Dave Noble

Which means nothing than perhaps not being able to prove that the passenger did anything such as to be able to deny travel - does not mean that the passenger was in the right

elitetraveler

Clearly the FA wanted the pax off; GAs took the pax off; there was no arrest; pax booked on next flight; other pax seem to feel FA was in the wrong.

The question is at what level of impolite or poor behavior should pax be subject to removal? Whatever transpired between the offloaded pax and the FA seems to have been momentary and limited, something that a good service professional would let go and moved on.

My experience in a several restaurants was the same few wait staff continuously were the ones who had virtually all conflicts with customers.

greg99

Do prosecutors peremptorily challenge you every time you're run through voir dire to pick a jury?

If this is how you think about circumstantial evidence when it's not a criminal matter, I'd definitely want you on my jury if I'm a defendant...

Greg

Dave Noble

In places where I could (and have for several months) serve on a jury, the bizarre idea of asking jurors questions is not permitted. The main thing that would determine whether I served would be whether I chose to decline ( since not obligated to serve again )

As far as I am concerned, the only thing that is known is that the passenger was politely and assertively asked to leave the aeroplane; whether the event which precipitated it , really justified the outcome, I would not presume to judge from the video. The attendant has the right to a workplace where is not expected to accept being insulted/assaulted by others. Whether the passenger did or did not made insulting remarks about the FA ( as was suggested by one hearsay report ) is unknown

Not prejudging what occurred would be what I would want from any juror if I was involved in a trial

rove312

AA/US flight status and the tracking sites indicate that the direction of flight 408 was PHX-PDX, so I guess this happened at PHX? If so, the wiki and title should be changed.

FWAAA

No, it was a flight from Phoenix to Portland, and the passenger was booted in Phoenix.

The passengers could have been from Portland and on their way home.

cbn42

I find it very unlikely that a passenger could do something that would justify being removed from the aircraft without the surrounding passengers noticing. An aircraft cabin is a cramped place. If she did something in the jetbridge or at the front of the cabin while getting on, that would be one thing. However, assuming that this incident began after she sat in her seat, I don't see how it's possible that the people around her would not see it.

I also doubt that passengers would boo if they weren't fairly sure they knew what was happening. If I suddenly saw a flight attendant removing a passenger without knowing the backstory, I would start wondering what happened, but I wouldn't jump to conclusions.

Based on a preponderance of evidence, the flight attendant is at fault. Of course there isn't enough evidence to convict him of a crime.

nrr

I was once on a flight where a pax became ill and an emergency landing was required. AA took statements from people in the surrounding seats (I was one of the closest).
On a jfk-cdg flt. a woman was removed from a flight (she feigned illness to get a seat with more legroom and then recanted); the captain was in phone contact with dfw; she was allowed to return (to a round of boos from pax).
In any event, were statements from any of the pax taken?
Documentation is essential should future law suits occur.

milesandmoremiles

A video of only one part of the situation is not at all a preponderance of evidence. How you can make a determination that the FA was at fault based on just this video?

Also, based on other accounts and reports, what occurred was towards the front of the aircraft with the passenger not moving when requested and then calling the FA very derogatory terms.

So as you can see, there are two completely different accounts so far to this event. How can you make a determination on fault based on whats currently been presented?

When a crew member has a passenger removed from an aircraft or an incident occurs with a passenger, they complete an incident report. If its available, the crew member will document if there were witnesses.

kerflumexed

About 15 years ago, the CEO of an airline I was working with felt there were too many unjustified on-board removals (their term for a pax gettin the boot.) We selected several actual events and did video recreations just up to the decision point and then used these in recurrent training to ask the flight attendants whatcha gonna do? And followed that up with what actually happened - the pax being removed. As I recall one was snarky comments and profanity, another was an overhead bin conflict, and several others. This was a good program and helped to center the needle and not being spring loaded to eject someone. Back then of course, no video recording, normally no litigation, and no media coverage.

We also did a similar program for brand new captains facing them with customer relations problems and training for how to make a good decision instead of jumping to conclusions. This included examples of how to deal with a flight attendant in your face demanding that someone be removed from the aircraft and/or a return to the gate while taxiing out for departure.

judolphin

Again, this is absurd, because:

(a.) the supposed derogatory terms were homophobic slurs
(b.) this whole argument is predicated on a flight full of people headed to Portland, OR unanimously siding with a homophobe. Portland, Oregon.

This is actually your argument. You're cementing the fact that the FA did something wrong and is also lying about it, since the "explanation" you posit is one of the most implausible things I've heard in a while.

PVDtoDEL

If the passenger called the FA a <deleted>, then she was asking to get kicked off. In today's culture of safety and security hysteria, passengers simply cannot expect anything else.

If we look at the game theory of it, it doesn't seem like the flight attendant would have sufficient incentive to risk his job by kicking off a passenger and then inventing a fictitious story. In contrast, a passenger making a rude and offensive remark and then not taking responsibility for their actions is a predictable story. A woman crying is more than enough to get the rest of the passengers to support her if nobody else heard her rudeness to the FA - that's fundamental biology more than anything else.

It's premature to come to conclusions without the whole story. Chances are, only the FA and the woman kicked off know the whole thing.

aztimm

According to this local news snippet, the flight was PHX to PDX:

http://www.kpho.com/story/30258706/w...-at-cabin-crew

judolphin

This was a plane to Portland, OR. Are you aware of what Portland, Oregon is?
It is not plausible that she said the slur, where the FA could hear it but literally no other passenger could hear it.

Anyone who heard her call him that, liberal or conservative, homophobic or pro-gay rights, would have applauded when the woman insulting the FA was ejected. No one applauded.

It does seem extremely plausible that the FA had a short fuse that day, kicked off the pax and then made up this ridiculous story because he knew the truth wasn't on his side.

I would bet actual money that the woman never used a homophobic slur towards the FA simply due to no one applauding her ejection.

Because if she used it loud enough for the FA to hear on a crowded plane, it is certain other pax would have heard the slur. At least one person who heard the slur would have applauded, especially in response to the jeering, when she was ejected. No one did.

DiscHandler

Not entirely true. See the link below. The passenger admitted that she was busy talking on her phone while boarding and in the aisle. She may have ignored the flight attendant (the 4 times could be an exaggeration but who knows) when he asked her to move out of the aisle and take her seat.

Most passengers are on their phones listening to music or playing games and probably would overlook this type of interaction till it escalates. So if we assume the following (1) she was on the phone, (2) she didn't hear the attendant multiple times ask her to move, (3) she then responded in a snarky fashion when he became "louder", would that justify a removal? I don't know. I see so many passengers ignore agents/attendants that I feel sorry for them. If you add in a racist/homophobic slur, I see the equation shifting.



Tiana Fough says she was busy talking while boarding the flight bound for Portland and finding her seat. The flight attendant asked her to move out of the aisle but she didn't realize it until she says he started barking orders at her.

“He said, ‘I asked you four times to stay there and you did not do as I asked.’ I was like, I didn't hear you, I didn’t hear what you said," explained Fough.

http://www.abc15.com/news/region-pho...oo-flight-crew