Was Cebu Pacific being Vindictive when it Refused my Wife a Flight to Taiwan on Wednesday Night?
By Kevin Stoda
On Monday night, I had written up the following article on Cebu Pacific’s anti-consumer and safety practices. The article’s name was “SECURITY ISSUES, DOUBLE BOOKINGS AND CEBU PACIFIC AIRLINES”.
Subsequently, I have experienced two more days of dealing with Cebu Pacific’s various staff members and have learned how flat the hierarchy seems to be at CP, Philippines’ largest domestic airline. Namely, there appears to be no one in charge at Cebu and when making decisions and requests, it may take pulling teeth for hours to even get referred to someone who has some working authority or autonomy to do anything beyond whatever the company’s inflexibly followed and guidelines are..
In a clear example of this customer’s weakness vs. a goliath of a regional airline, I was given only 55% credit for the flight I wrote about in the article, “SECURITY ISSUES, DOUBLE BOOKINGS AND CEBU PACIFIC AIRLINES”. However, the 55% of the fair that is refunded goes into an account that disappears after 90 days—i.e. if you lose it, you lose it.
http://www.cebupacificair.com/
WAS CEBU BEING VINDICTIVE?
Worse still, it appears that my raising a fuss about being mishandled in my internet blogs and in my 3 visits to the various Cebu Pacific Manila offices, led to my wife being prohibited to join me on my flight from Manila to Taipei—our return flight after my wife had to go to Manila this week and do a visa interview at the USA Embassy.
While other reasons were given for not allowing my wife to take her seat on that Cebu Pacific flight, I was certainly taken aback by the airline’s taking on the negative role and blind bureaucratic tone that they did—almost all behaved like they lived in an only doing my job Nazi-follower mentality..
Finally, the Cebu staff even stated unequivocally that my wife would NOT BE REFUNDED THE COST OF THE TICKET.
Eslkevin's Blog 
http://cebuinformer.com/featured/12230/did-cebu-pacific-air-do-the-right-thing/
Did Cebu Pacific Air do the right thing?
Posted on 08 January 2010. Tags: brand disaster, Cebu Pacific, Cebu Pacific Airlines, flight tickets
Share0diggs
digg2Cebu Pacific Air screwed up, properly. Recently a Cebu Pacific flight crew tried to offload a mum with her child, which is suffering from Global Development Delay (a condition that delays a child’s ability to acquire motor skills in the same speed as other kids).
Yesterday officials from Cebu Pacific Air denied charges of discrimination against people with special needs. This was handled badly I suppose. What could Cebu Pacific officials do now to make this worse?
Right, they could offer free Cebu Pacific tickets to them to make the “little problem” go away. And that’s exactly what they did according to reports, they offered free flight tickets. As if Cebu Pacific does not have enough issues to solve, especially their website performance which is often criticized from users.
Now I guess they have another problem, let’s see how this story develops. What do you think should have been done from the Cebu Pacific officials?
Update from the inquirer 22 January 2010:
A fight for the rights of children with special needs.
This was how lawyer Salvador Panelo described the decision of the parents of a teenage boy who was allegedly forced to deplane from a Cebu Pacific flight because he was “mentally ill” to formally file charges against the airline on Thursday.
“Special children have equal rights as us. They are human beings who shouldn’t be treated like that,” Panelo told the Philippine Daily Inquirer by phone.
Panelo said that his clients, Gerry and Maritess Alcantara, filed a P5-million damage suit against Cebu Pacific before the Antipolo City prosecutor’s office.
“It’s a damage suit for the unlawful acts of Cebu Pacific for attempting to offload the mother and her child… for abusing a special child,” Panelo said.
The couple slapped Cebu Pacific with charges of violating Republic Act 7610, a special law that prohibits minors from being subjected to abuse and harassment and Republic Act 7277, the Magna Carta for Persons with Disabilities.
The lawyer added that the Alcantaras would file on Friday a separate criminal case against the flight purser, the pilot, three crew members, and three vice presidents of the airline.
The Alcantaras’ 14-year-old son has global developmental delay, a condition wherein there is a lag in the development of some of his faculties.
Maritess Alcantara and her son were on a Cebu Pacific flight back to Manila from Hong Kong when the airline purser asked them to deplane supposedly because of a Cebu Pacific rule that no two “mentally ill” passengers should be on the same flight.
Maritess refused to deplane and felt humiliated for the alleged rude treatment of the crew.
Panelo earlier said that Cebu Pacific’s rule specifically said that “mentally ill” passengers did not include special children, which only indicated that the flight crew had misinterpreted the airline’s regulations.
Cebu Pacific earlier apologized for the incident and said it did not, and would not discriminate against passengers with special needs.
On Thursday, however, Panelo pointed out that his research has shown that Cebu Pacific figured in several other incidents where it had offloaded passengers with special needs, such as deaf or wheelchair-bound persons.
The lawyer said he would introduce these incidents as evidence in court.
“They think they can get away with murder,” Panelo said.