Westjet and Thomas Cook aircraft and children over 3

[unityco]

What do you make of this? The restriction on "infant" restraints over 36mo has me suspicious (I suspect they mean all carseats,) as well as the banning of a TC approved device.

Thomas Cook Airlines accepts Transport Canada or FAA-approved child and infant restraint systems. The AmSafe Child Restraint System (CARESTM) is not accepted for use on board. Infants must be held by a parent or guardian during takeoff, landing and whenever the seatbelt sign is illuminated. For infants and children under 36 months old, you may purchase a seat for their use and you may, but are not required to, use a restraint system. Children 36 months and older are not permitted to travel in an infant restraint system.

Both forward and rear-facing restraint systems are permitted, however, infants less than 9 kg (20 lb.) may only use a rear-facing restraint system. For rear-facing restraint systems, the child/infant must be held during taxi, takeoff, landing and when the seat-belt sign is illuminated. The restraint system must remain secured during these times.

From: http://www.westjet.com/guest/en/travel/basics/security-travel-alert/alberta-hawaii.shtml?mrd=0

 

[ketchupqueen]

Um... I would not be flying with them. The CARES IS an FAA approved device, and the insistence on holding the baby when the seatbelt sign is on and during taxi, takeoff and landing is nonsensical (the seat must be secured, but not the child???)

 

[unityco]

...the insistence on holding the baby when the seatbelt sign is on and during taxi, takeoff and landing is nonsensical (the seat must be secured, but not the child???)

Hmm. I didn't make that inference when I read it (assumed they meant if you HADN'T purchased a seat for your child,) but your interpretation may be correct, which is even worse. >.< I don't get how TC rules wouldn't apply to these leased aircraft.

ETA: Oh god! I just read the RF seat bit! I just skimmed over it before as the 36mo thing is what caught my eye!

 

[bubbaray]

This is because Thomas Cook is a British airline. It's like when a USA airline code shares with, say, Air France and people are surprised when they have to hold a child on take off and landing instead of using a purchased seat (air France rule). This isn't exactly a code share (it's a lease apparently) but it's still a Thomas Cook aircraft, which means that British rules apply

I'm assuming that the no CARES thing is because it isn't permitted in the UK.

 

[unityco]

This is because Thomas Cook is a British airline. It's like when a USA airline code shares with, say, Air France and people are surprised when they have to hold a child on take off and landing instead of using a purchased seat (air France rule). This isn't exactly a code share (it's a lease apparently) but it's still a Thomas Cook aircraft, which means that British rules apply

I'm assuming that the no CARES thing is because it isn't permitted in the UK.

I still don't understand how that can be kosher though. How can the owning airline circumvent laws in the country in which it's being used? They're not being used for service between here and the UK even! UK regulations should be irrelevant.

 

[bubbaray]

It is the norm in aviation that the on-board rules for passengers are those of the country where the plane is owned.

The lap baby thing is common with EU carriers.

 

[1mommy]

Their instructions sounds seriously messed up and confusing. An "infant restraint system" I would take that to mean a bucket seat, and if your 3 year old still fits in a bucket seat I'm impressed. And for holding the baby during take off and landing, that seems pretty messed up- isn't that the most dangerous part of the flight?

 

[unityco]

The other weird thing about it is that elsewhere it states the plane will be staffed by WJ crew (I assume TC or at least freelance pilots though, as these aren't aircraft WJ normally flies.) Since the pilots don't usually stroll the aisles, who's to know if UK rules are followed?

 

[5littleH2OBabies]

The pilots are Thomas Cook's pilots and from the UK. My parents just got back from Hawaii on this very flight - pilot had a super thick Yorkshire accent, the only Canadians were the WJ FAs (ID was also TC).

This doesn't surprise me honestly and also after a discussion with someone from TC about the regs he called them "guidelines" and the airlines were also free to set their own policy (doesn't sound as written in stone as the FAA regs). Anyone who's tried to fly Sunwing will have seen this nonsense first hand.

 

[ketchupqueen]

I'm guessing you might get wiggle room because of that with some crews, but you might also not. They might have it drilled into their heads that different rules apply.

One thing I've heard of people doing is installing the rear facing seat, holding the child while the crew checks that everyone is buckled, and then when the crew buckles in put the child in the seat.