Alternatives when airline refuses to board due to passport's nationality.
#136
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 42
Just a random, related question. Does the US restrict who can board a flight on its carriers that don't touch the country? For example, if someone on the no-fly list books BOM-AMS-MSP on DL, would they get blocked from boarding at BOM, or would they be allowed to fly the first segment and then get stranded at AMS?
#137
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Programs: United MileagePlus Silver, Nexus, Global Entry
Posts: 8,798
If it wasn't for the billions spent, as well as the lives lost, Kuwait Airlines would be Iraqi Air.
If this was a situation of Kuwait refusing to transport an Israeli to Toronto I'd be writing my MP, the PM & the media demanding that their landing rights be revoked immediately.
#138
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,886
Kuwait Air doesn't have any choice but to obey the laws of their nation, where ever they are.
#139
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Not here; there!
Programs: AA Lifetime Gold
Posts: 29,371
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry: BlackBerry8530/5.0.0.1030 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/417)
"Should"? Judgement call and you may be right. But the reality is we do and they are a sovereign nation and they have their laws. I don't agree with all of them, but then I don't agree with all the US laws.
Kuwait Air doesn't have any choice but to obey the laws of their nation, where ever they are.
It will be interesting to see the results of the lawsuit mentioned in Post #25.
Originally Posted by Tchiowa
Kuwait Air doesn't have any choice but to obey the laws of their nation, where ever they are.
#140
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: ECP
Programs: DL Diamond
Posts: 1,658
EK will fly an Israeli. They will even fly them on a Dubai-bound flight so long as they are connecting... So an Israeli could fly, for instance, CDG-DXB-HKG. They still can't enter Dubai as the UAE doesn't recognize Israel, but that doesn't preclude EK's computers from "reading" the Israeli passport...
#141
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,886
#142
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: ECP
Programs: DL Diamond
Posts: 1,658
As far as I understand it, though, the law suit is a US Citizen against the US DOT?
#143
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Not here; there!
Programs: AA Lifetime Gold
Posts: 29,371
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry: BlackBerry8530/5.0.0.1030 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/417)
Insofar as monetary compensation... perhaps. But if Kuwait Air wants to keep flying to the United States, they'll need to address a lawsuit against them eventually--and they may well prevail in court.
As far as I understand it, though, the law suit is a US Citizen against the US DOT?
Yes. It's a federal -- not a state -- lawsuit, apparently seeking to compel the DOT to enforce anti-discrimination laws which the plaintiff contends apply to his situation.
Originally Posted by DC777Fan
As far as I understand it, though, the law suit is a US Citizen against the US DOT?
#144
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,886
Insofar as monetary compensation... perhaps. But if Kuwait Air wants to keep flying to the United States, they'll need to address a lawsuit against them eventually--and they may well prevail in court.
As far as I understand it, though, the law suit is a US Citizen against the US DOT?
As far as I understand it, though, the law suit is a US Citizen against the US DOT?
But our legal system is a bit screwy.
#145
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: ECP
Programs: DL Diamond
Posts: 1,658
The DOT -- and by the DOT, I mean an unelected bureaucrat at the DOT -- decided that Kuwait Air's refusal to transport Israelis (in this case on the JFK-LHR route) does not constitute discrimination. The federal lawsuit, as I understand it, challenges that decision.
#146
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
If the DOT is going to absolutely ban carriers from discriminating on the basis of passenger citizenship when it comes to transport on their own international flights serving the U.S., then all common carriers with service to/from this country better be prepared for massive amounts of fines (from the U.S. and foreign governments) for transporting people, regardless of citizenship, who may or may not be admissible and/or eligible for transport under the laws of all involved countries (the sending country, the vehicle flag country, and the receiving country) for a given flight.
#147
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Not here; there!
Programs: AA Lifetime Gold
Posts: 29,371
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry: BlackBerry8530/5.0.0.1030 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/417)
The DOT allows airlines to do what all common carriers with service to/from the US do: discriminate based on citizenship/nationality in determining which documents are and are not acceptable for international travel on their own planes.
If the DOT is going to absolutely ban carriers from discriminating on the basis of passenger citizenship when it comes to transport on their own international flights serving the U.S., then all common carriers with service to/from this country better be prepared for massive amounts of fines (from the U.S. and foreign governments) for transporting people, regardless of citizenship, who may or may not be admissible and/or eligible for transport under the laws of all involved countries (the sending country, the vehicle flag country, and the receiving country) for a given flight.
Are there any situations, other than Kuwait's Fifth Freedom JFK-LHR and LHR-JFK flights, where the laws of the carrier's flag country require discrimination that is not also required by the laws of a flight's sending/receiving countries? Or is this a one-off situation merely involving these particular KU flights?
Nothing -- except, perhaps, economics -- requires KU to carry local traffic between JFK and LHR.
Originally Posted by GUWonder
If the DOT is going to absolutely ban carriers from discriminating on the basis of passenger citizenship when it comes to transport on their own international flights serving the U.S., then all common carriers with service to/from this country better be prepared for massive amounts of fines (from the U.S. and foreign governments) for transporting people, regardless of citizenship, who may or may not be admissible and/or eligible for transport under the laws of all involved countries (the sending country, the vehicle flag country, and the receiving country) for a given flight.
Nothing -- except, perhaps, economics -- requires KU to carry local traffic between JFK and LHR.
#148
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
Are there any situations, other than Kuwait's Fifth Freedom JFK-LHR and LHR-JFK flights, where the laws of the carrier's flag country require discrimination that is not also required by the laws of a flight's sending/receiving countries? Or is this a one-off situation merely involving these particular KU flights?
U.S.-blacklisted countries' citizens have also been subject to extra-security screening on the basis of nothing more than citizenship status even when the free person with a blacklisted country's passport is admissible in the sending and countries. This has largely been an example of discrimination based on citizenship.
In both cases, the discrimination is driven by the carrier's flag country rules.
#149
Moderator: Manufactured Spending
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,576
Back when Pan Am operated intra-German routes, I sat next to a North Korean passport holder flying from Frankfurt to West Berlin. It was either 1988 or 1989. He was in a business suit and thought he was just a normal Korean(i.e. South Korean). I mean, who would have thought that a North Korean would be flying on Pan Am, which was almost like an American flag carrier. I thought he was kidding about being North Korean, until he showed me his DPRK passport. To this day, that guy remains the only North Korean I've seen in person. I mean, I've seen more pandas than North Koreans... that's just strikes me as odd.
But regardless, that was an interesting episode. Thanks for sharing.
#150
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,348
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry: BlackBerry8530/5.0.0.1030 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/417)
Are there any situations, other than Kuwait's Fifth Freedom JFK-LHR and LHR-JFK flights, where the laws of the carrier's flag country require discrimination that is not also required by the laws of a flight's sending/receiving countries? Or is this a one-off situation merely involving these particular KU flights?
Nothing -- except, perhaps, economics -- requires KU to carry local traffic between JFK and LHR.
Are there any situations, other than Kuwait's Fifth Freedom JFK-LHR and LHR-JFK flights, where the laws of the carrier's flag country require discrimination that is not also required by the laws of a flight's sending/receiving countries? Or is this a one-off situation merely involving these particular KU flights?
Nothing -- except, perhaps, economics -- requires KU to carry local traffic between JFK and LHR.
All of the BS about "didn't present a valid passport" etc is just that -- and KU knows it, which is why they are quick to rebook, rather than try to claim that the passenger was wrong and the ticket value is lost. Timatic doesn't even have a field for "airline", so IATA (whose rules the ticket was purchased under) doesn't appear to allow airlines to arbitrarily ignore passports from a specific country when it's not related to verifying that the customer will be able to enter the destination, which is not at issue here.
The customer isn't responsible for verifying obscure rules of a code-share partner -- when I book a United regional jet flight, do I have to call Skywest to ask whether they will take my California license, etc? No. And as pointed out, this is not a common problem to be aware of, as US carriers can take North Korean, Iranian, and other passport holders, and carriers like EK will take Israeli passport holders even connecting through DXB.
IMO, until the practice of selling these tickets is ceased (and the DOT should get involved to do so), the airline must rebook proactively, and potentially pay IDB/EU261 compensation if the replacement flights are not very close to the same time.