jamesinclair

In addition, an air carrier may not prohibit a person with a disability from traveling unless it determines that the disability is a direct threat to the health or safety of others. In that instance, the air carrier must provide the individual with a written decision of its actions.

Well that's easy enough here.... Masks are to ensure the safety of others. If you can't wear one, you are a risk to their health and safety.

dunno282

genuine question here. Are there specific types of medical conditions that only exist in the United States that prevents people from wearing masks? Because it seems like other countries in the world don't have a problem with wearing a mask.

MOC991

Well usually an airline policy change is in a small microcosm only affecting relatively small groups within those who travel on that airline without health and life or death impact. In this case, masks are required due to a global pandemic in the macrocosm. I think feigning that it is just an airline policy ignoring the non-airline reason for it is a bit disingenuous.

I'm not sure if this was covered here or somewhere else on the forum, but after being rebooked on a later flight, that guy was banned from flying again on AA at least while masks are still required:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/18/u...on-straka.html

javabytes

While AA may be motivated by factors that also exist outside the airline, the federal government has not implemented a mask requirement (with the FAA declining to do so again yesterday) so this is still a matter of company policy.

skylady

A lot of it comes down to respect of other people. Whether you disagree, or agree with the mask policy, let's all try to work together to have a nice flight. I'm going back to work next month, after 4 months off, and the only thing I wish for, is a peaceful atmosphere.

MOC991

I did not dispute it being a company policy. I just pointed out that it was a company policy put in place due to a global pandemic, which is different than an airline policy change such as only offering snacks on flights less than 2 hours like you are trying to reduce it to. Persisting down this line of argument beyond that is silly and clearly intentionally trying to create a false equivalency.

The reality is there is a global pandemic with a confirmed 8.4million+ cases and 453,000+ dead as of right now. Based on previous pandemics and the excess deaths in the past few months, the numbers are much higher. Unlike that past pandemic data, those are confirmed cases rather than those adjusted to account for unconfirmed cases and deaths. The federal, state, and local governments at the least have issued guidelines recommending mask usage. Many state and local governments are requiring masks.

AA, although not required to by federal law, can enforce their mask policy and they have shown that they will just like any private business can enforce mask usage. In the US, you likely do not have a constitutional or legal protection to not wear a mask beyond if it could negatively affect you for legitimate medical reasons, which their policy seems to try to account for. They could clarify if medical documentation is needed. Beyond that, the only winner to any lawsuits, which seem inevitable based on the unfortunately politicized rhetoric surrounding this pandemic, will likely be the lawyers who take the cases laughing all the way to the bank. On airlines, it would be even less likely to be successful to sue not to wear masks since federal law does give air crew a great deal of discretion over removing passengers.

carlosdca

As this is the AA forum, please elaborate on what factors may be motivating AA...I'm all ears...

SpaceCoastBill

You highlighted it yourself. a DIRECT threat.

That mans you need a person exhibiting symptoms and coughing all over the place.

Your generic "its all a risk" fails the test.

dangersquid

"Direct threat" is defined as "a significant risk of substantial harm to the health or safety of the individual or others that cannot be eliminated or reduced by reasonable accommodation.”

Given the ongoing outbreak and official CDC guidelines to wear masks, it seems easy to argue that not wearing a mask prima facie constitutes a "significant risk to health and safety."

Edit:Note that the airline can eject you from the plane if you can't fit into the seat on the theory that not fitting into the seat properly is too dangerous in case of a crash etc. The risk of actually being hurt in a crash like that seems lower than the risk from covid19 at the moment.

SpammersAreScum

And, by the way, the exact same text is also in the ADA, just to close the loop on that. I'm sure the commonality is not a coincidence.

mvoight

According to that twitter feed, the FA asked if he had paperwork (for his medical condition)
What paperwork was required to present to the FA? I did not see anything on the AA site about paperwork when they announced the change

dangersquid

I would be willing to bet a very large amount of money that he was not diagnosed as unable to wear a mask by a doctor.

born sleepy

Straka is a professional victim and provocateur, a wanna-be Milo Yappawhatever V2.0 angling for a Fox News show.

GrumpyYoungMan

You're likely correct, but I can't find where AA's policy states the need for such diagnosis.

dangersquid

Does AA have a written policy informing people that they have to wear a seatbelt? Or that you can't smoke on the plane? Or is that all just something that you find out when you're on the plane?