Penalty For Using Wrong Lav
Jan 25, 2019, 12:57 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Blue Ridge, GA
Posts: 5,512
Penalty For Using Wrong Lav
FA's on a 739 transcon were determined to keep all 156 in the Main Cabin from accessing the front lav. They made reference to unspecified consequences.
What might those entail? Has anyone paid a price?
One of the back toilets was out of commission. Rows 1-5 used one while 26 rows had two in the rear. Accordingly, Comfort+ gets no waiver and is literally last in line for "relief."
What might those entail? Has anyone paid a price?
One of the back toilets was out of commission. Rows 1-5 used one while 26 rows had two in the rear. Accordingly, Comfort+ gets no waiver and is literally last in line for "relief."
Jan 25, 2019, 1:19 pm
#2
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: RDU
Programs: DL DM+(segs)/MM, UA Ag, Hilton DM, Marriott Ti (life Pt), TSA Opt-out Platinum
Posts: 3,227
I suppose they could hit you with the vague: "Interfering with a flight crew" or "failure to follow crew instructions". I seriously doubt any prosecutor would pursue that case though...and the airline wouldn't want all the negative press.
Jan 25, 2019, 1:20 pm
#3
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: PHX
Programs: Delta DM, Marriott Lifetime Titanium, HHonrs Diamond
Posts: 1,336
That is the largest capacity aircraft in DL's fleet that does not have a mid-cabin lavatory. Definitely sucks for C+. I imagine they wanted to prevent a crowd standing around up front, but...
If I was in C+ I would send a polite note of inquiry to DL about that policy and how it might change when a rear lavatory is down. I mean you can easily see from most C+ seats if the front lav is open so if you just get up when it is unoccupied, it should not be a disruption at all.
It is obvious from the new boarding structure that DL is really trying to create value in C+ and this anecdote is a great way to point out a negative value to C+ if this truly is policy.
If I was in C+ I would send a polite note of inquiry to DL about that policy and how it might change when a rear lavatory is down. I mean you can easily see from most C+ seats if the front lav is open so if you just get up when it is unoccupied, it should not be a disruption at all.
It is obvious from the new boarding structure that DL is really trying to create value in C+ and this anecdote is a great way to point out a negative value to C+ if this truly is policy.
Jan 25, 2019, 1:30 pm
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Back in Reds Country (DAY/CVG). Previously: SEA & SAT.
Programs: DL PM 1MM, AA PLAT, UA Silver, Marriott Bonvoy Titanium
Posts: 10,353
FA's on a 739 transcon were determined to keep all 156 in the Main Cabin from accessing the front lav. They made reference to unspecified consequences.
What might those entail? Has anyone paid a price?
One of the back toilets was out of commission. Rows 1-5 used one while 26 rows had two in the rear. Accordingly, Comfort+ gets no waiver and is literally last in line for "relief."
What might those entail? Has anyone paid a price?
One of the back toilets was out of commission. Rows 1-5 used one while 26 rows had two in the rear. Accordingly, Comfort+ gets no waiver and is literally last in line for "relief."
Jan 25, 2019, 1:45 pm
#6
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2001
Programs: DL 1 million, AA 1 mil, HH lapsed Diamond, Marriott Plat
Posts: 28,190
The TSA has weighed in on staying in one's cabin on international flights.
https://thepointsguy.com/news/aa-eco......-bathrooms/
https://thepointsguy.com/news/aa-eco......-bathrooms/
Jan 25, 2019, 3:16 pm
#9
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
My general view of these things is that I don't have any desire to find the one FA who turns this into a "federal case". Even if the US Attorney refused to prosecute, this could be an unpleasant experience.
Jan 25, 2019, 4:31 pm
#12
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Geneva and on an airlane
Programs: life ritz platinum, SA hon circle, Eastern Executive Traveler, Delta Flying Colonel, AA Admiral VIP
Posts: 117
There is no faa rule about which lav to use. But there is a state dept one that passengers are not allowed to congregate in groups around the toilets nor anywhere in the aircraft." This all happened post 9/11. I think some airlines and FA have used the congregate rule to the lav rule. The following is a suit a first class passenger did against Alaska when the first lav was full of economy passengers.
https://onemileatatime.com/lawsuit-a...avatory-usage/
But if the airline has made such a rule and the FAA has approved it, then it sticks
https://onemileatatime.com/lawsuit-a...avatory-usage/
But if the airline has made such a rule and the FAA has approved it, then it sticks
Jan 25, 2019, 5:32 pm
#13
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northern Calif./Eastern Ida.
Programs: Amethyst Premier Plutonium Medallion
Posts: 20,643
I guess it all comes down to what type of confrontation you are willing to deal with...
I will say that FAs need to use an ounce of common sense in situations where DL chooses to deploy them with an aircraft that has a lav INOP. It's annoying for everyone involved, but a little bit of grace and dignity goes a long way. Have passengers queue up at the curtain, and give F passengers who need to get up priority to jump the queue. It's not rocket science.
I will say that FAs need to use an ounce of common sense in situations where DL chooses to deploy them with an aircraft that has a lav INOP. It's annoying for everyone involved, but a little bit of grace and dignity goes a long way. Have passengers queue up at the curtain, and give F passengers who need to get up priority to jump the queue. It's not rocket science.
Jan 25, 2019, 6:19 pm
#14
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
There is no faa rule about which lav to use. But there is a state dept one that passengers are not allowed to congregate in groups around the toilets nor anywhere in the aircraft." This all happened post 9/11. I think some airlines and FA have used the congregate rule to the lav rule. The following is a suit a first class passenger did against Alaska when the first lav was full of economy passengers.
https://onemileatatime.com/lawsuit-a...avatory-usage/
But if the airline has made such a rule and the FAA has approved it, then it sticks
https://onemileatatime.com/lawsuit-a...avatory-usage/
But if the airline has made such a rule and the FAA has approved it, then it sticks
Jan 25, 2019, 6:31 pm
#15
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1
Literally asking for a friend...I searched for something more closely related, but they were all outdated...so even though this is kind of the opposite to the original situation- this thread seemed most appropriate. I gifted my friends 2 AS upgrades so they could fly in F for the first time. I recently asked one of them how it was, and was baffled by her response. Apparently, after reaching cruising, the pilot came out for a break to use the lav. My friend really "had to go" and was anxiously watching the seat belt sign and the lav occupied sign. The pilot came out and lingered for a while in the galley. Since the lav occupied sign was now off, another pax approached the FA to use the facilities and was told to use the lavatory in the back (we're not sure if this pax was from Y or F). My friends were sitting in row 1, so the heard the whole thing. After hearing this, my friend got up and used the lav in the back too. When she came back to her seat, she was very loudly chastised by the FA who said, "I tried to tell you, but you got up and left too quickly--- but you are supposed to remain seated while the pilot is out of the cockpit". My friend was really embarrassed- now were all wondering--- why the mixed messages? Why did the FA have to be so loud about it? Since when is that the policy? Is that true for only F class? Anyone have any thoughts?