The Editor, Sir:

I noted with concern the report on Television Jamaica on the evening news of June 17, that on the instructions of the chairperson, an aircraft operated under the national airline returned to the departure gate to facilitate a passenger that had missed the flight.

This action on the part of the chairperson, irrespective of whom that passenger was, has set a very bad precedent.

Inconvenience

It is the standard that a flight is closed sometime prior to the scheduled departure. It takes time to settle passengers and as much as is possible airlines need to adhere to their schedules. Flying late inconveniences passengers and persons who pick them up at their destinations. Also, some times people need to make connecting flights, so there are a number of reasons why this is a bad precedent.

In the case of Air Jamaica, which is already so deep in the red, one must also wonder about the additional cost associated with the action ordered by the chair-person. Can we afford the extra cost of the fuel wasted to abort the take-off and return to the gate? Should not good management practices insulate the captain of the aircraft from the chairperson of the airline? Is the chairperson technically competent to make flying decisions or does her expertise lie in other areas?

Relevant authority

I believe that had the chairperson restricted herself to policy and allow the relevant authority to deal with operations, this incident would not have happened. Unfortunately it did and as such, I would implore the minister with portfolio responsibility for Air Jamaica to take whatever action is deemed necessary to avoid an incident like this in the future.

I am, etc.

A. A. McCREATH

Perth Road, Mandeville