JetBlue IFC deploys emergency slide
Aug 10, 2010, 1:03 pm
#107
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Night Vale
Posts: 1,872
Going outside, INAL. As I understand it, failure to comply with crew member instructions is a civil issue, not criminal.
Complicating this that airlines are reluctant to intervene and pursue a case. It costs money, and besides, the airplane made it to the gate, etc.
If it is a punch in the nose, then the individual crew member must file and pursue charges, and the airline will typically not get involved even though it is criminal - assault. The crew member figures that it is not worth the trouble and they don't want to spend their own time and pesos to travel back to the city where the plane landed.
So the system makes it difficult to bring justice to bear on these jerk passengers.
I recall being in a meeting at an un-named airline where there had been a spike in violent acts against flight attendants. Al, in charge of internal audit and special projects, announced that the CEO had decided that the airline would now pursue criminal charges and support the flight attendants and provide legal support.
So it would be good if more carriers would support their crew members instead of looking the other way.
My two cents....
Complicating this that airlines are reluctant to intervene and pursue a case. It costs money, and besides, the airplane made it to the gate, etc.
If it is a punch in the nose, then the individual crew member must file and pursue charges, and the airline will typically not get involved even though it is criminal - assault. The crew member figures that it is not worth the trouble and they don't want to spend their own time and pesos to travel back to the city where the plane landed.
So the system makes it difficult to bring justice to bear on these jerk passengers.
I recall being in a meeting at an un-named airline where there had been a spike in violent acts against flight attendants. Al, in charge of internal audit and special projects, announced that the CEO had decided that the airline would now pursue criminal charges and support the flight attendants and provide legal support.
So it would be good if more carriers would support their crew members instead of looking the other way.
My two cents....
Aug 10, 2010, 1:14 pm
#108
Join Date: May 2008
Location: new york
Programs: trueblue ,mileageplus skymiles, hilton honors silver
Posts: 965
Should the passenger be banned?
I wonder if B6 will ban the passenger involved in this incident. If she was creating a hazard to other people while disobeying the FA it might be worth it .
(Although I suspect they will not do anything ) . I agree that the FA needed to be arrested (I imagine his action caused other flights to be delayed)) but I agree that a plea bargain is likely (I do think the bail is to high) .
(Although I suspect they will not do anything ) . I agree that the FA needed to be arrested (I imagine his action caused other flights to be delayed)) but I agree that a plea bargain is likely (I do think the bail is to high) .
Aug 10, 2010, 1:42 pm
#109
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MSP
Programs: DL GM, AMEX Business Platinum, AMEX Delta Reserve, DL SkyClub Member, Choice PM
Posts: 2,218
On-going Poll ... 82+% of folks believe that the FA is a HERO ...
Of 1724 respondents ... at 3.40pm EST Aug 10, 2010 ...
1420 = 82.3% believe that the FA (SS) is a HERO ... and all charges should be dropped. ^
304 = 17.6% believe he should be fired.
http://www.startribune.com/polls/100...&pid=100342889
1420 = 82.3% believe that the FA (SS) is a HERO ... and all charges should be dropped. ^
304 = 17.6% believe he should be fired.
http://www.startribune.com/polls/100...&pid=100342889
Aug 10, 2010, 1:44 pm
#110
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2009
Programs: I miss NW, TW
Posts: 4,828
What the FA did was funny 
but he is the wrong party.
No FA should deploy an escape slide because of anger. If they are there for safety as they like to claim, then they should treat all safety equipment with care. With pilots, you wouldn't tolerate it if they were mad and decided to smash the wing tip on the terminal windows (last gate at the end).
The FA should never call a passenger a motherf... as reported in the news. The news reported that it started with motherf and was 12 letters long. A level headed FA whose primary mission is safety would calmly instruct the passenger to be seated, even quoting regulations, if necessary.
Nonetheless, grabbing two beers and sliding down the slide is funny!
As far as the poll, he should be fired AND be a folk hero!
What if a houseguest of yours got mad at you and poured cement down your toilet? Would he be a folk hero then?
but he is the wrong party.No FA should deploy an escape slide because of anger. If they are there for safety as they like to claim, then they should treat all safety equipment with care. With pilots, you wouldn't tolerate it if they were mad and decided to smash the wing tip on the terminal windows (last gate at the end).
The FA should never call a passenger a motherf... as reported in the news. The news reported that it started with motherf and was 12 letters long. A level headed FA whose primary mission is safety would calmly instruct the passenger to be seated, even quoting regulations, if necessary.
Nonetheless, grabbing two beers and sliding down the slide is funny!
As far as the poll, he should be fired AND be a folk hero!
What if a houseguest of yours got mad at you and poured cement down your toilet? Would he be a folk hero then?
Aug 10, 2010, 1:56 pm
#111
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9630/5.0.0.591 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/105)
Further proof that public opinion should not be used to guide law making.
Originally Posted by dd1612
Of 1724 respondents ... at 3.40pm EST Aug 10, 2010 ...
1420 = 82.3% believe that the FA (SS) is a HERO ... and all charges should be dropped. ^
304 = 17.6% believe he should be fired.
http://www.startribune.com/polls/100...&pid=100342889
1420 = 82.3% believe that the FA (SS) is a HERO ... and all charges should be dropped. ^
304 = 17.6% believe he should be fired.
http://www.startribune.com/polls/100...&pid=100342889
Aug 10, 2010, 2:04 pm
#113
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Home: East Mids UK - Work (Base): Accra, Ghana.
Programs: BAEC: Silver - Marriott: Titanium
Posts: 12,086
Chris Elliott is reading more into the Airliners.net posts than is there. The "$1,000 fine if I get off the plane. Your carry on drama ain’t worth that to me." is in response to someone suggesting that FAs should gate check bags on the jetway. The OpSpecs for B6 do not consider the jetway an extension of the aircraft, so they cannot do that.
This Chris Elliot certainly seems to be the master of selective cut and paste!
Aug 10, 2010, 2:06 pm
#114
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: Back to UA, missing DL; Marriott Gold
Posts: 10,494
The New York Daily News article has many details that are missing from the other accounts of this tale.
Here are a few:
Cops found him in bed with his boyfriend when they arrived to arrest him at a beachfront home in the Rockaways with a porch overlooking the Atlantic Ocean, sources said.
He boasted to skeptical cops that he really did escape by chute with his carry-on luggage.
"Oh, yes, I did! I threw them down first and I went down after," he told cops, sources said.
He was grinning as police walked him in handcuffs to a squad car. "He left with a big smile on his face," said neighbor Curt Karkowski.
Here are a few:
Cops found him in bed with his boyfriend when they arrived to arrest him at a beachfront home in the Rockaways with a porch overlooking the Atlantic Ocean, sources said.
He boasted to skeptical cops that he really did escape by chute with his carry-on luggage.
"Oh, yes, I did! I threw them down first and I went down after," he told cops, sources said.
He was grinning as police walked him in handcuffs to a squad car. "He left with a big smile on his face," said neighbor Curt Karkowski.
^
Aug 10, 2010, 2:20 pm
#115
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: CLT
Programs: Choice Hotels/FFOCUS
Posts: 7,256
Of 1724 respondents ... at 3.40pm EST Aug 10, 2010 ...
1420 = 82.3% believe that the FA (SS) is a HERO ... and all charges should be dropped. ^
304 = 17.6% believe he should be fired.
http://www.startribune.com/polls/100...&pid=100342889
1420 = 82.3% believe that the FA (SS) is a HERO ... and all charges should be dropped. ^
304 = 17.6% believe he should be fired.
http://www.startribune.com/polls/100...&pid=100342889
Aug 10, 2010, 2:24 pm
#116
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hotlanta.
Programs: I've gone underground!
Posts: 4,601
I thought 2 beers and popping the chute was cool... but wait:YES!!!! What a great last day on the job!!!
Aug 10, 2010, 2:27 pm
#117
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9630/5.0.0.591 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/105)
The "not reckless" claim is missing a vital component. The guy never identified an emergency that required activation of the slide. I would think that should come a few steps ahead of making sure that it didn't hurt anyone.
The guy has panache, but that doesn't make him any less of a jerk for his behavior. Walk off the plane and never come back. Even take the beer with you. But causing several thousand dollars in damages to company property is just plain stupid and wholly unjustified.
Originally Posted by TWA884
This from the New York Times:
Mr. Slater’s court-appointed lawyer, Howard Turman, said that Mr. Slater’s activation of the slide was not reckless. He said Mr. Slater followed the proper procedure for activating the slide, checking out the window first to make sure no one was on the tarmac who could be struck by it.
Mr. Turman, of the Legal Aid Society, offered an account of the flight, JetBlue 1052 from Pittsburgh, that he said justified Mr. Slater’s actions. He told reporters that on the ground in Pittsburgh, a female passenger had been verbally and physically abusive to Mr. Slater when he intervened as she squabbled with a male passenger over access to the overhead luggage compartment.
“The woman initially at Pittsburgh slammed the overhead into his head,” Mr. Turman said of Mr. Slater.
A passenger on the flight, Greg Kanczes, said that he saw a large, fresh-looking gash on Mr. Slater’s forehead at the beginning of the flight. “It was about an inch-and-half long, and it was a big red mark or cut,” Mr. Kanczes said by phone Tuesday. “There was no bandage.”
Mr. Turman, of the Legal Aid Society, offered an account of the flight, JetBlue 1052 from Pittsburgh, that he said justified Mr. Slater’s actions. He told reporters that on the ground in Pittsburgh, a female passenger had been verbally and physically abusive to Mr. Slater when he intervened as she squabbled with a male passenger over access to the overhead luggage compartment.
“The woman initially at Pittsburgh slammed the overhead into his head,” Mr. Turman said of Mr. Slater.
A passenger on the flight, Greg Kanczes, said that he saw a large, fresh-looking gash on Mr. Slater’s forehead at the beginning of the flight. “It was about an inch-and-half long, and it was a big red mark or cut,” Mr. Kanczes said by phone Tuesday. “There was no bandage.”
The guy has panache, but that doesn't make him any less of a jerk for his behavior. Walk off the plane and never come back. Even take the beer with you. But causing several thousand dollars in damages to company property is just plain stupid and wholly unjustified.
Aug 10, 2010, 2:46 pm
#118
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Formerly HPN, but then DCA and IAD for a while, and now back to HPN!
Programs: Honestly, I've been out of the travel game so long that I'm not even sure. Maybe Marriott Gold?
Posts: 10,677
As I read the first paragraph in this post, I thought I was going to give a big "+1." My opinion, however, diverges 180 degrees from that point on.
I, too, am involved with a business in which there is a significant component of dealing with difficult "customers." The difference is, that, in my business, "customer safety" is a huge component. Employees have not only a responsibility for maintaining composure in the interest of business development but also in the interest of keeping things safe and maximizing outcomes.
My impression is that FAs, as a job category, value the safety aspect of their positions highly. That is, they are not simply flying waiters. In this light, this FA's actions are not defensible. He is, at least in part, responsible for peoples' lives.
Anyone who is applauding this guy's theatrical exit is demeaning the importance of FAs. Any FAs who are applauding what he did deserve to be considered flying waiters.
I, too, am involved with a business in which there is a significant component of dealing with difficult "customers." The difference is, that, in my business, "customer safety" is a huge component. Employees have not only a responsibility for maintaining composure in the interest of business development but also in the interest of keeping things safe and maximizing outcomes.
My impression is that FAs, as a job category, value the safety aspect of their positions highly. That is, they are not simply flying waiters. In this light, this FA's actions are not defensible. He is, at least in part, responsible for peoples' lives.
Anyone who is applauding this guy's theatrical exit is demeaning the importance of FAs. Any FAs who are applauding what he did deserve to be considered flying waiters.
Aug 10, 2010, 3:06 pm
#119
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LAX
Programs: oneword Emerald
Posts: 20,615
An individual on an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States who, by assaulting or intimidating a flight crew member or flight attendant of the aircraft, interferes with the performance of the duties of the member or attendant or lessens the ability of the member or attendant to perform those duties, or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both. However, if a dangerous weapon is used in assaulting or intimidating the member or attendant, the individual shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life.
One who assaults, threatens, or intimidates a flight crew member or attendant while aboard an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States, and thereby interferes with the performance of that crew member's duties or lessens the ability of that crew member to perform his/her duties is punishable under this subsection. See United States v. Meeker, 527 F.2d 12 (9th Cir. 1975). A violation of 49 U.S.C. § 46504 is a general intent crime; it does not require any specific intent to intimidate or to interfere with the flight crew member or attendant.
Aug 10, 2010, 3:08 pm
#120
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SNA
Programs: UA Million Mile Nobody, Marriott Platinum Elite, SPG Gold
Posts: 25,228
Of 1724 respondents ... at 3.40pm EST Aug 10, 2010 ...
1420 = 82.3% believe that the FA (SS) is a HERO ... and all charges should be dropped. ^
304 = 17.6% believe he should be fired.
http://www.startribune.com/polls/100...&pid=100342889
1420 = 82.3% believe that the FA (SS) is a HERO ... and all charges should be dropped. ^
304 = 17.6% believe he should be fired.
http://www.startribune.com/polls/100...&pid=100342889
A hero? A pathetic flight attendant gets beat up by an old lady and he runs away? This is your definition of a hero? Back in the day he he would be called a coward.