ANA, JAL team up to tackle abusive customers under joint guidelines

Not necessary abusive customers, sometimes it just unsatisfied customer due to poor service can be caused this problem.

I wonder which country’s passengers are the most difficult.

I fly both these airlines almost weekly domestic and maybe monthly long haul. I've never seen any abusive incident on either - it's always a serene experience.

Maybe with the ramp up in tourists we are getting the America effect, where flying is a complete and utter bun fight most of the time, customers are rude and staff don't care about the quality of their own work.

@N.Knight

Then you will be surprised to find out that 99% of JAL's and ANA's abusive customers are the entitled and demanding Japanese ones, following that "Okyakusama = Kamisama" culture.

No need to take my word, just search YouTube and similar videos.

BTW, from this pov, except Chinese and Koreans, foreigners are less likely to cause scenes, because anywhere else you can quickly get kicked out of your flight or even get ridiculous fines if you grously misbehave.

So stop blaming foreigners for all the problems.

There should be a worldwide database for abusive travelers and banned from using any airline.

I dated for some time a Japanese cabin attendant who has been working for ANA for almost 20 years. She said that without any doubt the Japanese were the more difficult to deal with. She described them as rude, impolite and often miss behaving in one way or another.

I dated for some time a Japanese cabin attendant who has been working for ANA for almost 20 years. She said that without any doubt the Japanese were the more difficult to deal with. She described them as rude, impolite and often miss behaving in one way or another.

I don’t believe it for a second. Flying within Japan is almost always completely Japanese except for me and everyone acts great. Flying in and out of Japan is okay as well. I went back home for the first time in some years and flying there was awful. Every part of the experience!

No need to take my word, just search YouTube and similar videos.

YouTube will give you any "fact" you're looking for.

So stop blaming foreigners for all the problems.

Just my experience. I fly probably 15+ long haul flights per year and maybe 30+ domestic in Japan Europe and USA. Used to fly twice a week Itami to Haneda and back.

Japanese carrier flights are, in my experience, infinitely better than the horrendous flights in North America and Europe.

I have never seen an incident on a Japanese carrier; plenty of them on American, United, BA, etc.

@N. Knight

Thst is correct. However, just to be clear, the number of domestic rude and entitled customers is way way much larger than problems with foreigners travelers. It's logic and normal. 99% of the travelers are Japanese on the internal router and more than 85% on International ones.

99% of the travelers are Japanese on the internal router

Source please. (Neither the JNTO nor the airports distinguish between Japanese and foreign passengers on domestic routes in their statistics, but it's possible that the numbers exist somewhere.)

and more than 85% on International ones.

Not even close. Acccording to latest numbers, roughly 53% of the international flight passengers using NRT are Japanese, at KIX it's only 16%.

Not even close. Acccording to latest numbers, roughly 53% of the international flight passengers using NRT are Japanese, at KIX it's only 16%.

Ahh yes. But are these passengers using JAL or ANA?

There is a much higher proportion on Japanese using the Japanese carriers. Most people outside of Japan have never even heard of ANA despite them being a huge airline.

I suggest that, by proportion, there is higher incidences of unsavoury behaviour from foreign customers.

Those non-Japanese carrier flights must be a nightmare.

Ahh yes. But are these passengers using JAL or ANA?

The statistics would not break down by airline, they only break down by Japanese, non-Japanese and transit passengers. That being said, I did not dispute your comment (with which I tend to agree), but @DanteKH's orificially sourced numbers.