Well she was the boss, and he didn’t do his job properly. First Class is a fairly stupid concept to start with (I have flown business class for work and I find it very practical, you get the extra space you need) but for several times the price, first class has to offer these intangibles, like nuts on a plate. I think she was right to correct her employee, but wrong to go off the handle. We don’t want people doing that on aeroplanes, its dangerous.
Also I don’t see why she has been arrested in Korea for an offence committed in the US. Is it possible that this is being done to make the airline look better?
While law in these circumstances is generally pretty complex, the rule of thumb is that on board a registered vehicle (that has not been hijacked or stolen) crimes committed aboard that vehicle even in international waters or airspace fall under the jurisdiction of the country where the vehicle is registered, unless that country for some reason cannot or refuses to prosecute.
Also, dude, no one is arguing whether anyone was in their right to “correct” their employee, why even mention this. What’s being argued is what constitutes any sort of sane definition of “correcting” said employee, especially given the minor quality of the error. Let’s refrain from even sort-of justifying, unnecessarily, the asinine behavior of the world’s entitled class. They contribute bupkiss and ruin everything they touch.
I understand where you are coming from, but this incident has more in common with telling a bus driver to return to the station on the wrong side of the road.
Yes, either situations can be safe, but no exec has the right to make that call for trivial insubordination. So she has been lawfully arrested.
Except the plane didn’t take off before returning to the terminal, thus no international air space, no leaving jurisdiction of the airport, and none of your examples apply.
Yes, it does, because once you board an aircraft you are considered to be in “airspace” until you disembark. The aircraft’s wheels touching the tarmac is a meaningless distinction.
So, Ms. Cho, your ‘apology’ intriguingly hints at the possibility of one or more other text messages, that did not appear in the newspapers and for which you are not sorry. Any really good ones?
Potentially: As best I can tell, the protagonist of this merry tale made two very serious mistakes:
As a matter of law, they did something stupid and disruptive on a commercial passenger aircraft. Bad choice of venue. That automatically assures you an audience(some of it moderately wealthy and very internet connected themselves) who are deeply unimpressed by the delay; and puts you right into the crosshairs of humorless feds who either loath the disruptions of the world or see terrorists behind every tree. This isn’t a nightclub where a brawl between a couple of mediocre entertainment personalities and their sycophants is practically part of the fun, rather than a crime.
As a matter of culture, they Made The Company Look Stupid and made daddy look stupid. If you are, say, a highly placed executive in a Chaebol with a bit of a reputation for opacity and nepotism, a hilarious story about your kids screwing up highly visibly in the cushy jobs your influence got them is not going to amuse you. I’m guessing that daddy was not amused and neither were any of his colleagues of similar status within Korean Air and the Hanjin Group as a whole.
I’ll definitely concede toypur point about legality. This is one of those few international markets where all players accept a high degree of regulation and, more importantly, everyone takes that regulation seriously because plane crashes are bad for the whole market.
The point about embarrassing the company is one that only translates in part from Korean culture into an English-speaking one. I think we might have a few oligarchs whose attitude towards the relationship between company and family are more feudal.
