Morning:
20°c
Johnny Depp has become, in his young middle age, like a star of the movies’ golden period
Secret deal hatched by News of the World to hush up details of phone-tapping was sealed in a tiny room at the Royal Courts of Justice
More...
Mother booted off Easyjet flight for asking passengers to mind baby
Last updated at 22:37pm on 13.02.07
Grounded: Ann Jordan was told she couldn't fly because she had the wrong safety seat for daughter Azrael
TO Ann Jordan and her family, it was simply a kind gesture from a fellow passenger who wanted to help resolve a problem.
But instead of allowing one of her two young children to sit on the lap of another traveller during take-off and landing, the airline marched her off the plane.
The reason given by easyJet had nothing to do with safety on board the short-haul flight.
It was made, it was explained, because of child protection fears.
And even though Mrs Jordan was sitting next to the woman passenger who had offered to look after her three-month-old son, Kaleb, she was told it was too much of a risk.
Rather than the airline finding an alternative, the 35-year-old mother of two was hauled off the plane in tears and told to find a suitable booster seat before she could fly home.
"It was insulting, not just to me but to the passenger who wanted to help," she said. "I was absolutely disgusted. It's political correctness gone mad.
"I was in tears when they took me off the plane. I felt absolutely humiliated.
"The captain and the cabin crew just would not see sense and compromise. I couldn't believe it. It was just crazy."
Mrs Jordan was flying from Bristol to Newcastle last week after visiting family in Cardiff when the furore erupted.
Although she had arrived at the airport with a booster seat for her one-year-old daughter Azrael, it was only once on board that she realised it would not fit the plane's seats.
The woman passenger next to her happily offered to hold Kaleb while Azrael sat with Mrs Jordan.
But the captain claimed that because the woman passenger was a stranger it was possible – although highly unlikely – that Kaleb could be abused.
Scores of other travellers attempted to persuade the cabin crew to allow the family to continue their journey home but after a short delay they were removed from the flight.
She and her children then had to wait hours for another flight and were allowed to board only after Mrs Jordan's mother drove 60 miles through blizzards with a new safety seat.
Mrs Jordan, whose husband David, 31, is a computer engineer, said she would not fly easyJet again.
"When the captain said I couldn't travel because of child protection laws I couldn't believe it, she added.
"He could easily have allowed the baby to sit next to me on the kind lady's knee where I could keep a close eye, but he was too much of a jobsworth. So instead, he left us stranded."
Mrs Jordan had no trouble flying to Bristol because she had been with her sister, Clare Ash, 27, and each sat with a child on their knee.
But her sister was not with her for the return journey.
She now claims that easyJet did not specify the kind of safety chair she would need. She criticised the firm for having no replacement on board in the event of a problem.
EasyJet said: "Under the Child Protection Act, it is not easyJet's policy to allow another passenger to take responsibility for an infant to be seated on their lap for take-off or landing.
"We appreciate Mrs Jordan's Frustration, but these policies and our resulting actions were taken to ensure the safety of her and her children.
"The safety of our passengers is Our top priority, which is why we do not compromise."
Reader views (19)
Here's a sample of the latest views published.
Well explained, Farrah from Milwaukee, WI, and Frank from Wolverhampton. Those who choose to have children need to be responsible for their welfare/safety, etc, for such situations (including checking out rules such as these in advance e.g enquiring re booster seat size, etc), instead of hoping to "wing it" (excuse the pun) with a sympathy vote from others. By my reading, Easyjet acted in an entirely appropriate manner to its usual high standards.
- Fiona, Edinburgh
Farrah - You may have read the Easyjet website but you clearly did not read the article we are commenting on. I quote: "The reason given by easyJet had nothing to do with safety on board the short-haul flight. It was made, it was explained, because of child protection fears." In other words, fear that the child would be "abused" by the passenger on whose lap he would have been sitting!
- Adam, London, UK
Farrah, USA... are you an employee of easyjet?
You sound like a parrot for PR.
I hope you are never in the same position with 2 young babies because I have been and have had arrogant jobsworth staff on easyjet too.
Don't you know that a child is much more likely to be abused by a family member or someone they know rather than a stranger?
- Anne Black, Edinburgh
The mother should have been prepared and read the airlines rule and restrictions for passengers before taking off. Airlines have seatbelts for a reason! The child needed to be strapped in, not being held by someone else. What if the airplane skidded on the runway, or some other take-off disaster. The child would have been toast or seriously injured.
Please, remember the airlines truly have the child's best interest and safety at heart. The 'PC' is there because people do stupid things. It's like the 'don't drop this in water while plugged in' on the hairdryer, or the 'your beverage may be hot' for hot coffee. It seems simple, but its all there because someone doesn't get it.
Parents - your child's safety should be FIRST - it should not be an inconvenience.
I looked at the Easyjet website - it CLEARLY states the requirements for children on its webpage
- Farrah, Milwaukee, WI
A member of the cabin crew should have sat with this passenger and held one of the children during take off.
Shame on those who choose shame and humiliation, instead of caring and kindness. We should never tolerate any corporate 'police state' manners, especially involving our children!
Solution? BOYCOTT the airline company. Also, support the airlines which advertise for 'family friendly' philosophy.
- Tessa, Boston, USA
I've had many flights spoiled by screaming kids. Keep them off planes altogether or put all the families in a soundproofed section to themselves.
- Keith, Farringdon
Sleasy jet strikes again.
- Clive Drew, Sevenoaks UK
Young children must sit on an adults lap for take off and landing, wearing a child seat-belt that fixes on to the adults. The blame here rests with the airline. When a passenger is travelling with 2 young children the airline need to specify clearly exactly what the passenger requires either at the time of booking or at check in. That clearly did not happen. As the passenger had been allowed to board the plane a member of the cabin crew should have sat with this passenger and held one of the children during take off.
Too often these days children are treated as some kind of alien species in this country. There are few facilities for our children anywhere, few restaurants that welcome them and life is made impossible if you attempt to travel with more than one of them. Other cultures cherish their youngsters making them welcome, happy and part of everything that goes on. What has happened to us here in Britain. It is a sad state of affairs.
- Jane, London
Unfortunately it's the American "sue" culture and I sympathise with Easy Jet for being stuck in the middle, if anything happened to the baby on landing or take off the lady could sue Easy Jet.
- Gareth, Hackney
Yet again another instance of the overriding fear of litigation determining a company policy. The commonsense Phil in London asks for seems to have been outlawed by the legions of lawyers now driving decision making in most walks of life. If a parent is happy to have a child on the lap of a fellow passenger, then what is the problem.
- G, London, UK
The trouble with this society now is that people just accept anything that is thrown at them - no matter how ludicrous. And unfortunately with the PC brigade getting stronger and stronger, these kind of ludicrous things happen more and more frequently. PC is destroying this country. Sorry, it has already destroyed this country.
What is next easyjet? Arresting someone for talking to a child that sits next to them just in case they might be grooming them for some sexual act!
Get real.
- Nick, Bedford
Definitely an overreaction. Especially since a recent episode of Airline featured a mother in exactly the same position and who was allowed to let a fellow passenger hold her child. In fact, the Easyjet ground staff helped her to find a volunteer. So I think Easyjet is making excuses after the fact to defence a jobsworth pilot.
- Harry Albright, Melton Mowbray, United Kingdom
Tomtom, with respect, Frank was not talking about the possibility of a criminal prosecution; he said, "... the mother would have sued the Airline". I do not think a court would find in her favour if it was she who had taken the decision to disregard the airline's policy. Such a decision, made on the facts, is an example of an individual taking personal responsibility - something which seems to be increasingly rare today. We do not know from the article whether a child sitting on the lap of another passenger, with a parent's consent, constitutes a criminal offence; but somehow I doubt it!
- Adam, London, UK
Sorry Adam but that is now how the law works - it is not the mother who decides whether to sue. It is Criminal Law... EasyJet is just doing what its lawyers say to keep its liability insurance premium down.
- Tomtom, Leeds England
Frank - what do you mean "rules is rules"? Do you not believe that foolish rules should be challenged? Surely, since this is about child protection, the final decision should be the mother's? She would struggle to sue the airline if she had taken a positive decision to disregard its advice.
- Adam, London, UK
Insufferable stupidity, made worse by Easyjet's defence. The Nanny State infects normal human relations and we all become anxious strangers.
- Mark Adams, UK
Absolutely correct, Frank from Wolverhampton.
- G. Hoffmann, Norway
What on earth has Political Correctness got to do with it? Rules is rules. If anything untoward had happened to the baby the mother would have sued the Airline. I agree with the Pilot.
- Frank, Wolverhampton, England
Sheer and utter lunacy. Political correctness gone totally mad. How much crazier can things get? What about a return of some good old commonsense?
- Phil Jones, London UK
