Being Cabin Crew – The Ugly Truth

Table of Contents

Page 1 – Feeling Bullied A Harrowing Experience
Page 1 – Allegations of Inappropriate Touching
Page 2 – Behind the Galley Curtain 
Page 2 – Dealing with the Grievance 
Page 2 – Stupidity Ignorance or Both? 
Page 3 – Workplace Mental Health
Page 4 – Ex Police Officer now Cabin Crew 

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 2

Feeling Bullied A Harrowing Experience

Having spent my entire working life as cabin crew I was made redundant in 2020 following the outbreak of Covid-19. I was on long term sick at the time struggling with my mental health. The minute redundancies were announced I knew my cards were marked.

During my thirty years with this airline I maintained a clean work record, demonstrated a strong work ethic and was passionate about providing an exceptional standard of service. I worked hard and carried out my duties to the highest standard.

In later years as a Flight Manager I worked closely with my crew to gain trust and respect, ensured safety and service procedures were followed and tried to create a happy working environment.

Mental health is a critical aspect of workplace well-being and it’s something I’ve always been passionate about.

One aspect of my role as a Flight Manager I particularly enjoyed was coaching and developing. During my twenty five years as an Onboard Manager I wrote and delivered hundreds of performance appraisals.

In 2003 a couple of years after being promoted to Flight Manager my partner became gravely ill. As his health deteriorated I found myself in a very difficult situation.

Flying full time made looking after him very difficult and part time really wasn’t an option. In those days this type of contract was only generally offered to those returning from maternity.

Having told my manager I was considering leaving as it seemed to be the only option, he managed to get me part-time.

Despite the turmoil of the next five years which had a huge impact on my mental health, I remained loyal and committed to the company and rarely missed a duty.

In performance appraisals written on me by colleagues throughout my time as Purser and subsequently Flight Manager, I was described as proactive, approachable, a great communicator and someone who thrived on delivering exceptional standards of service.

I took a keen interest in my performance and development and spoke with my manager regularly. We had a good relationship, were open and honest with each other and I was repeatedly told I was a high performing member of his team.

I wear my heart on my sleeve and am by nature thoughtful, kind and considerate. As a Flight Manager I understood the importance of rewarding outstanding performance but also felt it was important to highlight areas where there was room for improvement. I believe that’s part of being an effective manager.

For Christmas 2018 I was rostered a flight to Seattle. It had a long layover and I didn’t want to be away from home for so long. My dad had recently become very frail and was in the last stages of his life.

Using the in-house swap system I managed to swap the duty with for a shorter trip to Atlanta. It was a decision that would change my life.

What happened in the months that followed is difficult to comprehend and had a catastrophic effect on my mental health. That was well over three years ago and I’m still struggling to come to terms with what took place.

I had considered leaving the airline many times over the years but loved flying, believed I did my job well and was never quite ready or brave enough to call it a day.

At the time this episode of my life began I had been back at work for less than a year. I had been off for eighteen months on long term sick with issues relating to my mental health.

What I endured at the hands of several Managers, the Head of Department (Head of Cabin Crew) and even the company CEO defies belief.

They were all fully aware of my situation and I had made it very clear that I was crumbling under the pressure of having to deal with a fictitious grievance.

The complaint against me had been raised by an ex serving police officer who had joined the company as cabin crew eleven months earlier. At the time we flew together he was still in his probation period.

A few years earlier in 2014 I’d had an encounter with the Head of Department. It ended with me reporting her for a breach of confidentiality.

Although she was not initially involved in the disciplinary proceedings between the ex police officer and myself, I believe she was the driving force behind the investigation. As my story unfolds I will present indisputable evidence to support this.

I think she saw the grievance as an opportunity for revenge. As such the investigation became a vindictive witch hunt and nothing I could have done would have changed the outcome.

I believe the Head of Department wanted to see me punished and was prepared to do whatever necessary to achieve that.

Allegations of Inappropriate Touching

During a flight to Cape Town some years ago I was asked by one of the cabin crew to speak with a customer sitting in the front row of the Business Class cabin.

Since take-off she had been asking to be upgraded because her husband was unable to get comfortable. I’d seen him board the aircraft and noticed he had a spinal issue which prevented him from being able to stand up straight.

After introducing myself she told me she wanted to be upgraded to First so her husband could lay down. Having explained I didn’t have the authority to upgrade them she said they had been upgraded many times before by the Flight Manager. She told me as a top flying club member they were entitled to be upgraded.

I explained that wasn’t company policy and although we do everything possible to make returning customers feel welcome, the Flight Manager is not allowed to upgrade.

She told me they had flown out to Cape Town in First but were disappointed with the seat so changed their return flight to Premium.  It was the first time they had travelled in this cabin and found the seat extremely uncomfortable.

Despite trying to help as much as I could her only interest was being upgraded. At this point in time the company strictly prohibited us from upgrading anyone to First.

A couple of years earlier a friend and colleague of mine had been given a disciplinary for upgrading someone during the flight.

As her voice became louder she suddenly blurted out “you have no idea what it’s like to live with someone who’s disabled”.

I empathised and said I really did understand how difficult it was and explained I’d been a carer for many years for my partner. She looked me in the eye and said “he probably had AIDS”.

Her comment hit me like a ton of bricks. I couldn’t believe what I had just heard. I stood up, walked away and didn’t have anything to do with her for the remainder of the flight.

Her comment resonated with me because my ex partner did have AIDS. Those years were some of the most difficult and traumatic of my life.

Flying is a job unlike any other. During my thirty years with the airline I met many amazing people including my current partner.

I always felt proud to work for this organisation and did everything to make every customer’s journey special. I get an immense amount of satisfaction from making people happy and am passionate about delivering great customer service.

I can hardly remember a day when I didn’t feel excited about going to work.

I had always planned on hanging up my wings at 55 but in 2016 a year before my 50th birthday was on long term sick. I never believed I’d be well enough to return to work.

Against all odds in March 2018 after almost eighteen months of being away I finally returned. Although I was no longer the person I once was, being back doing the job I loved was more than I could have wished for.

Settling down into my role as a Flight Manager was easier than I had expected. I loved being back, worked hard and always tried to set an example for others to follow.

I am by nature a bit of a joker and love to make people laugh. Although I expected my crew to work hard I always tried to create a fun and relaxed working environment.

On 24th December 2018 I operated the flight to Atlanta that I had swapped onto. In the eighteen months that followed, taking my life was at the forefront of my mind on many occasions.

On that fateful day I checked in with five of the most vile and despicable people you could ever wish to meet. One of them was Bart, an ex serving police officer of eight years.

He had been with the company for just eleven months and was coming to the end of his probation.

My alleged conduct during the flight and whilst in Atlanta led to him raising a grievance against me for bullying, harassment, overbearing supervision and inappropriate touching.

Bart was on the flight with Anna his now ex fiancée who was also crew. She had been in the company for around the same amount of time as him. I didn’t become aware of their relationship until well after we landed home.

Anna was also ex police but I don’t in what capacity. She was good friends with two other crew members on the flight.

Considering the seriousness of his allegations Bart said nothing to anyone about my alleged behaviour during the outbound or inbound flight or during our overnight stay in Atlanta.

Even after landing back in the UK he didn’t speak to his manager to raise concerns about anything that had allegedly taken place.

Upon arriving at the Cabin Crew Check-In area on 24th December I sat in the lounge with a coffee and began preparing for the flight. That included allocating each crew member an inflight working position.

I had only flown with one of the eleven crew previously. I allocated Bart a working position in First. Working in this cabin meant he would be working alongside me and four other team members.

From the second I met Bart he was aloof and unfriendly which was extremely unusual. I initially put it down to shyness.

When I asked him during our pre-flight safety briefing whether he’d worked in First before he confirmed he had many times.

What I witnessed on both the outbound and return flight showed otherwise. During both sectors I addressed a number of issues with him specifically regarding the way he was delivering the service. That was part of my role as a Flight Manager.

With him still being in probation I decided to write a performance appraisal. In line with company policy that’s exactly what I should have done.

Upon receipt of the appraisal he responded with accusations of bullying, harassment and overbearing supervision. He also accused me of inappropriate touching not only towards him but also towards the rest of the crew.

In his complaint he made twenty separate complaints about my performance, ability and conduct.

Despite proving unequivocally that Bart, his fiancée Anna and four others with whom they colluded were lying, the allegations against me were upheld. Almost nothing I said throughout the grievance investigation was believed.

Bart is a devious, malicious narcissist who was not prepared to accept any constructive feedback on his performance. His eight years in the police enabled him to cleverly manipulate everything that happened between us.

For his complaint to be upheld he knew the importance of having witnesses to support his version of events. He therefore colluded with several members of the crew.

Anna his now ex fiancée was good friends with two crew members one of whom was on the flight with her best friend. Mia had been in the company for just over a year, her best friend Peter had been flying for six months.

As someone with an impressive memory which Anna confirmed in her witness statement, Bart manipulated facts from situations that took place in order to distort the truth. This made it incredibly difficult for me to defend myself from the allegations made against me.

The following paragraph is from Anna’s witness statement. She was working out of the galley at the opposite end of a very large aircraft. She only came to the front where Bart and I were working once and that was on the inbound sector to London. Upon arriving at the front galley at my request she stayed for just a few minutes.

copy of written text
“Workplace” by Facebook is a corporate communications platform. FSM = Flight Manager which was my rank. CM = Crew Member.

In addition to Bart, three other employees one being Anna also accused me of inappropriate touching. Her witness statement and one written by crew member Ven are so vile, poisonous and full of hatred that even now I find them incredibly difficult to read.

All five witness statements submitted by those who supported Bart’s complaint were full of lies and inconsistencies. It wasn’t difficult to see collusion had taken place.

The remaining three witness statements written by the crew members who worked alongside Bart and myself in First Class plus those written by the Captain and First Officer were honest, relatively accurate and told a completely different story.

Despite providing a significant amount of evidence to prove Bart, Anna and their accomplices were lying, the managers dealing with the case and the Head of Department who later dealt with my appeal, refused to believe a word that I said.

Four out of the six employees involved in this matter had been with the airline for less than twelve months. The fifth was on his first operating fight back after having been on a ground placement for a year.

The remaining crew member who was Ven had been with the airline for four years. He had been called on the morning of the flight from standby because we needed an additional crew member.

The following paragraph comes from Ven’s witness statement. He’s talking about Bart. Anna was Bart’s fiancée not his wife. Ven had never flown with him or anyone else on the crew previously.

copy of written text
From the witness statement of crew member Ven. CC = Cabin Crew

Along with Bart and myself there were four others working in First. Lottie was the longest serving employee after me. She had been with the airline for eight years.

Katrina and Claire had only been with the company for just over a year but both had flown previously. Bruce was the second longest serving crew member.

Katrina and Claire were best friends who had been at another airline for thirty years. They had been onboard managers for twenty of those years before being made redundant.

Almost nothing that was said by Lottie, Katrina and Claire in their witness statements was believed by the company. Bruce failed to return his statement.

Bart’s complaint was submitted three weeks after the flight. It was almost four months before the company requested witness statements from other members of the crew.

Each crew member was asked to respond to more than thirty questions about my performance, ability and conduct. The questions were based on allegations made by Bart.

One question was “please share any observations you have about Laurence and his physical touching towards either yourself or any of the cabin crew throughout the flight.”

This is a leading question because it suggests a presumption of inappropriate physical touching. It also prompts the respondent to provide information that supports that presumption.

A more appropriate question would have been “Did Laurence touch you or anyone else during during the flight? If so, please describe the nature of the touching”

Out of eleven questionnaires which included the two pilots, nine were returned.

As part of my defence I asked a doctor of clinical psychology to write to the grievance hearing manager regarding the accusations of inappropriate touching. I had been seeing him for some time because of matters relating to my mental health.

During our sessions we spoke about something I have struggled with for my entire adult life. I believe it stems from a physically abusive relationship I was in when I was eighteen. Without going into more detail than necessary, I find physical contact that may be perceived as being affectionate very difficult.

It’s something I have never spoken openly about yet was now sharing this intensely private information with my employer to clear my name.

This next paragraph is from Bart’s complaint. The second paragraph is from the outcome of my appeal that was heard by the Head of Department.

copy of written text

copy of written text

The doctor I was seeing is a Consultant Clinical and Counselling Psychologist and an Associate Fellow of the British Psychological Society. He is a registered Applied Practitioner Psychologist with the Health and Care Professions Council. He’s been in practice for more than thirty years and has the following letters after his name; BA (Hons), MSc Med Psych, DClinPsych, CPsychol, AFBPsS.

The Head of Department joined the airline sixteen years after me. She moved into her current role in 2016. My flight was in December 2018. According to her LinkedIn profile she has nine ‘O’ levels including English and Maths and an ‘A’ level in English literature. Despite not having any qualification in psychology she seems to know better than a clinical psychologist.

I had proven unequivocally in my evidence using factual evidence that the three crew members who accused me of inappropriate touching had lied throughout their entire statement. It made no difference.

Nobody had been touched inappropriately by me at any time. The only physical contact I’d had with a crew member was the moment I touched Ven’s ankle for a split second whilst playing a joke on him.

In their witness statements the three cabin crew who worked alongside Bart and I in First stated they were unaware of any inappropriate touching at any time. In fact out of eleven witness statements only one crew member claimed she had seen me touch another inappropriately. That person was Bart’s fiancée Anna who was working at the opposite end of the aircraft to me.

The remaining witness statements confirmed nobody saw me touch anyone inappropriately or was even aware of any such behaviour.

The following paragraph comes from Anna’s witness statement. For point of reference I’m five foot seven. Bart is over six foot.

copy of written text
FSM = Flight Manager

I believe the Head of Department was determined for this allegation to be upheld. She never expected to receive a letter from a clinical psychologist stating it was unlikely I would touch anyone in this way. As such she was left with no choice but to claim his opinion was not correct.

Her statement that my ‘physical contact’ made those concerned feel uncomfortable refers solely to statements written by Ven, Anna and Bart. The fact I had proven conclusively that all three lied throughout their witness statement made no difference.

With regards to tickling someone’s leg, here’s what happened. Towards the end of our return flight to London I touched Ven’s ankle for a split second whilst he was sitting on a bar stool in First.

Two crew members who were present at the time witnessed what took place. Both had worked alongside Bart and I on two long sectors. One was Lottie the other Katrina. Katrina was sitting next to Ven at the bar when I touched his ankle. Lottie was standing alongside them.

Although Katrina was new to the company she was working up a rank in the role of First Class Purser. Prior to joining she had been an onboard manager for many years at her previous airline.

The word “tickled” was used by Ven in his witness statement. I wouldn’t describe making contact with someone’s leg with your forefinger as tickling.

The following comes from Lottie’s witness statement;

“Towards the end of the flight Laurence was in very high spirits and was laughing and joking with the crew.”

Although Bart was not present when this incident took place, Ven must have mentioned it after the flight. I believe that’s the reason why Bart came up with the idea of accusing me of inappropriate touching. He just needed to convince others to support his story.

After I touched Ven’s ankle he gave no indication he was upset by what had taken place. I was just having a joke with him and Katrina, Lottie and several passengers who were present at the time all laughed. Ven also laughed and said “you gave me such a fright”.

Had he been upset by what had taken place there was plenty of time for him to speak with me. He could also have reported the incident to his manager upon returning home. He said absolutely nothing about it until he was asked to submit a witness statement more than three months later.

My finger was in contact with Ven’s ankle (over his sock) for less than two seconds. In her witness statement Katrina who was sat right next to him said she was unaware of me touching anyone inappropriately at any time.

Ven also accused me of squeezing his waist yet in his witness statement says he did not see me touch anyone else inappropriately.

Crew member Mia accused me of touching her leg whilst she was helping with the service in First Class. She also states she did not see me or was aware of me touching anyone at any time.

In this industry you have to make friends quickly. You can fly with someone once and never see them again. Spending ten hours together on a flight means there’s plenty of time to chat and to get to know each other. Considering so much touching was allegedly going on, nobody apart from Bart and Anna witnessed it or was even aware of it.

Peter and Mia were best friends. In his witness statement Peter says Mia told him I had been “quite physical on a few occasions”.

In her witness statement Mia states I touched her leg whilst in First Class and then says “I don’t wish for this to be taken further”.

In May 2020 when redundancies were announced in response to Covid-19 I was told my job was at risk. I was on long term sick once again because my mental health had deteriorated as a result of having to deal with this abhorrent complaint. I had been off work since December 2019.

My employment was terminated in September 2020. When my P45 arrived a few weeks later in the post there was nothing attached to it and nothing else in the envelope.

It had been several months since I had spoken with my manager. The last email I received which was from someone in the office I didn’t know was to invite me to appeal the decision to make me redundant. I declined the offer.

That’s how my thirty years with this airline came to an end.

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 8

Table of Contents

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 7

Page 1 – WhatsApp Chat Post Flight
Page 2 – Missing Rave Reviews
Page 3 – Ven’s Witness Statement
Page 4 – Finale Ven’s Witness Statement

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 9 (TBA)

WhatsApp Chat Post Flight

To kick off this chapter I want to share a WhatsApp conversation that I had with a friend who’s also a Flight Manager.

The conversation was used as part of my defence. Like all other evidence I submitted it made no difference.

I’ve made a few corrections to typing errors. I don’t usually send such long messages so was typing way too fast. I was also still extremely tired after what had been an incredibly challenging flight.


whatsapp text conversation
  • WP = Workplace, the company’s communications platform

What I say regarding the Purser working from the back of the cabin to meet Bart refers to me asking her to help him because he was lagging way behind Claire and Lottie who were also serving in the cabin.

Unsurprisingly Bart lies about what actually took place. You can read what he says here.

  • CCM cabin crew member

  • Being on a remote stand refers to passengers having to disembark down steps and be transferred to the airport building by buses.
  • Pax = passenger




Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 7

Table of Contents

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 6

Page 1 – A Royal Commendation
Page 1 – Lana’s Investigation Continued
Page 2 – More from Lana’s Investigation
Page 3 – Yet More from Lana’s Investigation
Page 4 – Almost Finished but not Quite
Page 5 – That’s It for This Chapter

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 8

A Royal Commendation

On Bart’s LinkedIn profile he states whilst serving as a police officer he received a Royal Commendation.

Bart is a devious and hateful narcissist who’s also a habitual liar. I was immediately suspicious about the existence of this award so wanted to confirm its existence.

Having scoured the internet I could find nothing regarding a Royal Commendation that was associated with the police.

Statements from Bart’s LinkedIn profile

The only thing that comes up on Google for a Royal Commendation can be seen in the following screenshot. It’s a fictitious medal awarded for merit in Star Wars!


Having asked a few ex and currently serving police officers if they had ever heard of this award, none had.

I messaged the police force where Bart worked who told me they couldn’t give me any information about it. They recommended I submit a Freedom of Information request.

In that request I explained I had learnt someone had been awarded a Royal Commendation whilst serving as a police officer on their force a few years ago. I asked what it was awarded for.


I initially found it odd the police wouldn’t give me this information. Surely there’s no breach of confidentiality in telling me the purpose of an award. Unless of course it doesn’t exist.

Bart also states in his LinkedIn profile he received another award for merit whilst in police school. I also asked about that.

The police were happy to tell me about an award that was given for long service but wouldn’t say anything about a Royal Commendation or the “student’s student award” awarded during training.

I believe they wouldn’t give me that information because having said someone had told me they’d received these awards, if the police confirmed they didn’t exist they would in effect be telling me Bart was lying. Somewhere along the line that’s likely to be a breach of trust/confidentiality.

Therefore they said they were not able to share this information because it involved a third party.

I have since had a conversation with someone who served on the same police force as Bart a couple of years after he left. He messaged following a post I made on social media. He said he had never heard of either of the two awards.

Lana’s Investigation Continued

I want to return to the outcome of the initial grievance investigation carried out by Cabin Crew Manager Lana.

The following excerpt comes from minutes taken by Employee Relations Consultant Pedro during the meeting that took place between Bart and Lana;


This point relates to the gay-themed cartoon that I showed T and Ven on the bus to the airport in Atlanta.

These first two screenshots come from Anna’s witness statement. The third comes from my defence;



This also comes from minutes taken during the meeting between Bart and Lana.

From minutes taken during Bart’s meeting with Lana

None of the crew were spoken to at any time during the investigation by Crew Manager Lana, Hayley or the Head of Department who heard my appeal.

It’s clear from his response Bart was being asked about his engagement with customers. The only thing he mentions is that he helped someone out by giving them a battery. Why didn’t he mention any of these incidents which are far better examples. They come from his written complaint;

J Class – First Class
From Bart’s complaint

His comment regarding his level of customer engagement regularly being described as exceptional and one of the best ever seen on board is typical of a narcissist.

Furthermore the cabin crew are not required to do any “introductions” to customers seated in the Premium cabin.

Customer Relations confirmed there was nobody by the name of Mark or Jason sitting anywhere in First Class.

Bart mentions the name Mark twice, once in reference to Mark and Jason and again when he talks about Mark and Iris. Yes according to the passenger manifest there was nobody by the name of Mark in First Class.

Customer Relations confirmed there was a customer by the name of Pam in Premium. I forgot to ask whether there was an Iris in First Class. The company could have done that as part of their investigation into my claim that Bart was lying.

Bart undoubtedly has an excellent memory yet seems to have forgotten about these three encounters which if true, would have demonstrated pretty good customer engagement.

The battery incident is a nothing. Most cabin crew will go out of their way to help a customer if they can. Giving someone a battery because you have a spare is the minimum anyone could do.

I once lent someone my reading glasses because they had lost theirs. I’ve also allowed people to make calls and send texts from my phone more times than I can remember. I also once allowed someone to call the U.S whilst we were on the tarmac at Heathrow because her father was very ill. I didn’t at the time have roaming so the call cost me a considerable amount of money.

Being the narcissist that Bart is, he believes nobody could possibly be as kind as him. Yet as someone who takes a huge amount of pride in the standard of service delivered by members of my team, I saw nothing that stood out despite working alongside him on two long sectors.

This next allegation demonstrates like so much else, what a farce this investigation was.

In Anna’s witness statement she refers to Bart and me by our surnames. In the screenshot below CM (crew member) is Bart and FSM (FM Flight Manager) is me.

The Gatehouse – Cabin Crew Check in Area

I didn’t say I did not “deliberately” ignore Bart. I said I didn’t ignore him because the incidents that have been raised never happened.

Regarding the encounter in the hotel corridor Anna says they were on their way to have drinks with the crew. By this she means they were going to T’s room for pre-dinner drinks.

Having been ignored by me not once but twice according to Bart’s complaint although Anna seems to have forgotten about the second alleged encounter, they said nothing about what had just happened to anyone.

Out of nine witness statements nobody was aware of me ignoring or excluding anyone at any time. How strange considering Bart and Anna allege I ignored them both for the entire trip and went on to give several examples.

Bart did not try to say “hello” to me when we checked out the hotel. This comes from his complaint;

From Bart’s complaint

Bart’s reason for saying “I looked at Laurence to acknowledge him however he ignored me again” was because whilst waiting for the crew to arrive in the lobby to check out, I was sitting with T and Katrina talking about how to run services on the flight home. Both were working up for the first time in supervisory roles and the flight was full.

Therefore Bart knew he had to be careful what he said because he didn’t know what T and Katrina would write in their witness statements.

As an ex police officer he knew statements would be requested from the entire crew. I stated in my response to Bart’s complaint that during check-out I didn’t see Bart.

According to Lana’s LinkedIn page she has a degree in criminology and sociology. I find that incredulous. Although a vast subject, sociology includes the study of human social relationships and deviant behaviour. Yet she failed to recognise a narcissist and habitual liar when she came face to face with one. She also failed to see similar traits in his fiancée.

Despite proving much of what Anna and Bart said was lies, Lana still believes the incident in the corridor may have happened.

In the outcome to her investigation Lana says “I accept this may have happened but cannot say if it was intentional.” She then says it should be a learning for me to pay attention to my team.

Whilst writing this last paragraph I looked at Lana’s LinkedIn page once again because I wanted to check I got it right and she did have a degree in criminology and sociology.

When I saw her latest post I could not believe what I was reading.


Lana blocked me from viewing her LinkedIn page and turned comments for this post off. Having recently looked at her profile using a different account, she states she has completed a Mental Health First Aid course.

I sincerely hope the knowledge she gained will spare others from enduring the same traumatic experience I went through, especially now that she’s the head of a department.

What “very experienced manager” Hayley says shows just how little she knows about mental health. Does she really think men who are struggling with depression walk around looking sombre and miserable?

Nobody I ever flew with would have any idea what I was dealing with in my life. I always came across as a happy and outgoing person. It’s called “putting on a front.” Very few people and especially men who struggle with mental health want anyone to know what they’re going through.

The truth is you will rarely be aware of what someone is dealing with. I only told the company because I had to. I would have preferred to have kept it private.

I would also have preferred not share some of the most intimate details of my life in a story published online. However I feel this is a story that really needs to be told.

Being at work made me happy. I loved my time on the aircraft and loved my time away. My days of going out drinking and partying were long gone but I was sociable and believe I was generally liked.

Following the disciplinary meeting carried out by Hayley I shared a letter with her from a clinical psychologist who I had been seeing. He confirmed it was unlikely I would touch anyone inappropriately.

She was aware of my struggles with mental health because we had spoken whilst I was off sick with stress following the first investigative meeting with Lana.


At the time of sending her that WhatsApp message I was in a deep state of depression.

Hayley upheld every complaint against me including one that had already been dismissed at the investigation stage.

The evidence I submitted proved without reasonable doubt that Bart was lying. I also gave several examples to prove he and his fiancée Anna had colluded with other members of the crew.

It didn’t make the slightest bit of difference.

I am not saying because I was struggling with my mental health that Bart’s complaint should not have been investigated. Nor am I saying complaints should not have been upheld were they to be valid. As my evidence proved, none of Bart’s complaints were valid.

In response to me asking Hayley in writing to be mindful about when she sent me the outcome of her investigation, I received it three hours after I landed from a flight.

In response to my request she said;

“In terms of the outcome letter I am always mindful of flying duties and intend to send the outcome by email after I have reviewed your roster.”

Despite being a Cabin Crew Manager she has no understanding of what’s it’s like to be Cabin Crew because she has never flown full or part time as Cabin Crew.

So she looked at my roster, saw I was landing from the company’s first celebratory flight to Tel Aviv and decided that was an appropriate time to send me the negative outcome of her investigation. I had nine days off before my next trip.

With that in mind it’s important to remember one of the complaints she upheld was that I didn’t give consideration as to how Bart may feel when I sent him his performance appraisal.

I was told I couldn’t be sure he was rested or in a good place at the time he opened it. It was sent more than twenty four hours after we landed.

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 6

Table of Contents

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 5

Page 1 – Outcome of Lana’s Investigation
Page 2 – An Aircraft Called Emmeline Heaney
Page 3 – Profile of a Narcissist
Page 4 – Anna’s Witness Statement
Page 5 – Our Standards Policy

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 7

Outcome of Lana’s Investigation

This first excerpt comes from the letter Bart sent to his manager following our flight together. My performance review was sent to him on 28th December 2018, we landed on 26th December.

“TalkitOut” is the company’s mediation service. Company policy states mediation should always be considered before pursuing a grievance. Just like the Our Standards Policy and Anti Harassment and Bullying Policy, this didn’t seem to apply to Bart.


Being the narcissist that Bart is, it’s understandable the most difficult comment for him to deal with was the one in which I said he needs to work on his personality. I didn’t actually say that but in his fury that’s how he’s interpreted it. This is what I actually said;


Bart’s complaint was passed initially to Cabin Crew Manager Lana to investigate. Having replied in writing to the points he raised, I was then invited to a grievance investigation meeting. By this time Lana had already met with Bart.

Two months and ten days later I received the outcome of her investigation. Here’s the most relevant points ;


SEP questions relate to the mandatory safety questions each crew member must be asked individually during the pre-flight briefing.

These are not the same as the Aircraft Familiarisation Points. The purpose of these is to familiarise the crew with the type of aircraft we’re about to fly on. Seven are listed, any three must be read out during every briefing. These points never change.

Having been asked by my manager to get the crew more vocally involved from the start, I decided to ask the familiarisation points as questions to the group as a whole.

I said just shout the answers out.


Bart – Time in company eleven months, still in probation. Never flew previously.

Mia – Time in company similar to Bart. Never flew previously. Accused me in her witness statement of touching her leg but said “I don’t wish for this to be taken further”.

States additional questions were not needed because everyone had answered their questions correctly. That’s not correct because the first questions were asked to the group as a whole. Some people answered, most didn’t.

I began by saying “I’m going to ask the Aircraft Familiarisation Points as questions, just shout the answers out”. Therefore Mia would have been fully aware each crew member still needed to be asked an individual safety question. A pre-flight briefing is conducted prior to every flight that leaves the UK. The crew know what information must be delivered and what to expect.

As each crew member answers their question correctly it has to be acknowledged on the Flight Manager’s iPad. These questions are never asked to the group. This part of the briefing is mandatory for all UK airlines.

Lottie – Most senior crew member after me. Her witness statement was detailed and honest.

Having used this briefing format several times I could see the crew didn’t like it. I therefore went back to my usual briefing on my next flight. That wasn’t because of Bart’s complaint, I only found out about that three months later.

OBM is onboard manager. There should have been three OBM’s on the flight but I was the only one. Both Purser positions were filled by cabin crew working up a rank. The Pursers are also onboard managers.

On many flights the First Class Purser position has been removed. When the change was implemented the Flight Manager took over the duties associated with this position. Where a Purser is present they run the service and are responsible for completing “performance monitoring/feedback” on their crew. It only appears on their iPad.

The pre-flight briefing lasts about twenty minutes. Asking the Aircraft Familiarisation Points as questions took only a few minutes. The rest of the briefing was no different to any other.

Anna – Time in company less than twelve months, still in probation. Flew previously for another airline for a short period of time. States she’s ex police.

The briefing was “unusual” because I had changed the delivery following a conversation with my manager. He said the company wanted to get everyone involved verbally from the start. I didn’t change the briefing because I felt like it.

Tommy – With the company for about five years. On his first working flight back after being on a ground placement in recruitment for a year. This was his second flight back, he worked as an “additional” crew member on his first flight.

Worked up in the rank of Purser in Economy. He had recently been turned down for promotion to this position. Having included him in the email I sent to the Economy crew after the flight in which I stated he did an amazing job, he didn’t reply.

Katrina was understandably a little apprehensive. She was relatively new and had not worked up before. When I asked if she’d like to do it she could have said no, she’s a mature adult (a similar age to me). We had never met previously and there was no pressure.

I asked her because her Crew Manager told me she had been an onboard manager at her previous airline for twenty years.

She told me she would give it go and I said I would give her loads of support. She confirmed in her witness statement I was very supportive.

Peter – Time with the company six months. Never flew previously. The youngest and most junior on the crew.

The following comes from his witness statement;


The next screenshot comes from my defence. Peter’s assertion that I asked all crew individual questions about (emergency equipment) locations and other safety questions that were not part of the briefing is not correct.

The first set of questions were the Aircraft Familiarisation Points that are usually read out by the Flight Manager but this time were asked as questions to the group.

From evidence I submitted to the company

I told the crew I had brought a huge box of chocolates for us to share during the flight and luxury mince pies from Marks and Spencer. I had spent more than £40 on a group of people I had never met.

The chocolates were opened during our outbound flight, the mince pies I saved for the flight home because we were leaving on Christmas Day. Despite few of the crew liking me and many talking behind my back, they enjoyed the chocolates and mince pies. None were left over.

Anna seemingly shared a few bits of tinsel with Mia and Peter. Nobody else did anything to bring any Christmas festivities to the flight.

Crew Manager Lana says regarding the delivery of my briefing there’s a performance issue here and Laurence needs to reflect on doing things differently and “read his audience”.

The following screenshot comes from minutes taken by Employee Relations Consultant Pedro during the meeting between Lana and Bart;


Had my manager not asked me to get the crew more verbally involved my briefing would have been exactly the same as it always was. Unless you try something a few times how are you supposed to know if it works?

Cabin crew work in a safety critical environment and the airline are constantly emphasising the importance of safety. There’s a mountain of information the crew must memorise so I believed that by asking the aircraft familiarisation points as questions it would be helpful. It was also a great way of getting the crew verbally involved from the start of the briefing.

Maybe I should have asked all nine crew members to tell me something about themself that nobody else knows. That is afterall what Cabin Crew Manager Hayley told me she does when she flies.

As stated in an earlier chapter, according to Hayley’s LinkedIn profile she has never flown as cabin crew previously. Although Cabin Crew Managers at this airline also fly, they do not fly as an onboard manager. She would therefore never be in a position where she was required to conduct a preflight safety briefing for the crew.

From evidence submitted to the company

I wonder whether Bart would have said he was an ex police officer with a Royal Commendation?

That will make more sense when you read the next chapter.

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 5

Table of Contents

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 4

Page 1 – Bart’s Performance Appraisal
Page 2 – Bart’s Response
Page 3 – Bart’s Response (cont.)
Page 4 – Behaviour/Conduct in Atlanta
Page 5 – Adult Content
Page 6 – My Behaviour in Atlanta 1
Page 7 – Bart’s Complaint Finale

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 6

Bart’s Performance Appraisal

Finally it’s time to share the performance review that I wrote on crooked ex police officer now cabin crew member Bart.

The text comes directly from the original documents. Where necessary explanations have been added in coloured font.

Performance Review – Bart  

Flight Numbers – 24/25 December 2018

Bart was allocated a working position in the First Class by me prior to the pre-flight briefing.  When asked, he said he had worked in the many times cabin before and was familiar with the service.

During the pre-flight briefing whilst asking the crew as a whole questions about the aircraft type as a refresher, Bart wasn’t very forthcoming with answers and generally remained quiet.

He did however answer his individual safety question competently.

Ordinarily these “aircraft familiarisation points” would be read out by the Flight Manager.  There are seven listed, at least three had to be read out.

Having been asked by my manager to make my briefing more interactive so the cabin crew became involved from the start, I decided to ask the points as questions instead of just reading them out. I said to the crew present “just shout the answers out”.

During this briefing I asked six or seven questions.  Three were answered immediately by Katrina and Claire.  Everyone else remained silent.

After saying in a jokey manner “shut up you two you can’t answer any more questions” I said to the rest of the crew “come on guys, if you don’t know the answers to these questions you’ll be up the creek without a paddle”.  These were very basic safety questions that everyone should have known.

I received a half-hearted response to the remaining questions.  

For the rest of the briefing Bart mainly looked at the floor. I would have liked a little more eye contact from him.  It’s nice to see people engaging with you when you’re talking to them.

There was a short delay on the ground departing Heathrow, Bart was in the cabin talking to his customers which impressed me.  I thought he was introducing himself and doing seat introductions however as I realised after takeoff, he had been taking his drinks and meal orders.

During “seat introductions” the crew explain how the First Class seat operates and the associated functions. It should be done after takeoff.

When I told him that’s not how the service is done he said customers started telling him what they wanted to eat/drink so he wrote it down.  I told him he should have explained at that point how we do the service.  Quite why he even had his order sheet with him at that time I’m not sure.  If he was introducing himself his customers’ names are on his iPad as well as their flying club status.

If they were volunteering that information it’s clear they haven’t flown with us before hence it’s a perfect opportunity to explain how we deliver the service.

Bart said my use of the words “quite why” was “sarcastic and ridiculing him”.  This complaint was upheld throughout the grievance.

I said his customers’ names are on his iPad believing he may have wanted to address people by name. Were that to be the case names are on his iPad so it wasn’t necessary for him to have his customer order sheet with him.

For clarification, at some point before or just after take-off crew copy customer names from their iPad to their customer order sheet. They can then address each customer by name when taking their order.

There was no reason for Bart to have his customer order sheet and a serving tray with him whilst casually talking to people during a delay. The crew use the tray to lean on whilst completing the order sheet in the presence of each customer.

Once Bart started taking orders people would have seen him coming and had their order ready for when he arrived.

Whilst he was taking his orders Lottie, Claire and Katrina were keeping themselves busy doing other things in the cabin. They were also chatting to their customers but no orders were taken.

After Bart had taken an order from every customer on his side he said nothing to anyone. Once orders have been taken the crew inform the galley crew member what meals need to be loaded into the ovens and how many of each hot or cold starter is needed.

Bart didn’t do that because he was aware orders should not have been taken on the ground.

At that point Bart had not been given a meal break down by the galley so wouldn’t have known how many of each meal choice was available for his side.

The total number of hot meals should be split between the three crew serving in the aisles. Once they’ve used their allocation they explain that choice is no longer available. Once they’ve finished taking orders whatever has not been used can then be offered to anyone who didn’t receive their first choice.

Doing the service this way ensures all three aisle crew begin the service with the same number of meals to offer to customers in their section.

This is how the service should be delivered as per the Service Procedures Manual.

Having discovered Bart had taken all of his orders whilst the aircraft was still at the gate, I simply told him that’s not the way we do the service. Of course I wasn’t happy but I wasn’t telling him off. Other Flight Managers I know would have told him in no uncertain terms that what he had done was not acceptable.

With the cabin being half empty, after take-off I asked Bart to work with Ven in Premium. I asked him because Katrina and Claire had asked me if they could work together and Lottie was the most senior member of crew so I wanted her to remain in First.

Just prior to the last service I asked Bart to clear in rubbish on the right side of the Premium cabin whilst I did the left side.  He was talking with another crew member in the galley.

I cleared in a few rows then returned to the galley to empty my tray and went back out to finish off.  When I returned for the second time Bart was still talking. Only then did he finish his conversation and go into the cabin.

When asked to do something by an onboard manager providing he’s not doing anything more important, Bart needs to do what he’s asked straight away.

I did the afternoon tea service in Premium on the left aisle with the other Premium crew member (Ven).  Whilst observing Bart from across the aisle I could see he was being polite and professional but wasn’t really engaging with his customers.

This is a complaint that comes up time and time again in Voice of Customer questionnaires. In fact a comment that accompanied a ‘good’ mark that we received on our inbound sector said “although the crew member was professional they weren’t very engaging”.

Voice of Customer feedback is the questionnaire customers receive after their flight.  The crew are marked poor, good, very good, excellent. The accompanying comment actually said the “stewardess was professional but not very engaging”.  I didn’t use the word “stewardess” because I didn’t want to draw attention to whoever it was aimed at.

The customer who left the comment was not being looked after by Bart but it demonstrates how important it is that we build a rapport and engage with people instead of just methodically serving them.

Our inbound sector (Atlanta to London the following day) was full in First Class. We had a crew member working up as Purser. Every single customer in the cabin had drinks and a full three course dinner.  Many also finished with cheese and biscuits.  As a result the service was extremely busy.  Everyone then wanted to be woken two hours later for breakfast.

As we were coming to the end of the flight a top flying club customer told me Bart had woken him for breakfast, converted his seat (from flatbed to seat position) but didn’t go back to serve him.  Upon asking Bart how the customer had been missed out he told me he had been working from the front of the cabin, the Purser (Katrina) had been working from the back.

The Purser would not normally help an aisle crew member serve breakfast. They tend to help in the galley and do other service related duties.  Katrina was helping Bart because he was so far behind Lottie and Claire that I asked her to start from the back and work forwards to meet him.  

He didn’t appear to be very apologetic and didn’t go back and apologise personally to the customer.  Upon speaking to Katrina she told me she had only served the back three rows so hadn’t gotten anywhere near seat 8K.

I compensated the customer as an apology and said if he didn’t want breakfast now he could use the Arrivals Lounge at Heathrow.

During the breakfast service the Flight Manager is required to do the service in a different cabin. I tried to keep an eye on First whenever I returned to the galley. That’s when I saw Bart was way behind Lottie and Claire and asked Katrina to help him.

When I spoke to Bart about how he did the service he told me he had first woken up every customer on his side who wanted breakfast.  He then went back to the front to start serving.  I explained that’s not how the service is done.

By not delivering the service the way it should be done, all of Bart’s customers were awake and sitting back in their seat waiting for breakfast.  The service takes time to deliver and he now had 16 people all waiting to eat.    

Bart is relatively new to the company and I appreciate there’s a lot to take in especially with having to work in three cabins. The best way to learn is to ask plenty of questions.  He should also work regularly in each cabin to stay familiar with the services.

The company have high expectations of cabin crew and the service we deliver.  Working in this cabin involves so much more than just taking orders, putting things down, then clearing them away.  We also need to have good product knowledge and be able to deliver an outstanding level of customer service which includes using our personalities to ensure people leave with great memories. 

Personally I didn’t find Bart particularly friendly, not towards me anyway.  He didn’t say hello when he came down to check out in Atlanta, didn’t say goodbye before leaving the aircraft at Heathrow or when getting off the bus in the staff car park.

In fact we spoke very little on both sectors despite working in close proximity to each other.

I didn’t see him spend any significant time with any one customer in the cabin on the inbound sector other than when he was taking their order.  Part of the reason why people choose to fly with us is because of the cabin crew.

For that reason the company tries to employ people with great personalities who also have the potential to deliver outstanding service.  Bart clearly demonstrated those skills during his interview but now needs to follow them through.

When working at the front he must remember to check on the flight crew regularly (pilots) and to also go in to see them occasionally.  As well as engaging with customers (irrespective of which cabin he’s working in), he also needs to build a rapport with his colleagues and that includes the Flight Manager.

Bart asked me to reset a customer’s entertainment screen for him during one of the services and said he didn’t know how to do it.  If he’s unsure how to do something he should ask to be shown, that’s how you learn.  He was shown by Purser Katrina.

Bart comes across as confident and relaxed in his role but needs to be giving a great deal more to achieve the standard of service that’s expected of him.

When going to/returning from the crew bunks he should not walk through the cabin without wearing a tie because he’s in full view of customers until he enters the Crew Rest Area.

When I did my walkaround prior to landing I opened two window blinds at the back of the cabin that were obstructed by pillows.  The two windows were immediately forwards of the emergency exit.  I also removed items from several ottomans.

When crew prepare the cabin for take-off/landing window blinds throughout the cabin must be open and especially either side of an emergency exit.

There should be no loose items on the ottomans positioned in front of the seat.  Securing the cabin for take-off and landing is one of the first things cabin crew learn in training. 

I hope Bart takes on board what has been said and I’m also including a step by step guide of what needs to be done when working in First Class.  I hope he finds it useful.

I feel there’s plenty of room for improvement and whilst nobody expects a relatively new crew member to learn everything in a few months, Bart should be showing a little more potential at this stage.

Bart, I am more than happy for you to contact me should you wish to discuss anything.  I did not do your performance review on the aircraft, that was completed by Katrina who worked up as Purser.

I did not discuss your performance with her.  I would have liked to have spoken with you more about your performance but unfortunately the flights were exceptionally busy.

 I look forward to flying with you again at some point in the future.

Laurence – Flight Manager

The cabin crew have service flows on their iPad but they’re set out in a much broader manner.  I believed by giving Bart a step-by-step guide of everything that needs to be done from start to finish it would be helpful and he could print off a copy to keep in his pocket.

My role as a Flight Manager was to lead, support and develop the crew.  Bart was totally unfamiliar with the service and had struggled with many aspects of it.

Regarding Katrina doing his performance review, at the end of each sector the Purser and Flight Manager are required to complete a short anonymous assessment on their crew.

It’s only possible to complete a review on the people you’re required to do it on.  Bart’s review would only appear on Katrina’s iPad.  On my iPad I could only do a review on the two Pursers.

I was later told by the Head of Department I should have discussed Bart’s performance with Katrina so she could mark him accordingly.  Alternatively I should have done his review on her iPad. 

Katrina had been in the company for a similar amount of time as Bart but was working up as Purser in the cabin.

I believed doing either of those things would have amounted to a breach of confidentiality. I would never have discussed a crew member’s performance with another crew member who was working up in a supervisory role.

The review I wrote on Bart from home was an additional review. I felt it had to be written because Bart’s performance was way below standard. I didn’t decide to write it until after I arrived home and had rested.

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 4

Table of Contents

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 3

Page 1 – Fighting Hatred in the Workplace
Page 2 – Employing a Sociopath
Page 3 – The Day that Changed My Life
Page 3 – When It All Becomes Too Much
Page 4 – Shalom Tel Aviv
Page 5 – Post Flight Customer Feedback
Page 6 – Cue Second Disciplinary
Page 7 – Outcome of the Grievance
Page 8 – Yee Haw The Last Page!

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 5

Fighting Hatred in the Workplace

In 2011 I had an encounter with the Head of Department that led to me reporting her for breach of confidentiality. I believe in 2019 when my name came to her attention because of the grievance raised by Bart that she saw it as an opportunity for revenge.

When a second incident was then reported to her by the CEO she asked for it to be dealt with as a final written warning. Bart’s grievance was also being dealt with as a final written warning.

As a senior manager she would have been fully aware that if upheld I could be fired.

Upon receiving the complaint from the CEO she should have immediately passed it to someone else to deal with. With her already dealing with one disciplinary in which I was involved, dealing with a second matter equates to a conflict of interest.

copy of a company policy

Quite early on in the first grievance investigation I sensed something wasn’t right.

In law the objective of a grievance is an opportunity to collate balanced evidence from both sides and to be fair and objective. It’s not about proving guilt. The purpose of the investigation is to establish whether there has been a breach of any company policies.

It was clear from the start, this investigation was taking a different direction. There didn’t seem to be any interest in establishing whether the allegations against me were truthful. The company only seemed to be interested in ensuring the grievance was upheld.

The evidence being examined was far from balanced. Every word I said in my defence was backed up with indisputable evidence. Everything Bart said in his complaint was lies. The only evidence he could provide to support his allegations came from his now ex fiancée and three or possibly four team members with whom he colluded.

Bart whose an ex police officer is a manipulative liar with a sense of entitlement. He was aggrieved at not having been given the opportunity to work up in a supervisory role on our flight. A colleague who had been with the company for just a few months longer than him was given that opportunity.

He had never flown previously and having joined the airline in February 2018 had been with the company for just eleven months. Katrina who worked up as Purser had flown with another airline for thirty years, twenty as an inflight manager.

Although witness statements provided by Anna, Ven, Mia and Peter strongly suggested the existence of collusion, the Head of Department stated in the outcome to my appeal she could find no evidence to support this.

All Cabin Crew Managers report to the Head of Department. Since writing my story I’ve learnt from two people who worked under her that she’s the driving force behind most if not all grievance investigations. She is no longer with the company.

Bart’s entire complaint focussed on character assassination. He was upset at not having been given the opportunity to work up so had taken a dislike to me before we’d even spoken.

Addressing several performance related issues with him during both flights irritated him further. The final nail in the coffin was the performance appraisal I wrote on him which was also copied to his manager.

A complaint that was dismissed during the initial investigation was subsequently upheld by Crew Manager Hayley who dealt with the second stage of the disciplinary process.

This relatively new manager had no idea what she was doing and had clearly not read the outcome of the initial investigation properly or at all.

She was repeatedly described by the Head of Department as “a very experienced manager” yet nothing could have been further from the truth. She was oblivious that Bart’s complaint about the way I conducted my pre-flight safety briefing and in particular my use of the phrase “up the creek without a paddle” had already been dismissed.

In her investigation that took six weeks to complete she upheld this point along with all other complaints made against me.

The following comes from the outcome of Hayley’s investigation;


The following screenshot comes from my appeal.


Had I used the “ice-breaker” suggested by Hayley, nine people would have to tell the room something about themselves that nobody else knew. We only have twenty minutes for the pre-flight briefing during which time a significant amount of information must be delivered and each crew member must also be asked an individual safety question.

According to Hayley’s LinkedIn profile she was a Cabin Crew Base Manager at her previous two airlines. She says nothing about ever having flown as Cabin Crew.

Although Cabin Crew Managers at this airline do fly, they do not fly as a Flight Manager or Purser. They would therefore never be required to conduct a pre-flight safety briefing.

So what Hayley means to say is that were she to fly in the capacity as an onboard manager and be required to conduct the pre-flight safety briefing that’s what she would do.

The following screenshot comes from the outcome of my appeal conducted by the Head of Department.

copy of written correspondence

Regarding the comment “up shit creek without a paddle”, what I actually said can be seen in Bart’s own complaint;

copy of written correspondence
SEP questions refers to the individual safety question that each crew member must be asked during the pre-flight briefing. They come from the Safety Equipment and Procedures Manual.

The following screenshot comes from the outcome of the initial investigation carried out by Crew Manager Lana;

copy of written correspondence

Saying up the creek without a paddle was a poor choice of words? Personally I don’t see anything wrong with this phrase at all.

Bart’s allegation that my briefing included “a bombardment and tirade of safety questions” and that I subsequently “became visibly and verbally annoyed despite everyone answering” was like everything else in his complaint, a devious and malicious lie.

Witness statements from the rest of the crew fail to support these allegations.

In the outcome of the appeal investigation the Head of Department stated she did not believe the crew were fabricating evidence. Whilst carrying out her investigation all she did was read through documentation associated with the case, or so she claimed.

Throughout his complaint Bart recounted situations that had taken place and cleverly manipulated them. He knew if he was to be believed he had to get other crew members to support his version of events.

This is someone with an impressive memory for detail which is a prerequisite of being a police officer. His complaint was submitted four weeks after we landed from our flight to Atlanta yet he remembered everything in great detail about my performance and behaviour from the second we met.

During the early part of my pre-flight safety briefing I asked the crew six aircraft familiarisation questions. The first three were answered immediately by best friends Katrina and Claire. Everyone else remained silent.

The following screenshot comes from evidence I submitted as part of my defence. In Bart’s complaint he accused me of becoming “visibly and verbally annoyed” when the crew failed to answer the questions”.

copy of written correspondence

Throughout his grievance Bart attacked every single aspect of my behaviour and personality. He was trying to build a picture of someone who was angry, unprofessional and a bully.

The crew who complained about the “different style of delivery” of my pre-flight safety briefing in their witness statements were Bart’s fiancée Anna, Peter and Mia. Ven wasn’t present in the briefing.

Katrina and Claire who had been with their previous airline for thirty years and crew member T who worked up as Economy Purser had no complaints about the style of delivery.

The following extract comes from minutes taken during Bart’s meeting with Crew Manager Lana. Pedro was the Employee Relations Consultant. His purpose for being present was to take minutes and to ensure correct procedures were followed.

From minutes taken during the meeting with crew manager Lana and Bart

This comes from the outcome of the initial investigation into Bart’s complaint. Lana states in an earlier section of her investigation that she could find no evidence of bullying or harassment having taken place on the aircraft. She then says words I used in my appraisal amount to bullying and harassment.

Those words were “quite why”.

From the appraisal I wrote on Bart

The following comes from the outcome of Lana’s investigation;

copy of written correspondence

Regarding not giving consideration as to how Bart may feel when reading the report, how does anyone feel when they’re given a constructive appraisal irrespective of when it has been written?

According to British Employment Law managing an unsatisfactory level of performance by providing developmental feedback is neither bullying or harassment. Providing of course it’s delivered courteously and in a professional manner.

Bart had been flying for eleven months and had never flown previously. Part of my job description as a Flight Manager was coaching and developing.

On our flight together Bart struggled with every aspect of the service despite telling me he had worked in that cabin many times before.

Knowing what I know now, I don’t believe he had ever worked in First Class previously. I think it was his first time but as a narcissist with an overinflated ego he didn’t want to admit it. That’s why he had no idea how the service should be delivered. He made some really basic mistakes, mistakes that any crew member who had ever worked in that cabin before would never have made.

During the grievance investigation I asked the company to confirm whether he had worked in First before. Inflight working positions are recorded electronically for every flight. I never received a response.

When you read the appraisal I wrote on Bart you’ll see it was written in a courteous and professional manner and with the aim of trying to develop him.

Reading the last paragraph in the excerpt above regarding treating colleagues with dignity and respect is farcical. I’ve already shared several extracts from Bart’s complaint which are rude, disrespectful and highly offensive but there’s far worse to come.

Anna and Ven’s statements were also in breach of the the company’s “anti harassment and bullying policy” yet nobody was interested.

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 3

Table of Contents

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 2

Page 1 – When Work Colleagues Tell Lies
Page 2 – Hideous Bunch of Misfits 
Page 3 – Writing Performance Appraisals 
Page 4 – Incompetent Middle Management

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 4

When Work Colleagues Tell Lies

Shortly after writing chapter one of my story I posted a link on a Facebook group widely used by current and ex cabin crew of the airline. It attracted a huge amount of interest and the moderators didn’t feel it was appropropriate for the nature of the page.

Shortly before being removed crew member Peter who was on my Christmas flight to Atlanta in 2018 posted a comment. I responded but the entire thread disappeared soon afterwards.

At the time of our flight Peter had been flying for six months. He was upset at what I’d written and said “a man is doing a blog about being bullied and attacked whilst attacking and bullying people who were only asked to do a witness statement. The situation was nothing to do with me yet he felt the need to slander my name. Things that have been written about me are hurtful and upsetting and I was only being honest and truthful.”

During this chapter I’ll share excerpts from Peter’s witness statement and from the statements of other members of the crew. I want to show that he was being anything but “honest and truthful”.

copy of written correspondence
From crew member Peter’s witness statement

Peter is referring to his best friend Mia. In her witness statement she accuses me of touching her leg. She’s also good friends with crew member T who worked up as Purser in Economy and with Bart’s ex fiancée Anna.

Considering she “mentioned” to Peter I had been “quite physical on a few occasions” you would have thought she would also have said something to T who was not only her friend but also her manager for the flight.

Peter, Mia, Anna and T worked together out of the back galley in Economy for two nine hour flights.

Mia and Anna spoke to a Cabin Crew Manager together prior to their next flight about “my behaviour”. Having spoken to that manager I was told the only thing they complained about was receiving an email from me on their days off which contained developmental feedback.

The following screenshot comes from Mia’s witness statement;


This is from T’s witness statement;

copy of written correspondence

Regarding placing my hand on T’s shoulder, take a look back at what I said during the first investigative meeting regarding Bart’s complaint. It took place before witness statements has been requested.

Here’s the relevant paragraph.

Regarding Mia saying she didn’t find me particularly approachable, she was very pleasant when I did a drinks service in Economy with her on the outbound sector and was also very chatty when she sat across from me at breakfast on Christmas morning in the hotel.

On the inbound sector she also felt comfortable approaching me during the dinner service to draw my attention to the portion size of the Christmas dinner. She could have spoken to Katrina who was the Purser in the cabin but instead came to me.

This also comes from Mia’s witness statement. On the flight to Atlanta Bart worked in a full Premium cabin. The Economy cabin was half empty therefore the crew didn’t need any help. I did a drinks service with Mia because as a Flight Manager it was part of my role to oversee the service and I always tried to work with as many of the crew as possible.

Strange how Mia remembers Bart being in Economy yet doesn’t remember doing an entire drinks service with me.


On our return flight to London once the dinner service in Economy was finished I asked T to send someone to the front to help us in First. The service was very busy and really wasn’t going well.

T, Mia and Anna arrived a short while later. With there already being seven of us at the front which included Ven in Premium I didn’t need three additional people. The front galley on the aircraft is very small.

I asked Anna to go back to Economy, Mia to help Bart on the right aisle because he was struggling to keep up with the service and T to remove service items that customers had finished with.

Despite so many of us working together in such a small area, according to witness statements nobody saw me or was aware of me touching Mia’s leg.

If this incident happened which it didn’t, why didn’t she mention it to anyone? And if she didn’t want it to be taken further why mention it in her witness statement? The answer to that is because I believe Anna coerced her into make up the story to support Bart and her own allegation of inappropriate touching.

If a man old enough to be her father genuinely touched her leg, having then learnt some months later that he also allegedly touched other crew members inappropriately, why wouldn’t you want it to be addressed?

Mia was in First helping Bart on his aisle for about forty five minutes. So she worked alongside him during that time. I was also busy helping in the cabin. Here’s another screenshot from her witness statement.

copy of written correspondence
from Mia’s witness statement. FSM/FM = Flight (service) Manager

I was stressed because the service was a shambles and the galley was chaos. I had Bart on one aisle who was struggling to keep up and a crew member in the galley plating food like it was school dinners.

Being a night flight I wanted to get the lights off so customers could sleep.

Katrina who was working up as Purser was working hard but was trying to do everything herself. The role of Purser is to lead and direct the service, it’s not just about being an additional pair of hands.

This was her first time working up and she hadn’t been with the airline that long. It was just very unfortunate the service was much busier than normal and there were so many challenges to deal with.

Although I was supporting her as much as I could which she confirms in her witness statement, I didn’t want to take over completely.

Whilst all this was going on Mia claims I touched her leg and thought I had “dropped something or was having a laugh.”

T was also present in the cabin at this time yet was unaware of any inappropriate touching.

For most of the dinner service there were seven of us working in two relatively narrow aisles in a small cabin. Towards the end of the service once Ven had finished in Premium he also came to help out.

According to witness statements nobody apart from Anna who was at the opposite end of the aircraft in Economy and Bart who was in First, saw me or was aware of me touching anyone inappropriately at any time.

There’s very little room around the bar at the back of First Class and the galley is also very small. The galley wall can just about be seen in this photo. I’ve included it to show how narrow the walkway is behind the bar stools.

This is where I was sweeping the carpet with a dustpan and brush prior to landing when I touched Ven’s ankle. He was sat on the middle bar stool talking to Katrina who was sitting to his left.

Virgin Atlantic Upper Class bar area on the aircraft
Arrow pointing to the dividing wall between the cabin the galley

In Bart’s witness statement he says “Laurence constantly touched me and other crew members on or below the hips. Excessive and unwanted touching especially by a manager who has not created good rapport was not welcomed and was commented on by many members of the crew.”

In Anna’s statement she said “I witnessed Laurence touch crew member Bart below the hips while negotiating a tight work place (I think she means workspace). Crew member Bart looked uncomfortable with Laurence’s hand placement as his posture straightened and he looked surprised. Laurence also touched me below the hips and it made me uncomfortable.”

In one response in Ven’s witness statement he repeats three times that me touching his ankle made him feel “very uncomfortable”.

Having arrived at the front of the aircraft with T and Amy, Anna was present for just a few minutes before I asked her to return to Economy.

Despite eight out of ten crew members confirming in their witness statement they didn’t see me touch anyone inappropriately or were even aware of any such behaviour, the allegation was upheld by both Cabin Crew Managers and by the Head of Department who subsequently heard my appeal.

Two crew failed to return their witness statement. One was Bruce who worked the First Class galley, the other a female crew member in Economy.

I even supplied a letter from a doctor of clinical psychology who stated it’s “unlikely” I would touch anyone inappropriately.

It’s worth remembering that Bart was a serving police officer for eight years. Anna also came from a police background. With that said, from recent events in the news we are now aware there’s a serious problem with corruption, abuse of power and serial offending within the police in the UK.

I dread to think how many innocent people were “framed” by Bart during his time as an officer in the north of England.

With regards to Ven’s allegation of me squeezing his waist, think about that for a moment. How do you squeeze someone’s waist?

In Ven’s witness statement he accuses me of being “touchy feely”. In this photo Ven is on the left behind me. His arm is draped around Peter’s shoulder and Peter’s arm is around Ven’s waist. I wonder whether he’s squeezing?

My hands are firmly in my pockets.

three male cabin crew wearing pink sweatshirts

I look very tired in this photo. I had just spoken to my dad who was extremely poorly. I knew he was in the last days of his life and hoped he’d still be alive when I landed home. He passed away just over a week later.

My dad lived with me since my mum died in 2010. I was his carer for almost nine years. He was now in a lovely care home but it had been a long and difficult fight to get him a place.

Little did I know when leaving Atlanta on this Christmas afternoon in 2018 with this seemingly happy bunch of people that my life would never be the same again.

In Ven’s witness statement he says when he arrived for the flight he didn’t know anyone on the crew. Less than twenty four hours later him and Peter have clearly become extremely good friends. Whilst that’s not uncommon for cabin crew I have a good reason for mentioning it.

In his comment on Facebook regarding my blog Peter said, “I would never lie maliciously to hurt someone.”

The following comes from his witness statement;

“Laurence spent a lot of time in the flight deck”.

Were this to be true it would have been extremely damaging. My role on the aircraft was to be in the cabin and not to be spending long periods of time chatting with the pilots. By making this statement Peter knew exactly what he was doing.

The comment can only refer to the inbound sector because the outbound flight was half empty and very quiet.

Peter didn’t come to the front of the aircraft once on either sector. He states several times in his witness statement we saw very little of each other during both flights. Therefore he can’t possibly know what I did with my time.

The only other person who made a comment regarding my availability in the cabin or apparent lack of it, was Ven. Peter and Ven were working at opposite ends of a very large aircraft.

Not even Bart or Anna made reference to me spending long periods of time in the flight deck.

This comes from Ven’s witness statement;

From Ven’s witness statement.

It seems very clear why Peter wrote what he did in his statement. So much for “only being honest and truthful”.

This is from his social media page;

copy of an instagram post with text

Ven worked position CM7 (CM = Crew Member) which looks after the Premium cabin. He worked out of the same galley as me, Bart, Lottie, Katrina and Claire.

I asked him on the inbound flight once he finished his service to help us in First. Katrina was the Purser in that cabin so I don’t understand why Ven believed he was doing that position.

According to his witness statement, on our inbound flight, as well as working in a full Premium cabin looking after thirty eight people, he not only helped out in First but somehow ran the service. He also claims to have done some aspects of my role which was Flight Manager.

Anyone who has flown as crew for this airline and particularly with me will see through his lies. His rank at this time was Cabin Crew which is the same as the other eleven crew members on this flight. He wasn’t even the most senior member of crew.

Whilst Ven has since been promoted his lies contributed to me losing my job.

The following screenshot comes from documents submitted as part of my defence. The text in blue is the question being asked by Lana the grievance investigation manager. Orange is Ven’s response. The black is my response.

FM = Flight Manager.

Maybe he thinks he worked the First Class Purser position because I asked him to show Katrina how to do the drinks bar paperwork for Customs.

I asked for Ven’s help because he was a competent crew member and I was busy doing other things.

Regarding his comment about making a seat belt sign announcement, each time I read that it makes me laugh. At this airline the onboard managers have always made all cabin announcements. They can if they wish delegate them to one of their crew.

During the flight the seat belt sign announcement is usually made by the Economy Purser. It’s mandatory at least one announcement be made so if not done within a few minutes the other Purser or Flight Manager will do it.

With there being three onboard managers even though two were working up, Ven claims he made the announcement because “due to lack of experience it wasn’t made.”

Ven also states I didn’t make a welcome announcement after take-off which is odd considering Bart and Anna both criticised my after take-off announcement.

This is the reason why as part of the witness statement requested by the company the crew were asked;

“Please share any observations on Flight Manager Laurence’s PA’s.”

Considering Ven believes he was working as Purser and also did parts of my position as Flight Manager, I’m surprised he didn’t claim to have made the after take-off announcement himself. After all this ignorant deluded buffoon believes he went over the head of all three onboard managers and made an announcement regarding the seatbelt signs because it wasn’t made.

Part of my responsibility as a Flight Manager was to ensure safety procedures were followed. According to Mia’s witness statement I was a very strict Flight Manager.

If Ven had genuinely made an announcement because it wasn’t made by me or one of the Pursers you can be sure it would have been mentioned by Anna and Bart in their correspondence. Needless to say it wasn’t. Nor was it mentioned by anyone else.

Even Peter makes reference to my announcements in his witness statement. He says his travelling companion thought they were “were really long and didn’t need to be”.

Ven cites “lack of experience” as being the reason why the announcement wasn’t made. He also says I should have taken charge but didn’t. That’s a strange comment to make considering Bart accused me of being a bully and of overbearing supervision.

I had been flying for this airline for 30 years, my last 22 were as an onboard manager (first Purser then Flight Manager). Katrina and Claire had both flown previously for another airline for thirty years, twenty as Flight Managers.

Lottie was the longest serving crew member and carried out her role to a high standard. She was fully aware of all company procedures. She had been with the company for eight years. Making an announcement regarding the seatbelt sign is not only company procedure but also a requirement laid down by the UK Civil Aviation Authority.

The most junior crew member in First was Bart who had only been flying for eleven months. According to minutes taken during his meeting with the crew manager investigating his grievance, he complained he wasn’t given the opportunity to work up as Purser.

As you’ll see when I publish his performance appraisal he wasn’t able to do his own job properly let alone run the entire service in the cabin.

I even had to compensate one First Class customer because Bart had woken him for breakfast but then didn’t go back to serve him. He was completely missed out. The customer subsequently complained to me mentioning Bart by name.

I spoke to Bart there and then about why he had been missed. Having asked how he did the service he told me he first woke everyone up on his side who was having breakfast. He then converted their beds back to the seat position and then started serving breakfast.

I told him that’s not the way the service is done in the cabin.

I wasn’t present for most of the breakfast service because I am required to do the service in Premium.

In his complaint Bart told more lies about why the customer was missed out. Needless to say he refused to take any responsibility and blamed Katrina and Claire for what happend.

This next excerpt comes from evidence submitted as part of my defence. It’s regarding the dinner arranged for us in the hotel on Christmas Eve by the company. It was the evening we arrived in Atlanta.

Three tables had been set up. Bart, Anna, T, Peter, Mia and their two companions sat at one table along with another two crew from our flight. I sat on a separate table with the Captain, First Officer, Lottie, Katrina and Claire. The third table was occupied by another crew.

The crew member I was asked to speak to by the Captain was Peter.

copy of written correspondence
From evidence submitted as part of my defence

Despite having seen so little of me during both flights and the entire trip according to his witness statement, Peter says “he (Laurence) came across professional towards customers but to crew I feel he came across unapproachable and not so professional, his attitude made me feel awkward around him”.

On our outbound flight whilst half the crew were on their rest break I went to the back to check on Peter. He was in the galley alone and we spoke for about ten minutes.

He told me he was best friends with Mia, that she had persuaded him to apply for this job. He also told me he worked in a gym.

Making conversation wasn’t easy which I put down to the significant age gap and him still being very new. Peter was in his early twenties and had been with the company for six months. I’m in my early 50’s and had been with the company for almost thirty years.

That was the only time we spoke one-to-one or spent any time alone.

In response to another question he says “I don’t feel he took his time to engage with his crew”. In another, “If I’m honest I didn’t find Laurence approachable in the slightest, mostly because of his (pre-flight) briefing and he didn’t take much time to engage with myself.”

Here’s his answer to another question;

“Please share any other information you feel may be relevant to the performance and behaviour of Laurence and crew member Bart on this duty.”

“He (Laurence) also sent an email to all the crew regarding the flight and Voice of Customer which was very unnecessary and long”.

Voice of Customer refers to the post flight questionnaires completed by customers after the flight in which they score the performance of the crew.

Bear in mind Peter had only been with the airline for six months and had never flown previously.

The email he’s referring to was only sent to the four crew working in Economy plus crew member T who worked up as Economy Purser.

Although I occasionally wrote performance appraisals from home after a flight I had never contacted a group of crew in this way.

I foolishly believed that with them all being quite new and with T having worked up in a supervisory role that they would appreciate some constructive feedback delivered in an encouraging and friendly manner.

I always took a keen interest in my performance and was concerned my scores had dropped slightly in the previous month. Even though I was still above average I wanted to get them up as quickly as possible. I always aimed to perform at an optimal level.

During the inbound pre-flight briefing the Flight Manager shares with the crew the scores from the outbound flight. The scores are from the Voice of Customer questionnaires completed by passengers on that flight.

I therefore felt there was no reason why I shouldn’t share them with this group of crew from our inbound sector. Only on-board managers have access to the scores and comments. Admittedly this is not a requirement and I doubt it’s something other managers do.

I had never done it before but felt it would be appreciated because three out of the four crew working in Economy were relatively new. Crew member T who worked up in a supervisory role had also recently been turned down for promotion to that rank.

I was initially only going to email him because I thought he may be interested to know the scores for the flight but then decided to include Anna, Mia and Peter as well. I also copied in their managers plus my own.

Only one out of the four Cabin Crew Managers replied.

Email from a Cabin Crew Manager (MPD = Manager Performance and Development)

So Mia was the only crew member to reply. The same Mia who said she didn’t find me approachable and who accused me of touching her leg.


Crew member T didn’t reply either despite me saying in the feedback email “T did an outstanding job working up”.

Don’t forget T had just returned from a year of working in cabin crew recruitment.

When Peter speaks about Bart in his witness statement his tone changes completely. Peter and Bart worked at opposite ends of the aircraft and Bart spent almost no time in Economy. On the outbound flight it wasn’t necessary and on the inbound he was far too busy to leave First Class.

Anna who had been with the airline for less than eleven months complained about my email to a Cabin Crew Manager when checking in for her next flight. Although she says she spoke with Julie on the 27th, it was actually the 28th.

Guess what the name is of the crew member whose name I’ve obscured? It’s Mia. Now scroll up and have a look at the date on the email that Mia sent to me thanking me for my feedback. Don’t bother I’ll save you the time, it was the 28th December 2018.

CM = Crew Member OMB should read OBM – On-board manager (Flight Manager)

The emails Anna refers to were not included with the paperwork I received as part of the outcome of the initial investigation. Therefore I don’t know the content. Bear in mind this is someone who had been in the company for eleven months.

The following screenshot comes from evidence I submitted as part of my defence;

From evidence submitted as part of my defence. FM – Flight Manager

This next screenshot comes from crew member Lottie’s witness statement. She worked alongside Bart and I in First. After me she was the longest serving crew member on the aircraft.

Her statement was honest and accurate considering the amount of time that had passed since the flight.

Bart did not collude with her, Claire or Katrina. The three of them worked alongside Bart and I in First Class.

Lottie’s witness statement

From what she has written you can only imagine what Anna and Mia said about the content of my email. Her comment about me laughing and joking with the crew is a reference to me touching Ven’s ankle whilst I was behind him sweeping the carpet. The only crew members present at the time were Lottie and Katrina.

I want to bring this section to an end by sharing the email I sent to the Economy crew.

I appreciate it’s longer than it could have been but at the time of writing I wasn’t in a great place mentally. My dad was very poorly, it was a couple of days after Christmas and I was at home alone.

Losing myself doing something I enjoyed was a good distraction.

The purpose of the email was to share some of my experience with four young people who had been in the company for less than twelve months. Only Anna had flown previously. We left Atlanta on Christmas Day and flew home through the night.

VoC is the Voice of Customer programme. These surveys are sent once passengers have completed their journey.


Peter and Mia thought my email was totally unnecessary whilst Anna claimed it had a negative effect on her mental health and was a further attack from an overly critical Flight Manager.

Peter had been in the company for six months, Mia for just over a year and Anna for less than a year. Neither Peter or Mia had flown as Cabin Crew prior to joining the company.

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 2

Table of Contents

Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 1 

Page 1 – Retaliation, Making it Personal  
Page 2 – Performance Management System 
Page 2 – My Performance Management Record 
Page 2 – Combining the Rank of Junior and Senior 
Page 2 – Completing Onboard Appraisals 
Page 3 – The Early Days at the Airline 
Page 4 – More of the Good Old Days
Page 4 – Cabin Crew Life Downroute
Page 4 – Pre-Flight Safety Briefings
Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 3

Retaliation, Making it Personal

The two managers dealing with the grievance raised against me by ex police officer now crew member Bart didn’t seem interested in establishing whether he was telling the truth.

The documentation included in the outcome of the investigation carried out by crew manager Lana enabled me to see all correspondence associated with Bart’s complaint. That included minutes from his one and only meeting with the her.

At no time was he advised verbally or in writing should it be discovered he has made false or baseless claims he could face disciplinary action up to and including dismissal. I find that surprising considering the Employee Relations Consultant who was present during the meeting is a solicitor in employment law.

The following screenshot comes from those minutes. The Employee Relations Consultant is present to ensure company procedures are followed and to take minutes. The meeting is conducted by a Cabin Crew Manager who was Lana.

Regarding Bart not being happy with the way his ‘performance management’ was delivered to his manager, I sent her a copy which is company procedure and always has been.

All training manuals state an employee’s manager must be copied in on any performance management that’s written. Bear in mind Bart was still in probation having only been flying for eleven months.

With all allegations against me being upheld I filed an appeal. It was dealt with by the Head of Department.

This was an opportunity for her not only to look again at all of the evidence but to also investigate what I had been stating from the start, that Bart and five members of crew one of whom was his fiancée were lying.

At the start of the appeal meeting I asked the Head of Department whether she had just read my appeal or the entire case. My defence was made up of more than five hundred pages of evidence. She said she had read the entire case.

During the eight weeks that it took her to investigate the matter she didn’t speak to Bart or any of the crew on the flight.

As part of my evidence I made reference to a WhatsApp conversation that I’d had with a friend/colleague following the flight. I sent the conversation as a screenshot to Crew Manager Hayley.

Hayley didn’t add a copy to the case notes. I’d also sent her a photograph of the hotel corridor. That hadn’t been added to the file either.

Despite making reference to both pieces of evidence multiple times in my appeal, the Head of Department didn’t ask to see them.

The following is a screenshot from an email I sent to her regarding this matter;

copy of written correspondence in an email
FSM = Flight Manager

Prior to doing my ‘return to work’ course after being off for almost two years in 2016 I had to be cleared by Occupational Health. As well as wanting to talk about my mental health they also wanted me to have a hearing test. That’s because whilst off I had developed tinnitus.

Despite having worked for the airline for almost thirty years, when I arrived at the training base on the first day of my course I was terrified. It had been a long time since I’d socialised with anyone and was no longer the bubbly confident and outgoing person I once was.

I wore a dark business suit and whilst waiting for the day to begin sat in the corner watching apprehensively at everything going on around me. I wasn’t convinced I would get through the course.

Driving out the car park three weeks later was an amazing feeling. I couldn’t wait to get back on an aircraft.

Nine months later to be accused of bullying, harassment, overbearing supervision and inappropriate touching by a bunch of ignorant misfits set me back enormously.

Their poisonous lies took me on a journey so dark I don’t believe I’ll ever fully recover.

Throughout the investigation I struggled to understand why there was such determination for this grievance to be upheld. Proving Bart and his accomplices were lying took over my life and became an obsession.

Once I put on my uniform no matter how I felt, I was representing the company. I always tried to do that to the best of my ability.

In my role as a Flight Manager I was responsible for ensuring safety procedures were followed and to lead, motivate and develop a team of crew. From performance appraisals I received from those working alongside me I clearly did a pretty good job.

selfie of a male flight attendant in uniform
Taken at some point in 2019 whilst fighting a grievance I had no chance of winning