flyerCO

ADA doesn't apply. The ACAA does and it is much more restrictive. Part of problem I see with most people commenting is not understanding difference between ADA and ACAA.

Absent proof of a direct threat airlines cant dent accommodation under the ACAA.

Often1

While I would be fine with DL suing the two who disobeyed a lawful crewmember order for the costs it incurred in returning to the gate, I don't think that will happen.

I'm fine with DL banning them and also, hopefully for collaborating with other US carriers in creating a list which all can use and thus getting these people off commercial carriers, at least those operating in the US.

As is unfortunately typical of FT, these conversations devolve into the validity of the underlying issue. Whether DL ought to have a mask policy is a perfectly fine OMNI topic. This is about what to do with people who don't obey lawful orders.

mogollon75

I tend to agree. I think we are living through "mask madness" but you can't just choose not to do what the flight attendant or other airline employee tells you to do.

flyerCO

The problem is airlines not obeying laws. I 100% agree with mandatory masks. However in order to do that we would need a DOT/FAA rule. Otherwise it's a policy of the airline instead and thus subject to ACAA.

The issue is if once allowed to ignore a law, it emboldens one to do it again in future.

readywhenyouare

We need a lawsuit to bring all the evidence into light. I'm particularly interested in how the virus stays at bay while you are eating and drinking.

BamaGirl

Perhaps I am misinterpreting this. But it appears the same exception is allowed by the ACAA:

(1) You can determine that there is a disability-related safety basis for refusing to provide transportation to a passenger with a disability if you are able to demonstrate that the passenger poses a direct threat (see definition in §382.3). In determining whether an individual poses a direct threat, you must make an individualized assessment, based on reasonable judgment that relies on current medical knowledge or on the best available objective evidence, to ascertain:

(i) The nature, duration, and severity of the risk;

(ii) The probability that the potential harm to the health and safety of others will actually occur; and

(iii) Whether reasonable modifications of policies, practices, or procedures will mitigate the risk.

(2) If you determine that the passenger does pose a direct threat, you must select the least restrictive response from the point of view of the passenger, consistent with protecting the health and safety of others. For example, you must not refuse transportation to the passenger if you can protect the health and safety of others by means short of a refusal.

(3) In exercising this authority, you must not act inconsistently with the provisions of this part.

(4) If your actions are inconsistent with any of the provisions of this part, you are subject to enforcement action under Subpart K of this part.

(d) If you refuse to provide transportation to a passenger on his or her originally-scheduled flight on a basis relating to the individual's disability, you must provide to the person a written statement of the reason for the refusal. This statement must include the specific basis for the carrier's opinion that the refusal meets the standards of paragraph (c) of this section or is otherwise specifically permitted by this part. You must provide this written statement to the person within 10 calendar days of the refusal of transportation.

flyerCO

The difference is that under ACAA airline must show you have a condition that poses a direct threat. They can't do that in most cases. The ADA isnt as restrictive in circumstances where direct threat can be used. There's no requirement to prove under the ADA. THE ACAA does require proof that a passenger has a condition that is a direct threat and the reasoning must be able to be provided in writing if passenger demands. Not only that but the ACAA specifically requires if there's doubt, passenger must prevail.

flyerCO

The difference is that under ACAA airline must show you have a condition that poses a direct threat. They can't do that in most cases. The ADA isnt as restrictive in circumstances where direct threat can be used. There's no requirement to prove under the ADA. THE ACAA does require proof that a passenger has a condition that is a direct threat and the reasoning must be able to be provided in writing if passenger demands. Not only that but the ACAA specifically requires if there's doubt, passenger must prevail.

Seminolefan

Did you even read what you just stated? Nothing but lies except for one thing.

SOBE ER DOC

This is an unfortunate, ill-informed and dangerous statement on your part. Was it "condom madness" when public health officials were imploring people to use them to prevent HIV transmission? Is it "vaccine madness" when we tell people to get vaccinated to prevent contracting preventable contagious diseases. Is it "seat belt madness" that we require every passenger in a vehicle to be wearing a seat belt or face a fine?

The irresponsibility of people who think they know better than the scientists, public health professionals and physicians is absurd. Folks who think they know what is and is not safe right now is like telling a pilot that you now better how to safely operate an airplane or telling a mechanic what you know better how to fix your car than they do. People who are refusing to wear masks are not patriots, they are not better informed than others and they are not protecting their freedoms. DL has every right to kick these people off the plane. DL SHOULD kick these people off the plane...they are dangerous.

Think about it this way...over the history of hijackings in the US, less than 3,000 people have died yet we have extensive security measures in place to prevent them. Over 146,000 people have died from COIVD and all the airlines are asking people to do is wear their darn masks.

readywhenyouare

Such bad examples. Plenty of planes have crashed due to bad pilots and bad mechanics. If captains had just listened to their first officers plenty of lives would have been saved. So yes, it's perfectly acceptable for less experienced people to ask questions and point out inconsistencies.

Twice now Fauci has removed his mask when he thought the cameras were off. Did you see his baseball stunt? If an 80 year old virologist who has devoted his career to this kind of stuff doesn't take it seriously then why should anyone else? We went three months being told they don't do anything and now suddenly a change of heart? We've known how viruses work for over a century. So give me a break.

And none of you have answered why it's ok to have your mask off as long as you have a bag of chips on your tray table. This is isn't science. It's emotion.

Stgermainparis

If folks don’t want to wear a mask, they don’t have to fly Delta, right?

Current testing methods aren’t helpful because it can take 7-8 days before there are enough viral particles to get a positive. Lots of false negatives before the week mark. Plus, wouldn’t people then complain that their privacy was being violated? The mask seems the lesser invasive.

Zorak

It's not "ok" in the grand scheme of things, but it's a concession to practicality. It'd be better to wear the mask the whole flight. If you minimize the time that it's off that's still better than not wearing one the whole flight. "There's a slight flaw so we should eliminate it entirely" is childish reasoning. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

random.parts

Im not sure I fully understand the point of being outraged at a company policy such as “no mask, no service”. I don’t see how its any different than requiring clothing. I am in the camp of “stay home if you dont want to get sick”, and to not be a hypocrite, I am also in the camp of “if you dont like a company policy, stay away from that company”. I dont care how they market the policy.



Its good to know that DL is enforcing its policy. I personally fly UA and wore a mask this past month - fine, whatever - I needed to get to where I was going so I wore shoes and clothes and a mask to get there.

SOBE ER DOC

You can believe what you wish, but as a physician I will believe in science and data which tell us that if everyone were simply to wear masks we would have this illness under control in quick order. The people who told you that masks did nothing were politicians, those attempting to appease politicians and other who chose not to deal in data and facts. EVERY public health professional I know that was not under the influence of politics or personal gain has said from day one that you need to wear a mask, wash your hands, stop touching your face and avoid large crowds, particularly in enclosed spaces.

If one chooses not to wear a mask then they should expect to be publicly ridiculed, shamed and ostracized for putting everyone else at risk due to their stupid and selfish behavior. No apologies on this. I would be okay with people being fined, much like they are for not wearing a seat belt. The mask deniers are not heroes, they are not patriots, they are not defending their constitutional rights. They. Are. Idiots.

To answer your question about eating and mask use...it is an issue of exposure time...concentration of the virus in the air increases the longer you go without a barrier device. If each person exhaling releases ten copies of a virus into the air per minute and there are 100 people on a plane and the air is exchanged every three minutes (as is common on larger commercial aircraft) there are 3,000 copies of the virus in circulation at any given moment. If even half of the people on the plane are wearing their masks at all times then the viral load in the air is reduced by 50%, which substantially reduces risk of transmission. Further, when folks are drinking, their faces are in close proximity to a can, a bottle or a cup which is likely to reduce transmission of viral particulate into the air owing to our exhalation being partially obstructed by the object in question. This further reduces the viral load in the air...particularly if people take their mask down to take a drink or put food in their mouths and then replace their mask over their mouth and face. So, there is your answer. I'm sure you'll find some fault with it like you tend to do with everything on the boards that you disagree with

As a business, DL has the right to refuse service to people who do not comply with their rules and regulations. Don't like it? Don't fly DL. No one is forcing anyone to fly any airline. Want to sue DL for some poppycock claim of discrimination or bruised feelings or any other snowflake reason then I will be the first physician to volunteer to testify on DL's behalf as a expert witness pointing out that the plaintiff in the case is a litigation-happy idiot.