This is the main V-Flyer Forum for general discussion of everything related to flying with Virgin-branded travel companies.
#468459 by slinky09
21 Feb 2009, 19:41
quote:Originally posted by Slipperman
The bar closing a couple of hours before landing doesn't sound too bad to me. After all, it's been open for 8!

It may be the best option but I for one do get pissed off when this happens - because I tend to spend the first 4 hours of a flight working, request my meal later and look forward to relaxing with a film and a drink toward the end of my flight. So the muppets who spoil it for all really cheese me off!
#468465 by Nottingham Nick
21 Feb 2009, 21:08
quote:Originally posted by slinky09
So the muppets who spoil it for all really cheese me off!


Welcome to my world. [;)]
#468475 by RichardMannion
21 Feb 2009, 23:39
quote:Originally posted by buns

funny how UK Citizens always forget that elsewhere around the Globe police are known as law enforcement - expect to be tasered and have a gun thrust at you if you misbehave[}:)]

buns


And as for Brazilian electrcians, well... [}:)]
#468481 by buns
22 Feb 2009, 00:32
quote:Originally posted by RichardMannion
quote:Originally posted by buns

funny how UK Citizens always forget that elsewhere around the Globe police are known as law enforcement - expect to be tasered and have a gun thrust at you if you misbehave[}:)]

buns


And as for Brazilian electrcians, well... [}:)]


Touche[:D]

Your wicked sense of humour cracks me up

buns
#468486 by esf666
22 Feb 2009, 02:00
in the old days you used to call the steward to your seat and then be served a drink, if we returned to this and stopped serving anyone anything other than soft drinks who went to the galley then we could control them more - not completely of course.
#468490 by ilikebluesmarties
22 Feb 2009, 11:05
And how many crew prefer taking drinks to seats over serving them at the galley's? If that rule came in, it would be dropped faster than a lead balloon.

IMHO When a passenger gets totally bladdered from the onboard drinks then it is no body's fault but the cabin crews, they are there for passenger safety mainly. By getting these idiots steaming drunk they are not carrying out their main duty. If they can't or won't refuse people alcohol that are clearly beyond control, then they shouldn't serve it in the first place(i.e. find another job)

And before you go shooting me down, I am cabin crew and I take full responsibility at my airline if I cause a similar situation(which I have once, 3 years ago)
#468493 by Sealink
22 Feb 2009, 11:59
I don't think anyone has said that the crew don't have a duty, but it is often a difficult call. It happens in hotels too.
But this idea that you can get steaming drunk and abdicate all responsibility to someone else is wrong and I think that it's used too often to justify excessive drinking.
#468496 by slinky09
22 Feb 2009, 13:08
quote:Originally posted by ilikebluesmarties

IMHO When a passenger gets totally bladdered from the onboard drinks then it is no body's fault but the cabin crews', they are there for passenger safety mainly. By getting these idiots steaming drunk they are not carrying out their main duty. If they can't or won't refuse people alcohol that are clearly beyond control, then they shouldn't serve it in the first place(i.e. find another job).

And before you go shooting me down, I am cabin crew and I take full responsibility at my airline if I cause a similar situation(which I have once, 3 years ago)


Thanks for the perspective, however I don't agree. You see, when I get drunk instead of blaming Mr Tanqueray for his marvellous blending of gin and a bar person's ability to mix an excellent dry martini, the blame is entirely mine. You see, I am the one who drinks it.
#468500 by virginboy747
22 Feb 2009, 13:22
Thanks slinky. Was just wondering if ilikebluesmarties has ever worked a LAS flight?
If so I'd be interested to know how:

a) you can stop someone going to one of the other three galleys on the aircraft
b) you can stop someone else getting drinks for them
c) you can stop them drinking their own alcohol if they're doing it out of sight so you dont know they have it

Of course we're not going to serve someone if they are clearly drunk, only a lunatic would do that. The problem is assessing how much alcohol each passenger can take before becoming drunk. As I've said one pax can have several beers and still be fine, while someone else only needs a couple and they're slaughtered. How can you know each person's limit? If people are becoming loud and abusive we stop serving them, but it's usually too late as that last drink will be the one that tips the balance. We are in an impossible situation with free drinks bars all flight. You can warn people and have a quiet word with them and of course stop serving them, but we also have to rely on people using their common sense. I'm sorry but it' not just the crews fault.
Also if one crewmember gives a pax ten beers then obviously that crewmemeber is being irresponsble. But if the pax gets a beer from each of the sixteen crew-members how are the other crew to know? It is almost impossible to monitor until you see pax starting to get lary. We dont have a chart in the galleys to write down what each of the 451 pax has had! These situations will keep occurring until we stop having free bars, which I cant see happening in the near future.
#468501 by Nottingham Nick
22 Feb 2009, 13:27
quote:Originally posted by slinky09
You see, when I get drunk instead of blaming Mr Tanqueray for his marvellous blending of gin and a bar person's ability to mix an excellent dry martini, the blame is entirely mine. You see, I am the one who drinks it.

That's where you are going wrong. We now live in a society where you can sue Mr Tanqueray for giving you a hangover and not making it clear enough to you that by drinking his product, you will get drunk. [V]

When you have sued him, move onto the company that owns the pub / supermarket that supplied the bottle, they must have breached health and safety regs by not giving you a written warning of possible negative consequences of your actions.

Blaming other people for your own guilty pleasures / bad habits / carelessness / weakness / stupidity / addictions is the way to go now.

Remember - everything you do wrong is someone else's fault - and 'Where there is blame, there's a claim!'

Nick
#468506 by Slipperman
22 Feb 2009, 14:04
quote:Originally posted by Nottingham Nick
quote:Originally posted by slinky09
You see, when I get drunk instead of blaming Mr Tanqueray for his marvellous blending of gin and a bar person's ability to mix an excellent dry martini, the blame is entirely mine. You see, I am the one who drinks it.

That's where you are going wrong. We now live in a society where you can sue Mr Tanqueray for giving you a hangover and not making it clear enough to you that by drinking his product, you will get drunk. [V]

When you have sued him, move onto the company that owns the pub / supermarket that supplied the bottle, they must have breached health and safety regs by not giving you a written warning of possible negative consequences of your actions.

Blaming other people for your own guilty pleasures / bad habits / carelessness / weakness / stupidity / addictions is the way to go now.

Remember - everything you do wrong is someone else's fault - and 'Where there is blame, there's a claim!'

Nick




[Off Topic]

Sooo.. Therefore, V-Flyer has now to pay for all my UC flights 'cos it was you bu$$ers that gave me the taste for it...Whoopee!

[/Off Topic}
#468508 by slinky09
22 Feb 2009, 14:22
quote:Originally posted by Nottingham Nick
quote:Originally posted by slinky09
You see, when I get drunk instead of blaming Mr Tanqueray for his marvellous blending of gin and a bar person's ability to mix an excellent dry martini, the blame is entirely mine. You see, I am the one who drinks it.

Blaming other people for your own guilty pleasures / bad habits / carelessness / weakness / stupidity / addictions is the way to go now.

Remember - everything you do wrong is someone else's fault - and 'Where there is blame, there's a claim!'

Nick

Thanks Nick. Silly me - I must try to forget personal culpability, not find it odd that in the USA a knife in a shop is stickered with 'beware sharp edge', and remember it's all about me me me me (mad larf, a haaaaaaaargh! [}:)])
#468522 by n/a
22 Feb 2009, 18:28
quote:Originally posted by RichardMannion
One reason why I will never fly direct to Vegas with VS, would rather go via LAX or SFO.


But, Your Grace, surely this would not happen in J?

GJ
#468537 by MarkedMan
22 Feb 2009, 23:51
The rational thing to do in a situation such as the Vegas run is to profit from it.

Henceforth, on all flights where Virgin deems there to be excessive drinking, leading or not to verbal and/or physical abuse of other passengers, drinks in all economy cabins will be subject to the following charge scale: small beer - 8 pounds; small wine - 10 pounds; small spirit bottle - 12 pounds. All drinks must be pre-ordered and pre-paid - there will be a single serving run. Only cash will be accepted, and only in the right change. EG - if all you have is a fiver, and two two-pound coins, no dice. Can't buy anything, tips not accepted, nor are overages.

All alcoholic duty free purchases will be stowed in overhead lockers with locks, which the cabin crew will secure prior to departure, and re-open 10 minutes before landing.

Any passenger visibly subjected to verbal or physical abuse in the judgment of cabin crew will receive a 25 pound voucher to be used on future Virgin flights.

The policy will remain in force for the minimum of one year, or until one year has elapsed from the latest report of drunken behavior.

Anyone wealthy enough to be able to afford UC will not of course be subject to this policy; that wouldn't be cricket. The situation with PE will be monitored after the policy is enforced in Economy, and if problems should arise in that cabin, it will also be subject to the new drinks policy.

You'll either be able to eliminate fuel surcharges from the Vegas run (to be replaced by a much more profitable type of fuel surcharge in the long run), or you will get rid of the drinking problem on the route, and save/make some money.

I'm sure with the kind of actuarial sophistication they have in the industry Virgin should be able to determine the right price point and pricing policy for the booze to achieve whatever outcome they desire. And, yes, of course you'll have the usual litany of complaints about how only rich people get to have fun, and how we're setting a policy for a few bad apples to the detriment of the majority, but, you know, that's tough. We're in a free market, and what counts is money. I mean, sixty years ago, the kinds of people getting rotten drunk in smelly bars in the nether regions of the old country wouldn't have gotten within 5000 miles of Vegas, so what do they want now, free booze? [;)]
#468541 by Tinkerbelle
23 Feb 2009, 01:43
quote:Originally posted by MarkedMan
small beer - 8 pounds; small wine - 10 pounds; small spirit bottle - 12 pounds



[:0][:0][:0]
#468555 by DarkAuror
23 Feb 2009, 10:51
quote:Originally posted by MarkedMan
small beer - 8 pounds; small wine - 10 pounds; small spirit bottle - 12 pounds.


As the 'free booze' is included in the cost of my ticket and I had to pay for alcohol then I would expect to see my ticket price to be cheaper.

What probably would happen is more people will try to sneak their alcohol in as large water bottles, well, it would work for vodka and gin.[}:)][}:)]
#468560 by pjh
23 Feb 2009, 11:33
quote:Originally posted by MarkedMan
Anyone wealthy enough to be able to afford UC will not of course be subject to this policy; that wouldn't be cricket.


So does that mean they'll be completely free to get hog whimperingly plastered and bother other passengers at will and without recourse? A sound policy for a sound Britain in my opinion

Not sure that the equation of cricket, wealth and decent behaviour holds up that well anymore. [:w]

Paul
#468561 by Nottingham Nick
23 Feb 2009, 11:37
quote:Originally posted by pjh
Not sure that the equation of cricket, wealth and decent behaviour holds up that well anymore. [:w]

LOL [oo][oo]
#468569 by RichardMannion
23 Feb 2009, 12:57
Maybe VS should just charge for alcohol full stop. Or maybe you get x number of free drinks per flight, dependent on class of travel.

Wonder how many people are already on their way before they even step on the plane? Maybe time to get a bit harsh at the time of boarding.

But then why let a few muppets spoil it for everyone else.
#468570 by Decker
23 Feb 2009, 13:02
yeah all those mojitos and champagnes in the clubhouse! Fie on them!
#468571 by daywalker
23 Feb 2009, 13:20
quote:Originally posted by RichardMannion
One reason why I will never fly direct to Vegas with VS, would rather go via LAX or SFO.


That's easier cos they just run around saying the champers has run out with 9hrs of the flight to go. [:(]
#468572 by RichardMannion
23 Feb 2009, 13:22
quote:Originally posted by daywalker
quote:Originally posted by RichardMannion
One reason why I will never fly direct to Vegas with VS, would rather go via LAX or SFO.


That's easier cos they just run around saying the champers has run out with 9hrs of the flight to go. [:(]


But I know why they have normally run out, it's the company that I travel with that is responsible.... [:w]
#468640 by MarkedMan
24 Feb 2009, 01:20
quote:Originally posted by pjh

Not sure that the equation of cricket, wealth and decent behaviour holds up that well anymore. [:w]


LOL! I need to stop reading Pelham Grenville ! Tho' I don't know that decent behaviour ever did [;)]
Virgin Atlantic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 176 guests

Itinerary Calendar