tommyleo

I doubt it. By tomorrow, the American media and public will move on to the next "outrage du jour" and totally forget about this incident.

MSPeconomist

I would hope that the passenger with these huge emotional service animals would have been forced to buy two additional seats for them.

jetsetter

I can see how this could have happened with an overly zealous express carrier flight attendant, and I have observed similar behavior before. Also PHL is not known for its good customer service for people with or without disabilities.

Misc Observations. I'm going to try to give you some thing here you may not have known if you have not closely worked with the ACAA :

1. A carrier cannot eg require that a person with a disability (service animal or not) sit in any particular seat such as the bulk head. Generally the carrier should work with the pax to determine which seats works best, but other than the exit row rule, they cannot require that a pax with a disability sit or not sit in any particular seat. Some pax with disabilities, some guide dog users, eg. prefer the bulkhead, and others prefer other seats. Also carrier eg cannot require pax with a disability to pre-board, etc.

2. I observed a situation on a PHL US commuter carrier where an express f/a tried to say that a blind person could not keep their folding cane in the cabin. Luckily, the pilot was a little mor knowledgeable and corrected the f/a.

3. I observed a situation on a PHL BWI route where ground employees at BWI triede to insinuate that a blind person had to get off first or last. This is not the case, and a carrier cannot impose special rules on people with disabilities even if the carrier employees are imposing an arbitrary rule based on some sort of safety concern they have.

4. There have been ongoing situations in PHL in the location near C16 where the buses from the F terminal arrive & depart where staff, contractors most likely, appear not to have been trained in the ACAA.

5. I wonder where the CRO was, Complaint Resolution Official, when this unfolded at PHL. All carriers are required to have a CRO on duty at all times, and the CRO is supposed to have a higher level of training on both the ACAA & Part 382 regulations, and is supposed to have the authority to direct other employees on proper procedures with ACAA. Sometimes there is difficulty because technically CRO's are part of passenger service, and they can get in to turf wars with in flight or flight ops. Usually a CRO would eg be a passenger service supervisor.

6. I'm curious how the people at US Express totally botched and bungled this, and why they did not think that this would mmake the news. I wonder if they called SOCC or whatever US calls this, and SOCC is supposed to either have people on duty familiar with ACAA or they would be able to page or call an analyst at the carrier that focuses on ACAA. Again, these are the general procedures with carriers, but may not be US's specific procedures. Often an airline will have a Part 382 expert on call that can be called or consulted. The DOT holds periodic in person & web forums with both airline & disability advocate representatives. In fact, they just had one yesterday Thu Nov 14 to introduce new accessibility requirements for airline web sites (must comply with WCAG 2.0 AA) and airline kiosks (will require a similar level of accessibility as ATM machines). They also announced a new rule regarding seat strapping of foldable wheelchairs, and also at the beginning of the webinar they reminded people that US was just fined due to its issues in CLT & PHL.

studentff

Simple. Flight crews that go on power trips are delusional in their belief that their power is absolute within their little aluminum tube.

Note that the "safety hazard" perceived by the crew was that they no longer had absolute control over the passengers and that the passengers had displayed backbone. We have seen this time and time again; one passenger disagreeing with a crew member is "disruptive" while multiple passengers disagreeing with a crew member is a "safety hazard."

Don't these passengers know they are supposed to defer to the FA and cockpit crew like peasants deferring to royalty, regardless of how absurd the actions of the crew are?

dtremit

What exactly do you do, then, if the passenger insists on sitting in a seat where the service animal can't be accommodated? I'm seeing reports elsewhere that the passenger was seated in 9D (the aisle-facing seat at the back) and was unwilling to move. So you have a passenger who can't be moved against his will, a service dog which can't be separated from the passenger, and a safety issue because the dog is unsecured in the aisle. It seems to me that there's no solution to that situation which doesn't require disregarding a regulation.

lizs

You know, I am NOT a dog person but service animals are always impeccably behaved and I would have had no issue with that dog underneath my feet for a flight. The yippee ones that don't seem to actually sit in their bags and bark throughout the flight I have a real issue with (but off topic)

The fact that no accommodations were made, that US seems to be standing by their clearly sham of a story instead of apologizing is ridiculous. We've all seen service animals and I do not believe the dog was "unable to be controlled". The mere fact that all the passengers threw a fit as well is very, very telling, even though none of us know the true story.

jetsetter

https://www.facebook.com/albert.j.rizzi#
Also earlier I found a pax who was on the flight on Twitter.
Its neat in 2013 how we can do that, even in 2005 you may not be able to very easily connect with people in any sort of situation of interest but now with things like Twitter & Facebook you can connect to almost anyone anywhere with a situation or item of interest.

tuphat

Based on several personal horror stories with PHL commuter concourse staff, I'm not surprised. They are atrocious compared with US staff at CLT and elsewhere.

tommyleo

Here is the passenger's version of the story, directly from his Facebook page:

"There were 35 people on the flight tonight. Every one of them stood up in solidarity for the discriminatory treatment I received and the way my dog was unwelcome on the flight. The flight attendant told the pilot that I was confrontational and was attacking. Everybody on the plane counter that with the truth that we were accommodating to the best of our ability. What was most disturbing is that contrary to what most of my blind peers choose to do I let the manifest know and I let US airways know in advance of my flight that I was blind and traveling with my guy dog. I always do that just so people will not be made to feel uncomfortable. Yet today my effort to make sure that everybody's flight was an enjoyable one was countered with Aiden obstinant and rude flight attendant I cannot tell you how honored I am that everybody got off the flight and we are all now on a bus going to Islip. None of the people on the flight signed up for this three hour tour and I thank them for joining me for standing up for rights of the blind and poor guy [guide] dog handlers. So if anybody has an attorney who would like to take on US airways with 35 witnesses who all stood up to argue the lies that this flight attendant put forth forcing a flight to be canceled I am welcoming a phone number and an introduction. I think each and everyone of the new friends I made on US Airways flight from Philadelphia to isolate [Islip] which is not a flight but a bus right now will always be my friends."

Superguy

US put a statement on their FB page. Can't post it at the moment.

MojaveFlyer

Don't know about the one on FB but the once quoted by the ABC story blames the pax for being "disruptive". Standard language for what happens when the FA takes a disliking to a pax, they become "disruptive" and a "safety concern". COA I say.

tommyleo

Here is a link to the Facebook post by US, which is clearly blaming the pax. Bad move.

I may take back my post above saying that this will be forgotten tomorrow...

tommyleo

Jim,

US is claiming otherwise. This is from their Facebook page:

"The captain made the decision to cancel the flight and alternate means of transport were secured to get the passengers to their destination."


I'm inclined to believe you over the PR department of US.

lizs

Blaming the blind guy and basically accusing him of making the whole thing up. Nice move US Airways

Facebook statement in its entirety:
--------------------
Folks – I know there is a lot of heat around the issue of the passenger and his service animal that was removed from one of our express flights recently. One of the first things everyone should ask themselves is, “There certainly must be more to this story than meets the eye … an airline wouldn’t just boot them off a flight for no good reason, right?” Absolutely.

US Airways transports more than 80 million customers each year and ensures that all customers, including those with disabilities, are treated with dignity and respect. We’re particularly sensitive to those customers who travel with service animals and we partner with Assistance Dogs International (ADI), an organization that trains and places assistance dogs around the world. US Airways employees volunteer to travel with and work with assistance dogs in training to help them prepare for travel with disabled partners. Over the past 10 years, US Airways employees have participated in transports everywhere from California to Croatia. So we understand the special needs and laws surrounding transporting our disabled customers and their service animals. So we have been investigating what happened here, and that investigation continues.

Here are a few things folks should consider:

• The safety of every passenger on our aircraft is our first and foremost priority.
• To ensure the safety of all passengers, the carriers and FAA have approved cabin policies the ensure that, should an incident occur, everyone can be safely evacuated without aisle-way obstruction.
• In compliance with the Air Carriers Access Act, and the FAA, service animals must be either under the seat in front of a passenger, on their lap (if equal to or smaller than a lap child), or at their feet … but at no time can they be in the main aisle of the aircraft as that is a primary evacuation route. In this instance, the animal was not able to be secured out of the main aisle, and attempts to work with the customer failed to ensure compliance with this safety rule.
• The customer is an advocate for disability rights, and appears to have forced a confrontation with his disruptive behavior, rather than simply complying with the instruction and securing the dog. Everyone was tired, it was near midnight, and I’m sure patience was in short supply as the aircraft had already been delayed on departure due to a mechanical issue and the animal was restless. We all would be.
• Once that was communicated by the cabin crew to the flight deck crew, the decision was made to return to the gate to remove the customer and calm the situation.
• Several other passengers, upon seeing the customer’s removal from the flight, piled on to the emotional confrontation, making threats to contact media and make an issue of out ‘kicking a blind man and his dog off a US Airways flight.’ This reduced the FA to tears, and they were unable to continue as they believed their safety was in jeopardy. The captain made the decision to cancel the flight and alternate means of transport were secured to get the passengers to their destination. Again, everyone was tired, it was late, and I’m sure folks simply wanted to get home. As a result, our customers did not get to their destination until after 2 in the morning.

So, having said all that, we apologize to the customers of the flight for the inconvenience caused by this incident and will be reaching out to them. I am sure everyone involved wish it had never happened and they had simply gotten to their destination on time.

We are also supportive of crews as they do a very difficult job, and in very sensitive emotional circumstances, to guard the safety of all our customers, on every flight, every day. If a crew member ask you to do something, there is a lawful and reasonable reason to comply with the request. That is simple and easy to do. Feel free to ask questions and get clarification, but forcing confrontations or making threats jeopardizes the safety of everyone on board. You can bet that will create a delay and potentially removal from the aircraft. No one wins there.

As I said, we continue to investigate the circumstances surrounding the incident, and we welcome any additional information that will enable us to better accommodate our disabled passengers and their service animals. We want to improve our service, and avoiding these kinds of confrontations through education and sensitivity are always the better path.

Thanks for taking two minutes to read a bit more about what we believe occurred on this flight. After all, there certainly is more to the story … right? Absolutely.

-- John McDonald - Spokesman, US Airways

------------------------------------------------------

copperred

Aww poor widdle FA couldn't control herself after being called out on her discriminatory nonsense? No sympathy here. She's lucky no one (or perhaps someone did?) got her name. Seriously, what were you thinking?

Yes the more to the story is that you're going to get sued, justifiably so, but unfortunately it won't undo your overall scumbag attitude. Are you trying to be UA here? I recall having seen someone crawl off an incoming aircraft after it had been sitting for an hour to demand UA supply the promised wheelchairs. UA's excuse was that the plane arrived at a different gate than planned; it was all of 5 gates away but that's a million miles to the lazybones at UA.

Response from someone who actually was on the flight and sat next to the man and his dog. Further proof this FA is horrible.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/...ent-1124492731