Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Alaska Airlines | Mileage Plan
Reload this Page >

Some Passengers Banned on AS Flight Back From the DC Insurrection

Some Passengers Banned on AS Flight Back From the DC Insurrection

Old Jan 9, 2021, 7:20 am
  #31  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: AA Gold AAdvantage Elite, Rapids Reward
Posts: 38,293
Originally Posted by Often1
AS has now announced that the 14 join the other 228 who have been banned thus far for refusing to wear a mask.

The decision is not made by the onboard crew. Their job is to maintain order as best they can and for the Captain to assess whether a diversion may be ncessary.
Yup, that’s exactly right! If they divert to another airports. They will remove some passengers off the flight. If they don’t behave well. They must follow the rules. You must obey to your flight crew instructions. You have listen to your flight attendants. Keep your mask on during the flight.
N830MH is offline  
Old Jan 9, 2021, 7:24 am
  #32  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SEA
Programs: AA LT PLT; HH Diamond; AS 75K
Posts: 2,877
Originally Posted by BRITINJAPAN4
For us non US people, cam anyone explain why so many seem to have a strong aversion and objection to protecting their own and other peoples health ?
Because we are the greatest nation in the world with the best health care, military, education, employment, and fairness of all time and nobody is going to tell us otherwise. Even if all the scientific evidence that disputes these claims
tkelvin69 is offline  
Old Jan 9, 2021, 8:14 am
  #33  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,712
Originally Posted by BRITINJAPAN4
For us non US people, cam anyone explain why so many seem to have a strong aversion and objection to protecting their own and other peoples health ?
I don't think there's a strong aversion per se to the above, but some just don't like being told what to do, as if they're a child. I have no qualms with masks, and engaged in the practice during a time when others suggested I shouldn't. I thought they should mind their own business then, as I think they should now.

A private enterprise has every right to mandate their house rules. Don't like it, then can go elsewhere or without. Though I believe masks are prudent and offer some protection (always have), the issue I have is when they (anyone or entity that is not the private enterprise whose rules I'm subjected to for their service or product) say you *must* comply. I'm an adult and can make my own decisions.

Last edited by Visconti; Jan 9, 2021 at 8:21 am Reason: clarification on "they..."
Visconti is offline  
Old Jan 9, 2021, 8:47 am
  #34  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Seattle
Programs: Alaska airlines 100k
Posts: 921
Originally Posted by Visconti
I don't think there's a strong aversion per se to the above, but some just don't like being told what to do, as if they're a child. I have no qualms with masks, and engaged in the practice during a time when others suggested I shouldn't. I thought they should mind their own business then, as I think they should now.

A private enterprise has every right to mandate their house rules. Don't like it, then can go elsewhere or without. Though I believe masks are prudent and offer some protection (always have), the issue I have is when they (anyone or entity that is not the private enterprise whose rules I'm subjected to for their service or product) say you *must* comply. I'm an adult and can make my own decisions.
no shoes, no shirt, no service has been well litigated and deemed acceptable based upon safety and social etiquette.

no indoor smoking or within 20 feet of a door for federal buildings has also been accepted as norm based upon primarily health and safety. This occurred easily after tobacco Corp accepted scientific data that smoking and second hand smoke could “potentially “ be associated with cancer risk.

Mask “mandate” if needed to be litigated would be likely on par, but again scientific data must be acknowledged and verified then accepted. Some in the community still believe the earth is flat and that the moon landings were staged. We need not wait for 100% to accept because 100% requirement is a false doomed to fail barrier.

no shoes , no shirt, no mask, no fly, no exceptions.
BOB W, notquiteaff and Klrduks like this.
Xrayman is offline  
Old Jan 9, 2021, 9:01 am
  #35  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
Originally Posted by Xrayman
no shoes, no shirt, no service has been well litigated and deemed acceptable based upon safety and social etiquette.

no indoor smoking or within 20 feet of a door for federal buildings has also been accepted as norm based upon primarily health and safety. This occurred easily after tobacco Corp accepted scientific data that smoking and second hand smoke could “potentially “ be associated with cancer risk.

Mask “mandate” if needed to be litigated would be likely on par, but again scientific data must be acknowledged and verified then accepted. Some in the community still believe the earth is flat and that the moon landings were staged. We need not wait for 100% to accept because 100% requirement is a false doomed to fail barrier.

no shoes , no shirt, no mask, no fly, no exceptions.
This.

Remember that masks are required by air carriers, not by CDC/DOT rule. As many hotels are finding, tough measures are a marketing plus. Most passengers want everyone to wear masks and it is likely an economic loss to a carrier which does not require masks. I am certain that as the number of people "banned" increases, the marketing analytics people are looking at who those people are and I am willing to bet that the majority are folks the carriers are just fine losing as customers.
Often1 is offline  
Old Jan 9, 2021, 4:11 pm
  #36  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 1,353
Originally Posted by N830MH
Yup, that’s exactly right! If they divert to another airports. They will remove some passengers off the flight. If they don’t behave well. They must follow the rules. You must obey to your flight crew instructions. You have listen to your flight attendants. Keep your mask on during the flight.
Can they divert to a military airport, or a cargo/private airport far from a downtown, and drop off the passengers there and then... so that there are no taxis or Ubers anywhere nearby? Am sure that there must be some of those in the Midwest!
AndyPatterson is offline  
Old Jan 9, 2021, 4:22 pm
  #37  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,326
There would be security issues with landing at a military airport and turning some passengers loose. Most "private" airports can't handle large jets.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Jan 9, 2021, 9:42 pm
  #38  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: East Ester, Alaska
Programs: Alaska Million Miler, United Million Miler, Wyndham Rewards Diamond, Choice Hotels Diamond
Posts: 12,139
Originally Posted by ffman999
I was on a recent AS flight where the FA in F told me that somewhere between 6-8 passengers refused to wear their masks back in Y, and that despite multiple warnings and refusal, it would just be a “yellow card.”
This kind of behavior by Alaska FA's really annoys me. There's a good reason for the mask mandate and for the consequences that follow failure to comply. Alaska puts a lot of emphasis on friendly and kind employees (Witness all the "Committed to Kindness" pins) and while that's appreciated, it's out of pace if being kind means essentially allowing others to do as they please at the expense of public safety.

Keep in mind that a significant percentage of these maskless goons spend most of their days not wearing masks, thus increasing the likelihood that they could be an unwitting (or is it witless) carrier of Covid-19. They shouldn't be given any quarter. If logic and polite requests don't work, they should be treated like like the threat that they are and red carded. One warning. That's it.

Again, these "kind" but evidently simple minded FAs who think they're doing these losers a favor by being extra lenient with them are in reality putting all the passengers around them at heightened risk of contracting Covid. They always say how "Safety is our first concern". Well, in the Age of Covid, wearing a mask is an integral part of the safety protocol.

Allow me to quote New England Coach Bill Belichik in advising Alaska's FAs: "DO YOUR JOBS!"
Seat 2A is offline  
Old Jan 9, 2021, 10:16 pm
  #39  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: KMFR
Programs: AS MVP
Posts: 61
That woman had an onion wrapped in her towel. Somewhat theatrical.
MapMan25 is offline  
Old Jan 9, 2021, 11:41 pm
  #40  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,550
Originally Posted by MapMan25
That woman had an onion wrapped in her towel. Somewhat theatrical.
According to snopes there's apparently a myth that it will alleviate the effects of tear gas, but there's no evidence to support the myth.
chrisl137 is offline  
Old Jan 10, 2021, 6:36 pm
  #41  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 1,353
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
There would be security issues with landing at a military airport and turning some passengers loose. Most "private" airports can't handle large jets.
True! The MPs could just escort them to outside the entry gate for the base, and leave them surrounded by rattlers and tumbleweeds...
AndyPatterson is offline  
Old Jan 10, 2021, 6:48 pm
  #42  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,946
Originally Posted by Seat 2A
This kind of behavior by Alaska FA's really annoys me. There's a good reason for the mask mandate and for the consequences that follow failure to comply. Alaska puts a lot of emphasis on friendly and kind employees (Witness all the "Committed to Kindness" pins) and while that's appreciated, it's out of pace if being kind means essentially allowing others to do as they please at the expense of public safety.

Keep in mind that a significant percentage of these maskless goons spend most of their days not wearing masks, thus increasing the likelihood that they could be an unwitting (or is it witless) carrier of Covid-19. They shouldn't be given any quarter. If logic and polite requests don't work, they should be treated like like the threat that they are and red carded. One warning. That's it.

Again, these "kind" but evidently simple minded FAs who think they're doing these losers a favor by being extra lenient with them are in reality putting all the passengers around them at heightened risk of contracting Covid. They always say how "Safety is our first concern". Well, in the Age of Covid, wearing a mask is an integral part of the safety protocol.

Allow me to quote New England Coach Bill Belichik in advising Alaska's FAs: "DO YOUR JOBS!"
with all respect, what is it that you want them to do? You're 40,000 feet in the air, you've asked multiple times to no avail, beyond the yellow card what is the solution. Strongarm someone? Maybe I misread the post that you're referring to but I thought I read that the FA's said they asked the person several times and beyond that their only recourse is the yellow card. They're right. What else can they do? If you've got a viable solution I'm all ears because this has become the bane of my existence - and I feel like I'm doing my job very well.
AS Flyer is offline  
Old Jan 10, 2021, 7:04 pm
  #43  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,550
Originally Posted by AS Flyer
with all respect, what is it that you want them to do? You're 40,000 feet in the air, you've asked multiple times to no avail, beyond the yellow card what is the solution. Strongarm someone? Maybe I misread the post that you're referring to but I thought I read that the FA's said they asked the person several times and beyond that their only recourse is the yellow card. They're right. What else can they do? If you've got a viable solution I'm all ears because this has become the bane of my existence - and I feel like I'm doing my job very well.
Short of diverting and offloading, you don't have a lot of options.

There's been discussion elsewhere of adding an airlock and a plank to walk, but that would take refitting of aircraft.

FWIW, I've been flying AS throughout the pandemic and have been happy with the way crews have handled things. Fortunately I haven't been on a plane with a group of belligerent non-mask wearers.
chrisl137 is offline  
Old Jan 10, 2021, 7:10 pm
  #44  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,819
Originally Posted by AS Flyer
with all respect, what is it that you want them to do? You're 40,000 feet in the air, you've asked multiple times to no avail, beyond the yellow card what is the solution. Strongarm someone? Maybe I misread the post that you're referring to but I thought I read that the FA's said they asked the person several times and beyond that their only recourse is the yellow card. They're right. What else can they do? If you've got a viable solution I'm all ears because this has become the bane of my existence - and I feel like I'm doing my job very well.
With that many non-compliant passengers, and given the very recent backdrop of the riot at the Capitol, perhaps the captain lands the plane and boots them off? I understand there is nothing else the flight attendants can do, but maybe this warrants some leadership from the flight deck.
AS Flyer and NoLaGent like this.
flytoeat is offline  
Old Jan 10, 2021, 7:15 pm
  #45  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: AS, UA, WN, IHG Diamond Elite, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton Gold, CET 7*
Posts: 3,284
Originally Posted by chrisl137

There's been discussion elsewhere of adding an airlock and a plank to walk, but that would take refitting of aircraft.
There's our sub-fleet! I'm pretty sure only the A321s could handle that mod.
AS Flyer and ACBLtd like this.
NoLaGent is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.