jewels421

This is a great analogy. You are perfectly entitled to hold that belief and refuse to sit at the counter -- I may find that belief to be repugnant, but it's not illegal. But the restaurant cannot ask the black person to move (it doesn't sound like El Al asked women to be re-seated, so they are in the clear). And the racist customer cannot do anything that is illegal or against restaurant policy to bring about what they want (e.g., they cannot physically remove the other customer, or block the servers from doing their job). In this case, the Haredi were trying to get what they wanted by violating policy/FA orders by standing in the aisle.

ELY001

That is not true. What I was pointing out is then men who, for whatever reasons, do not wish to sit next to a woman, are not violating anyone's human, legal, or civil rights. In fact, forcing men who, out of millenia old religious belief, do not wish to sit next to a woman, can actually be construed as a violation of the human and civil rights of those men.

This wasn't a case of discrimination. This was a case where, for religious purposes, men did not want to sit next to a woman. They did not discriminate against the woman nor try to interfere with her political, civil, or human rights by not wanting to sit with her on religious grounds. In fact, it would be discrimination to try to force those men to abandon their religious belief and sit next to a woman where long accepted religious laws dictate otherwise.

Because you can't since it is. This isn't something they just made up a few days ago. This has been a long held religious practice dating back thousands of years.

That is correct however by forcing these Haredi men to sit next to a woman you are advocating de facto that they abandon their interpretation and practice of Judaism for yours.

They were not discriminating against the women on the flight. They simply did not want to be seated next to them for accepted religious purposes.

You're letting your personal hatred towards this sect of people cloud your judgement on this issue.

Much like you are trying to force your views on them by having them sit with women when, according to accepted religious principals, they are forbidden from doing so and in light of the fact that EL AL can and should have made reasonable accomodation.

ELY001

So, let's take a look at the facts on this thread and summarize the incident and conclusions:

1. The EL AL flight in question was not delayed for hours as the media reported. Other posters on this thread reported the flight landed less than 20 minutes late.

2. Regardless of the above, it is well known that Heredi men refuse to sit next to women citing religious grounds. This has been a common practice amongst the Haredi community dated back thousands of years.

3. Some other reasons for these men wishing to sit next to one another in blocks are to make it easier for them to form a minyan for prayer during the flight, enable blocking from their view films that are immodest and offend their religious sensitivities, and to stay away from other passengers (both male and female) who bring non kosher food on the flight and consume it.

4. As a business that specifically markets its services to Haredi passengers (as well as secular ones) EL AL, by this point should have gained experience with these sorts of seating issues and should have adopted protocols and policies where everyone could be accomodated expeditiously and without delay.

There is really no need to assess and critique the religious practices of others. The Haredi community is an importnt and vital source of revenue for EL AL, so much so that the company decided not to fly on Shabbat after it was privatized in order to retain the patronage of this sector. Consequently, the focus should be on EL AL and it's actions in ensuring reasonable accomodation for all.

Dovster

I recall when smoking was allowed on flights -- and as smokers were the ones demanding it, they had the last rows of planes reserved for them.

It seems to me that LY should reserve the last rows of planes for men who request in advance not to be seated next to women.

This would not only satisfy their religious beliefs but, at the same time, benefit all other passengers as nobody prefers being in one of those rows -- at least not in Economy.

ELAL

There used to be such a system around 10 years ago, wonder why they stopped it.
Most haredim wanting seperate seating happily agreed to it.

jewels421

You see it as people trying to force them to sit next to women. But... the other point of view is that these men chose to buy tickets for this flight. They chose to put themselves in a situation where they knew they might have to sit next to women, as opposed to chartering a flight, buying multiple seats, or buying far enough in advance to reserve a block of seats together. They bear the responsibility to ensure they follow their own beliefs. Other customers could choose to accommodate those beliefs (by accepting a request to switch seats). But, neither businesses nor customers are obligated to do so.

Deckard

I think what is surprising about this thread is the El Al angle. I've been on multiple TATL flights where Haredim have caused a scene until the captain threatened to deplane them. I've never flown El Al.

ELY001

That is not correct. I see this as an EL AL logistical issue. The company specifically targets the Hardei sector for patronage and does not fly on Shabbat mainly because it does not want to lose the business of that sector. Consequently, since the company specifically caters to this clientele who have known "requirements" then the company should have policies and procedures in place to accommodate those "requirements" without inconvenience to other pax and the Hardei themselves.

This is an excellent idea. The issue of religious men refusing to next to women due to long held religious practice is not a human/civil rights and/or discrimination issue. It is also not limited to EL AL and the airline industry. I've heard of train lines where the train company itself prohibits non related men and women from sitting next to one another during overnight trains.

The issue here is accommodation, and your proposed method for such would ensure incidents such as this one do not occur.

Indelaware

Yes, One's right to religious practices ends when that right interferes with another person's right. You ask what rights were interfered with -- several:

The airline has a right to depart on time; that the delay is long nor short is immaterial.

Other passengers have a right to depart on time;that the delay is long nor short is immaterial.

Flight attendants and other airline employees have a right to a work place devoid of any sexual or gender identification. The moment a passenger requests an airline employee to take note of the passenger's sex or gender, the questioner makes the workplace a hostile environment. Likewise, a passenger who requests an airline employee to take notice of another passenger's sex or gender also makes the workplace a hostile environment.

Each person has a right to define her/him/itself as male, female, or otherwise. No person - neither the airline employee nor fellow passenger - has the right to ascribe a person as being either male nor female.

Passengers have a right not to be identified on the basis of sex or gender; neither the airline nor its employees have any right to judge a person as being either male, female or otherwise.

The airline and all passenger's have a right to safety. While it may not have happened here, one can certainly imagine a case where a passenger requesting a seat change while on the aircraft obstructs the orderly and safe boarding of other passengers, blocking aisles, making flight attendants unavailable to deal with any potential emergency (yes, such emergencies do happen while still at the gate).

Passengers who do not wish to sit next to a particular person do not have to - as long as the doors are open, such passengers have a right to deplane. Passengers purchase the right to air transport on a particular flight, they do not purchase the right to air transport in a particular seat or with (or without) a particular seat mate -- any more than a person in purchasing a ticket is purchasing the right to transport on a particular (type of) aircraft. Such passengers do not have the right to demand re-seating. They may request it, but only if done respectfully and peacefully, and only if they request to be moved into a seat otherwise unoccupied.

Passengers and airline employees have a right to travel only with rule abiding passengers. If the aircraft doors had been closed and the fasten seat belt light illuminated, any person not sitting with seat belt locked, is failing to follow lawful crew instructions necessary for the safe operation of the aircraft.

For security reasons, no seating changes should ever be permitted (except in emergency situations such as seats breaking or other dammage to the aircraft), once the aircraft departs the gate with the final manifest. One can certainly imagine many reasons why knowing who is in a particular seat my be necessary.

Imagine if the flight crew had received information once inflight that a Mr. D.O. Guerrero was planning to crash the aircraft, but neither flight crew nor security personnel could find him because he had refused to sit next to a Mrs. Ada Quonsett and was no longer in his assigned seat. Imagine further if Capt. Demerest's aircraft went down over the Atlantic because Mr. Guerrero could not be located: all those poor families waiting extra time to know the fate of their loved ones whose identification is delayed because people weren't in the seats identified on the manifest.

Dovster

I have yet to fly any airline which does not allow you to change seats once boarding is completed. There have been many times that I moved to an empty row so that I could stretch out -- on El Al, on Delta, and on a number of European carriers.

(Of course, you cannot switch cabins or move to an Economy Comfort seat for which there is an extra charge, but that is a different story.)

I have upcoming flights on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day and both, as of right now, are almost empty. If that is still the case when the plane is boarded, I can guarantee you that everyone on board will wind up in otherwise empty rows.

yosithezet

I think we have now exhausted all reasonable discussion on this topic from most every angle. Further discussion of of the religious aspects are welcome in OMNI. This thread is now closed.

yosithezet
Moderator, EL AL Forum