steve33

There are plenty of issues that the fake-doctors on this board don't understand. I just had my patellar tendon repaired, and walking down a slope was nearly impossible (given it would cause it to be elongated to walk down a slope) but walking up a slope was perfectly fine.

If the folks in row 24 wanted to be in a low row, they should've a) checked in sooner or b) bought a BS ticket

donjo

I'm not a fake doctor, and I wasn't referring to the legitimately disabled passengers using this benefit. The point of my post was that the benefit is being abused.

And to the poster who said I must not treat anyone with Lupus, RA or COPD, I do on a daily basis, and none of them walk to the gate with the alacrity I witnessed on my last flight.

The point is, this benefit is abused.

Terminator8

It's "equal treatment" for them to get on the plane before people who paid for EBCI? That's equal treatment to you?

As for deplaning, they usually do walk off on their own ahead of all the able bodied people, and it's a major problem. Because as soon as they leave the plane, a chair is waiting for them and they take forever to get in and get moving creating a logjam behind them. So not only do these people get on first but I then have to wait for them to get off as well. How is that equal treatment to me?

lexdevil

It is equal treatment for them to be able to exit at the same time as others in their section of the plane.

Other than during the short period when I had a broken ankle, I'm just like you. I too wait for the folks getting into the wheelchairs. I guess I'm just a bit more patient than you are.

As for the logjam, I think it might occur regardless of when the disabled folks get up. If the chairs arrive on time (a rarity, in my experience), they're in the jetway blocking traffic regardless of whether there are folks trying to get in them.

lexdevil

I don't deny that there are cheaters. I'm not sure of the best way to prevent cheating. I do think the "...and anyone else who could use a bit more time..." language invites it. In fact, given that language I'm sure that many of these folks don't think that they are cheating.

I'm sure that you have seen some cheaters, but I bet there are some you might misdiagnose. I've traveled with a teenager with RA, and I bet you would have thought she was a cheater.

At the same time, I don't think that punishing disabled people because others cheat is fair (or legal). We don't get rid of designated disabled parking spaces because some jerks cheat.

Terminator8

You didn't respond to my full point though. I agree it's equal treatment for them to get off the plane. HOWEVER, it is not equal treatment when they also get to board before everyone else just because they have an injury or illness. So that's where your "equal treatment" argument falls apart. You can cite it for one situation and then ignore it for another.

Disagree. The logjam occurs not only because of the chairs and them trying to sit in the chairs, but also because they're putting their carryons to the side, their family is standing there waiting. It's a friggin' mess and some people have tight connections to make and don't have time for that rubbish.

ucfjoe

It's a problem. Lots more preboarders on WN than any other domestic carrier I fly. Why? Because of lack of seat assignments. So WN should just go to seat assignments and add a F cabin and call it a day. In the meantime as a sign of protest I think FTers should all claim preboard need to overwhelm the system and force a change. Just don't do it on flights I'm flying on please.

lexdevil

You are right. That is because disabled people are entitled, both legally and ethically, to treatment that you interpret to be "better." My point is that, at the very least, they deserve equal treatment. The "better" treatment to which they are legally entitled is intended to provide equal access, because treating them the same as everyone else will deny them access.

Your argument is that in order to have equal treatment, if they get a benefit in one instance (early boarding), they must accept a disadvantage in another (back of the plane and/or last off) in order to even the playing field. That's like saying that if they get the disabled parking spots at the grocery store, they should have to take the most distant parking spots at the shopping mall. Or like saying that kids who qualify for special education classes (and get the benefit of smaller classes) should not be allowed to take Art classes in order to compensate for the unfair benefit that they received. It fails to recognize that the purpose of the accommodation (the "better" treatment) is to provide them with equal access. Because Southwest does not have assigned seating, these folks need to board early to get seats that will meet their needs. That fact does not mean that they should suffer a disadvantage when leaving the plane.

I also find it interesting that some are frosty about folks who arrive in wheelchairs but deplane on foot, while you are annoyed by those who gum up the works by leaving in wheelchairs (the very folks that no one thinks are cheating).

steve33

Wasn't referring to you, but to all the others who claim someone is abusing the system because they can walk fine - but in reality they have no idea what the preboarder's problem is. For instance before my repair I'd preboard to get bulkhead because my height and having my knee bent at 90 degrees was intolerable.

Someone could have an issue that doesn't present itself - ie someone with epilepsy would be better off in bulkhead as a seizure in a normal row could likely cause injury to other passengers in the row - bulkhead they can at least seize on the floor.

It's discriminatory to ask them to wait. If they said "passengers of size, please wait for the normal sized passengers to deplane before you do," it'd be a complete disaster.

Alright, lets say your leg is in a brace or cast that makes it not able to bend and you preboard because that's the only way your leg will fit on the plane. Does that mean you should deplane last? What about if you're on crutches and can't pull your own bag? What if you have a tight connection with either of those? If I had a seat blocked off and I knew my carryon would fit overhead, sure I'll board last no problem. I'd actually prefer that. But of course boarding last and deplaning first wouldn't be equal treatment either. There is no solution where everyone will be happy. If cheaters are stopped, they'll complain about legitimate preboarders. If they eliminate preboarding, there will be a huge PR nightmare.

lexdevil

I should note that I do think that it is kind and polite for those who cannot exit easily/quickly to allow others to go first. This includes not only disabled people, but folks who have to get bags that are stored many rows behind them, families with children, people who have failed to pack up their stuff in a timely manner, and travelers who have gotten sloppy drunk during the flight.

But the fact that it would be kind and polite for these folks to exit the aircraft after others (assuming that they do not have a tight connection to make themselves) does not mean that they should be required to do so.

Had the OP been interested in changing behavior rather than insulting people, their post should have been a polite request that folks who move slowly consider waiting to exit the aircraft until they will not delay other travelers. This might have actually changed some behavior, and they would not have needed to single out disabled passengers. Some on this thread have even mentioned that they have seen many disabled passengers do this by choice. Instead, the OP made an outrageous suggestion (that the disabled be consigned to the furthest seats), and made rude comments ("first five rows full of drooling old people"). To the OP, try having some empathy. You'll be drooling again sooner than you think.

Rd3

I think a large issue is due to the fact that since WN doesn't assign seats, and doesn't have a 1st/business cabin, the 'prime' seats for some folks (the first few rows) are being taken by preboarders, while those who are loyal enough, and spend enough to become A-List, or pay the extra $12 for EBCI are out of luck, which is a lot different than the legacies, where money/status/loyalty usually gets you better seats--that's a large part of the frustration.

Rd3

[/QUOTE]If the folks in row 24 wanted to be in a low row, they should've a) checked in sooner or b) bought a BS ticket[/QUOTE]

Disagree--you could be A01, but if a flight has 15 pre-boarders-which my flight from BWI-LAS had last week....then...

rickg523

Sounds like everyone is trying for some one size fits all rule. That's impossible.
I think WN should accommodate pre-boarders in the front rows of the plane, but that pre-boarders should be last off for the exact same reason they board first. Because they need extra time and slow down the process. Also, preboard accompanying passengers should be seated in the front of the plane and held with their preboarder. Basically, get on early, get off last. As others have mentioned, often the wheelchairs aren't ready as soon as the doors open. Now just hold them at the jetway exit until an FA says preboards are ready to get off.
But exceptions should be made. And can easily be accommodated on WN where seats aren't assigned and where the CC are encouraged to socially interact with passengers.
So, any preboarder with a tight cxn should of course, not be held (let's remember, a cxn that could be okay for you or I might be tight for someone with a physical infirmity). In fact they should get off first, again for the exact same reason they got on first. They need more time. Just show the FA your ongoing BP with the short cxn time. The FA can just call for a chair to be sent down first. In fact, with a decent comm protocol, this would be better for the preboard with a tight cxn than the current wheelchair crapshoot.
Regular boarders (or preboarders) with tight cxns can do this on WN now and generally the FA will help them out. (Data point - 100 WN flights a year for 5 years). I've heard this doesn't work well on other airlines, but I think the nature of WN's more "democratic" open seating plan, encourages less status-entitlement, thus less "why should I wait, I'm 1K/DM/SE/just generally more deserving of perks than the kettlelice on this flight."
I'd wager that, if informed that preboarding included these provisos, a good portion of pre-boarders would opt to board normally. Without a doubt, on certain routes.
The only issue is, as FT posts demonstrate frequently, there are folks who absolutely cannot stand exceptions to rules. They always seem to think someone else's convenience is a personal imposition. They should probably avoid WN, because personal exceptions happen a lot on Southwest. This is generally characterized as WN staff going above and beyond their normal duties to help a passenger out.

lexdevil

You are correct that the lack of pre-assigned seats makes this a Southwest specific issue. At the same time, the legacy carriers do block some prime seats for disabled passengers. This means that even on the legacy carriers, some elite passengers do end up in less desirable seats in order to accommodate the disabled. It is simply less obvious that this has occurred because without pre-boarding determining seat options, there is no way to know why any individual ended up in their seat.

I am Gold with United and I still, on occasion, end up in the back of the plane or in a middle E+ seat. And there is probably at least one non-status disabled passenger in an E+ aisle seat that could have been mine, had that seat not been blocked for people with disabilities. I just don't know it for sure. And I definitely can't pick out that individual to glare at and resent for taking "my" seat.

lexdevil

I disagree with you about having a "rule," but I appreciate your tone and approach. Thank you for being thoughtful and not hateful.

Instead of a "rule" with exceptions, I would prefer a strong suggestion that anyone needing more time to deplane wait until a break in the action in order to maximize their comfort and expedite the progress of other passengers. That suggestion, as part of the standard end of flight announcements, might really help. Especially because I imagine that there are slow moving passengers who are not aware that waiting is an option. The plane tends to empty with a very clear front to back, row by row logic, and it simply may not occur to some (especially infrequent travelers) that they can wait.

I prefer this to a "rule and exception" strategy because I'm concerned about how the latter would work. Would pre-boarders and their partners need to be marked in some way? That's just creepy. Would fellow passengers identify them to FAs if they noticed them deplaning early? Even more creepy. Would passengers and FAs have faulty memories and misidentify individuals as pre-boarders, leading to arguments? A very disturbing thought. I imagine that it would be easy for fellow passengers to mistake through passengers for pre-boards, causing all sorts of confusion. I'm also kind of creeped out by the language of "holding" them.

Practically, if the goal is expeditious deplaning, arguments about whether someone was a pre-boarder and/or whether they deserve to have an exception made for them are likely to slow the works considerably.