MonThruThurs

Looks like a legacy-US crew and the whole encounter is not recorded, but interesting scene.

YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhwF...ature=youtu.be

Edit: Reddit removed the post for a violation of their rules, link to a PDX news channel w/ flight info instead.

http://m.nydailynews.com/news/nation...icle-1.2395213

lobo411

What's interesting to me is that thousands of people can be turned into a lynch mob based on nothing more than a 60 second long video showing the back of someone's seat. But I guess that's how real lynch mobs work too--the bandwagon effect.

Dave Noble

Not only that , but it isnt just that the whoe encounter is not recorded, but the video shows nothing about the situation which caused the agent to come and eject the passenger from the aeroplane

All the video indicates is the agent quite calmly and politely informing the passenger that she is required to disembark

Maybe a situation was blown out of proportion by an agent, but the video indicates nothing

packattack12

I think the reactions by multiple passengers hints at least something wrong

Exec_Plat

Flight number? Airports?

Like the boy that cried wolf, FAs like this are going to make it difficult for other FAs when there really is an issue. If true, you are allowed to complain about an FA being rude. Period.

Exec_Plat

Of course.

But like police that occasionally will abuse a citiizen under the cover of the badge, then they and other officrers lie to protect the blue, this FA and oth FAs will likely not tell the truth. Or they will say "I didnt hear nothing" Or shade it- will te female SA emphsoize how 'emotional' the girl was? Will they paint a picture of "she appeared to be emotionally unstable and we felt she was a flight risk".

Obviously we dont know what happened from that video clip. But we do know that there will be a good many witnesses that will hopefully give their statements, one way or the other.

and I am perfectly OK with jumping to conclusions and making judgements based on my biases.

pacman3

I watched the video - clearly the passengers sitting around the woman being ejected from the aircraft witnessed what happened and were quite disturbed. The agent who had to ask her to leave was only doing her job - that fact was recognized by the ejected woman. Obviously, the video didn't show the precipitating event, but in the many decades I have been flying, I've never seen passengers rally behind another passenger unless they genuinely thought the person had been wronged. American really needs to investigate this matter and take appropriate action against the male attendant if warranted (the 8-10 people sitting around definitely think it was). On airliners.net it is reported that the incident occurred on October 11 on a flight from from ATL-PHX-PDX. Should be very easy to identify both the ejected passenger as well as the attendant.

This is really an unfortunate incident for American - lots of customers will see this video and book on another carrier in the future, if only in solidarity with someone they believe was wronged. The airline really does need to 'make it right' for its own sake, irrespective of who was 'right' and who was 'wrong'. Bad showing.

ty97

a.net (I can not personally confirm) says AA408 on 10/11 and that the FA in question is male and not featured in the video.

nwflyboy

They remove a passenger, I would expect everyone to cheer. Two people got the benefit of an empty seat next to them - now that's something to feel good about. They should be removing more passengers!

justageek

duplicate

jetsetter

I agree that its 95% likely that the pax would not support the removed pax for no reason. It would also have been interesting if either of:

1. Other passengers either got off the plane or disrupted the flight in support of the ejected passenger. This is not un heard of. At PHL there was a case where a commuter f/a tossed off a passenger who is blind using a seeing eye dog. All of the passengers rallied around the tossed off pax and dog, and they ended up having to cancel the flight. It actually gained huge media traction, I think because of the dog. Nobody really cares about the pax, but people got really excited and engaged because it involved a dog and somehow society and the media were able to make a connection with the dog.

or

2. If the pax had resisted the removal effort, and or if they had to get the PDX airport police? Then there would have to be full statements, and at arraignment the prosecutor would have to lay out to the judge the horrid acts that the passenger committed to warrant being thrown off the plane. Also the media gets excited about police, arrests, courtroom proceedings, etc. so that would have been a driver to get more of a investigation. Also does anyone know what the parameters are for when such an incident would be handled by local police and prosecutors vs. when it would be handled by the feds, FBI, with a corresponding arraignment in federal district court. as opposed to say the local PDX district court? Interfering with a flight crew is a federal crime rather than a state crime, but I don't know if the door of the aircraft has to be closed 9in order to triggger that charge? Or how do the airport police decide to arrest you either for disorderly conduct, or interfering with a flight crew? Can a local non federal LEO even arrest you for a federal crime of interference with the duties of a flight crew? Or can they only arrest you for disorderly, for example, and then the feds would charge you with the federal crime?

I wonder how much training the LEO's have in forcably removing someone from a full flight, and the degree of force or negotiation they use, eetc.? I.e. do they have to evacuate the plane first?

3. If someone is arrested or detained dby the police in a circumstance like this, and they find they really did not do anything wrong, I wonder if sometimes they are released without being charged and therefore again a complete investigation or court action never takes place? "Hey, we'll just let you go." Hey, we'll just sweep it under the rug.

Also the person could have asked for compensation for being removed. The gate agents main mission is to get the flight out on time, so especially if the removal reason is questionable, they may very well give out something like VDB compensation. Remember, if they have to call the police, make arrests, and fill out all that paperwork, I think we're looking at possibly a 2 hour delay, and its going to be a much more involved process for the flight crew, the gate agent, the pax, etc. there may also be another plane that needs that gate. So you might think its crazy, but gate agents are under enormous pressure to keep the ops running on time, and the voucher candy isn't there money.

judolphin

.

If pax in question had deserved the boot -- i.e., if she were being disruptive or rude in any way to FA, I feel reasonably certain the other pax would have applauded rather than jeered.

We must not witchhunt and we cannot engage in vigilante justice (i.e., no one outside of the people directly involved need to know the name of the FA or pax).

That said, eyewitness accounts paint this as a misunderstanding and blatant overreaction/abuse of power by the FA. This is disturbing at face value and I hope AA's investigation is conducted properly.

BThumme

This was taken from the reddit thread:

cmd320

I move to require FAs to wear body cameras while on the job.

patgarrett

Tim sounds like he needs to grow a pair or find another job. I'm sick of these AA prima donnas.