TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 13 °C Wednesday 22 May, 2013

Virgin to re-think policy on men sitting beside unaccompanied children

A public backlash has seen Virgin Australia reconsidering a policy barring men from sitting beside unaccompanied children.

Image: Steve Parsons/PA Wire/Press Association Images

VIRGIN AUSTRALIA IS reviewing a policy barring  men from sitting beside unaccompanied children after a Sydney fireman was asked to swap seats because he was sitting beside two boys.

Johnny McGirr, 33, was reportedly flying home from Brisbane in April when he took his seat next to two boys, thought be be aged 8 and ten, according to the Sydney Morning Herald. However, just as passengers were fastening their seat-belts, a flight attendant came over to him and asked him to move.

When he asked why, McGirr was told it was against airline policy to seat men beside unaccompanied minors. “I said, ‘Well, that’s pretty sexist and discriminatory. You can’t just say because I’m a man I can’t sit there,’” McGirr said.

“After that I got really embarrassed because she didn’t even explain. I just got up and shook my head a little, trying to get some dignity out of the situation,” he said.

“And that was it. I pretty much sat through the flight getting angrier.”

Virgin initially defended its position, however in a written complaint to the airline McGirr pointed out that – as a fireman – it was his job to protect minors. Instead, he said, the airline had treated him as a “potential paedophile”.

“The majority of sexual assaults are [also] committed by men,” he wrote. “Does that mean that we can’t sit next to women? Should we just have a seat by ourselves and that way women and children will be protected?”

Virgin Australia tweeted that it was reviewing the policy in light of the incident:

We understand the concerns raised around our policy for children travelling alone, a long standing policy initially based on customer feedback.

In light of recent feedback, we’re now reviewing this policy. Our intention is certainly not to discriminate in any way.

In his complaint, McGirr wrote that he recognised vulnerable children must be protected and suggested the airline’s policy be changed so that unaccompanied children are chaperoned by a member of staff – or that the seat beside them is never sold.

Read: Virgin Atlantic employee quits over alleged emails to paparazzi>

Read next:

Comments (83 Comments)

  • Perhaps men should be checked in as luggage into the cargo hold, in individual containers marked as hazardous. Or in a glider towed by the main plane. This would completely avoid the problem. Lets not forget also, it was men who perpetrated 911.

    Reply
    • What happens if a soccer team with all in first class. Would all those players over 18yrs old have to be shifted around so their not sitting beside their younger team mates. Let’s hope it never comes into sport. Imagine in rugby we’d have scrums for 18′s and over or wrestling, judo, or any contact sport. It’s getting beyond a joke

      Reply
  • In our community a few years ago a retired man who had worked all his life as a local doctor was sitting in the park on a bench watching the children play. He was asked to leave unless he was supervising a child. He was told it was the rules in the council funded park that he could not sit there. The poor man was devastated. This is not just happening in planes … It’s policy in the local playground which you pay for.

    Reply
    • Stories like that are heart breaking. It’s going to get to a stage where unless your are walking swiftly with your head down and not smiling you will be considered suspicious and a danger to society.

      Reply
    • Terrible. And all the taxes he paid for in his working life probably payed for the park ten times over and now he’s not allowed to enjoy it.

      The saddest fact of all is that most abuse of children happens within the home.

      Reply
  • “Not every man who plays with a child that is not his own is a paedophile, some people are just nice” – Scroobius Pip.

    Hope he takes action against Virgin, the policy is changed, and any monies compensated be donated to a service that does protect children.

    Reply
  • I would have asked to be bumped up to first class or else just sat there. By moving the guy in question they were implying that he posed a potential danger to the 2 children with absolutely no basis in fact. A trip to his solicitor would be in order I think. Where will this end? I mean will it extend to trains, buses, cafes or anywhere else some guy sits down? Will men now have to get up and leave their seats because some young kid sits down beside them?

    Reply
  • My brother was told he couldn’t take his camera to the children’s pool while his wife was taking their two daughters down a slide !! The female life guard roared at him and really embarrassed him. This happened at an adventure centre in Sydney in April last. He did see signs afterwards but said they were small and had no food / drink written first. I don’t think he will be registered on the offenders list.

    Reply
    • There are numerous documented cases in the UK and Ireland of women who molest children. This is an outrage!

      Reply
    • You usually can’t take photos in a pool in Ireland either!

      Reply
    • So I believe !! He just wanted a few holiday snaps of them having fun wasn’t like he was hiding in a tree with a big zoom lens

      Reply
    • @kent it’s not an outrage. An outrage would be if a man was left sitting beside two minors who were in the care of airline staff and one or both children were some way abused by this man.

      It’s possibly an ill thought out policy but at the end of the day it affords as much protection to the man as the kids.

      Reply
    • Vinny, how dare you?

      This is absolutely ridiculous that this would be airline policy.

      If minors are travelling alone (and I don’t understand why they would be) then the airline, by agreeing to let them travel alone should take on the responsibility of their duty of care or refuse to carry minors alone. This means acting as a reasonable parent would.

      That means suitable supervision. Minors, in a plane where the background of all others is unknown should be pretty directly supervised, leaving no cause for concern and no embarrassment for the innocent party being moved solely on the basis of a presumption.

      Reply
    • Vinne I would go along with it as long as I was the one being bumped up to first class. I hate sitting beside children anyway.

      Reply
    • Courtesy of Sickipedia. Ian Thorpe the Australian swimmer was nicknamed the Thorpedo. Good for a swimmer, not so good guving swimming lessons on Sunday morning!

      Reply
    • @tomy How dare I? How dare I what? Not agree that this is an outrage? It’s not an outrage. I did say its I’ll thought out not that I will ever justify my opinion to you. Are you that stupid that you would be outraged by something like this? Get a life.

      Reply
    • @tomy just to be sure, Will has said we are not allowed to take photos of our own children in a swimming pool in Ireland. As an innocent male father do you recommend that I be outraged by this? Just not sure myself

      Reply
    • It’s an outrage that someone could be assumed to be a threat when the parents have decided that:
      a) it’s not worth the money to accompany them
      b) the airline staff are not trustworthy enough to take care of minors or
      c) a service exists that can provide more direct supervision but the airline themselves don’t trust that

      Instead, in order to cover their own asses and keep the cost of in-flight supervision down the airline has decided ever adult male is a potential pedophile. If you don’t think this is an outrage fine – I retract the “how dare you” and replace it with “I can’t understand fear filled people who can’t ensure their own kids’ safety agreeing that the weight of responsibility should be heaped on the embarrassed shoulders of people who’s character you don’t know”.

      With respect to the swimming pool – children are not semi-clad on a plane, they are in a pool. It is a very difficult thing to watch every corner of a pool and it’s changing area and a very different situation.
      Taking photos, which can be distributed easily, despite the original intention being for your own memories, can end up going further than intended and viewed by people other than intended.
      Nobody deserves to be publicly humiliated – however, I can see why the privacy of minors is easily at risk. The ban there isn’t on fathers taking photos of their own kids – it’s of cameras.

      Please also note that while I am incredulous at your point of view, I’ve not resorted to insults.

      Reply
    • Difference being, Women aren’t allowed take pictures of children in many pools in ireland, this includes having your phone out. So its not discriminating on the sex of the ‘offender’ (i use that term very losely)

      Reply
    • @tomy, if the head line of this article read, “Virgin Apologise to parents of minor abused on flight” and the content of the article read something like ” airline staff allowed the offender to sit beside the children and when he saw his oppourtunity he abused the child”. And before you dictate to me that women abuse kids also let me tell you that I’m well aware of that fact but the fact still remains the vast majority of child abusers are men. And if you like it or not there are people out there who if asked to move and the reason explained would understand . I work in the area of child protection and know exactly what can happen in an instant and won’t have people like you insult me with your “How dare you” questions.

      Reply
    • Just wondering Vinny if you think the same policy should be enforced on Dublin Bus, Irish Rail, Bus Eireann and so on? There are plenty of unaccompanied children on these services every day. Should I have to give up my seat the next time I’m on a train or bus?

      Reply
    • But it didn’t read that….

      And if it did read that headline it should go on to say that the parents were culpable in not providing trusted accompaniment.

      As for “how dare you” – I’ve taken that back, it brings nothing to your argument to go back on that roundabout.

      I wouldn’t dream of stating that women have been known to abuse too – I think you pointing out that men are more likely actually exposes the complete weakness of your point of view.

      It’s not about who is more likely in this case, you are concentrating on that it is LIKELY rather than the FACT that not only is it very UNLIKELY that a PERSON sitting beside one or more kids is a pedophile but that the true responsibility here is not with the stranger it’s with the person who is in locus parentis.

      Moving all the men to the back of the plane seems to be your suggestion though…..

      Oh, and I’ve worked with young people too – and will again when I finally get a teaching job. I don’t know how that changes the discussion though.

      Reply
    • @Brian, it’s not Dublin bus policy and would be unworkable. I’ll say it again “it’s an ill thought out policy”. My points are quiet clear,
      Its not an outrage, in my opinion.
      Clearance is not absolute and a peadiophile could very easily and have in the past been given clearance to work with children.

      Reply
    • I heard about him. The poolside paedo I think they call him.

      Reply
    • I suspect the outrage was directed at your acceptance of the key assumption Virgin made here: all men are suspected paedos. Apparently. That is outrageous. However, if you think it’s ok then I assume you call for a garda escort on leaving your house!

      Reply
    • I’m sure Ryanair could think of a money – making opportunity from this story…

      Reply
    • Just to add fuel to the fire , this is standard policy at MOST major airlines including Aer Lingus, Air France, American, United, pretty much all the Oneworld Alliance airlines and until recently BA who had a similar fall out as a result of media attention! In fact this policy has been in place for decades and was never an issue until we suddenly became all uppity and politically correct! In my own experience as crew it is as much to protect the adult as the child! Do I think it’s sexist? Yes! Do I think kids are as much at risk of women? Probably! BUT do I think I kid is more like to falsly accuse a women of harassment? Definately NOT!!!

      Reply
    • The vast amount of abusers are family members or friends of family… Much safer to send your kids with strangers then…

      Reply
  • I predict a John Waters column.

    Reply
  • Christ what’s the world coming to !!! Glad I am getting old !!! So many polices, regulations, rules and polices !!

    Reply
  • Maybe Michael O’ Leary could start up a child only airline: CryinAir.

    Reply
  • Ridiculous policy indeed as anybody can be a potential threat to children . Man woman animal mineral or vegetable . I think in this day and age its ludicrous that young children are travelling on their own anyway . Minors can’t enter a bar or cinema alone but they can fly halfway around the world with an airline taking responsibility for them !!

    Reply
  • Women have been known to assault children, men and women. Men have been known to assault children, men and women. Children have been known to assault other children. The solution is simple – one passenger per flight. The pilot would, of course, be housed in a sealed compartment which could only be accessed from the exterior; this would protect the pilot from the passenger and the passenger from the pilot.

    Reply
  • Jesus what a load of nonsense! Most pedophiles are known to their victims like family members or shock horror priests

    Reply
  • Smiley 14/08/12 #

    The problem is that the media have exaggerated child attacks way out of proportion to their incidence. They’ve always happened but, to sell their news, media have created such an atmosphere of fear that now parents don’t allow their children the freedom enjoyed by children in the past. Not only is that developmentally bad for the children, it is leading to sedentary lifestyles, obesity, lack of imagination and lack of learning about how to deal with a range of situations.

    Reply
  • What if a standby was available and it was beside a 17 year old. Would it say Ladies only.

    Reply
  • What do they expect to happen in a plane anyway? There are people ALL AROUND you.

    Reply
  • Embarrassing for the airline.

    Scary stuff actually that things could go so far that the entire adult male species could be seen as a potential paedophile.

    I’m sure the airline meant well, but this is paranoia in its purest form.

    Reply
  • What parent lets a 8 and 10 year old travel alone????

    Reply
    • i flew on ky own befire at the age of 11, parents brought me as far as security and a member of the airline staff brought me and another minor to the gate and on the plane, checked on us during the flight a few times and accompanied us off the plane to neet our designated adults (in my case a relative).

      it was standard enough until ryanair cut costs to the teeth

      Reply
    • Your not allowed to let minors fly alone in Europe as far as im aware, they must have an adult with them.

      Reply
    • Any parent who uses common sense rather than irrational hysteria, that’s who. If, for example, a kid is put on a plane by one parent and met at the destination by, say, a grandparent, and airline staff are happy to mind the kid for the few hours in between, it’s a huge waste for a parent to make a return flight to accompany them. Are there any cases whereby unaccompanied minors have been abused in planes by men sitting next to them? If not, it just reeks of both hysteria and gross offensiveness. I had no idea that airlines had decided to paint all men as potential paedophiles in these cases and it’s an absolute disgrace. I would be both mortified and absolutely livid if I was treated in such an insulting manner by an airline.

      Reply
    • From the Aerlingus website, BA, Air France and KLM have similar policies.
      Aer Lingus does not accept reservations for unaccompanied children under 12 years of age for travel on Aer Lingus scheduled services.

      Children under 12 years of age cannot travel unless accompanied by an adult aged 16 years or older, who will take responsibility for the child.

      Reply
    • @mark that policy wasnt always there for aer lingus they only started doing that after they cut their prices to compete with ryan air. its a case of extra cost as they probably have to pay staff extra to supervise minors as there is a lot more work (ie taking care of them from the moment they check in to the moment theyre handed over to their relatives in the destination airport)

      Reply
    • ya’d think they’d just have an extra charge for the service though. Rather than charge everyone just incase there are any occasions its needed.

      Reply
    • Yes Mark you are correct this time. Children are not allowed to fly alone in Europe – they must be accompanied by a qualified pilot at all times.

      Reply
    • Thank you for your approval Patrick but you are wrong about the bbc showing the weather for the whole of ireland after the news. They don’t, Ireland is always left blank. They do show the north of Ireland.

      Reply
    • I never mentioned television Mark. BBC give a comprehensive view on the internet.

      Reply
    • You will find in my comments before your’s, i mentioned TV, that is what i was talking about. And i am right. They do not show the weather for Ireland on TV the internet they do like i said in my comments.

      Reply
  • Kent is dead right !! Women are pedophiles too !! I can’t believe people have thumbed that comment down?? It is true. Ridiculous rule Virgin.

    Reply
  • The is beyond the realms of ridiculous. If someone tried to do this to me, id see them in court before too long. Do the realise that there are people like myself, a professional youth & community worker with every relevant clearance.

    Reply
    • Yes les because the Airline have a list of everyone with clearance and they compare that list with the passports as you board. Also clearance means nothing only you have never been caught

      Reply
    • wat are you on about? clearance means nothing if you haven’t been caught accusing me of something Vinny. Im a professional youth community worker.

      Reply
    • Vinny – that’s EXACTLY the attitude which is the problem.

      The suggestion that someone could even be involved in something as vile as in any way bringing harm to minors can destroy lives.

      I’m not saying that if people have suspicions that they shouldn’t act on them; they absolutely should. But in this case, the guy was simply assumed to be a potential threat because he is male.

      Reply
    • “Also clearance means nothing only you have never been caught”

      That’s gotta count for something.

      Reply
    • The only thing clearance means is the person referred to in the said clearance has not been caught or convicted of anything. Surely u understand that. And don’t be so dramatic for god sake

      Reply
    • Yes Brendan clearance is the best one can get but surely les can accept its not an absolute. There are people out there who have lived with and been married to child abusers without knowing what they were up to so clearance from a stranger is hardly water tight

      Reply
    • Vinny, you appear to be referring to Garda vetting.

      Yes, that is basically a statement which says that you have been convicted of nothing. Your suggestion allows the thought that all people convicted of nothing are potential pedophiles. If you want to stir that kind of logic up then you may as well say that all pedophiles have cut their toenails at some point in their lives therefore anyone with short toenails is a potential pedophile; remove your shoes before I let you sit beside these 2 minors…

      While Garda vetting is not a certificate of non-pedophilia it says something. In addition there are also child protection courses http://www.childprotection.ie/training.

      I’m afraid if you think that being male and over 18 means that a person is a risk to children then your understanding of what people do in roles where they work with children is sadly lacking.

      Reply
    • @tomy my point are pretty black and white with no room for ambiguity.

      I never mentioned toe nails I never said people are potential child abusers or any of the other waffle in your statement.

      Would you like me to make my own conclusions about your apparent insistence on been allowed to sit beside unaccompanied minors? No I don’t think you would.

      Fact is clearance is not absolute?

      The fact is this is not an out rage and you have no right to make the assumptions you made about the parents of these kids paying or not paying this that or the other or what arrangement was made with the airline.

      Reply
    • @tomy I say a clearance just means the person referred to has not been caught for or convicted of anything.

      You then add that I’m saying the everyone who has no conviction is a potential child abuser and you talk to me about insults?

      Ian Huntly had clearance. The woman if the crèche in the uk in the last couple of years had clearance.

      Clearance means very little full stop

      Reply
    • Vinny, maybe you should read my comments again – I haven’t been insulting you.

      Instead of us continuing to apparently misinterpret each others comments I will say this:
      It is simply not on for actions which suggest an assumption of wrong doing in any situation to embarrass an innocent person. IMO it’s a disgrace.
      In this specific case, the situation could be very easily avoided by the provision of someone acting in locus parentis.
      The actual number of pedophiles per capita is unfortunately very difficult to establish and find any research on. I think it fair to say though that the vast majority of people are not and never will be guilty of a sex crime against anyone, never mind a minor.

      While I understand your passion for the protection of minors, I’m sure you’re also concerned with human dignity. If it were you who were asked to move and on turning around saw the faces of other passengers looking at you wondering “what does this airline know about that guy?” – I’m sure you’d wonder how this reflects on you and how such questions can multiply within communities and become detrimental to your own career.

      Lastly, as someone who has just finished my degree and am looking for teaching work I am disgusted that you would say on a public forum what you did 2 messages back.
      When I have worked with minors before I have consciously worked as one of a pair and ensured that my reputation is beyond reproach. I intend to keep it that way. With yourself having experience of working with kids before it shocks me that you would open the door in such an unprofessional way to raising unfounded doubts about any other.

      Reply
    • @Tomy

      The very reason I don’t find this whole thing outrageous is right there in your comment. I have regularly been reminded by people who know me not to be on my own with kids. In fact policy dictates that im not to be alone with kids. Are they implying I’m a child abuser? No. Are they trying to protect me and the kids? Yes. Is it the perfect system? No.

      You have been advised the same or at least should have been. Did you take offence? I doubt it. Did you know personally that the intention is good and be happy to know that you are not a risk to kids.

      If what happened on the plane happened to me I genuinely would not care. I would be well aware that it could not be personal slur on my character nor were they saying i was a risk to children. although ill thought out they were clumsily trying to make sure the kids were ok.

      With regard to what I said two messages back, why would you be so upset? I didn’t say anything about you I highlighted the pitfalls with jumping to conclusions and putting spin on what people say.

      Reply
    • To suggest that someone has an “apparent insistence” I find unprofessional.

      As for your points, they don’t fit.

      When you work with kids as a professional you are in a role. The average joe coming onto a plane is not there in a role where the kids protection is in their mind in any way.

      With someone there acting in locus parentis there would be no need to insult the passenger.

      I don’t really know what else there is to say on it. That’s really the crux of this situation.

      Reply
  • Odd that people just keep saying women can abuse kids too rather than acknowledging the overt discrimination purely based on gender. If the genders were switched there would be mass outcry and calls for the policy to change and the airline shut down or boycotted because it was discriminating against women or aboriginals or disabled etc….

    Reply
  • bob 14/08/12 #

    messed up world,would I let my kids sit nxt to someone on plane? of course I would as there is no problem.on the other hand should women be allowed swim in the sea if they are menstruating, they might attract sharks! let’s walk thru life afraid,it keeps us under control!

    Reply
  • Children ARE allowed fly in europe,once they sign a consent form for the airlines legal safety,with no regard for their safety during travel or after leaving the airport,and staff dont look after them,thats a service they have to pay for,and usually dont

    Reply
  • Australians get very wound up over silly things. A few years back when I was a smoker, I was in a bar in Byron Bay with friends. I lit a cigarette and proceeded to order a beer at the bar. The girl behind the bar reacted like I had smacked her across the head with a hurley and began screaming very aggressively into my face that if I was going to smoke, I must stand at least 3 metres away from the bar. I told her that surely, the smoke from my cigarette would find its way into her lungs and kill her even from the designated safe distance of 3 metres, and also, how was I supposed to get a drink? That didn’t go down too well and I was asked to leave. This Virgin rule is equally, if not more ridiculous. They are a funny old bunch, our antipodean friends.

    Reply
  • What’s Vatican Airways policy on this?

    Reply
  • I hate sitting near children.
    I would of thought they did him a favor.

    Reply
  • Has there been many / any documented cases of unaccompanied minors being abused while flying? Why should any man have to accept being treated with suspicion and made feel uncomfortable when using air transport , ok if it was a priest or a cork DJ sitting beside the kids I’d understand some concerns , but a fireman being asked to move, surely they should be bragging that in the event of a fire on board we have supplied unaccompanied minors with their own fireman ;)

    Reply
  • Firstly who sends kids of that age unaccompanied half-way across the world. Secondly, airlines listed above that have this as a policy also have reserved seating AND all the necessary information (sex, age) they could use to offer people choices that are NOT next to unaccompanied minors…. fuss over, no? Any non-reserved seating airlines we are all taking our chances as to who we will be sitting next to – not just the minors!!

    Reply
  • In his situation I would have requested that I be moved. A man would have to be naive in the extreme, to allow himself be put in a position, where he may face an allegation of child abuse that cannot be immediately and comprehensively refuted. It is an accusation that stains, regardless of the accusation’s veracity. I wonder sometimes, at people who behave as if the world was as they wish it to be, instead of how it actually is.

    Reply
  • Most full service airlines offer an UM service! I dont get the big deal!!!!

    Reply
  • It is true that some men are paedophiles and some paedophiles are men. However, the conclusion that all men are paedophiles is false but there are so many sad stories that the risk of insult (to individual men) is outweighed by the risk of harm (to individual children) and it is a sad day when such policies are thought necessary.

    Reply

Add New Comment