Penalty For Using Wrong Lav

Reply

Old Jan 25, 19, 12:57 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Blue Ridge, GA
Posts: 4,146
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."
LegalTender is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 1:19 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: RDU
Programs: DL DM (segs), Hilton DM, Marriott Pt, TSA Opt-out Platinum
Posts: 2,339
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.
Brendan, Silver Fox and strickerj like this.
HDQDD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 1:20 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: The ATL
Programs: Delta DM, Marriott Lifetime Titanium, HHonrs Diamond
Posts: 346
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.
FlyBitcoin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 1:30 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Now: SAT. Previously: SEA, DAY/CVG
Programs: Delta PM
Posts: 5,158
Originally Posted by LegalTender View Post
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."
Not sure about consequences but maybe you had the same FAs I had on a flight about a year ago. Mid Cabin lav on a 757 was out. FAs initially tried enforcing a “no Economy passengers using the FC cabin lav”, which I and many others ignored as I found it rather pathetic that these FAs thought it was somehow acceptable to have an 180 Y passengers try to use only 2 lavs on a 5 hour transcon flight - a 90:1 passenger to lav ratio.
Silver Fox and strickerj like this.
ATOBTTR is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 1:39 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Somewhere
Programs: Delta FO (I use to be More)
Posts: 2,709
I was on JFK to SDQ recently and had an FA force it. He would send everyone even the elderly to the back of the bus.
HWGeeks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 1:45 pm
  #6  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Programs: DL 1 million, AA 1 mil, HH lapsed Diamond, Marriott Plat
Posts: 28,174
The TSA has weighed in on staying in one's cabin on international flights.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/aa-eco......-bathrooms/
obscure2k and ryw like this.
3Cforme is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 1:46 pm
  #7  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: PIT to MSP to PIT; repeat
Programs: Delta, United, AA, Jet Blue .... Whichever is Cheapest
Posts: 1,473
RRDD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 3:05 pm
  #8  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Back home in the REAL Washington (SEA); still working occasionally in the other Washington (DCA area) and near LAX (El Segundo CA)
Programs: DL PM 1.3MM; AS MVPG 75K
Posts: 12,106
had to double-check your screen name there ...
jrl767 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 3:16 pm
  #9  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 40,623
Originally Posted by HDQDD View Post
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.
Still unlikely, but FAA does have civil authority to propose fines up to $13,333. Those are theoretically public, but they are not publicized.

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.
Often1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 3:28 pm
  #10  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: JAX
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 4,023
The lavs flush backwards for people in the wrong cabin.
TomMM is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 4:08 pm
  #11  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
Programs: Global Mercenary
Posts: 164
I thought FA's and Pilots have ultimate authority once airborne.
vj_rama is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 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
Transpacificflyer likes this.
Zurick is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 5:32 pm
  #13  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: West Coast, Best Coast
Programs: Flying whoever is most convenient
Posts: 15,119
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.
Spiff, ftv, flatdawgs and 1 others like this.
PV_Premier is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 6:19 pm
  #14  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 40,623
Originally Posted by Zurick View Post
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
To be precise, there is no DHS rule on domestic flights. However, if a carrier chooses to include the requirement that pax remain in their ticketed cabin as part of the carrier's safety & security policy and that policy is then filed with FAA, it is a violation of FAA rules. Same difference.
Often1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 19, 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?
sprika is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread