First of all a BIG WELCOME to the flyertalk boards, rnfasea. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif
You helped us see this from a totally different angle. Thanks for your insight into the situation.

Seattle FA:

Thanks for your input, and welcome.

Many (most) of us here are quite familiar with the rules and regs, and what many FA's have to go through in their daily rigor.

However, what burns us a lot is when, in the face of such clearly established rules, the rules are seemingly arbitrarily applied or enforced as it is in the case of Snake P.

Had an announcement already been made, the FA was telling other mobile callers to quit, etc., this would have been a moot discussion. We'd be chastising him instead of the FA.

But that is not the case, and seems to be a matter of selective enforcement rather than responsible management and execution of one's empowerment.

Somewhat interesting to hear the corporate info from the Seattle FA. Kind of expected, though, eh?

Bruce said it best, folks. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsup.gif



------------------
Only one thing endures & that is character.
- Greeley

In deciding whatever the right action to take here should be, consider that if you had decided to take an action that requires the crew to call for law enforcement to forcibly remove you from the plane, you would have, by your deliberate action, significantly inconvenienced all the other passengers on the aircraft by causing the flight's late departure. That's not to say that there are not fights for preserving liberty and freedom that justify choosing to inconvenience others, but this is a factor to be considered.

Asking a passenger to turn off their cell phone more than once is nothing new. We do make a five minute prior announcement that we read instructing people to turn off them off. Some people don't listen, don't hear or just don't want to. I use mine also, but do a quick "gotta go" when that p.a. is made. No one likes to tell someone twice, but it is our responsibility to do so...just like emergency row restrictions and bag stowage problems. SEA f/a said, if there is an FAA inspector onboard whether checking or just flying for pleasure, we will hear about it. There was one that flew on our flight once that reprimanded a f/a for not telling a passenger that his ultra-thin laptop could not be placed in the seatback pocket and there could be a fine not only to AA, but to the f/a personally as well. But those are the rules and even with the eye rolling and dirty looks, have to do it.

Also, using the lav early enough to be back before departure is not unusual either as is hearing a complaint. Unless the f/a miscontrued something, I'm surprised that you would have been asked to deplane. I'm sure there was an incident report somewhere explaining why the f/a felt compelled to do this. In my 14 years with AA, in passenger service and flight service, have personally only seen two people forced to get off...one was very abusive (profanity, definate threatening words and body language) and one was drunk. Like I said, the details that lead up to this incident are very mild ones and if there was nothing left out, then bringing to it to the attention to AA to have it reviewed was necessary.

I've thought about what I would do if I were "wronged" in this way. I think I would refuse to deplane and force them to give me their names and badge numbers while we wait for the police to remove me. In other words, I wouldn't let it go and I would take the issue to court. I would get names of the surrounding passengers as witnesses. Surely one or two of them would agree to help out. I know that it would also inconvenience the others on the flight by an added delay, but I think that it would be worth it and the delay really wouldn't be long.

I'm sure I would be arrested and fined, but I think that in the long run, I would be vindicated and the wrong would be righted.

In a small way, I think you were wrong Snake to let them get away with this. That way you've let that FA and pilot go free to abuse someone else on the next flight. Maybe you don't have the time or money to deal with it and I can understand that. But I think I would deal with it.


[This message has been edited by stimpy (edited 12-25-2001).]

I hear what you're saying, Stimpy. I won't disagree with you, nor will I comment that you're right, I'm wrong or vice versa, et. al.

Everyone's life experiences are unique. My experiences with "John Law" make me well aware that sometimes ya gotta roll with the punch, and not try to take the punch flush on the chin just to show that the punch wasn't that tough. We don't all see the same situation the same way. It's going to be different for each individual. There were a few variables in the FA Eva Braun conflict that affected my reaction, as I've noted in an earlier post.

In my younger years, yeah, I would have told them to stick it, and gone through the righteously-wronged-dude-actions. Actually, in my younger years (and that ain't that long ago, eh?), there would have been a good chance it would have taken 4 hard-working, cussing cops to drag me off that airplane...so, you see, patience & forbearance with hemorrhoidal people have been traits that I've developed over the years.

But I took a few deep breaths (literally) and really worked on one thing: staying calm. 'Cause if I didn't stay calm I would never have seen LA that day, nor possibly that weekend. And THAT was my priority, again for reasons already noted previously in the thread.

I can tell you this: I was a lot calmer than that FA, that's for sure. The AA Ground Supe in DFW can attest to that......I'm proud of myself in that respect, to be honest with you. As I said, several years ago I would have been locked up. Been there, done that (not from airplane weirdness) and no desire to visit the American Judicial System again anytime soon.

RE: AA & FA Eva:
Just because one person is out in the middle of a cornfield braying like a jackass doesn't mean I gotta go on out there & join 'em to prove that I can bray, too.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

------------------
Only one thing endures & that is character.
- Greeley

Not bad, Stimpy, you said "I" only eighteen times.

The only flaw with the train of thought in most of these posts is that the airlines are not a democracy. You are not due a fair trial when you're flying. And these days, when you decide to pursue it in a courtroom, there is a strong chance you won't get one in the real world either.

There are certainly more than a few Flight Attendants that are a little jumpy and power hungry but more passengers that haven't figured out that things are different now and it's not all about them anymore. Sorry, that's just the way it is.

I notice that with maybe one or two exceptions on the thread, no one has mentioned that when Mr. Snake was deplaning, there were other pax still talking on their own cell phones. Perhaps he should have stopped right where they were, and asked the gate supervisor, why am I being asked to deplane and they are not...?

AS Flyer is right -- up to a point. If a flight crew has legitimate security issues, they should be able to throw people off planes -- even while in flight (joke!). But let's not use phony security issues as justification for going on a power trip at some passenger's expense.

If the airlines mistreat passengers for any reason, including "security," they will quite simply go out of business, and all the airline employees can sit home collecting unemployment benefits. Does anyone really want that? Do you doubt that this is the inevitable outcome of such nonsense continuing indefinitely?

The U.S. needs to get serious about security -- at airports and elsewhere -- but abuse of ordinary citizens who happen to be traveling by air is not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination.

Bruce

[This message has been edited by bdschobel (edited 12-25-2001).]

That's a pretty serious statement you made. But I don't care what you say, I still have a Constitutional right to a fair trial.

... it's not all about them anymore

So, who's paying your paycheck now, if it isn't the customers? That bailout money was supposed to be a one-time thing. Especially with all the FA's that were furloughed, FA's with anti-customer attitudes like yours should not be on the plane.

Probably because the real crime was "making the FA uncomfortable" by

a) giving the FA a "unpleasant look"

b) making a comment pointing out inconsistent treatment of passengers in FC

We already know that the crew can eject you just for looking like someone of Middle Eastern descent. When you really get down to it, they can eject you for body odor if the crew felt like it.

Nothing amazes me about AA anymore.

The only thing I would have done differently was to have sent a well-written letter to some major newspapers/tv stations right after the incidence. The only way you can get AA to take responsibility for such cases is adverse publicity. The newspapers would have been more than willing to pick up such a story.

You definitely do. But is it worth it? Is it worth coughing up the $200 an hour a lawyer's going to cost you? Is it worth coming up with the bail money to get out of jail? Is it worth going to jail in the first place?

Also, keep in mind that if you get beligerent and confrontational, you've just given the airline all they need to justify throwing you off the plane.