No nuts for me....due to NRSA allergy

Old Oct 9, 16, 7:12 pm
  #16  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: wandering expat
Posts: 40,136
Originally Posted by CappuccinoAddict View Post
Get the hint not to do it again? You do realize some people are deathly allergic to nuts and trace amounts could kill them? Or apparently not. It is so insensitive to place blame on this person. It doesn't matter how or why she got in the seat; she was either entitled to be there by company policy or she paid to be there. That is an irrelevant matter.
If you are a FA who is allergic to nuts, why are you sitting in a business cabin where nuts are served?
halls120 is online now  
Old Oct 9, 16, 7:15 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: DFW
Programs: UA 1K, AA peon
Posts: 1,101
Originally Posted by fastair View Post
I'm going to guess you don't operate a business that the ADA covers (airlines aren't regulated by the ADA, but a very similar piece of legislation called the ACAA.). If you did, I would ask your council about food allergies and the ADA and suits that have been settled over alleged violations. A 5 second google will provide you enough data to know that you are very wrong on your interpretation of what accommodations must be made for people with food allergies
ACAA says each airline is free to make its own peanut policy. What is United's policy?
( http://allergylawproject.com/2015/01...senger-rights/ )

I don't like this NRSA versus 'real' customer debate especially when it comes to safety. It is immaterial except that perhaps the airline should have a protocol for their employees who fly.

If I did have an allergy with which I wasn't comfortable with the person next to me eating my allergen, then I would also be uncomfortable with the person in front, behind, to my other side and the FA walking up the aisle with the allergen in uncover ramekins. I would have also made my situation known to the Gate Attendants and before the flight took off every crew member I met if they weren't proactive and addressed my needs when I took my seat.

It is surprising (sarcasm) that airlines doesn't have an alternative boarding snack for this situation.
Michael D is offline  
Old Oct 9, 16, 7:31 pm
  #18  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Programs: UA Million Miler
Posts: 1,216
I do agree with the OP that the FA should have moved to a different seat or perhaps to a jump seat -- definitely not inconvenience a passenger especially in a premium cabin.

I don't understand how an airline can even employ a FA with such allergy that can't be routinely controlled by medication. Seems like someone who needs a new job like a GA or something.
AlanInDC is offline  
Old Oct 9, 16, 7:38 pm
  #19  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: PHL
Programs: UA Plat, 2MM
Posts: 1,653
If she really is a non rev she should have moved to back, empty seat or galley. Paying pax should not be displaced by non rev.
TonyBurr is offline  
Old Oct 9, 16, 9:30 pm
  #20  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Washington D.C.
Programs: UA Gold MM , AS MVPG , MR LTPP, Hilton Dia
Posts: 474
People need to talk to a doctor. There is no medical study supporting this belief that nuts in proximity to someone cause an allergic reaction. If this were true, people would be going into anaphylactic shock in restaurants, supermarkets, etc.
Major G is offline  
Old Oct 9, 16, 9:38 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: LHR (sometimes CLE, SFO, BOS, LAX, SEA)
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 5,787
It genuinely hadn't occurred to me -- because I'm very lucky to be allergy-free -- that severe food allergies might significantly restrict your career options. That's a bummer.

I do wonder what your long-term career prospects are like in the "flight attendant" career role if you have a severe nut allergy and have been medically advised that you cannot be near them. That seems really tough.
mherdeg is offline  
Old Oct 9, 16, 10:07 pm
  #22  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 31,635
Originally Posted by Major G View Post
People need to talk to a doctor. There is no medical study supporting this belief that nuts in proximity to someone cause an allergic reaction. If this were true, people would be going into anaphylactic shock in restaurants, supermarkets, etc.
Yeah, every serious proximity reaction to food allergies that I've heard of involved something that made the situation worse. (For example, proximity to the offending material being cooked.)

Personally, I have non-threatening but extremely widespread food intolerances, sometimes to some pretty small quantities. I have never reacted to what anyone near me is eating, though. (Wearing is another matter--I have been driven out of the room by perfume more than once.)

Originally Posted by mherdeg View Post
It genuinely hadn't occurred to me -- because I'm very lucky to be allergy-free -- that severe food allergies might significantly restrict your career options. That's a bummer.

I do wonder what your long-term career prospects are like in the "flight attendant" career role if you have a severe nut allergy and have been medically advised that you cannot be near them. That seems really tough.
I don't think anyone with a serious allergy to anything they might encounter on the plane has any business being a FA.

Personally, I could never work in a field where I had to entertain clients (there is exactly one dish I can order in a restaurant and not all restaurants will carry it), nor could I work in a field where I had to deal with smokers.
Loren Pechtel is offline  
Old Oct 9, 16, 10:11 pm
  #23  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: BOS
Programs: UA 1K 1.45MM, Marriott+SPG Plat, Clear, Nexus, Global Entry and MEX Viajero Confiable
Posts: 1,777
Originally Posted by halls120 View Post
If you are a FA who is allergic to nuts, why are you sitting in a business cabin where nuts are served?
This.
NH_Clark is offline  
Old Oct 9, 16, 11:53 pm
  #24  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: West coast
Programs: UA 1K, A-List
Posts: 13
Its not a disqualifier for anyone having an allergy to be hired for a position. Do UA Express FA's serve nuts in an open container? If not then she wouldn't be dealing with nuts anyways. This is obviously an outlying case. FAs or regular pax notwithstanding.
mythx88 is offline  
Old Oct 10, 16, 1:43 am
  #25  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Programs: NZ *G
Posts: 5,774
If you have SUCH a severe nut allergy... (or any seveer allergy to "common" foodstuffs) HOW can you be employed as a FA???
trooper is online now  
Old Oct 10, 16, 2:53 am
  #26  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: DEN
Programs: UA GS
Posts: 1,336
And that's what's wrong with America. If I can't successfully inconvenience everybody around me or if my own common sense is lacking, I just sue.

Last edited by Plane-is-home; Oct 10, 16 at 2:54 am Reason: Wrong quote
Plane-is-home is offline  
Old Oct 10, 16, 3:21 am
  #27  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: HaMerkaz/Exit 145
Programs: UA, LY, BA, AA
Posts: 13,046
OP, how do you know it was a NRSA?

Originally Posted by Major G View Post
People need to talk to a doctor. There is no medical study supporting this belief that nuts in proximity to someone cause an allergic reaction. If this were true, people would be going into anaphylactic shock in restaurants, supermarkets, etc.
Uh, that's just not true. I am severely allergic to peanuts, including airborne. And yes, I have reacted to the smell in proximity...
joshwex90 is offline  
Old Oct 10, 16, 7:37 am
  #28  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Programs: UAL 1k, AA Gold, Delta Silver
Posts: 48
Imagine a pregnant woman who can become nauseous just smelling certain foods. You've all heard about that (and many of you gave experienced it). That's what it can be like for people with severe nut allergies. Mr BlueSky has them and I've had to make a lot of adjustments in how I handle food. However, while Mr BlueSky will refuse the nuts, he would not expect a seat mate to refrain from enjoying them, even if it makes him somewhat uncomfortable. If this FA has a severe smell reaction, she should have (a) politely asked OP if he'd be willing to refrain due to her allergy, (b) been prepared to accept his "no" if necessary, and (c) either ask to move (if very severe) or put up with it (if less severe). There's a point at which allergy sufferers have a level of personal responsibility for not exposing themselves to known trigger situations.
BlueSky72 is offline  
Old Oct 10, 16, 7:39 am
  #29  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,595
Originally Posted by Michael D View Post
ACAA says each airline is free to make its own peanut policy. What is United's policy?
( http://allergylawproject.com/2015/01...senger-rights/ )

I don't like this NRSA versus 'real' customer debate especially when it comes to safety. It is immaterial except that perhaps the airline should have a protocol for their employees who fly.

If I did have an allergy with which I wasn't comfortable with the person next to me eating my allergen, then I would also be uncomfortable with the person in front, behind, to my other side and the FA walking up the aisle with the allergen in uncover ramekins. I would have also made my situation known to the Gate Attendants and before the flight took off every crew member I met if they weren't proactive and addressed my needs when I took my seat.

It is surprising (sarcasm) that airlines doesn't have an alternative boarding snack for this situation.
/agree with you on all points. I linked UA's policy earlier, it's rather vague. I've boarded plenty of families in advance where they wanted to wipe down the traytable area and other areas around their seats for any possible residue. Once onboard, I don't know what the flight attendants do once notified, it would seem that most of the time, the people notify the crew in advance. In the case of an NRSA who likely wasn't assigned a seat until after boarding had commenced, it becomes a bit more complicated, as it did in the OP's situation. But once onboard, be it ANY passenger, no matter what they paid to sit it the seat, the same safety rules should apply equally. Yes, NRSA get's last meal choice, but they don't need to be the last person off in an evacuation, don't have to turn off their electronic devices earlier, don't have to remain seated when the seatbelt sign is off, they can bring a properly documented emotional support animal on, can request mobility assistance...things for the safety of everyone, including themselves only, apply equally to all.

Last edited by fastair; Oct 10, 16 at 9:16 am
fastair is offline  
Old Oct 10, 16, 8:29 am
  #30  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Programs: UA 1K, BA Gold
Posts: 1,483
Per the UA website policy: "For operational reasons, we cannot remove any onboard products based on individual customer requests, and we do not offer nut-free buffer zones on our aircraft. Since we cannot guarantee nut-free flights, we encourage customers to review any health concerns with their physicians prior to flying."

Seems pretty reasonable to me. I don't want to hurt someone with an allergy, but if someone is going to have a severe medical reaction or die if exposed to any kind of nut on a plane, they should talk to their doctor and probably not fly. They should know that it is not possible to be completely peanut free. It is a known risk that there may be a stray peanut in the seatback or someone may open a pack of trail mix they bought in the airport. It would be irrational for someone with an allergy that severe to take that risk. Of course, people do irrational things all the time.

Of course, if I had been treated rudely by airline staff, that is a separate matter, and I would probably file a complaint, and maybe even ask for compensation, especially if flying in paid business or first. I don't file many complaints, but when I have, I stick to the facts, and have usually gotten some compensation (miles, which I use, so is fine with me).
Artpen100 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread