flight attendants out of control?
Oct 29, 2015, 9:17 pm
#16
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Washington, DC US
Posts: 58
Here's a link to the Fox News story: http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2015/1...on-and-called/
No Knee Defender.
And 2 weeks ago, when a man choked a woman for reclining her seat on a Southwest flight from LAX to SFO...?
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...019-story.html
No Knee Defender there, either.
FYI.
Oct 29, 2015, 9:32 pm
#17
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pittsburgh
Programs: MR/SPG LT Titanium, AA LT PLT, UA SLV, Avis PreferredPlus
Posts: 31,007
Perhaps he was looking at this older Fox new story where a Knee Defender caused a fight, after someone tried to used the product on United, which "prohibits use of the device, like all major U.S. airlines"
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2014/0...ght-air-scrum/
Nope, that was on Southwest, where it's also banned.
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2014/0...ght-air-scrum/
Nope, that was on Southwest, where it's also banned.
Oct 29, 2015, 9:47 pm
#18
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Washington, DC US
Posts: 58
Perhaps he was looking at this older Fox new story where a Knee Defender caused a fight, after someone tried to used the product on United, which "prohibits use of the device, like all major U.S. airlines"
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2014/0...ght-air-scrum/
Nope, that was on Southwest, where it's also banned.
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2014/0...ght-air-scrum/
Nope, that was on Southwest, where it's also banned.
Oct 29, 2015, 11:20 pm
#19
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2012
Programs: A3, AA. Plasticy things! That give me, y'know, Stuff!
Posts: 6,293
If OP has any good statistics on the # of security incidents resulting in off-loading, it would be great if he posted them. Otherwise, this is just another media hype incident which seems pretty clear:
1. Must obey crewmember instructions.
2. Don't film or record crew members onboard (not only a safety & security issue, but there are plenty of whacko stalkers out there).
1. Must obey crewmember instructions.
2. Don't film or record crew members onboard (not only a safety & security issue, but there are plenty of whacko stalkers out there).
Oct 30, 2015, 12:02 am
#20
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: California
Programs: AA EXP...couple hotels and cars too
Posts: 4,548
How about video and audio monitoring in the passenger cabin?
This way we always have that ever important "yeah but what was said BEFORE they turned on their phone" footage.
Or FAs need to wear body cams?
double
My call in this case was this guy was a prick and deserved to be abused. AND the flight attendant abused their authority. Both
This way we always have that ever important "yeah but what was said BEFORE they turned on their phone" footage.
Or FAs need to wear body cams?
double
My call in this case was this guy was a prick and deserved to be abused. AND the flight attendant abused their authority. Both
Oct 30, 2015, 12:37 am
#21
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 8,460
Basically, FA's based in the US are the worst in the business. They are rude, act like they are performing brain surgery, and they look so unhappy one would assume they are going through labor if they weren't performing their duties.
On the international airlines I've flown, I've had nothing but friendly and courteous FA's, not to mention the fact that they dress like women and appear to have seen the inside of a gym recently.
On the international airlines I've flown, I've had nothing but friendly and courteous FA's, not to mention the fact that they dress like women and appear to have seen the inside of a gym recently.
Oct 30, 2015, 12:55 am
#22
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,886
RULE 21 REFUSAL TO TRANSPORT
UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:
A) Breach of Contract of Carriage – Failure by Passenger to comply with the Rules of the Contract of Carriage.
...
H) Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to:
...
2) Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;
UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:
A) Breach of Contract of Carriage – Failure by Passenger to comply with the Rules of the Contract of Carriage.
...
H) Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to:
...
2) Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;
Oct 30, 2015, 4:18 am
#23
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cambridge, UK
Programs: VS, BA, C, C++, IoT
Posts: 117
One article has a link to her FB page where she tells her side of the story.
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php...375195&fref=nf
I'm sorry, but when someone is that illiterate, to the point where you can't even follow what she's saying, I just can't get on her side. She comes off as an entitled DYKWIA who actually isn't anyone.
Just my gut feeling after reading her page.
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php...375195&fref=nf
I'm sorry, but when someone is that illiterate, to the point where you can't even follow what she's saying, I just can't get on her side. She comes off as an entitled DYKWIA who actually isn't anyone.
Just my gut feeling after reading her page.
Oct 30, 2015, 6:14 am
#24
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: MCO, YEG
Posts: 1,181
3 million people fly everyday without incident; we get reports like this maybe once per day. I would say, almost without exception, by simple logic, that there is a good reason to toss them. If it was simply crews on power trips, there would be a whole lot more people being tossed.
Oct 30, 2015, 6:25 am
#25
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 8,460
Not necessarily, most people despise American FA's. But, despite that hatred, most people have the common sense to realize that they better just do what the FA's tell them to do because the crew, captains, airlines, and security will pretty much take whatever the FA says as gospel truth and the conversation ends there.
Oct 30, 2015, 7:57 am
#26
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: south of WAS DC
Posts: 10,131
3 million people fly everyday without incident; we get reports like this maybe once per day. I would say, almost without exception, by simple logic, that there is a good reason to toss them. If it was simply crews on power trips, there would be a whole lot more people being tossed.
i have received a lot of kindnesses from both FA,s and passengers. TSA is another matter.
Oct 30, 2015, 8:04 am
#28
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: HSV (formerly AUS)
Programs: AA MM (like it matters!) All of my flying was personal travel, and COVID-19 stopped that.
Posts: 223
Basically, FA's based in the US are the worst in the business. They are rude, act like they are performing brain surgery, and they look so unhappy one would assume they are going through labor if they weren't performing their duties.
On the international airlines I've flown, I've had nothing but friendly and courteous FA's, not to mention the fact that they dress like women and appear to have seen the inside of a gym recently.
On the international airlines I've flown, I've had nothing but friendly and courteous FA's, not to mention the fact that they dress like women and appear to have seen the inside of a gym recently.
Last edited by Ocn Vw 1K; Oct 30, 2015 at 8:23 am Reason: Edited by Moderator per FT Rules.
Oct 30, 2015, 8:38 am
#29
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 502
This really gets into a bigger issue: do you trust what is said in the media? According to the media ( see the link somebody provided regarding this incident on the first page ) the initial conflict seem to have resolved but it is stated the FA returned to this PAX and started up with him. Obviously that's an entirely different situation.
It may be the adage : a dog biting a man is not news, but a man biting the dog is. Sure, unruly passengers get kicked off all the time, but an FA going berserk would sell a lot more newspapers.
So again, who knows what really happened? But they do cite witnesses who sided with the PAX
It may be the adage : a dog biting a man is not news, but a man biting the dog is. Sure, unruly passengers get kicked off all the time, but an FA going berserk would sell a lot more newspapers.
So again, who knows what really happened? But they do cite witnesses who sided with the PAX
Oct 30, 2015, 9:46 am
#30
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2012
Programs: A3, AA. Plasticy things! That give me, y'know, Stuff!
Posts: 6,293
Good luck arguing the events (as described) qualify as a threat to anything other than the FA's autoritah. The CoC would also run into a small problem in that they attempt to extend law beyond what is actually on the books.