Calm Down, British Airways Looking To Hire "Air Rage Investigator"

Sir, we need you to sit down for this post. Thank you. British Airways is advertising for an “air rage investigator” to join their “asset protection group,” according to the Telegraph:

The post has been advertised against a backdrop of a sharp rise in the number of air rage incidents. According to the Civil Aviation Authority’s latest statistics, the number of incidents has increased from one in every 27,000 flights in 2002-3 to one in every 16,000 flights in 2005-6.

British Airways, however, insisted that it had not seen any significant increase on its flights in recent years.

The Pilots’ Union doesn’t agree, blaming new security guidelines that require passengers to show up early to airports, then leave them with lots of time on their hands with nothing to do but drink. The BA airways job posting claims to be looking for someone to “”thoroughly investigate incidents of disruptive passenger behaviour, gather relevant evidence and produce written reports”, this person should be an “enthusiastic team player.” Anyone up for it? —MEGHANN MARCO

British Airways seeks air rage investigator [Telegraph]
(Photo: RusselJSmith)


Edit Your Comment

  1. Trai_Dep says:

    Love how they blame alcoholics for air rage. Between the ridiculous security kabuki, the stoopid liquids confinscation scam, the intermable waits, “opitimizations” that leave schedules fluid as splooge arcing across a porn video camera, then (finally) a workforce demoralized by pension theft, CEO over compensation while everyone else’s paycheck is screwed, etc. etc. etc., it’s amazing that every flight isn’t a seething protest unseen outside of global trade conference meetings.

    Like my ma always said, “treat people how you want to be treated. Or Else.”

    They reap what they sow – it’s a shame they don’t recognize how toxic the airlines have made flying.

  2. Choices:
    – Show up 2 hours early to a peak-time flight and panic while you stand in line for that entire time
    – Show up 3 hours early, beat the rush and stand in a line for 1 hour, then drink for 2 hours.

    I prefer the latter, although I tend to sleep after drinking, not beat people with things.

  3. unwritten07 says:

    Has there really been a rise in the number of incidents of disruptive passenger behaviour? I wonder if the definition of disruptive has changed.

    Finding a drunk or tipsy passenger on a flight is nothing new. If a guy with a few drinks in him complains politely but loudly about his cold meal the crew could decide he’s a troublemaker.

    The airlines don’t have to admit that their shitty service might be to blame. If passengers cause the crew the slightest inconvenience the crew can just label them ‘disruptive’, dump them someplace along the way and go back to business as usual.

  4. HearsMusic says:

    Completely OT, but you know that you read too much Consumerist when you can tell within two sentences whether Ben or Meghann is writing a post. This one was so Meghann.

  5. arelys521 says:

    I don’t think it’s all the booze passengers drink that makes them mad. It’s getting the bill and discovering that Miller Lite just cost $8 a pop.

  6. MotherFury says:

    As an almost-former smoker, I can tell you if you mix nicotine withdraw with a two hour stressful wait in line, and after that tell the person that the only way they can smoke is if they go outside and start the two hour wait in line, you’re going to have some really beasty people on planes.

    I’m not making EXCUSES for smokers, mind you. I’m just saying hours of not smoking makes some smokers nuts. Myself included.

    Personally, I think everybody should be rendered unconscious for flying. Except the pilot and other crew, of course. Line ’em up, whack ’em up with something to knock them out, wheel them on the plane and strap them in. Replace the flight attendants with nurses & one doctor. Everybody gets “woke up” with a shot of adrenaline and orange juice when they get where they are going.

    Problems solved.

  7. Triteon says:

    If you’re furious because you’re stuck on the tarmac, is that road rage or air rage?

  8. rugger_can says:

    Do they really need to pay someone to do this? Seriously.. Is it that hard to figure out?

  9. FLConsumer says:

    Easy solution —
    Ditch the “increased” security measures, improve flight service, and improve the overall experience for the passenger… and guess what? You’ll have happy, docile passengers.

    The new security screenings take far too long and cost far too much for how little security they provide. If you want to blow up a plane, just throw your device in a box, walk it over to your friendly neighborhood Post Office, send it Priority Mail (or Express Mail) and your bomb will be happily placed on the plane for you. No muss, no fuss, no screening. Meanwhile, they’re strip-searching little old ladies upstairs in the terminal. Doesn’t make sense to me.

  10. mac-phisto says:

    @FLConsumer: you just got put on like every gov’t terrorist watch list in existence right there. lol.

  11. Sudonum says:

    Thats a great idea. Instead of air or oxygen, or whatever they pump into the cabin for you to breath, they ought to mix in some sodium pentathol.