ksweeney

I agree the moral question is separate from the legal question. I suspect that the new rules (e.g. all passengers wear masks) that U.S. carriers are imposing probably take away a lot of the moral questions. While flying is not shelter in place, it is far less risky than holding on to a stainless steel pole on the subway or buying food in many grocery stores.

abk

There is also the question of whether these "state" orders can actually regulate or limit interstate commerce.

QueenOfCoach

My niece is a business office manager in a nursing home. They identified their first COVID-19 positive patient two weeks ago.

She is now under a court order to not go anywhere except home and work. She can't go to the grocery store, can't go to the pharmacy. If she is spotted anywhere except home or work, she could be held in contempt of court and could be immediately fired. She lives and works in Fort Worth.

Her parents buy her groceries, drop them on her porch and wave from the sidewalk, across the front yard.

Yes, one can be legally curtailed from unnecessary travel.

MSPeconomist

Is she allowed to stop for gas on her way to/from work?

BTW, in some jurisdictions, getting to/from the airport could be where the stay at home rules apply, rather than the actual flight itself.

QueenOfCoach

I don't know. I only know what her father, my brother, told me.

ashill

That is exactly the attitude that is wrong and dangerous, the absolute worst of DYKWIA and American rugged individualism. The risk isn't to individual travellers; it's the risk to all of us of too many people travelling and circumventing (somewhat successful) local, regional, and global efforts to contain the spread of the disease and keep squashed outbreaks squashed. The risk of one more person travelling is (if the traveller is not at high risk) small. The risk of many more people travelling is high. It is not up to individuals to decide if they are special enough and their trip is important enough. That's why we have public health authorities.

That said, this topic is not AA specific.

azepine00

Yes and guidances vary. A lot. It makes little sense to apply the same rules to some rural county in california as to populated urban area and attempts to enforce such only leads to poor compliance everywhere... plus there are different interpretations and risk assessments of even similar scenarios by different states, cities, counties etc...
this will not go down to zero any time soon so we have to set some threshold of risk acceptance.. we had a couple months to stabilize the situation, generate awareness and build up the infrastructure - now we are probably near the point of letting ppl make own decisions and monitor the situation..

aztimm

This topic isn't limited to AA, and is only loosely connected to AA. Therefore I'll move this thread over to the Coronavirus forum.

~moderator AA forum.

SpinOn2

You are free to make that assertion all you want. Judge away if you will. However, there has always been risk when flying in relation to others. Nobody wants nor needs a lecture. Other people decided to fly, nobody is forced to be on a plane, that includes workers.

I will stop there because I do not want to derail this thread, but I'm tired of the judgement from others on what they feel is wrong or not. If airlines are going to offer fares/flights, then it is fair game for whoever wants to partake.

Dublin_rfk

To answer your question. I believe that thanks to the new system MR's are pretty much a thing of the past.That said, I'm still flying as much now as before. In the last two weeks two of my service calls that normally would have been two - three days and a non stop in each direction ended up taking five days and six segments. Zig Zag ing across the continent. Flying used to be enjoyable, now it's more work than work. Constant Bio monitoring, Constant changes in schedules, rules, and procedures. Research into what kind of paperwork each location requires prior to arrival. All of that and then getting to enjoy(?) a delivered luke warm dinner.

ashill

No one is forced to make that choice, but the rest of us are forced to live (or, quite literally, die) with it. My employer is not likely to allow me into the building until September at this point (though I can work from home and my paycheque is not in jeopardy). I live a 2.5 hour drive from my family but can't visit them because we're on opposite sides of the 49th parallel, and Canada (rightly) is very unlikely to open the border as long as the US doesn't get its outbreak under control, and that too-common American attitude will delay that happening.

I'm tired of the attitude that it's OK to put others in jeopardy in the name of others deciding to fly and "not getting a lecture".

EuropeanPete

I mean, there is in a hell of a lot of places. Not everyone is in Miami.

SpinOn2

Why would anyone else be at risk who isn't making the conscious choice to be out or fly? I have worked 5 days a week this entire time because I am considered an essential service. I do not live or interact with anyone at risk. So it is ok I supposedly put myself at risk for 2 months, but god forbid if i then want to have a life.

The only people that would be at risk are those who are like me who choose to take that risk. Same as you do every single day, anytime you drive... heck even step outside of your house.

I'm tired of people who think it is OK to want to continually restrict what other people do. We sacrificed, we slowed the curve, we crushed the curve, enough concessions, it's time to let those who want to go out go out and live.... free of you moral questioning while you hide inside. That's your choice... keyword CHOICE

Meanwhile while those who are scared sit at home hoping the government bails them out, I, like many people, choose to live and help keep the economy from collapsing any further.

Adelphos

Recent mobility other data suggest that Americans are starting to move around a but more, and that includes flying. I think a lot of the relaxation of various lockdown and travel restriction measures are really reacting to that reality rather than driving it. People know the leading edge of travel (including many in this forum) seem to suggest travel will start picking up in June. Already you see a lot of things opening up (like retail) in many states in May; executives and other business people may need to travel to reopen stores, restart commerce, etc.

JNelson113

Serious question . . . what do you think everyone should be doing? You've just made it clear that we should not be traveling, sounds like for any reason. Can we leave our houses at all, or just stay home and get groceries delivered? I am not trying to be snarky at all, but I find varying perspectives on this very interesting. If that is the case, then when can we leave the house again? When is it okay to travel again? When there is a vaccine? What if that is 18-24 months? What if it is years or never?