn't mean actually scroll through all the forums.

[Rockie]

Working as I do in this industry I don't have the luxury of ignorance when it comes to operations. What I always found disconcerting about this issue is the odd occasion when an aircraft doesn't land where it's planned to and passengers end up spending the night in a hotel. Scary thing for little ones without their parents or guardians and somehow a company representative just isn't the same thing. That's why I never sent my kids unaccompanied, but due to financial constraints I can understand why people do.

I'm sure Westjet is taking steps to make sure this doesn't happen again.

[GilletteNorth]

How much they going to sue for? 20 mill? Hope not...

If WJ charges a fee to provide a service and then doesn't provide it I can see them getting sued, hope the parents don't get big dollar signs in their eyes though... it wasn't THEM being unaccompanied.

[altiplano]

/

[CD]

So should you look through every forum every time you want to post something? Lots of people don't look in the WJ forum.

"search"

I didn't mean actually scroll through all the forums.

For me, I just use this little gem at the top of the main page:

View posts since last visit

Works every time...

[BigB]

Sorry CD,

Bit of advice. If your agenda is to spew info against an airline in which you have a problem with, please inform all with a balanced perspective. From what I can see, you are an AC F/A and or a TC employee.

Comments CD..........?

[fogghorn]

As far as I can tell, the "good samaritan" had no business walking that child off the aircraft. He walked past a flight attendant leaving, why the hell did he not inform the flight attendant at that point that the kid was a um? This guy probably committed an offence the minute he left the aircraft with her. He could have also informed one of the csa's while leaving the deplaning area. That was a bullshit move.

[Dust Devil]

As far as I can tell, the "good samaritan" had no business walking that child off the aircraft. He walked past a flight attendant leaving, why the hell did he not inform the flight attendant at that point that the kid was a um? This guy probably committed an offence the minute he left the aircraft with her. He could have also informed one of the csa's while leaving the deplaning area. That was a bullshit move.

I would say the crew showed some incompetence. Would it have been better to leave the child with an incompetent crew. I would imagine that the guy likely had no idea he was doing anything wrong he was just looking out for the best interests of the child and that was to get the child to her parents. Everyone worries so much about the one sicko out there when the vast majority of people out there are pretty good. At least I like to think so. It's just that all you ever hear about on the news is the sicko's so everyone assumes that everyone else is one. The guy did good. In an age where people pass other people after they hae been beat up on the streets or pass by people who are broke down on the highway I think it's good to see someone who didn't turn a blind eye.

[Guido]

I would say the crew showed some incompetence. Would it have been better to leave the child with an incompetent crew. I would imagine that the guy likely had no idea he was doing anything wrong he was just looking out for the best interests of the child and that was to get the child to her parents. Everyone worries so much about the one sicko out there when the vast majority of people out there are pretty good. At least I like to think so. It's just that all you ever hear about on the news is the sicko's so everyone assumes that everyone else is one. The guy did good. In an age where people pass other people after they hae been beat up on the streets or pass by people who are broke down on the highway I think it's good to see someone who didn't turn a blind eye.

Keep an eye out for the horses of the apocolypse, folks... I agree with you 100%, DD.

[fogghorn]

I think this fellow had a bit of "watch me be a hero syndrome" on his mind. He may have thought he was doing the right thing, but he scared the crap out of the girls parent(s) by showing up at arrivals with her.

[JakeYYZ]

Dust Devil wrote:
I would say the crew showed some incompetence. Would it have been better to leave the child with an incompetent crew. I would imagine that the guy likely had no idea he was doing anything wrong he was just looking out for the best interests of the child and that was to get the child to her parents. Everyone worries so much about the one sicko out there when the vast majority of people out there are pretty good. At least I like to think so. It's just that all you ever hear about on the news is the sicko's so everyone assumes that everyone else is one. The guy did good. In an age where people pass other people after they hae been beat up on the streets or pass by people who are broke down on the highway I think it's good to see someone who didn't turn a blind eye.

That’s a stretch.
The guy is sitting next to the little girl, who is traveling as an UM, and no doubt
clearly marked as an UM. The FA’s, I’m certain, would have checked on the little girl
on numerous occasions in-flight ..Crayons, juice, water blah blah. UM’s receive
lots of attention. There is no doubt in my mind that they would have asked
her to remain seated, at destination, until all other passengers had deplaned.
There is no doubt in my mind that this guy KNEW she was an UM.
The only way this guy could deplane with the little girl, would be to have her UM
necklace removed or covered in some fashion. The UM necklace is a RED FLAG,
to anyone in the scheduled carrier business.
Could be I’m wrong.. but, I call BS. There’s something very fishy here.

[Pygmie]

How much they going to sue for? 20 mill? Hope not...

If WJ charges a fee to provide a service and then doesn't provide it I can see them getting sued, hope the parents don't get big dollar signs in their eyes though... it wasn't THEM being unaccompanied.

Just read in the paper today, parents are asking for $70,000 in compensation from Westjet.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Edmonto ... 27265.html