| Welcome to the Crisis Management Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit. This board is for the discussion of all things involving corporate crisis management: strategies, best practices, crisis plans, mock disasters, media training, etc. It is also a place to follow and discuss current crises in the news, and the news media itself. This is a forum about preparing for and managing media crises, and a place to review, critique and discuss how real crises are being managed, or not managed. This is a forum not only for communications professionals, students and educators, but for anyone who has found that the ability to manage crises is an important part of their job. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Commuter Airlines Under Fire; Fallout from Calgan Air Crash | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: May 14 2009, 11:35 AM (246 Views) | |
| Steve Wilson | May 14 2009, 11:35 AM Post #1 |
|
Fatal Crash Raises Questions I'm not sure I'd want to be the PR guy at Colgan Air these days. Based on the news reports, the Continental Connection airline paid its pilots less than truck drivers, overworked them and hired people who even they say may not have been qualified. Really makes you want to jump aboard a commuter airline. The NTSB hearings resulting from the fatal crash of Continental Connection 3407 in Buffalo February 12 may result in a major overhaul of commuter airlines. Fifty people were killed in that crash. With airlines already being hammered financially, this is not likely to help business. What should they do? For starters, stop making excuses for running a shoddy operation. Don't blame pilots for lying about failing pilot tests. Don't they check out records and references? And this isn't just about Colgan and commuter airlines. Continental's name was on the side of the plane and the media often refers it as the crash of a Continental Airlines plane. I'm sure people are going to question how much Continental checks out the airlines it contracts with for commuter service. And finally, it's not like we have a lot of choices about flying commuter planes. In many circumstances, a commuter is the only choice you have when you want to fly. |
 |
 
|
| Allison Combs | May 14 2009, 12:39 PM Post #2 |
|
I'm not sure Continental will come out of this unscathed. They contract with a company that operates a "Sweat Shop" commuter service and blames its own pilots for being inadequately trained to fly their airplanes. Where's the oversight? Doesn't Continental have some responsibility to assure that the planes that bear Continental's name on the side have qualified pilots? |
|
|
|
| Steve Wilson | May 26 2009, 03:28 PM Post #3 |
|
As if Continental Airlines doesn't already have enough problems with its aircraft (or its name on aircraft), yet another story broke this morning on The Today Show about a passenger who is now paralyzed from the neck down because of turbulence on a Continental flight. The seat belt sign was on and the pilot had issued repeated warnings for passengers to remain in their seats, but a woman went to the bathroom and was injured when the plane hit heavy turbulence. Was Continental at fault? They said the seat belt sign was lighted. The passenger said she didn't hear anyone say she had to stay belted in her seat and decided a short bathroom break wouldn't hurt anything. This has become a sort of "he said, she said" episode with the facts hard to find. The passenger's lawyer says she did nothing wrong. Continental has declined comment. So how do you respond as an airline when someone is injured while using the bathroom during a descent when the seat belt light is on and people are asked to remain seated? And why is NBC giving the story so much play? Should Continental say something or is the airline thinking the seat belt sign is its only necessary defense? For more, go to: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/30938294/ |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Crises in the news · Next Topic » |
1:54 PM Sep 9