Community
Wiki Posts
Search

EWR AS F/A yelling evacuate

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 3, 2019, 12:05 pm
  #16  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,876
Originally Posted by NoLaGent
The mods should probably change the thread title as well since it was a GA that pulled the fire alarm as they were about to board and yelled for pax to evacuate, not an FA.
In the same way a newspaper should change its subtitle for the photo: "an Alaskan Airlines flight attendant"
I find it more annoying that misspelled words don't get changed in titles, thus making search impossible.
jjmadison and NoLaGent like this.
s0ssos is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 12:29 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SEA
Programs: AS MVP Gold 100K
Posts: 2,030
First of all, "See something, say something" doesn't work at all if you then criticize the person for acting. Speaking for myself I would much rather have someone err on the side of safety. Lets just say the GA let these people board and then some unfortunate incident happened in flight. We would all me sitting around criticizing the GA for her inaction. Why don't we wait for facts before we make conclusions.
jsguyrus is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 12:40 pm
  #18  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,876
Originally Posted by jsguyrus
First of all, "See something, say something" doesn't work at all if you then criticize the person for acting. Speaking for myself I would much rather have someone err on the side of safety. Lets just say the GA let these people board and then some unfortunate incident happened in flight. We would all me sitting around criticizing the GA for her inaction. Why don't we wait for facts before we make conclusions.
Because supposedly this is a sterile area. What do you think the men are going to do?
The problem with your logic is that "turning off your brain" is never a good thing.

(to illustrate why, do you just want to follow a toddler around and pretend like the toddler is a police dog, sniffing out all "bad" people? Of course not. Why?)
s0ssos is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 1:01 pm
  #19  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by jsguyrus
First of all, "See something, say something" doesn't work at all if you then criticize the person for acting. Speaking for myself I would much rather have someone err on the side of safety. Lets just say the GA let these people board and then some unfortunate incident happened in flight. We would all me sitting around criticizing the GA for her inaction. Why don't we wait for facts before we make conclusions.
It seems likely there are actions in between doing nothing and causing a panic that might have been appropriate.
mauve is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 1:48 pm
  #20  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SEA
Posts: 2,556
A New York CBS affiliate is reporting that "Sources told CBS2’s Tony Aiello on Tuesday the flight attendant is bipolar and had an issue with her medication."

https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2019/09...line-employee/
muji is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 2:00 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,844
Originally Posted by muji
A New York CBS affiliate is reporting that "Sources told CBS2’s Tony Aiello on Tuesday the flight attendant is bipolar and had an issue with her medication."

https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2019/09...line-employee/
I wonder what type of (anonymous) source would have that information? Further, what type of limitations there are for flight attendants taking medications for mental health conditions?
nancypants likes this.
flytoeat is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 2:09 pm
  #22  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: AS, UA, WN, IHG Diamond Elite, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton Gold, CET 7*
Posts: 3,304
This whole incident is a hot mess, I wonder just how much of the reality of it any of us will actually hear?
NoLaGent is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 2:16 pm
  #23  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South Park, CO
Programs: Tegridy Elite
Posts: 5,678
Originally Posted by s0ssos
Because supposedly this is a sterile area. What do you think the men are going to do?
The problem with your logic is that "turning off your brain" is never a good thing.

(to illustrate why, do you just want to follow a toddler around and pretend like the toddler is a police dog, sniffing out all "bad" people? Of course not. Why?)
Exactly. Which is why we have had incidents where obvious over-reactions result in innocent people being harrassed, police resources wasted, travelers' time wasted, etc. Just a few examples that I recall:

Remember the incident - also involving an AS flight - with the Orthodox Jewish men saying prayers?
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...ticle-1.123877

or the Arabic language student hassled for having Arabic flashcards
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...-settles-suit/

or the man who almost wasn't allowed to board because another passenger was "uncomfortable" after hearing the man speaking Arabic:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/arabic-...er-complained/

"Better safe than sorry" is fine where the additional step or action carries no real risk or cost in itself. For example triple-checking your door lock before leaving home is overkill but doesn't carry any meaningful risk or potential cost. Whereas the AS employee's actions did create a negative outcome - people were panicked, there was a risk of injury in the rush to "evacuate", a flight was delayed, first responder time and resources were used up, and two passengers were detained & questioned for no good reason.

To be fair, on average humans are inherently poor at assessing risk including probability of outcome without training. Discretion, logical thinking, and proportionality are very important in assessing a situation. But all the more reason to start with the least disruptive means of addressing the perceived risk - such as calling the airport police with a description of the men and what direction they walked towards, for example.
BearX220, 95037, muji and 1 others like this.
84fiero is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 4:08 pm
  #24  
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Seattle, WA
Programs: Alaska Airlines
Posts: 659
Originally Posted by flytoeat
I wonder what type of (anonymous) source would have that information? Further, what type of limitations there are for flight attendants taking medications for mental health conditions?
Employees taking medication for a diagnosed mental health issues are better than employees NOT taking medication for an un-diagnosed mental health issues.
If you start limiting what people can do, or penalize them for seeking help... they'll stop seeking help or just not report that they're struggling. That's how you end up with people going postal.

If it's true that it was a medical mishap (new medication, dose, etc) that caused this... that is unfortunate and hopefully the employee gets help and can return to work. It'd be nice if we lived in a society where a person who was struggling with any disease could inform their employer that due to a change in their treatment, they need a little extra time off to adjust/recover... or to serve in a reduced role for a week or two while their body adjusts.

Most companies don't offer that. And even if one did... most people wouldn't feel safe asking for that kind of treatment for a "mental health" issue vs. a physical disease for example.
nearlysober is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 6:03 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: BART Platinum, AA Plat Pro
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted by mauve
Then somehow NYPD SWAT showed up? Wouldn’t that response have taken a while? I thought that the Port Authority handled normal policing at airports.
PAPD has 2,200 officers, which makes them similar in size to SFPD, and considerably larger than Seattle PD (albeit the majority of their officers are not stationed near EWR). They have their own ESU --- basically what people would call SWAT in NYC. But I'm guessing most passengers just classify any officer with a rifle and body armor as "SWAT".
milypan is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 7:29 pm
  #26  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: AA Gold AAdvantage Elite, Rapids Reward
Posts: 38,341
Originally Posted by muji
A New York CBS affiliate is reporting that "Sources told CBS2’s Tony Aiello on Tuesday the flight attendant is bipolar and had an issue with her medication."

https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2019/09...line-employee/
Yeah, she can't pulls the fire alarms. It's very wrong. She should known better! There is no threats or criminal activity. No one pulls the fire alarms. No one! She could be arrested or disciplinary action against her.

She didn't take her medications. She need go to see psychiatrist. She can't have solve her behaviors.
N830MH is online now  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 7:29 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SEA
Programs: AS MVP Gold 100K
Posts: 2,030
Originally Posted by s0ssos
Because supposedly this is a sterile area. What do you think the men are going to do?
The problem with your logic is that "turning off your brain" is never a good thing.

(to illustrate why, do you just want to follow a toddler around and pretend like the toddler is a police dog, sniffing out all "bad" people? Of course not. Why?)
As I recall, the 911 hijackers were also in a sterile area.
jsguyrus is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 8:31 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dallas
Programs: AA PLT/5MM; AS MVP GLD 75K; DL DM; EK SLV; HHonors DIAM; Marriott GLD
Posts: 4,092
Originally Posted by jsguyrus

As I recall, the 911 hijackers were also in a sterile area.
Pre-911 sterile area < post-911 sterile area.
HKG_Flyer1 is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 8:55 pm
  #29  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: British Columbia
Programs: AS MVPG100K, Marriott Marriott Titanium Elite, Hilton Gold
Posts: 7,263
Originally Posted by HKG_Flyer1

Pre-911 sterile area < post-911 sterile area.
And with the multitude of TSA failures, very much less than zero! Hence why it is often referred to as Security Theatre.

James
jsguyrus and be_rettSEA like this.
Flying for Fun is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 11:02 pm
  #30  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,876
Originally Posted by jsguyrus
As I recall, the 911 hijackers were also in a sterile area.
You mean thousands of feet in the air?
So, these men will rush the cockpit and crash the airport?
84fiero likes this.
s0ssos is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.