Originally Posted by Beckles

That explanation is not feasible in my opinion, other Southwest employees must have been involved, this wasn't a single employee acting alone.

That explanation (in particular that he 'kept this off social media') does not seem consistent with the other versions of events.

Originally Posted by Arizzzona

She was clearly not physically threatened.

And her act to remove the passenger is tantamount to a lie.

Today, in a visible public service position, in this new social media world, it is a given that you have ceded your anonymity. That's just a fait accompli.

End result: Lousy PR for WN and a reinforcement of the sense that the old WN experience continues to fade and morph into being just another Legacy airline with .....y employees....

And yes, the guy sounds like a bit of Richard, but pulling him off the flight??? On a scale of 1 to 10 his actions are a 4, and hers a 25.

Okay, now for the Type A, engineer personality, rule worshippers, to resume saying this action was just fine....

Originally Posted by dc2

I can't verify the sequence of events since I wasn't there, but the article indicates the following:

1. Dad and kids tried to board with Dad's A list boarding position and ops agent refused them.
But a gate agent wouldn’t let his 6-year-old and 9-year-old board with him — so they’d all have to wait to board later.

2. Dad had words with ops agent and threatened to send a tweet regarding his dissatisfaction with the situation.
“In leaving I said, you know, ‘Real nice way to treat an A-list. I’ll be sure to tweet about it,’” he said.

3. Dad and kids boarded and were seated on the plane.

4. Dad sent out a tweet specifying the gate and the individual involved (I don't know if the Dad used first and last name and the article abbreviated the last name to just the initial of the last name.)
“Something to the effect of, ‘Wow, rudest agent in Denver. (Name deleted), gate C39, not happy @SWA,’” he said.

5. I believe SWA monitors twitter--looking for messages that refer to Southwest. Maybe the ops agent monitors twitter--I don't know.

6. Dad and kids were removed from the plane and agent threatened them with calling law enforcement if the tweet was not deleted.
Soon after getting to their seats, the family of three was asked to leave the plane.
Watson’s daughter, Lucy, said she feared for her father.
“She said ‘I’m going to call the cops,’” Lucy said. “I like thought something bad was going to happen, like my dad being in jail.”


7. The Dad removed the tweet.

8. Dad and kids re-boarded the flight and arrived at their destination.

Seriously, though, I have stood behind folks who have had several children board with Dad's (or Mom's) boarding position. Dad (or Mom) hold the stack with their BP on top. I can see both sides of this issue. This is kind of what my mental conversation is when I see this happen---On one hand, it is a violation of the rules. But, if you travel with anyone it is as if you have no status. Sure, you could let your children board on their own at their own boarding position--who is going to do that? What if there is an issue with the boarding pass when it is being scanned in (after you have already been seated on the plane)? Are they going to come and get you from your seat on the plane? And, I know the kids won't be seated in the exit rows. Plus, I don't want to sit next to the Dad (or Mom), anyway.

The other question on my mind is what if Dad had tweeted his remarks after the plane had arrived at the destination? Did he break a law?

Originally Posted by ursine1

… but the GA completely mishandled the situation.

Originally Posted by LAtraveler1

+1

Originally Posted by Non-NonRev

This.

Simply said, actions have consequences - users of social media and other "look-at-me" telecommunications methodologies need to realize that they're not exempt.

Originally Posted by FindAWay

How do each if you know she was not physically threatened? We have only the passenger's version of the account.

Originally Posted by ursine1

I see no evidence to the contrary, with the exception that it could be argued that his initial tweet (later deleted) was not "keeping this off social media."

If you have information to back up your opinion, please elaborate.

Originally Posted by Beckles

There must be more to this story because I don't for one second believe the Southwest employee who told him his kids couldn't cut in line, the Southwest employee who read the tweet, the Southwest employee who removed him from the plane, and the Southwest employee who told him to delete the tweet are all the same employee. It seems to me the most obvious explanation is that someone in a supervisory role was alerted to this tweet and recognized that this passenger publicly disparaging a gate agent for simply enforcing the rules is not acceptable behavior.

Originally Posted by dc2

The other question on my mind is what if Dad had tweeted his remarks after the plane had arrived at the destination? Did he break a law?

Originally Posted by Beckles

My point is your version of events credits all of WN's actions to a single employee, as I previously said:

Originally Posted by dc2

I am no fan of social media, but did the Dad break the law or violate the rules in the contract of carriage in sending out that tweet? (I don't know the answer to this question)

Originally Posted by dc2

Seriously, though, I have stood behind folks who have had several children board with Dad's (or Mom's) boarding position. Dad (or Mom) hold the stack with their BP on top. I can see both sides of this issue. This is kind of what my mental conversation is when I see this happen---On one hand, it is a violation of the rules. But, if you travel with anyone it is as if you have no status. Sure, you could let your children board on their own at their own boarding position--who is going to do that? What if there is an issue with the boarding pass when it is being scanned in (after you have already been seated on the plane)? Are they going to come and get you from your seat on the plane? And, I know the kids won't be seated in the exit rows. Plus, I don't want to sit next to the Dad (or Mom), anyway.