The largest expert travel community:
  • 775,102 Total members
  • 5,480 Users online now
  • 1,730,376 Threads
  • 31,995,265 Posts

Delta Offers Alternative for Flyers Who “Can’t” Wear Face Masks

Delta Offers Alternative for Flyers Who “Can’t” Wear Face Masks
Joe Cortez

Delta Air Lines will offer an alternative to their mandatory face mask policy for those flyers who claim they cannot use one for medical reasons. Through their “Clearance-to-Fly” process, the carrier will allow flyers who submit to a virtual consultation with a third-party medical professional.

For those who claim they cannot wear a face mask for “undisclosed medical reasons,” Delta Air Lines will provide an alternative pathway for them to still fly – despite their mandatory face covering policy. The airline announced a “Clearance-to-Fly” option for passengers, requiring a health screening immediately before boarding an aircraft.

“Clearance-to-Fly” Requires Hour-Long Virtual Examination

Since the Centers for Disease Control recommended face coverings for everyone while in the public, a vocal minority claimed they shouldn’t be required to wear one. Citing HIPPA and the Americans with Disabilities Act, some individuals will claim to have a medical condition which would be aggravated by a face mask, yet would not be required to disclose why.

Now, Delta is offering an alternative option for flyers to prove why they cannot wear a face mask. Through “Clearance-to-Fly,” those who say they can’t wear a face mask may still be able to travel with the Atlanta-based carrier, once they complete a medical screening.

Those who plan on using the “Clearance-to-Fly” program must arrive at the airport at least one hour prior to boarding. After checking in, those flyers must go through a virtual medical consultation facilitated by a Delta employee with a third-party medical professional.

If the visit is successful, the flyer will be given an exemption to board the aircraft and fly aboard the airline without wearing a face mask. However, those who do not pass the virtual visit, or falsely claim to have a medical condition or disability, will be barred from flying with the airline until the face covering requirement comes to an end.

The only exemptions are allowed for young children who can’t maintain wearing a face covering, or unaccompanied minors flying with the carrier.

Face Masks Still Among the Top Safety Measures of Airlines

Although there has been push back against wearing face masks, both airlines and passengers say it is among the top personal safety items. A survey by the International Air Transport Association found that wearing face covering is one of the top three policies which creates a feeling of safety. In addition, all major American airlines require passengers to wear a face mask while flying.

And while Delta is offering an alternative pathway for some flyers, the carrier is discouraging those who say they can’t wear a face mask from traveling until the pandemic is over. All Delta employees will still be required to maintain a face covering while dealing with the public.

Feature image courtesy: Delta Air Lines

View Comments (40)


  1. tonyv8

    July 21, 2020 at 12:19 pm

    I hope this exam is is on a per-flight basis and not a blanket exemption.
    Otherwise this could become another fake-service-animal scam by some passengers.

  2. live_in_a_suitcase

    July 21, 2020 at 3:03 pm

    As one of those who can actually document my medical conditions, being singled out for special attention is discriminatory by the very nature of the policy. Maintaining a “feeling of safety” according to an industry poll is NOT medically nor scientifically required for ACTUAL safety onboard an aircraft. The policy of Delta singles out disabled people and should not be tolerated, just as a policy which singles out people of specific ethnic or racial backgrounds would not be tolerated.

    This comment won’t address how the masks required fail to comply with Federal safety rules as established by OSHA.

    Back to the “feeling of safety” : One could also say that they felt safer when the flight had no overweight individuals on the plane because it might exceed the design limitations of the airframe, requiring those who refused to weigh themselves an exemption if they got weighed in private, under medical supervision to determine that they would not make the flight unsafe to operate. Maybe we should dose all passengers with tranquilizers so they “feel safer” in a metal tube shooting through the sky in excess of 500 miles per hour, at a height of more than seven miles above the surface with nothing below them but white,fluffy, soft-looking clouds (on occasion) to cushion their fall.

    As reported recently by Jon Rappoport:

    “Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings—Personal Protective and Environmental Measures.” Published in: “Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol.26, No. 5, May 2020.” (That journal is published by the CDC.)

    I quote from the abstract: “Here, we review the evidence base on the effectiveness of nonpharmaceutical personal protective measures and environmental hygiene measures in non-healthcare settings and discuss their potential inclusion in pandemic plans. Although mechanistic studies [*] support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza. We similarly found limited evidence on the effectiveness of improved hygiene and environmental cleaning.”

    Here are quotes from pages 970-972 of the review: “In our systematic review, we identified 10 RCTs [randomized controlled trials] that reported estimates of the effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis, we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks…”

    “Disposable medical masks (also known as surgical masks) are loose-fitting devices that were designed to be worn by medical personnel to protect accidental contamination of patient wounds, and to protect the wearer against splashes or sprays of bodily fluids… There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure. Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”

    “In this review, we did not find evidence to support a protective effect of personal protective measures or environmental measures in reducing influenza transmission.”

    “We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility…”


    (Note the “wwwnc” — which is correct. It is not “www”.)

  3. rylan

    July 21, 2020 at 5:23 pm

    Good for DL. Too easy for too many people to claim a bogus medical exemption. Now they have to prove it real time.

  4. jamesteroh

    July 21, 2020 at 7:19 pm

    If someone can’t wear a face mask, why not require a face shield? If someone has a legitimate medical condition where they can’t wear a mask they are probably in a high risk category and shouldn’t be flying anyway.

  5. CaptHolic

    July 22, 2020 at 2:48 am

    This sums it up PERFECTLY…

    “the International Air Transport Association found that wearing face covering is one of the top three policies which creates a feeling of safety”

    What a JOKE… That’s all people care about. The warm comfy safety blanket of ignorance… Doesn’t matter if mask do or don’t do anything. As long as the paying people “feel” safe…

  6. vargha

    July 22, 2020 at 4:09 am

    “However, those who do not pass the virtual visit . . . will be barred from flying with the airline until the face covering requirement comes to an end.”

    Not given the option to wear a crappy mask of their choice, but BARRED from flying until the mandate ends? How objective is this test? What will it involve?

  7. flyerCO

    July 22, 2020 at 4:18 am

    This wont last long as the exam isn’t allowed to be required by the ACAA.

  8. sekhmet101

    July 22, 2020 at 4:30 am

    Agree completely tonyv8.

  9. mhrb

    July 22, 2020 at 5:15 am

    Even anti-mask people aren’t stupid enough to waste an hour to avoid wearing a mask, surely?

  10. GrayAnderson

    July 22, 2020 at 5:35 am

    I’m going to take the opposite view from the poster above (tonyv8): A requirement to repeat the exam on a per-flight basis (or alternatively, a per-trip basis…I can see no justification for requiring a repeat within a single booked trip) would probably collapse under the Air Carrier Access Act as an unreasonable burden. I could see a case for repeating at intervals, but imposing repeated hour-long exams for an open-and-shut diagnosis of some sort (for an easy idea, someone who cannot wear a standard mask because they are missing an ear) would be absurd (if anything, it’s the reason that the no-ask rules exist to begin with). I cannot say what would go beyond a 10-15 minute consultation that would actually be necessary.

    Three notes:
    (1) The indication that I saw in earlier reporting isn’t that the exam would be an hour long, it was that pax should plan for an hour. My guess is that the exam would only be 10-15 minutes, but trying to guarantee that the doc would be available at a given moment would be tricky.
    (2) I think the bigger question is why Delta isn’t setting up for consultations in advance of the flight date (“You have to use our docs but you can have the consultation at your leisure” seems reasonable). Again, I think there’s an ACAA case hiding in there.
    (3) As to the cited survey, the IATA’s survey seems to be a mixed bag, and it sounds like the IATA went quickly into “spin mode” given the original reporting on here (not linked in the original story) and the fact that they were saying they “needed to get the message out” in the article you cited above: I would also interpret the results as “Face masks are polarizing…a lot of fliers really want them, a lot of fliers don’t.”

  11. Orange County Commuter

    July 22, 2020 at 5:42 am

    I think Delta has learned from the “my pet is a emotional support dog” scam. They aren’t taking your “internet MD exam” (AKA as “I sent some MD without morals $20 and he claims I have some medical reason not to wear a mask”) or personal declaration as evidence.

    Making you actually talk to a MD will cut out the “I made up a medical condition”. It’s hard to pull off this act to people who know what to ask.

  12. Tongie1

    July 22, 2020 at 5:47 am

    Those who cannot wear a mask due to health problems should be very concerned about getting covid 19.

  13. Kipale78

    July 22, 2020 at 6:10 am

    if you can speak all right, you can wear a mask.

  14. GoProf

    July 22, 2020 at 7:06 am

    Would like to know what would prevent a person from wearing a face mask other than ‘I don’t want too’. Just a relatively loose covering.

  15. Loren Pechtel

    July 22, 2020 at 7:06 am

    Why would it need to be repeated unless the initial problem was temporary. The information would be in their computers, very hard to scam.

  16. pony_trekker

    July 22, 2020 at 7:16 am

    Better alternative would be for those mofos to fucking drive themselves.

  17. FlyBitcoin

    July 22, 2020 at 7:17 am

    If the person qualifies for the exception, they should also be given a seat in the last row.
    No reason why other passengers in their row should bear the risk of this “third party” assessment.

  18. greentravelgal

    July 22, 2020 at 9:31 am

    Many folks here are missing the point. The exam would not be solely to confirm a valid exception – it would be *primarily* to check for COVID symptoms – and discuss potential exposure – before allowing the passenger on a flight without a mask. (Something beyond the self-declaration all passengers are required to make.) Hence the “Clearance to Fly” name. As such it would be required for each separate travel instance. If the exam also revealed that the claimed medical exemption was false, then the ban would take effect.

  19. ftl

    July 22, 2020 at 9:48 am

    Mr suitcase’s article is from May, and studies since then have shown that masks are effective in reducing transmission of the virus. Here’s a statement on July 15th from the director of the CDC:

    Yesterday, in an editorial published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Robert Redfield, MD, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), called for universal face coverings in light of the rampant spread of the virus.

    “We are not defenseless against COVID-19,” Redfield said in a CDC press release. “Cloth face coverings are one of the most powerful weapons we have to slow and stop the spread of the virus — particularly when used universally within a community setting. All Americans have a responsibility to protect themselves, their families, and their communities.”

  20. akbruces

    July 22, 2020 at 10:02 am

    It’s pretty simple; despite all the protests to the contrary, it’s a private industry, private company, instituting a requirement in order to fly. It doesn’t matter if YOU feel it violates YOUR rights, as far as I’m concerned, YOU violate MY rights to protect MY health and safety every time YOU refuse to wear a mask where mandated. That said, Delta is working on a “workaround” if you will, which I personally object to but again, it’s a private company. Their rules. My rule would be no mask, no fly, period. Find alternate transportation to your destination. End.of.subject.

  21. Orange County Commuter

    July 22, 2020 at 10:23 am

    I hate to break this to the “I can’t wear a mask crowd” but no the airline is NOT required by law to let you fly. No, it’s not considered discrimination to make you prove you need special accommodations. And if you really look most medical conditions which might preclude wearing a mask actually would make catching Covid almost guaranteed fatal. I have a friend with one of those.. she hasn’t left her house since early March, she certainly won’t fly Delta.

    As long as Delta protects the privacy of the person and the FA etc doesn’t get to know the medical details there’s no ACAA suit. I am sure one will be filed because lawyers like to make money but the truth is Delta is doing what they can. You are allowed to request people provide evidence of requests for special accomodations. (That’s why they test kids before putting them in a specialized learning plan, mom and dad can’t just say “junior needs a special program because we don’t like the regular class” :) Even your employer can ask for proof for accommodations for special work arrangements)

  22. JonMST

    July 22, 2020 at 3:43 pm

    @akbruces wants everyone wearing masks. “YOU violate MY rights to protect MY health and safety every time YOU refuse to wear a mask where mandated.”
    CDC has randomized controlled trials which @live_in_a_suitcase linked to those results. The CDC says masks don’t work. Masks don’t protect you.

    If masks actually did work, why would minors be exempted?

    Singapore hospitals figured this out and mandate frequent handwashing with soap and water. That is the means to stop the spread. Wearing a mask seems easy and has no real benefit, as stated by the CDC.

  23. deadmoneywalking

    July 22, 2020 at 6:15 pm

    The 3rd party medical consultant has to understand that the mask frightens my emotional support armadillo.

  24. PeggyJM

    July 22, 2020 at 6:29 pm

    @JonMST, since you are bringing up Singapore, are you aware that they have a mandatory mask rule everytime you leave your home, not just inside public places, but outdoors as well. Fine of $1000 SGD for not wearing one. The government has also provided masks to all residents.

  25. GeauxTigersGeaux

    July 22, 2020 at 7:49 pm

    Back of the bus, anti-maskers. You must be punished for not toe-ing the societal norm! @Live_in_a_suitcase, I’m in agreement with you. My doctor, not a third party, makes the call on whether a potential PE is going to be exacerbated by reduced oxygen flow, or decreased fluid consumption, etc. But we must BE SHAMED! Be SHAMED! It’s like the walk of shame in GoT.

    My kids are in (supposedly) third grade and first grade. There’s a policy that says you must be free of lice and you can’t send your kids to school with a fever. And yet people do it constantly, which infects the classroom, and other kids, etc.

    Shame from the crowd is a powerful weapon. The problem is that I can’t do my job (flying places to fix problems), or put food on my table. I can’t get food without without waiting two days for groceries for the pickup option. I can’t buy controlled substances (the Sudafed that works). As someone that is well aware of the restrictions that private businesses are permitted to put on consumers (anti-X Y or Z), I get it, but I literally cannot buy groceries without wearing a mask unless I go to a farm or a bodega somewhere in Houston. At that point, there’s no “choice to not patronize a business with rules you don’t like.” Choice has been removed. If you feel like you’re at risk, you are perfectly within your rights to wear an N95 mask or an Army M04 mask after you clear security, and you can drink your coffee from the tiny little NBC (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) proof straw on the mask. Germany says that kids are brakes on COVID-19, and that they don’t spread it. But sure, put my sweaty ass seven year old in a mask on a transatlantic flight. Cause it shows you care.

    You could wear a gauze mask that lets through pizza dough chunks, and you’re “ok.” I can be the guy that never coughs or sneezes anywhere but in a hanky and sanitizes my hands forthwith, and I’m the problem. It’s a fully haphazard implementation to make people feel better, while us poor fools that have to drink multiple liters of water even before we arrive at the airport are going to be “drinking shamed” by a Cornoa Bro on a plane when I’m sucking down yet another liter of water that bear the brunt of the impact. For the Feeeeeeeling of safety.

    Unfortunately, since most of my work is international, I cannot take the bus to client locations. Otherwise I would, cause you don’t find very many panicky Karens and Dougs on Greyhound, as compared to some of you dictatorial travelers.

  26. sdsearch

    July 22, 2020 at 8:25 pm

    live_in_a_suitcase, the problem is that the effectiveness of various measures depends on the specific virus. Covid-19 is not influenza, and is not even that closely related to influenza. The closest thing from the past that it appears to be related to is SARS. So just because studies may have shown one result with influenza, the results might be (and apparently have been) significantly different with Covid-19.

    You can’t extrapolate from one virus to a different virus in a different virus family, especially once the new virus has been around long enough for there to be some studies specific to it.

  27. PDog

    July 22, 2020 at 8:36 pm

    Wow… So much anger coming from all of you.

    I have an invisible disability. The federal government decided that I’d never be an “abled” person again a long time ago. All of you, and Delta for that matter, would think I am perfectly well, but I am far from it.

    It’s illegal to ask what’s wrong with me. When I park in the handicapped parking spot, you can stare at me like you hate me for taking it away from “someone who needs it”, but you can’t ask me why I have a placard. I have the placard for a reason.

    The people I know are not wearing masks for a legitimate reason. They are having a terrible time dealing with the hate and vitriol of the public. Every. Single. Day.

    Delta should just leave it alone and remember the ADA.

  28. lenscraft


    July 23, 2020 at 5:00 am

    @live_in_a_suitcase says that he has a condition which precludes him from wearing a mask. I’m genuinely curious as to what conditions would keep people from wearing masks. Does anyone know?

    I expect that most passengers would object if a passenger boarded covered with the postulant buboes consistent with an advanced case of bubonic plague. Given the wide variety of masks available (including those with UV sterilization and masks with valves) it is hard to imagine that a mask doesn’t exist for those with a specific medical condition.

  29. Firstboss

    July 23, 2020 at 7:26 am

    @live_in_a_suitcase , the whole global hysteria around the COVID with jobs of hundreds of millions millions of people jeopardized worldwide is exactly because of the high risk to people with disabilities and pre-existing conditions. the virus is not a problem for healthy people with healthy metabolism.

    So, being inconvenienced to avoid flying completely or going through verification if you absolutely must is the least you could do in return.

  30. Firstboss

    July 23, 2020 at 7:27 am

    @live_in_a_suitcase , the whole global mismanagement around the virus with jobs of hundreds of millions millions of people jeopardized worldwide is exactly because of the high risk to people with disabilities and pre-existing conditions. the virus is not a problem for healthy people with healthy metabolism.

    So, being inconvenienced to avoid flying completely or going through verification if you absolutely must is the least you could do in return.

  31. Mediaink

    July 23, 2020 at 8:49 am

    If you genuinely have a physical disability or legitimate health issue, this requirement shouldn’t put you off. In fact, it should be a relief that Delta is employing a methodology for separating you from the belligerent “it’s just my right not to” crowd. If it still makes you angry and indignant enough to write a BOOK on this thread, complete with numerous links, citing information that is either obsolete or parts of are simply being construed to support your fanaticism, there is a simple solution. Don’t fly Delta. This kind of policy, and others, are why many of us ONLY fly Delta. You don’t have to, and if there are a litany of excuses why you won’t switch to another airline, that means you prefer one of the better airlines in this country, wether it’s for their routes, their service, your status, whatever, and you’ll have to just suck it up, and get to the airport a little early, grateful that you have an opportunity to have your health issues VALIDATED by your preferred airline. Bottom line, you have a choice regarding the way you travel, and the private enterprises that facilitate travel for you, and are invested in keeping their customers safe, have a choice too.

  32. jagat101

    July 23, 2020 at 9:49 am

    In a confined, crowded space (ie fully booked planes, etc) using recirculating air for many’s a no brainer to wear an N95 or in my case, I’d wear my elastomeric reusable N100/P100 respirator with HESPA filters. As a healthcare provider myself who travels overseas often, I’m well aware how “dirty” plane interiors are and had been wiping down my plane seat area with sanitizing wipes long before this pandemic era we are in. Persistent hand hygiene is routine in my line of work as well as wearing PPEs (when and where it is essentially needed). With that said, am not truly with the “wear a mask every time/everywhere” sheeples.

  33. Boogie711

    July 23, 2020 at 10:03 am

    This is BRILLIANT.

    A) Anyone who has a legitimate medical condition should be GRATEFUL to Delta for taking their concerns seriously enough to hire a third party medical professional. They can be reassured that they are in fact healthy, and COVID-free.

    B) Anyone who wants to scam the system is going to be disincentivized by the prospect of a ban.

    So. Brilliantly. Good. Sure it’s going to piss off some people who throw up red flags about ‘rights.’ But guess what?

    I have a RIGHT not to get sick because of YOUR germs. Your mask doesn’t protect you… it protects me. And if you’re not wearing a mask, I have the right to be safe.

    You have a right to get upset, NOT because you disclose your medical condition – but because SCAMMERS are forcing you to disclose that medical condition to a neutral third party.

    Well done, Delta!

  34. rundmc

    July 23, 2020 at 5:02 pm

    This is another example of why these stupid face mask mandates are so illogical as to border insanity. The fact that young children – who are, literally, generally filthy and the hugest carriers in the human population of viruses and bacteria – are exempt from wearing them just goes to show that everyone knows face masks are useless. They are being used (as a recent New England Journal of Medicine article succinctly put it) as “talismans” by public officials and corporations to “show” they are doing “something” in the face of a virus that has everyone making decisions out of terror, not sound, informed policy. I thought we were told that all the schools had to close because young kids would spread the virus and then carry it home to their aging folks who would then immediately drop dead? But, now – in the face of numerous studies going back to the aftermath of the Spanish Flu in the 1920’s showing that face masks are ineffective in real world conditions to stop or even slow the spread of a virus – we are all being forced to wear something that inhibits our oxygen intake for hours at a time. Oh, but wait – if you can get past a medical “screening” or are a young germ and virus carrier, then no mask for you! Because …. somehow… you now can’t spread it…. This really all is so completely incoherent.

    Only great news for someone like me is that all of this stupidity has completely cured me of what I really think was my travel addiction. I used to get on flights every other week to just get away. Even after all of this is over (although, I don’t know if this level of crazy can be cured), this 2 million-miler + won’t be getting back on an airline in anything like the frequency I was before. I’m just so over flying now, and I’ve found a new love of driving and camping – no masks in the wilderness. (And, NO – I am not worried about getting a virus if I ever get back on a plane; I’m just too annoyed to fly airlines that seem to know so little about medical science or how viruses spread). So, tens of thousands more $ going into my retirement. All good.

  35. vinnmann

    July 24, 2020 at 7:54 am

    If masks are required to protect others, why are masks with exhaust valves/ports permitted?

  36. sethb

    July 26, 2020 at 8:16 pm

    @PDog, what’s wrong with you? Why do you have a handicapped placard?

    I’ve asked. You claimed it was illegal to ask. Try to have me arrested for asking and see how far you get.

    I’ll give you a clue: The First Amendment says I can ask anything I choose to. Deal with it. Or move someplace without it.

  37. lisah101

    July 27, 2020 at 7:39 am

    I’m confused – wearing a mask helps prevent someone infected from infecting others. How does a virtual visit rule out COVID-19 when so many people are asymptomatic but still able to infect others? Unless they are doing a physical COVID test, that person could still pass on infection.

    I am also sympathetic to those who have a hard time wearing a mask but NOT wearing a mask isn’t the answer. Find another way to be in public without infecting others, I’d have to research face shields, etc. The solution is not to go out without a mask but to find an alternative.

  38. sunnyjl

    July 27, 2020 at 4:58 pm

    This is a blatant violation of the ADA. Even private businesses are required by federal law to accommodate people with medical conditions and are NOT allowed to ask anything about their medical condition. This is LAW. Mask mandates are not LAW.

  39. downinit

    July 27, 2020 at 5:44 pm

    If you have a respiratory disorder, you really should not be flying (or going anywhere else in public) right now, in the middle of a respiratory pandemic. And it has already been proven time and time again that masks have zero effect on the oxygen saturation of the wearer, so I would love to know what sort of absurd conditions people are claiming to have that would preclude them from wearing a mask, aside from a homicidal case of covidiocy.

  40. CalVol

    August 5, 2020 at 1:23 pm

    ADA does not preclude denying entry/access to those who are deemed a direct threat.

    Delta seems to be seeking a means by which, during these unusual times, they can accommodate customers with legitimate issues while taking precautions to insure they are fit to fly and are not endangering others.

    Imagine the lawsuits if they take a hands-off approach and then someone(s) get sick and alleges it happened on a Delta bird on which pax were allowed to enter sans mask?

    If you prefer a simple “no mask no transport policy” Enjoy your drive from Poughkeepsie to Portland. Otherwise, this seems to be a reasonable middle ground.

    My wife has asthma. She would have a difficult time on anything but the shortest of flights. I do the vast majority of our shopping and errand running for that very reason. She does not think herself entitled to endanger everyone else in the world because she has a medical condition that makes it difficult for her to wear a mask.

You must be logged in on the FORUM to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply


More in Airlines

best budget airline

Spirit Offers 5X Points for All Bookings Through Mid-August

Joe CortezAugust 5, 2020

New Southwest Cleaning Protocols: Disinfect Tray Tables, But Tidy Cabins

Joe CortezAugust 5, 2020

Flyers Will Pay How Much for Empty Middle Seats?

Joe CortezAugust 5, 2020

Copyright © 2014 Top News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by Wordpress.


I want emails from FlyerTalk with travel information and promotions. I can unsubscribe any time using the unsubscribe link at the end of all emails