| Table of Contents Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 2 Page 1 – When Employees Tell Lies Page 2 – A Hideous Bunch of Misfits Page 3 – Bart’s Performance Feedback Page 4 – Quite Why… Page 5 – Cabin Crew Managers Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth Part 4 |
A Hideous Bunch of Misfits
With the flight to Atlanta being over Christmas, I wanted to make it a little bit special. Despite my dad being gravely ill, my thoughts were with my colleagues who would not be home for Christmas. The only person I had flown with previously was Bruce. I didn’t know anyone else apart from the Captain and First Officer.
I purchased a large box of chocolates for everyone to share and six boxes of ‘luxury’ mince pies from Marks and Spencer. I took a photograph of the chocolates because I asked my partner whether they were okay. He said I was bonkers spending so much money and should have gone to Lidl. I spent almost forty pounds on chocolates and mince pies for a group of people I had never met.
My pre-flight Briefing and entire performance as a Flight Manager were being investigated because of a malicious grievance raised by a crew member still in probation. It would take almost three years for me to understand why the company was so determined for it to be upheld.
Despite never having been given any constructive feedback about the content of my Pre-Flight Briefing, and having been praised many times in written feedback for the atmosphere I created, every single word that I said during that meeting was being scrutinised.
The following extract comes from evidence that I submitted as part of my defence. “Crew Mgr Fred” is the same Cabin Crew Manager who presided over the initial investigation into the second grievance raised against me in relation to the CEO’s complaint.
The Pre-Flight Briefing that he sat in on was the same style of briefing that I delivered prior to the flight to Atlanta. Instead of reading out the ‘Aircraft Familiarisation Points’, I asked them as questions to the group as a whole.
In Anna’s witness statement (Bart’s fiancée at the time), she also criticised many aspects of my Pre-Flight Briefing.
This screenshot comes from Peter’s witness statement.
The flight to Atlanta on December 24th 2018 should have had nine Cabin Crew, two Pursers, and a Flight Manager. Insterad, it had eleven Cabin Crew and a Flight Manager, who was me.
Although Ven was told when he was called for the flight on standby that he would be working up as Purser, for reasons already explained, I changed his working position to Premium, which is at the front of the aircraft, not the back. Peter states that he was “put down the back acting as crew.” Ven’s rank was Cabin Crew, so by working in Premium, he was in his correct rank.
The department that calls flying staff from standby would have seen the flight was missing two Pursers. With there being no Pursers on standby, a crew member (Ven) in the rank of Cabin Crew was called instead and told he would be working up. Ultimately, it’s up to the Flight Manager to decide who works where on the aircraft.
I was only told as we left Cabin Crew Check-In that an additional crew member had been called out. After boarding the aircraft and updating my iPad, I saw that Ven had been called to work as Purser but was actually Cabin Crew. By that time, I had no desire to start changing working positions around and felt comfortable with Tommy and Katrina working up.
As soon as Ven arrived at the aircraft, I spoke with him in the galley and explained that I no longer needed him to work as Purser. He repeated several times that he didn’t mind where he worked. We had never met, but he seemed like a nice guy, and I was happy to have another experienced crew member.
This comes from Ven’s witness statement:
The reason his iPad still showed him as working as Purser is because he was called out to operate as that rank. Therefore, that wouldn’t change until his iPad synced with mine. Bear with me over the next few paragraphs because this isn’t easy to explain.
In his witness statement, Peter says I “chose” Katrina to work up and makes a point of saying she was one of the least senior. In fact, he was the least senior, having been with the company for just six months.
During the first grievance investigation meeting with Cabin Crew Manager Lana, having explained my reasons for asking Katrina to work up as Purser, I was asked the following questions:
- When did I allocate working positions?
- How long before the start of the Pre-Flight Briefing were crew working positions entered into my company iPad?
- Who would I have asked to work up as the two Pursers had I not asked Tommy and Katrina?
I was asked these questions because, in his grievance, Bart complained that he wasn’t given this opportunity to work as Purser. He also accused me of not entering the cabin crew working positions into my iPad, which is a requirement. Anna repeated this allegation in her witness statement.
You’ll see from the screenshot above that Ven says, having looked at his iPad, he could see he had been allocated CM7 (CM = Crew Member), although it still showed he was operating as Purser. The fact that he could see his working position confirms that I had entered crew working positions into my iPad. Had I not, nobody would have been able to see the inflight working positions. The Flight Manager’s iPad is the master iPad that syncs with everyone else’s.
I believe that Ven told Bart, Anna, or both of them that I didn’t enter working positions, which is why Bart wrote that in his grievance, and Anna repeated it. They saw it as a ‘gotcha’ moment because, in their sick and twisted minds, they believed that by me not entering working positions, no upward performance feedback could be written on me. The truth of the matter is that these three belligerent idiots had no idea how the system worked.
The following comes from Bart’s grievance. The black text is from the performance feedback that I wrote on him, the blue and green is his response:
When Bart says “allocate roles,” he means allocate working positions. Even after eleven months in the company, he was still unfamiliar with the correct terminology. Katrina, who worked up as Purser and completed his performance feedback, scored him 10 on both sectors despite him struggling to keep up with the service and having no idea what he was doing.
Without going into more detail than is necessary, cabin crew inflight working positions must be entered into the Flight Manager’s iPad so the Pre-Flight briefing can commence. As each crew member answers their mandatory safety-related question, the Flight Manager marks a box adjacent to their name to confirm they have answered correctly.
Another reason that working positions must be entered into the iPad is so that mandatory performance feedback can be completed on each crew member. In addition to free text, a score out of ten must be given.
Cabin Crew working in certain positions are required to complete upward feedback on either their Purser or the Flight Manager. The Pursers and Flight Manager must also complete performance feedback on each other and on the Cabin Crew. If the Flight Manager doesn’t enter working positions, none of this can be done.
The following extract comes from Anna’s witness statement. She had been with the airline for less than twelve months but had flown previously as Cabin Crew with another airline for a short period of time.
‘JR90’ is a code that indicates a crew member is still relatively new. ‘VoC scores’ refers to Voice of the Customer questionnaires that passengers are invited to complete after their flight. Tommy, who worked up as Economy Purser, failed to complete any feedback, either on me or Anna, Peter, Mia and a fourth crew member with whom he worked.
When we checked in at Heathrow, Tommy informed me that he didn’t have his iPad because he was waiting for a replacement. Therefore, he would need to complete the mandatory performance feedback on paper, which is how it had been done prior to iPads being introduced. If he didn’t have the paperwork, he could have asked me or advised me that he was unable to complete any feedback electronically.
Claire, who was working in First, did my upward feedback. Scores used to be out of 10 but are now out of 5.
By saying “two main crew”, Claire means two Cabin Crew who are not trained Pursers. CSSs means Cabin Service Supervisor, aka Purser. “Rating” is the score she awarded me out of 5. “Brief” refers to the Cabin Crew Pre-Flight Briefing that I delivered prior to each sector.
In Ven’s witness statement, he says, “She was given no support by Laurence.” “She” refers to Katrina. Ven is alleging that I did not support her during her time working up as Purser. The following screenshot is from Katrina’s witness statement.
This also comes from Ven’s witness statement. Although it has always been company policy that inflight working positions be allocated by the Flight Manager, many allow the cabin crew to choose where they want to work. Ven is clearly unaware of company policy, not only with regard to this matter but also several others.
Bart’s statement, “I scored 10s on both sectors as the Purser saw how I actually worked and not how Laurence viewed things,” confirms that working positions were entered into my iPad. Had they not been, Katrina would not have been able to complete his performance feedback.
Cabin Crew Manager Lana told me during the initial grievance investigation meeting, which took place several weeks after she met with Bart, that having explained to him how the performance feedback system works on the iPad, his complaint was removed because it was not justified. You may recall that in Bart’s grievance regarding me not entering working positions, he states, “I’m sure this is a deliberate thing and something he has done before.”
In Anna’s witness statement, she also accused me of not entering working positions. She received her witness statement several weeks after Bart was told this part of his complaint was being dismissed.
Despite their inflammatory remarks, collusion, and blatant lies, Cabin Crew Managers Lana, Hayley and the Head of Cabin Crew still believed their version of events over mine. Their despicable and malicious lies cost me my job and destroyed my mental health and my ability to work.
This next screenshot comes from the grievance I raised against the company for the way my appeal was handled. The black mark covers the Head of Cabin Crew’s name.
Katrina, who had only been with the airline for a few months longer than Bart and was working up as Purser in First Class, completed his mandatory performance feedback. I wrote additional feedback from home because I felt the standard of his work during both sectors needed to be addressed. This was discussed at length during the appeal meeting. I’ll talk about it in more detail in a later chapter.
This next screenshot includes minutes taken during the first grievance meeting with Cabin Crew Manager Lana, plus evidence that I submitted as part of my defence.
On our outbound flight to Atlanta, the Economy cabin, which had 233 seats, only had 164 passengers. The Premium cabin had 38 seats with 32 passengers, and in First, we had 20 passengers in a cabin with 45 seats. We took off twenty-two minutes late at 09:47. The flight time was eight hours and forty minutes. With it being so quiet, The crew had a two-hour rest break in the bunks. I didn’t take a break because I didn’t feel comfortable leaving the cabin.
Because of the delay, we took off twenty-two minutes late, but landed at 14:20 local time, fifty-five minutes ahead of schedule. It took twenty minutes to get to the hotel.
In their witness statements, Mia forgot about the mid-flight drinks service that I did with her, and Peter forgot about the conversation we had in the back galley when he told me Mia had persuaded him to apply for this job. Anna, Mia and Peter all stated I didn’t go into the Economy cabin yet in Tommy’s statement, he said this:
The “3 doors” are emergency exits in the centre of Economy.
During the outbound sector, I spent plenty of time in all three cabins, but on the return, didn’t get an opportunity to go to Economy other than to buy some Duty Free in the back galley. I did the breakfast service alongside Ven in the Premium cabin which is a requirement. The questions asked in the witness statements were applicable to both sectors.
The email that I sent to the Economy crew after the flight further confirms that I spent time in Economy.
The following two screenshots which were included as part of my evidence, come from Anna’s Facebook page. Anna and Bart are not their real names.
I wonder whether Anna lied when she applied for her new job after being made redundant during Covid. Here’s another screenshot from her Facebook page:
Being Cabin Crew | The Ugly Truth 