Diet Coke a Weapon?
May 31, 2015, 6:24 pm
#121
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,907
As a non-white person, I don't approve of people pulling the racism card every time there is some conflict, or they are treated impolitely, or someone won't sleep with them, or some such.
But in this case
(a) claiming to a Muslim that the reason for the policy is to prevent use of the can as a weapon, which is total BS, and
(b) giving the other passenger an unopened can
makes this an excellent candidate for a discrimination case assuming the facts are undisputed.
No doubt one underlying reason is a lack of training and of courtesy and professionalism standards for legacy airline FAs. The FA should know never to make up a reason, and how to shut down other passengers who behave poorly. Neither of these things happened. And of course we all know that airline employees make stuff up all the time; in this case it blew up in her face.
No doubt it would cost money to send all FAs for training in what you should and should not do, but some point this is bound to have consequences for the airlines.
But in this case
(a) claiming to a Muslim that the reason for the policy is to prevent use of the can as a weapon, which is total BS, and
(b) giving the other passenger an unopened can
makes this an excellent candidate for a discrimination case assuming the facts are undisputed.
No doubt one underlying reason is a lack of training and of courtesy and professionalism standards for legacy airline FAs. The FA should know never to make up a reason, and how to shut down other passengers who behave poorly. Neither of these things happened. And of course we all know that airline employees make stuff up all the time; in this case it blew up in her face.
No doubt it would cost money to send all FAs for training in what you should and should not do, but some point this is bound to have consequences for the airlines.
May 31, 2015, 6:28 pm
#122
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Atherton, CA
Programs: UA 1K, AA EXP; Owner, Green Bay Packers
Posts: 21,690
This is nothing but a war of bad attitudes.
The picky picky passenger with a bad attitude demanding an unopened can
The annoyed FA with the bad attitude calling her on her BS.
The picky picky passenger with a bad attitude demanding an unopened can
The annoyed FA with the bad attitude calling her on her BS.
May 31, 2015, 6:29 pm
#123
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,907
And don't forget the racist male passenger fanning the flames with their remarks to the female passenger.
May 31, 2015, 6:29 pm
#124
Suspended
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: The electrified part of North Carolina
Programs: UA GM, AA GM, DL GM
Posts: 4,157
1) Why not? It was a Shuttle America flight plane and employees? Yes, UA has partial blame but only because it is marketed as a UA flight.
2) This is not UA cabin crew, it is Shuttle America cabin crew. UA does not recruit for Shuttle America. UA does not directly train or pay Shuttle America employees.
3) This is a Shuttle America Plane and crew. Do you know for a fact they have the same rules as UA with regard to open/closed cans? I don't know.
2) This is not UA cabin crew, it is Shuttle America cabin crew. UA does not recruit for Shuttle America. UA does not directly train or pay Shuttle America employees.
3) This is a Shuttle America Plane and crew. Do you know for a fact they have the same rules as UA with regard to open/closed cans? I don't know.
Using your reasoning, Electrolux only bears "partial" responsibility if a knob breaks.
2) I don't care if Electrolux has outsourced the stove assembly to a different company and the staff was trained by that company. If the stove isn't assembled properly, I'm holding Electrolux responsible. If they can't get the subcontractors to train their staff properly, I'm blaming Electrolux for their lax standards.
3) Do I care if an Electrolux subcontractor has different workplace rules than Electrolux when I'm buying an Electrolux stove? Would the workplace rules matter when setting the expectations for the Electrolux stove? Of course not.
Your attempts to deflect blame from UA have failed miserably.
CNN article: http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/30/us/uni...ain/index.html
(CNN)A simple request for an unopened can of Diet Coke on a United Airlines flight left Tahera Ahmad in tears.
Last edited by goalie; May 31, 2015 at 7:28 pm Reason: properly quote the member's name even if quoting multiple parts of their post
May 31, 2015, 6:35 pm
#125
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Not really. We are talking about in-flight xenophobic bigotry, specifically that involving beverage service and hostile/threatening passenger comments directed toward the female Muslim passenger.
May 31, 2015, 6:35 pm
#126
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: LAS HNL
Programs: DL DM, 5.7 MM, UA 3.1 MM, MARRIOTT PLATINUM, AVIS FIRST, Amex Black Card
Posts: 4,479
1) Why not? It was a Shuttle America flight plane and employees? Yes, UA has partial blame but only because it is marketed as a UA flight.
2) This is not UA cabin crew, it is Shuttle America cabin crew. UA does not recruit for Shuttle America. UA does not directly train or pay Shuttle America employees.
3) This is a Shuttle America Plane and crew. Do you know for a fact they have the same rules as UA with regard to open/closed cans? I don't know.
2) This is not UA cabin crew, it is Shuttle America cabin crew. UA does not recruit for Shuttle America. UA does not directly train or pay Shuttle America employees.
3) This is a Shuttle America Plane and crew. Do you know for a fact they have the same rules as UA with regard to open/closed cans? I don't know.
Legally I guess it is S5. It is UNITED AIRLINES that screwed up in the public eye. This by the way is about the 4th screw up I have heard about (thanks to FT) with UA that hit the news this past month. Great PR!
May 31, 2015, 6:39 pm
#127
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,907
1) If I buy an Electrolux stove, I don't care who supplied the knobs to Electrolux. If a knob breaks, I'll complain to Electrolux, not the knob manufacturer.
Using your reasoning, Electrolux only bears "partial" responsibility if a knob breaks.
2) I don't care if Electrolux has outsourced the stove assembly to a different company and the staff was trained by that company. If the stove isn't assembled properly, I'm holding Electrolux responsible. If they can't get the subcontractors to train their staff properly, I'm blaming Electrolux for their lax standards.
3) Do I care if an Electrolux subcontractor has different workplace rules than Electrolux when I'm buying an Electrolux stove? Would the workplace rules matter when setting the expectations for the Electrolux stove? Of course not.
Your attempts to deflect blame from UA have failed miserably.
Using your reasoning, Electrolux only bears "partial" responsibility if a knob breaks.
2) I don't care if Electrolux has outsourced the stove assembly to a different company and the staff was trained by that company. If the stove isn't assembled properly, I'm holding Electrolux responsible. If they can't get the subcontractors to train their staff properly, I'm blaming Electrolux for their lax standards.
3) Do I care if an Electrolux subcontractor has different workplace rules than Electrolux when I'm buying an Electrolux stove? Would the workplace rules matter when setting the expectations for the Electrolux stove? Of course not.
Your attempts to deflect blame from UA have failed miserably.
As for your example, sure you complain to Electrolux. And what does Electrolux do? They give you a new knob then they go back to their supplier to fix the problem. But in reality your example is useless. A knob on a stove is nothing like a whole other plane operated by someone else. A UX plane is not a knob on a UA plane. Your example is more like the seat on a UA plane made by a different supplier. So your example is a complete failure.
May 31, 2015, 6:41 pm
#128
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: LAS HNL
Programs: DL DM, 5.7 MM, UA 3.1 MM, MARRIOTT PLATINUM, AVIS FIRST, Amex Black Card
Posts: 4,479
You forgot the last part. Shuttle America (S5) was paid by United Continental Holdings to operate the flt. That is a very important part you left off.
May 31, 2015, 6:43 pm
#129
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Programs: UA 1K 3 Million/ex-many year GS, AA PLT/2 Mil, AS MVPG, HH Dia, Starwood Life Plat, Hertz PC
Posts: 1,401
Forget for just a moment how to apportion the "blame" between UA and S5. Look at the brand damage only. What is the value of the United brand? What is the value of the Shuttle America brand? (I would value the latter at approximately 0 since they don't attempt to really have a consumer presence.). What was the brand "cost" of this and similar events? Who paid it? If I were a competent CEO these are the questions I'd worry about. But then it is far from obvious what level of competency we are talking about here.
My point here is simple - it is UA's issue to solve because they are really the ones taking the hits. But they don't seem to see that based on how they are running their customer service approach across the board.
My point here is simple - it is UA's issue to solve because they are really the ones taking the hits. But they don't seem to see that based on how they are running their customer service approach across the board.
May 31, 2015, 6:46 pm
#130
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,092
They do not specify that I am flying with a separate airline, that they don't consider themselves liable or accountable for anything that occurs on board of that plane.
In fact, the entire mainline/regional business model in the U.S. is based on the premise that the travelling public considers these little airlines part of these "trusted" legacy brands with equivalent products.
The business can't have it both ways. You can't tell the customer "Yeah it's as good as United" and then when misadventure occurs go "Yeah we have nothing to do with that."
None of which have been proven. But I know that for some people that doesn't matter when it comes to rushing to judgment.
Last edited by FlyinHawaiian; May 31, 2015 at 6:58 pm Reason: multi-quote should be used
May 31, 2015, 6:49 pm
#131
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: IAD-DCA
Programs: Won Kay
Posts: 1,324
A friends sister (Muslim Woman in Hijab) was flying Chicago to DC on United. She asked for Diet Coke as a drink. The FA provided her with an already opened can. When she requested a new unopened can for sanitary reasons, the FA claimed that they don't give unopened cans because they can be used as weapon and refused to provide her any drink. The FA than proceeds to provide an unopened can of beer to the next passenger.
More details of the FA's behavior in this news report.
What do you guys think? Is this clear discrimination from the FA? Should United issue an apology?
More details of the FA's behavior in this news report.
What do you guys think? Is this clear discrimination from the FA? Should United issue an apology?
People with 3rd grade educations run our lives. This is case in point.
May 31, 2015, 6:50 pm
#132
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,907
Did not leave off. That does not make the FA a United employee paid and trained by United. Sure the FA is being a representative of United, but it doesn't make them a United employee. If you are a temp and an agency puts you in a position at a company, sure you are representing that company but you are not an employee of that company. You work for the temp agency, paid by the temp agency and if you screw up the company can tell you to leave and not come back but they can't fire you as you are not a direct employee of that company. I have never said the FA was not representing UA, just that they are not a UA employee. UA has to deal with the contractor and they can tell the contractor to not let that employee work any of their flights. But UA can't fire or discipline that FA. Sure, on the surface, to the average passenger, they don't see a difference. But in reality the FA is not a UA employee and that is ALL I have been trying to point out. Sure complain to UA, but then UA goes to the contractor about the incident. And I have never said UA shouldn't be the one to make it right to the passenger if the passenger has truly been wronged. But I can almost guarantee you, UA will go back to the contractor on the incident and make them do something, most likely behind the scenes where we will never see it but you know UA would not just hand out miles and money for subcontractor problems and not go to the subcontractor to be made whole again.
May 31, 2015, 6:51 pm
#133
Suspended
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: The electrified part of North Carolina
Programs: UA GM, AA GM, DL GM
Posts: 4,157
As for your example, sure you complain to Electrolux. And what does Electrolux do? They give you a new knob then they go back to their supplier to fix the problem. But in reality your example is useless. A knob on a stove is nothing like a whole other plane operated by someone else. A UX plane is not a knob on a UA plane. Your example is more like the seat on a UA plane made by a different supplier. So your example is a complete failure.
UX flights are part of the UA product offering, just like a knob is part of a stove. The simple fact that you think that my example is "useless" means that it, in the real world, is a perfectly good example of a company taking responsibility for its subcontractors. That's how weak your logical reasoning has been. @:-)
We now have two complete failures: UA's attempts to deflect blame and your support of their deflection attempts. @:-)
May 31, 2015, 6:56 pm
#134
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,933
It really doesn't matter what is painted on the side!
Even if is has "Abba Zabba Airlines" printed on the plane, the lady is accusing United Airlines and CNN is along for the ride! Educating the flying public will take more than a few posts on FT.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/30/us/uni...slim-chaplain/
Even if is has "Abba Zabba Airlines" printed on the plane, the lady is accusing United Airlines and CNN is along for the ride! Educating the flying public will take more than a few posts on FT.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/30/us/uni...slim-chaplain/
May 31, 2015, 6:56 pm
#135
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,907
It's ALL on UA. How many passengers purchased a Shuttle America ticket?
Electrolux would take responsibility for their product rather than, like UA and its supporters here on FT, try to deflect blame onto a subcontractor. As much as you want to believe in your reasoning, everyone can see that it's not holding up to the simplest of logical reasoning tests.
UX flights are part of the UA product offering, just like a knob is part of a stove. The simple fact that you think that my example is "useless" means that it, in the real world, is a perfectly good example of a company taking responsibility for its subcontractors. That's how weak your logical reasoning has been. @:-)
We now have two complete failures: UA's attempts to deflect blame and your logic. @:-)
Electrolux would take responsibility for their product rather than, like UA and its supporters here on FT, try to deflect blame onto a subcontractor. As much as you want to believe in your reasoning, everyone can see that it's not holding up to the simplest of logical reasoning tests.
UX flights are part of the UA product offering, just like a knob is part of a stove. The simple fact that you think that my example is "useless" means that it, in the real world, is a perfectly good example of a company taking responsibility for its subcontractors. That's how weak your logical reasoning has been. @:-)
We now have two complete failures: UA's attempts to deflect blame and your logic. @:-)