jsguyrus

Bretmd

NoLaGent

I'm really beginning to think we'll never know the whole story. There has to be some culpability on Alaska's part, as the pax is claiming on social media that AS has apologized to him. If it were a cut and dry case of seat poaching, I think they'd present those facts, but they're not and they've already confirmed the dupe seating error in their previous statement.

Here's the pax's statement which can be viewed on his public Facebook post.:

"Thank you to everyone for all the support. Alaska Airlines has reached out, apologized, and we are discussing making things right. I accept Alaska’s apology and appreciate it addressing the situation."

PV_Premier

<slow clap>

BlueHenFlyer

Flying for Fun

Nobody in first is obligated to board first!

og

apbailey

Have to agree. Their statement didn't make much sense, as it does nothing to explain the wide gulf between its assertion it was a "seating error" and the pax' that it was discrimination. The least they could have done is added some context about what happened, what their policies are, what did or didn't happen (and how policies were and weren't followed). It doesn't give anyone any idea of how to respond to the matter, or to even see that Alaska is addressing it in any substantive way.

I also have to say the certainty of reactions on this board is pretty gross. We don't know if it was a case of explicit discrimination by the FA, a case of implicit bias (i.e., two men can't be a "family"), a seating software mixup, or a botched and unticketed"self-upgrade." You'd think people on this board were in the row behind this as it unfolded, though.

UAPremierExec

no, but many of us have been flying Alaska since before the 737-700s arrived.... with many friends and contacts beyond.

And those who have flown Alaska more than once a year will also know that Alaska flight attendants never, ever, touch seating arrangements.

wwongo

I have no idea what happened but I think Alaska is handling this poorly. They are getting a lot of bad press and if there is more to the story, they are not telling it. The tweet says they have supported equality but it doesn't address the issue or what happened. Employees of companies with good track records on equality can behave in a biased way. The Starbucks employee who called the police on the black man over the bathroom issue comes to mind and Starbucks was very proactive in saying they needed to train employees better.

There are hundreds of comments on their twitter statement and most of them are negative. A few are supporting AS with a few homophobic comments thrown in too. Reading all those comments and some of the comments on here, it really strikes me how quickly so many people are to latch onto whatever scenario fits their prior bias. They can't all be true and it does matter what actually happened but we are living in the fake news world now I guess. It seems like what side you are on matters more than facts.

bocastephen

If the customers are at fault, they really should be thrown under the bus by Alaska - an attempt at free publicity and attention-grabbing for someone's sleezy bar under these conditions by those people should not go unanswered. If Alaska was at fault, then let's hear about it, clear the air, get the apology over and done with and move on. It's a seating issue, it's not like they were dragged off the flight by their ankles.

flytoeat

If the allegedly harmed party is wrongly playing the gay discrimination card, what's AAG to do? It puts them in a pretty tough position if they want to expose the fraud. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

bocastephen

I don't see how they would be damned if they expose it - in fact, it's an opportunity to re-establish their cultural position as a LGBT corporate leader by calling out a customer who is leveraging an important movement to gain personal publicity, and to make a statement about the importance of their commitment to LGBT causes which should not be treated in such a trivial, childish way.

While we still don't have all of the facts, I am taking the position that I smell a rat, and if it's rat we have, then the world should see it.

flytoeat

If this claim is specious, I absolutely agree they should expose it, but whether they would take the risk is the question. Unless they can clearly articulate the fraud, it would be a public relations nightmare. And that stinks.

NoLaGent

And I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it boils down. I'd bet that anyone involved in Crisis Communications would agree that they're following the playbook here, regardless of what the actual real story is.

If they'd been subject to homophobic slurs while being handcuffed and forcibly removed by the Cops, we'd have a different case on our hands, but this story will have a relatively short shelf life.