Slashdot Mirror


Passenger Avoids Delay By Fixing Plane Himself

It would be a shame if an engineer on a recent Thomas Cook Airlines flight doesn't get a complimentary first class upgrade every time he flies. The engineer was on flight TCX9641 when it was announced that the trip would be delayed eight hours, while a mechanic was flown in to fix a problem. Luckily for the other passengers, the engineer happened to work for Thomsonfly Airlines, which has a reciprocal maintenance agreement with Thomas Cook. After about 35 minutes the man fixed the problem and the flight was on its way. A spokeswoman for Thomas Cook said, "When they announced there was a technical problem he came forward and said who he was. We checked his licence and verified he was who he said he was, and he was able to fix the problem to avoid the delay. We are very grateful that he was on the flight that day."

7 of 178 comments (clear)

  1. I noticed this comment doesn't have a first post.. by GigaHurtsMyRobot · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's a problem.. just thought I'd show my ID and let you know I could fix it.

  2. Hrm by Steauengeglase · · Score: 5, Funny

    Shouldn't you get the death penalty for something like this? Seriously, this malcontent took work from airline repairmen. That is almost like eating babies. I say death to the traitor.

  3. Bad summary! by dzfoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Keith Lomax was not the engineer who fixed the plane. From the article:

    Holidaymaker Keith Lomax, from Stirling, was travelling home from a week's break with his wife when the plane's captain announced the expected delay.

    "We were in the plane, ready for take-off, when he announced there was a technical problem and that an engineer might have to be flown out from Manchester to fix it," he said.

    "Then a stewardess told us there was an engineer on board and they were checking out to see if he could work on it. He was obviously successful. When he came back onto the plane there was a round of applause from the back of the aircraft.

    Keith Lomax is just a passenger, on vacation with his wife, who witnessed the event and talked about it to the reporter.

    Jeez! now not even the submitters are R'ingTFA!

            -dZ.

    --
    Carol vs. Ghost
    ...Can you save Christmas?
  4. Re:No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express by gavron · · Score: 5, Funny

    He fixes airplanes. With toothpicks. He debunks myths. Without snopes or wikipedia. He once delivered a baby airplane from a mother airplane at forty-thousand feed - in the wind! He is the most interesting man's next door neighbor's cousin. "I don't always drink single-malt Scotch. But when I do, it's pretty decent. Stay thorsty, my frenz."

  5. Re:Charity is Unpatriotic by jav1231 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually, union rules would have forbidden him from touching the plane in the U.S. even if were an American in that union.

  6. Re:Charity is Unpatriotic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doesn't matter if he _could_ work on the plane. Many union rules forbid unscheduled activity. In effect, this guy took away 8 hours of pay from his union brother.

    What if he got hurt while working on the plane? Would the airline claim responsibility? His employer, even though the were not paying him for the labour?

    I'm not saying what he did wasn't sensible, but when you're dealing with unions and bureaucracy you must discard all common sense and reasonableness first.

  7. Re:Charity is Unpatriotic by KillerBob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the reason unions have so much power in the US is because the labour laws are so lax. in countries with strong labour protection laws, like most of Europe, Canada, Australia, etc., the government has been set up to protect the workers. Unions aren't needed as much, and so they do not exert their power... truth be told, I have never worked at a company that was unionized, because unions are dying a slow death in this country (Canada). Outside of the federal government and manufacturing sectors, most people are not unionized any more. who needs collective bargaining when we have public health care benefits, labour laws that say you can't be fired without cause and that you're entitled to severance if you've worked there more than 90 days, and a wealth of other fundamental rights that have traditionally been fought for by unions?

    In the US, though, things are different. Employers have much more power that they can exert, and as a result, the employees need to exert more collective power. It's protectionism. For starters, look up what it means to live in an "at will" state: you can be fired at any time, with no notice, no severance, and without cause. they need unions in the US, and so the unions exist, and they exert power.

    --
    If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb