flight attendants out of control?
 

It seems that we have a recent outbreak of people getting kicked off of planes for reasons (at least those presented by the media) that do not seem entirely fair, and the descriptions of the behavior of the FA's raises some issues.

The latest is this family or 9 getting kicked off today. From what is being presented about this, it seems that one FA was really off base.
I have personally never seen a flight attendant out of control but could today's story be as lopsided as it is being portrayed. Apparently there were witnesses to the last two events who sided with the kicked off pax.

I saw a blurb about this on Fox News. Apparently it had something to do with a thing called a "Knee Defender".

A link to whatever story OP was talking about would have been nice. Here's one from Yahoo that includes accounts from other witnesses:
https://www.yahoo.com/travel/family-...150654020.html

If a Knee Defender was in use, then that should be automatic game over, but I didn't see any mention of it in 2 stories I read.

It sounds like the FA is in the wrong here, but there's a question of whether the FA went on the PA to call the family "animals" after they deboarded.

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).

Seems like protocol was followed and this wasn't the FA's ultimate decision. Captain and law enforcement involved. While it's the Captain's final judgment, he apparently took advice from the cops too. Sounds like the decision to boot the other 8 had nothing to do with the FA.

The "animals" comment is uncalled for an unprofessional, but it has nothing to do with the security issues. Can't say the FA was wrong, just unprofessional.

Unlike a bus, you can't pull over to the curb at 35,000 feet and give someone the boot. Peoples' behavior tends not to improve with the passage of time.

Have you ever looked around and seen the mentality of the average entitled person...

No respect for anything or anybody.

Indeed, and that's the whole problem in a nutshell. People are acting horribly uncouth these days, even more so cramped together in a pressurised tube and deprived of control.

Perhaps it's time the gallows were introduced to modern air transport?

Like the person in the story who blocked the aisle for no reason? The FA wouldn't ask someone if they could let others by if there was no way for someone to do that. The guy who got kicked off was being inconsiderate to everyone else trying to board the plane.

I don't get the sense of entitlement that passengers have on planes today. You do need to follow the directions of the staff. It's not like they're asking you to do anything unusual.

"Can you move out of the way while you're doing what you're doing so others can get by?"

"Yes as soon as I'm done doing what I'm doing and you've all waited (aka nope)"

The coverage of these stories is almost invariably from the "aggrieved" party, with rarely anything but a cursory comment from the airline. As with the "aunt sues 7 year old" story, the truth is quite often something different. But it doesn't make for good headlines.

I prefer to wait for both sides to come out.

And I also wouldn't generalize the tens of thousands of "flight attendants" via a story every week or two.

Yeah people were up in arms about the lady who sued McDonald's for having her coffee too hot.

http://plotmistress.com/reviews/docu...es/hot-coffee/

It gets put into a different light when you see her skin grafts. ;)

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.

Not really. She tried driving down the street with a cup of hot coffee between her legs. The Forrest Gump saying comes immediately to mind.

Also couldn't help but notice that she made her tirade on Fb public, while everything else is private, and even non-friends can't comment. I definitely isn't winning any points with me with her presentation. She seems the "vindictive" type. I wouldn't be surprised if she leaves a 1-star Yelp review.

I'm reserving judgment until more witnesses come forth for either side. All we effectively have now is her side and B6's PR response... given those two as of right now, I'd side with B6.

One of these years the airlines will update their computer systems so passengers who dilly dally in the aisle and hold up others can be identified and whenever they fly again they get assigned to the last boarding zone or group.

You can't do that these days, that's discrimination ;)

Ever since 9-11 the flight attendants know they have the power to kick you off the plane by say certain key words to pilots. So yes I agree the flight attendants are out of control on many occasions. This does not include a pax urinating, defecting in the isle or any sexual mis conduct. But I certainly would get clearance to have sex in the lavatory.

It had something to do with a Knee Defender...? On Fox News? Really?

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.

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.

CoC

Please cite the legal basis for both those statements, and the sub clause - because no matter how many times you repeat it, it doesn't become true.

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

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.

Contract law. For example, United's Contract of Carriage says, in part:

Perhaps you should modify your gut feeling. It's pretty clear to me that English is not her first language (I'm guessing Hebrew for that, based on her Friends list).

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.

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.

sounds about like the right number. in over 50 years of flying, and thousands of flights, i have never seen any FA misbehavior.

i have received a lot of kindnesses from both FA,s and passengers. TSA is another matter.

Really!! And you base your comment on what a few negative post on a forum?

[Edit] where's the [Edit] LIKE button when you need it???

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

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.

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?