LegalTender

Verbatim from posts #20 and 22.

Water is still wet.

Why when confronted did one of the pilots not simply say "gotcha" and explain how the prank was done? Had they done that I seriously doubt FAs would have acted jointly. It was a breakdown in trust between cabin crew and flight-deck. A cabin-crew focused on this "hidden camera" and possibly losing focus on cabin safety.

fttc

Of course SWA will say it's investigated. There is investigation in name and there is investigation in real. The question is how it was done and the most important part is when. Several days after they let the evidence disappear? The FAs said the pilots were allowed to fly the next leg with a new crew. So the investigation was completed in the turn around? I hardly believe that's enough time to search the evidence. Obviously even though FAs requested preserving the CVR, that's not done either. How about the ipad? Did SWA confiscate it and preserve it? Most likely not either.

kennycrudup

If I didn't think @nsx would take it down before you could see it, I'd put one up right now. Dunno about you, but "mooning" was a thing in junior high, and while my butt has ... "propagated" ... since then, I still couldn't care less

kennycrudup

I'm really really hoping this was written tongue-in-cheek*!








* - no, not that cheek, ya perv

kennycrudup

So what? People selfie themselves in bathrooms in aircraft lavs all the time on IG, i.e., "placing a camera in an aircraft lav". Hell, I'm headed out tomorrow, I'll do it too (maybe even tying my previous post together with this one!).

Tanic

But were White Shoe Lawyers involved?

WillCAD

Quote from the Yahoo article linked in the OP:

Quote:

The suit states that when Steinaker entered the cockpit, she spotted an iPad mounted to the windshield to the left of the captain’s seat. On it, she reportedly could see a live stream of what appeared to be Graham in the bathroom.

So, technically, my previous post assumed facts not in evidence.

Graham may have dropped trau, or he may simply have been live streaming his stream. Either way, it's sexual harassment and a sex offense.

Taking a still selfie of your face is one thing. Taking video of yourself actually utilizing the facilities and then showing it to a coworker as a prank is a kettle of wax of a different color.

And even if nothing actually showed on the video - say, Graham was only washing his hands and remained fully clothed throughout - it's still sexual harassment to make a coworker believe that they (and everyone else in the workplace, including your paying customers) are being recorded in the lav and viewed live by their coworkers from six feet away.

Prank or not, these guys should have been severely disciplined, perhaps even fired. The fact that the FA is filing suit indicates to me that they were not disciplined.

Personally, I think someone in WN management laughed off this outrageous prank, and the pilots got off with nothing more than a mild talking-to.

kennycrudup

... or she's looking for a payday.

WillCAD

That is possible.

However, I find it highly unlikely that someone who is only looking for a payday would wait nearly three years before filing suit.

I find it far more believable that she has been fighting with WN's upper management for nearly three years to see these pilots disciplined for their transgression, and after getting nowhere fast, she decided as a last resort to file suit against Southwest Airlines.

kennycrudup

... probably 'cause they're laughing at her behind her back at how ridiculous she sounds. Some people just can't take a joke, especially when there's "victim" flags to wave about.

There's a lot of unscrupulous lawyers in the US; that's why when I watch that one car commercial with people running down the side of building we actually have to have "Do not attempt" at the bottom of the screen in this country.

WillCAD

This was not a 'joke', it was an incident of sexual harassment in the workplace and quite possibly a sex crime. I wouldn't be laughing at this, either, and it has nothing to do with raising any stupid flags, it has to do with behaving like professional adults on whose job performance hundreds of lives depend.

I have NEVER countenanced behavior like this in the workplace, and in today's climate, what kind of moron would think they could get away with it, even if they were childish enough to actually think such garbage is funny?

kennycrudup

Yeah, OK

rsteinmetz70112

If it happened anything like what is alleged and the FA in question wasn't using this to bargain something else. We simply have one side of a story which may or may not have any resemblance to the facts.

NoStressHere

There is always more to the story. Always. And we are not hearing what it is, any probably never will as the chances of going to trial are slim. The lawsuit will force WN to pay out some money to just get it over with, even if only a joke, or even if nothing ever happened at all. The only POSSIBLE proof of "something" is the alleged picture she has. And even that is in question.

It could be something really bad by Southwest, or by the pilots in question, or it could be a joke that went too far, or could just be a nut case going after them or Southwest. Nobody here knows enough to pass judgement. That is the only thing we know for sure at this point.

LegalTender

You have to wait for discovery. The iPad is possible proof. Some airlines lock down the tablets with monitoring apps so that everything is logged. Others allow personal email and pictures. Pilots are deemed mature enough to use the company devices prudently.

Depositions from 3 FA's will, in my opinion, motivate SWA to settle or proceed to trial.

The clear win for Southwest is no cameras in federal court. That image on the captain's iPad - of him using the front lav - will never hit the news. The longer this drags out, the less likely even Phoenix stations will staff the trial and recap daily testimony.