Airfarewatchdog
Welcome!
  • Real deals from your departure city
  • Verified by our Dealhounds

Did British Airways go too far to "protect" an unaccompanied minor?

rss link Airfarewatchblog


Did British Airways go too far to "protect" an unaccompanied minor?

Posted by David Landsel, Airfarewatchdog.com on Thursday, January 21, 2010

One passenger thinks so.

Mirko Fischer probably wasn’t expecting to be singled out as a potential pedophile on his British Airways flight out of London’s Gatwick Airport last April.

Fischer, a businessman who was heading home to Luxembourg with his pregnant wife Stephanie, took his seat on the plane – in the middle of the row, between his significant other and a 12-year-old boy he’d never met.

Just before takeoff and without warning, a flight attendant leaned in and gave Mr. Fischer the bad news: He’d need to change his seat. Refusing to do so, the attendant explained that the plane would not depart until he complied. Understandably humiliated and embarrassed, Fischer moved, but that was just the beginning – the 33-year-old hedge fund manager is now suing British Airways on grounds of sex discrimination.

“This policy is branding all men as perverts for no reason,” Fischer told London’s Daily Mail; the case will be heard next month. Fischer says he will donate any compensation he receives to the UK's National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children.

Does British Airways really have a policy that demands cabin crew arbitrarily reseat passengers it deems unfit companions for unaccompanied minors on its flights? Like all airlines, it no doubt has strict guidelines that include taking special precautions that the child is not lost in the shuffle. The most typical security measure is to seat solo-flying children as close to a galley and cabin crew as possible, in order to keep an eye on them.

JetBlue spokesperson Mateo Lleras says that the airline will generally try to keep the unaccompanied minor “somewhere close to the front of the plane” and in plain sight.

Tim Smith, a representative for American Airlines, says that the airline does “routinely place the unaccompanied minors in seating areas where our flight attendants can easily monitor and interact with the children.”

American would not, he states, “routinely move male (or female) passengers away from unaccompanied minors without cause.”

Then again, there’s always the possibility that British Airways does not do so either.

New York-based BA spokesman John Lampl couldn’t go into details due to pending litigation, but did supply an official statement from the airline saying that there was an internal investigation currently underway, and that the airline had been “looking at a potential settlement by meeting the customer's claim before this issue received any media coverage.”  

But isn't it a bit late for that?

How would you react in such a situation?

Categories: Airline Industry News

Post a Comment


(Please do not use your real name - this screen name will be your public identity on Airfarewatchdog.com)
(Your email address will not display in post)



Actually, he was with his wife and sat between his pregnant wife and the unaccompanied minor. Dumb move on the airline's part unless a similar name, not necessarily Mr. Fischer, was on a sexual predator list.
by TY_HI on Monday, February 01, 2010
Does anyone actually read the story before commenting (mrsklamc)? He was with his wife and separated by the child; not all that uncommon when seats are assigned.
by ermaher on Monday, January 25, 2010
This doesn't smell right. Something is missing. Airlines do routinely move UMs for the aforementioned reason. Plenty of passengers take things personally and are socially-challenged.
by John Smith on Monday, January 25, 2010
My 8 year old granddaughter flew from Sydney to San Francisco unaccompanied on United. We paid an extra $100 for her to fly "solo". She was put in the middle between 2 men...During the whole 17 hour flight she was never checked on by a flight attendant and never offered a meal...maybe I should start some litigation with United about this.
by lovemylife on Thursday, January 21, 2010
I think you read it wrong, it just says he was with his pregnant wife, not heading home to her. That "policy" just screams wrong to me. It's just as bad as racially profiling anyone with tanned skin as a terrorist.
by chemical_echo on Thursday, January 21, 2010
He was WITH his wife. This is going way way too far. I hope he wins his suit. My husband would have been mortified.
by SallyMo on Thursday, January 21, 2010
I don't understand- how was he between his 'significant other' and the 12 year old if he was headed home to his pregnant wife?
by mrsklamc on Thursday, January 21, 2010
© 1998-2012 Smarter Travel Media LLC. All Rights Reserved Privacy Statement | Terms of Use
Advertisement
http://rd.airfarewatchdog.com/?ad_user_tracking=%5Bsource%3D%2Ctaparam%3D%2Csupmt%3D%5D