Removed from flight/accused of travelling with disease
Jun 20, 2009, 11:42 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1
Removed from flight/accused of travelling with disease
Hello,
I was travelling on an international flight with my child who was recovering from chickenpox. i made the decision to travel because the chickenpox virus was no longer contagious. All the blisters had dried and started to scab over.
First leg of the flight was a 2 hour flight and we had no problems. It wasn't until we were boarding a NWA operated flight that we ran into problems. Seated infront of us were parents travelling with two - 4 week old babies. They had already travelled on a 9 hour flight from India. As we were taxing onto the runway, a passenger sitting next to the parents commented that my son has chickenpox. This sent the crew into a frenzy which resulted in us having to exit the plane. I was humilated and very upset. Having been accused of travelling with infectious disease. ... which was not the case. I was made to go to Airport medical Services where they took a quick look at my son and gave me a letter that approved him to travel!
I was then scheduled onto the next available flight to my flinal destination... which left 5 hours later.
I am in the process of writing a letter to the airline. Has anyone ever been accused of travelling with a contagious disease and removed from a flight.
I feel like the flight attendants took extra care of the irresponsible parents that were travelling with the newborn babies (premature). I am irritated that we were singled out and removed from flight. Who's to say that there weren't others onboard that had actual contagious diesease!
I feel that I should be compensated... with more than just a lunch vouchure!
Anyone ever experience something like this. AND where does it say that you need a letter consenting that you are 100% healthy to travel?
THANKS
Lucy
I was travelling on an international flight with my child who was recovering from chickenpox. i made the decision to travel because the chickenpox virus was no longer contagious. All the blisters had dried and started to scab over.
First leg of the flight was a 2 hour flight and we had no problems. It wasn't until we were boarding a NWA operated flight that we ran into problems. Seated infront of us were parents travelling with two - 4 week old babies. They had already travelled on a 9 hour flight from India. As we were taxing onto the runway, a passenger sitting next to the parents commented that my son has chickenpox. This sent the crew into a frenzy which resulted in us having to exit the plane. I was humilated and very upset. Having been accused of travelling with infectious disease. ... which was not the case. I was made to go to Airport medical Services where they took a quick look at my son and gave me a letter that approved him to travel!
I was then scheduled onto the next available flight to my flinal destination... which left 5 hours later.
I am in the process of writing a letter to the airline. Has anyone ever been accused of travelling with a contagious disease and removed from a flight.
I feel like the flight attendants took extra care of the irresponsible parents that were travelling with the newborn babies (premature). I am irritated that we were singled out and removed from flight. Who's to say that there weren't others onboard that had actual contagious diesease!
I feel that I should be compensated... with more than just a lunch vouchure!
Anyone ever experience something like this. AND where does it say that you need a letter consenting that you are 100% healthy to travel?
THANKS
Lucy
Jun 20, 2009, 11:50 pm
#2
Moderator: Delta SkyMiles, Luxury Hotels, TravelBuzz! and Italy
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 26,543
Welcome to Flyertalk, lucy J
I am moving your thread to the NW Forum for discussion.
Obscure2k
TravelBuzz Moderator
I am moving your thread to the NW Forum for discussion.
Obscure2k
TravelBuzz Moderator
Jun 21, 2009, 12:18 am
#3
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM
Posts: 768
Welcome to Flertalk! If this happened to me I would be thoroughly irate, but I would be entitled to exactly squat in compensation. It would never have occurred to me to get a letter from a Doctor that my child was not contagious, but I bet if you had one, this whole scenario would have never transpired.
In the panicky age of swine flu, TB and sars, I'm comfortable with air crews erring on the side of caution.
The good news is that you were able to be reaccomodated on a flight 5 hours later. For comparison, on my last flight, I sat on the tarmac at PHL for about 2-1/2 hours in a CRJ100 while we waited for a mild summer squall to blow through, missed my connecting flight in MKE (last flight of the night), dozed in the airport for a few hours and finally got home about 12 hours later than I had planned.
I the overall scheme of things, you weren't really all that put out.
In the panicky age of swine flu, TB and sars, I'm comfortable with air crews erring on the side of caution.
The good news is that you were able to be reaccomodated on a flight 5 hours later. For comparison, on my last flight, I sat on the tarmac at PHL for about 2-1/2 hours in a CRJ100 while we waited for a mild summer squall to blow through, missed my connecting flight in MKE (last flight of the night), dozed in the airport for a few hours and finally got home about 12 hours later than I had planned.
I the overall scheme of things, you weren't really all that put out.
Jun 21, 2009, 12:45 am
#4
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: USA
Programs: AA LT Plat, UA LT Gold, HH Diamond, Marriott LT Gold
Posts: 956
Welcome to FT!
The action of flight attendant to have you remove from your flight was just proper if you have no documentation to prove that your child is not contagious anymore. This is for the safety of everyone onboard who have no immunity to the disease or who are immunocompromised. Except for medical doctors and ARNPs, no one could really tell if your child is contagious or not. This incident could have been avoided if you were prepared to bring a letter from your PCP stating that your child is fit to travel. For this reason, I am not certain that NWA will compensate your for the incurred trouble. However, I am glad that you and your child reached your final destination in one piece.
The action of flight attendant to have you remove from your flight was just proper if you have no documentation to prove that your child is not contagious anymore. This is for the safety of everyone onboard who have no immunity to the disease or who are immunocompromised. Except for medical doctors and ARNPs, no one could really tell if your child is contagious or not. This incident could have been avoided if you were prepared to bring a letter from your PCP stating that your child is fit to travel. For this reason, I am not certain that NWA will compensate your for the incurred trouble. However, I am glad that you and your child reached your final destination in one piece.
Jun 21, 2009, 12:49 am
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2001
Programs: DL 1 million, AA 1 mil, HH lapsed Diamond, Marriott Plat
Posts: 28,190
From the Contract of Carriage (emphasis mine):
CONDITIONS OF PSGR ACCEPT - 76
_ F) CONDITIONS OF PASSENGER ACCEPTANCE:
IN THE FOLLOWING CATEGORIES REFUSAL OR REMOVAL MAY BE NECESSARY FOR THE COMFORT AND SAFETY OF THEMSELVES OR OTHER PASSENGERS:
1) PERSONS WHO ARE KNOWN TO, OR APPEAR TO HAVE A COMMUNICABLE DISEASE OR INFECTION TRANSMISSIBLE IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF A FLIGHT.NOTE: NW MAY ACCEPT SUCH PASSENGERS PROVIDED THAT: A)
THEY HAVE A PHYSICIAN'S STATEMENT INDICATING FITNESS TO TRAVEL AND ADVISING OF REASONABLE PRECAUTIONS TO BE TAKEN BY PASSENGER THAT ARE NECESSARY FOR SAFE TRAVEL, AND; B) THEY DO NOT POSE A THREAT TO OTHER TRAVELING PASSENGERS.
The OP got a physician's statement deeming the child fit for travel. That's how it is supposed to work.
Jun 21, 2009, 1:06 am
#6
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: CO OnePass Platinum AS MVP HHonors Diamond SPG Gold
Posts: 2,417
It seems now the OP is seeking "pain and suffering" compensation because:
Seems like just another case of someone who was inconvenienced due to their own actions or in-actions and is now trying to milk it for all it's worth. I hope NW sees right through this charade and simply relies with a form letter.
Jun 21, 2009, 2:45 am
#7
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Southeast USA
Programs: various
Posts: 6,710
Lucy, you should have either postponed travel or gotten a doctor's letter attesting to non-contagiousness before you ever started your journey. Your word as a parent is just not good enough. The family with the babies is a red herring argument, if I had been sitting in front of you and found out, I'd have raised a stink also. You didn't come out of this too badly, as your delay was relatively short and reaccommodation on another flight pretty quick. NW owes you nothing more. Frankly, I don't see any reason for you to play the victim card here, and you get no sympathy from me. 
Jun 22, 2009, 10:56 am
#8
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Minnesota
Programs: NWA - Platinum
Posts: 45
I agree with the basic opposition to the OP, however there may be more things to consider. First, most travelers are likely not even aware of the existance of the Contract of Carriage. Certainly most travelers are not knowledgeable in the details. I suspect the OP is not a frequent traveler and just a parent that decided the child was healthy enough to travel and not contagious anymore. Parents know these things and frequently don't freak out of something like Chicken Pox. It is reasonable for this parent to not think twice about traveling wiht this child.
Secondly, the child was likely seen by an airline rep at check in, gate agent, and the flight crew on the first leg. Nobody raised any questions at any of these times. Again, as time passes it becomes more reasonable for the OP to become more upset when told she can't travel on her scheduled itinerary.
Lastly, the airline is in a customer service field. They may not 'owe' the OP anything but it is in their best interest to provide some compensation for the trouble the OP had. The airline is aware that their customer base is not reviewing the Contract of Carriage and is probably happy about that arrangment. Therefore, when they return a plane to a gate and force a customer with a healthy child off the plane (in a layover city, not orginal departure) in order to get some sort of medical clearance fo the child to fly they should compensate the customer. I'm not suggesting massive compensation but I think that a complimentary fare or two would be in line. Again, not that the airline owes this but just to show that they prefer to be focused on their customer's as individuals and when their rules and protocols cause some inconvenience they feel bad and do care.
Secondly, the child was likely seen by an airline rep at check in, gate agent, and the flight crew on the first leg. Nobody raised any questions at any of these times. Again, as time passes it becomes more reasonable for the OP to become more upset when told she can't travel on her scheduled itinerary.
Lastly, the airline is in a customer service field. They may not 'owe' the OP anything but it is in their best interest to provide some compensation for the trouble the OP had. The airline is aware that their customer base is not reviewing the Contract of Carriage and is probably happy about that arrangment. Therefore, when they return a plane to a gate and force a customer with a healthy child off the plane (in a layover city, not orginal departure) in order to get some sort of medical clearance fo the child to fly they should compensate the customer. I'm not suggesting massive compensation but I think that a complimentary fare or two would be in line. Again, not that the airline owes this but just to show that they prefer to be focused on their customer's as individuals and when their rules and protocols cause some inconvenience they feel bad and do care.
Jun 22, 2009, 11:41 am
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
I agree with the basic opposition to the OP, however there may be more things to consider. First, most travelers are likely not even aware of the existance of the Contract of Carriage. Certainly most travelers are not knowledgeable in the details. I suspect the OP is not a frequent traveler and just a parent that decided the child was healthy enough to travel and not contagious anymore. Parents know these things and frequently don't freak out of something like Chicken Pox. It is reasonable for this parent to not think twice about traveling wiht this child.
Chickenpox complications are more likely to occur in adults than in children. Despite the fact that adults account for only 5 percent of chickenpox cases per year, they account for a disproportionate number of deaths (55 percent) and hospitalizations (33 percent) compared to children.
http://chickenpox.emedtv.com/chicken...kenpox-p2.html
I get medical advice from my doctor. It also happens that he is a parent, but his qualification to give medical advice results from his attending medical school and being a licensed physician, not from having reproduced.
It is not reasonable for parents to make medical decisions about possible contagion, nor is it reasonable for parents to disregard other passengers in this fashion.
Secondly, the child was likely seen by an airline rep at check in, gate agent, and the flight crew on the first leg. Nobody raised any questions at any of these times. Again, as time passes it becomes more reasonable for the OP to become more upset when told she can't travel on her scheduled itinerary.
Lastly, the airline is in a customer service field. They may not 'owe' the OP anything but it is in their best interest to provide some compensation for the trouble the OP had.
The airline is aware that their customer base is not reviewing the Contract of Carriage and is probably happy about that arrangment. Therefore, when they return a plane to a gate and force a customer with a healthy child off the plane (in a layover city, not orginal departure) in order to get some sort of medical clearance fo the child to fly they should compensate the customer.
I'm not suggesting massive compensation but I think that a complimentary fare or two would be in line. Again, not that the airline owes this but just to show that they prefer to be focused on their customer's as individuals and when their rules and protocols cause some inconvenience they feel bad and do care.
Stupidity should never be rewarded.
Jun 22, 2009, 11:54 am
#10
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 386
To be truly informed of all obligations, a person needs to analyze not only the Contract of Carriage, but also the foundational legal premise that holds it to be a binding and enforceable agreement under applicable jurisdictional authority.
After you complete your legal degree (or retained competent counsel) and conducted a thorough review for opinion, the picture still is not yet complete.
That's why many legal systems have a jury system. Black and white it is not.
If the contract of carriage stipulates that you can be removed for the appearance of a communicable disease, one could ask:
- what constitutes appearance of such disease
- what credentials are maintained by the crew that provide them expertise required to provide a medical assessment
- were illegal discriminatory practices employed by carrier 2 that were not exhibited by carrier 1 contributing to the differing experiences
- if not outright prohibited discrimination, was this a symptom of poor training programs, inadequate supervision, or employee incompetence
- was the removal of passengers conducted in a manner that imparted unnecessary embarrassment, pain, and suffering either via mailice or negligence
etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.
Hopefully, customer service will take the higher ground, recognize the situation as unpleasant and offer a good faith accommodation.
After you complete your legal degree (or retained competent counsel) and conducted a thorough review for opinion, the picture still is not yet complete.
That's why many legal systems have a jury system. Black and white it is not.
If the contract of carriage stipulates that you can be removed for the appearance of a communicable disease, one could ask:
- what constitutes appearance of such disease
- what credentials are maintained by the crew that provide them expertise required to provide a medical assessment
- were illegal discriminatory practices employed by carrier 2 that were not exhibited by carrier 1 contributing to the differing experiences
- if not outright prohibited discrimination, was this a symptom of poor training programs, inadequate supervision, or employee incompetence
- was the removal of passengers conducted in a manner that imparted unnecessary embarrassment, pain, and suffering either via mailice or negligence
etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.
Hopefully, customer service will take the higher ground, recognize the situation as unpleasant and offer a good faith accommodation.
Jun 22, 2009, 12:06 pm
#11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
To be truly informed of all obligations, a person needs to analyze not only the Contract of Carriage, but also the foundational legal premise that holds it to be a binding and enforceable agreement under applicable jurisdictional authority.
After you complete your legal degree (or retained competent counsel) and conducted a thorough review for opinion, the picture still is not yet complete.
That's why many legal systems have a jury system. Black and white it is not.
If the contract of carriage stipulates that you can be removed for the appearance of a communicable disease, one could ask:
- what constitutes appearance of such disease
- what credentials are maintained by the crew that provide them expertise required to provide a medical assessment
- were illegal discriminatory practices employed by carrier 2 that were not exhibited by carrier 1 contributing to the differing experiences
- if not outright prohibited discrimination, was this a symptom of poor training programs, inadequate supervision, or employee incompetence
- was the removal of passengers conducted in a manner that imparted unnecessary embarrassment, pain, and suffering either via mailice or negligence
etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.
Hopefully, customer service will take the higher ground, recognize the situation as unpleasant and offer a good faith accommodation.
After you complete your legal degree (or retained competent counsel) and conducted a thorough review for opinion, the picture still is not yet complete.
That's why many legal systems have a jury system. Black and white it is not.
If the contract of carriage stipulates that you can be removed for the appearance of a communicable disease, one could ask:
- what constitutes appearance of such disease
- what credentials are maintained by the crew that provide them expertise required to provide a medical assessment
- were illegal discriminatory practices employed by carrier 2 that were not exhibited by carrier 1 contributing to the differing experiences
- if not outright prohibited discrimination, was this a symptom of poor training programs, inadequate supervision, or employee incompetence
- was the removal of passengers conducted in a manner that imparted unnecessary embarrassment, pain, and suffering either via mailice or negligence
etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.
Hopefully, customer service will take the higher ground, recognize the situation as unpleasant and offer a good faith accommodation.
Jun 22, 2009, 12:13 pm
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: check swarm
Programs: DL DM & 2MM, SPG/Bonvoid LT Titanium, Hyatt Globalist, $tarbucks Titanium
Posts: 14,404
As we were taxing onto the runway, a passenger sitting next to the parents commented that my son has chickenpox. This sent the crew into a frenzy which resulted in us having to exit the plane. I was humilated and very upset. Having been accused of travelling with infectious disease. ... which was not the case. I was made to go to Airport medical Services where they took a quick look at my son and gave me a letter that approved him to travel!
I'd suggest that instead of her getting compensation, the OP should be thankful NWA isn't making her help recover their costs. @:-)
Jun 22, 2009, 12:20 pm
#14
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Programs: UA/CO(1K-PLT), AA(PLT), QR, EK, Marriott(PLT), Hilton(DMND)
Posts: 9,538
I am sure that all of us have been in instances where, had someone provided us with the time to give a coherent explanation, something unpleasant could have been avoided. It sounds like the Flight crew were not prepared to give the OP time to explain things. The subsequent removal from the flight, post-embarkation needs to be addressed by some level of compensation.
OP on the other hand needs to understand that people do travel with very young babies and that such behaviour is not irresponsible, it's simply a part of life. Also, the origin of the parents is irrelevant, unless I have my websites mixed up, and this is actually HannityTalk, or LouDobbsTalk.
OP on the other hand needs to understand that people do travel with very young babies and that such behaviour is not irresponsible, it's simply a part of life. Also, the origin of the parents is irrelevant, unless I have my websites mixed up, and this is actually HannityTalk, or LouDobbsTalk.
Jun 22, 2009, 12:33 pm
#15
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062