I would question the your claim not to film. The law is quite clear on it as far as the police is concerned. Now, where the FA is asserting governmental authority, I don't think it may a stretch to say there is a constitutional right to record her in her official capacity and also to gather evidence to defend criminal charges and bring civil claims.

People who have underpaid, semi-skilled service jobs requiring constant interaction with the general public are going to occasionally resort to power-tripping when they can get away with it. Imagine if terrestrial waitresses or bartenders were suddenly authorized by the U.S. government to eject patrons from their restaurant according to their discretion about safety risks posed to other patrons. Arbitrary restaurant ejections of drunks, loud and unruly and entitled families, and the moderately argumentative would immediately become a media theme because controversy / inflamed tempers / familiar grievances -> hits.

I haven't flown outside of business or first for at least a decade and like everyone else I get frustrated and annoyed by airports. But I can't even imagine (remember?) how a person who agonizes over a $25 checked baggage fee must feel about boarding last, or how dehumanizing it must be for a FA to enforce baggage gate checks on angry travelers with so little at stake. The opposing incentives and psychic friction are only accelerating as commercial aviation sector economics turns FAs into food and beverage salespeople and baggage police.

To properly answer the OP, yes, this is clearly getting covered more and further proof that there are no professional consequences emboldens more FAs to take out their (understandable) bad moods on people they just happen not to like. The truly bad actors from both groups (passengers, FAs) provide cover for these probably-avoidable escalations to end with police reports. It probably only ends at mood-detecting Robot FAs equipped with laughing gas and tranquilizer darts.

Sorry but "interference" clause is too ambiguous, unless clearly outlined as what constitute interference. Remember that contract law rest on the basis, that ambiguity in the contract benefits the party who did not draft it.

Hence short of obvious interference (i.e. setting fire, smoking, cause hurt, damage equipment, etc.), it's very difficult to use this clause.

I'm not saying who's right here (unless more witness come forth). Just how terms of contract are interpreted (crap I need a vacation, been reading too many contacts).

Passengers are another matter. I've never seen TSA do anything bad. Mostly it's the tin foil hat types that rail against them.

In this case, the passenger should have just moved to let other people board. It's common courtesy and yes you have to follow directions of the FA. The good story is that maybe the kids in the family will learn that if you're a (*&^, you lose some of your vacation.

Well said.

Or not.

http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2015/1...m/?intcmp=hpff

While I've certainly had rude FA's before, I've never had an "incident" with one, nor do I plan on having one. That being said, some of the above posters are correct, the issue is with US FA's. Other than isolated cases there is no "big problems" with FA's in any other country. Many seem to deal with getting out of their duties by using the "only here for your safety" or even the "9/11" excuses.

Hate to jump into the middle of a thread, but largely they are state laws, almost every state passed a law like this post 9/11. That's why they don't need a federal marshal to arrest you if you really went off the rails.

Strangely enough, these apply to ground crew or anybody who has responsibility for the safety of the airline, even as a check on each other. I used to keep a copy of our state's law in the pilot lounge because we had too many incidents of stressed out cargo pilots trying to cut corners.

Also, gotta say, the converse is true as well, just because you express skepticism about something doesn't mean it's not true.

Agreed, the only time I've had problems with an FA, it was exactly one person, but it was multiple times. The last time, she tried to kick me off the plane. That earned one of United's regionals an FAA complaint and a whole lot of oversight they didn't want on pre-takeoff procedures. I can't say that will usually be the result of an FAA complaint, but given I used to be a consultant to the FAA on safety procedures, she chose the wrong person to argue policy with.

Spill the beans, please. Why did she single you out?

Bottomline is that whoever trains the Emirates FA's should be hired to come to the US and train all the FA's here. Shape up or ship out should be the motto. Guaranteed all these American FA posers will be out on their fat lazy behinds within a month.

Probably b/c he asked for an extra bag of peanuts, was told it was $10.00 cash only, and dude went postal.

1) The passenger is clearly lying. A captain would not make an emergency landing because an economy passenger simply used a business class bathroom. She was clearly unruly either before entering the bathroom or after. My guess is she pushed her way past other passengers and slammed the bathroom door shut. And when she came out, she was being aggressive and non-repentant.

2) You're citing an airline called Niki? You may as well use the German Wings crash as evidence why it's no longer safe to fly.

Inquiring minds wanted to know...

Im guessing this:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/pract...yes-again.html

Once per day or week on US airlines, a few but very rarely anywhere else. There's something to it.
I'd sure wish to see stats on the matter: US/non-US and pre-9.11/post-9.11..