Disgraceful

[Sqad]

Amazon.co.uk User Recommendation

This would never happen on an American airline as in the US they treat their servicemen with respect.

Has SIR Richrd Branson lost the plot although I gather it is not Virgin policy to ban serving personel to travel in their uniforms.

A total disgrace.......in my opinion.

[friedgreentomato]

Oh murraymints get your head out of the clouds!!

[237SJ]

She was told by security that she couldn`t wear uniform. Have you ever spent much time in American airports? The Border control and (especially security people) can be VILE. The airline obviously wanted clarification as to the rules and the idiot security people misinformed them. You see loads of American servicemen travelling in combats in US airports - they even give them priority immigration queues. The security man must have been working with his eyes shut for years. The airline was clearly trying to make the best of a bad lot by giving her a sleeper suit to wear. Good story by the Mail as usual..

[murraymints]

Fgt..
..my head is not in the clouds but I was brought up to show respect to people that make a difference in life in a good way and sqad qualifies imo

[Sqad]

Jake- the Peg............i have lived in the UK much longer than you have........I have paid more taxes in the UK than you have......I have worked in the "public sector longer than you have.

I would suggest that you moderate your very distasteful answers.

[baza]

can't see any problem with wearing a uniform on a flight, overzealous tin pot G4S prat, no doubt wearing a pseudo US cop clobber and full of his own pee and importance.

[sandyRoe]

Going off at a bit of a tangent here, but is there much demand for el Gnome Jardines en Espana?

[237SJ]

baza - "Overzealous tin pot G4S prat, no doubt wearing a pseudo US cop clobber and full of his own pee and importance" LOL You`ve just described the people who man the x ray machines at JFK.

[sp1814]

So have I got this right?

Virgin do not have a policy in refusing to let soldiers wear combats or their uniform, and this was an isolated mistake made on the basis of misinformation by G4S?

Is that the crux of it?

[Sqad]

sp1814....yes.

Does that make a significant difference?

[237SJ]

Yes, that`s it in a nutshell. They have just mentioned the incident on the radio and G4S are saying that no complaint has been made. You can bet your bottom dollar the airline Station Manager will be taking this incident up with G4S though.

[zebo]

The GS4 staff at Schipol make the TSA look like angels, never encountered such harridans!
It's common in the US for service personnel to travel in uniform, they're given priority boarding without thought of offending anyone and treated with enormous respect. Why this security person should react this way is very odd.

[chrisgel]

There does seem to be a section of the people in this country that have a downer on armed forces personel. Their have been quite a few stories over the last couple of years of servicemen/women being refused service in pubs etc because they were in uniform.
Whilst I am not a massive tub thumper for Queen and country I do have respect for the job that the armed forces do and I don't understand why this anti Armed Forces trend has recently cropped up. Any theories?

[sp1814]

Sqad

Yes, i think it makes a massive difference.

If Virgin had a policy which prevents members of the armed forces from wearing their uniforms, that would be pretty outrageous.

The story sounded suspect from the beginning because if such a policy were in place, we would've known about it before now, surely?

From what I've read, this story boils down to something that I've suspected for some time...

There are a surprisingly high number of idiots who work in airline security.

[Sqad]

sp1814.....and i would agree........but for me the end result.......was "Disgraceful."

[sp1814]

chrisgel

I remember reading a story a couple if years ago of a pub which had banned service personnel:

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/national-news/2012/06/27/bar-boycotted-over-ban-on-soldiers-92746-31273727/

As to the reason (from a forum post on the Times Educational Suppliment):

"I live in Coventry and go into Browns regularly and I know why the squaddies were banned. The bar has a VERY strict customer code. No gangs of men (i.e. no more than a pair of men going in unless accompanied by women), no shaven headed tattooed men/women, no military personnel and basically no one who looks like they could be "trouble."

The bar attracts office workers both at lunch time and after work and then students (it's right next to part of the uni) all through the day. It's the type of place where a middle aged man can go for a pint, an elderly lady for a cup of tea and a student for a school dinner type lunch all at the same time and it doesn't feel awkward.

I think Ken Brown has such a strict door policy because a number of bars in Coventry typically have trouble when students and non-studenty types mix. The staff would have simply followed orders and I agree it's unfortunate that the soldiers were turned away - they weren't there to cause trouble - but I can see why it happened."

[sp1814]

Sqad

That's basically my beef.

I travel a lot for work and the worst part of my job is dealing with airport security.

I understand that they do an important job, but that's no reason to lock away their common sense in a big trunk at home.

Also, this nonsense about "other passengers might get offended" - that is utter cobblers. Simply made up on the spot.

[Sqad]

sp....I agree.

[Charity]

It used to be a rule that service personel were not allowed to visit licensed premises without prior premission from a commanding officer.
It's a few years since my exhusband left the army so perhaps this has changed.

[Charity]

(in uniform)