fredc84

Well, plus the fact (I think) that another revenue family with a daughter wearing leggings thought it would apply to them (it doesn't, they are paying customers). It's interesting, if you google something to find articles about this, all the headlines still say "Females passengers removed from flight for wearing leggings" not "Employees barred from flight from violating dress code". Of course, the second wouldn't garner nearly as many clicks.

chavala

interesting. So the 10-year-old girl was not even involved with this.

"Watts was further incensed when another woman who was listening told her 10-year-old daughter to put a dress on over her leggings, apparently thinking United's policy applied to all passengers, not just those flying free."

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-un...-idUSKBN16Y2HY

fredc84

Correct, that family were revenue but overheard the non-revs get told they were dressed inappropriately...which they were.

fredc84

Huh, I must have missed that part...when did they make them walk through the city naked yelling "shame!"? LOL

MSPeconomist

Watts caused the problem by twitting without knowing all the facts, but the UA twitter team made it worse when they didn't immediately suspect that the issue might have been the nonrev dress code. It was a huge mistake to immediately define the GA by appealing to the CoC and state that GAs can use their discretion to boot passengers what aren't dressed properly.

cv11nyc

I am the farthest thing from a koolaid drinker towards my employer United Airlines. However Ms Watts has pursued her narrative on the evils of United so feverently that I think it's time to provide a counter story. A friend of mine and fellow employee was on holiday in China when his son became gravely ill. They spent 7 days in hospital in Shanghai where they were only allowed to see him for 20-30 minutes per day and tests failed to determine the problem. The boy needed to brought back to the US. Just getting the boy's blood count at an appropriate level to allow travel was very touch and go.

The cost and logistics of arranging the medical evacuation and escorting doctor were quite simply staggering. Thankfully the company took care of both in time to meet the boy's blood count to travel. I cannot emphaisze how much stress this releaved the family from. The boy is now back in US receiving treatment. There is no way this would have happened without many employees dedicating all of their time to make it so.

So you know what Ms Watts, my employer is not misogynistic nor uncaring esp towards employees and their family. I'm sure you are thrilled with the name recognition your shameless Twitter campaign has generated. For the rest of the flying public, I offered this as a rebuttal to the social media bully that is kicking United as insensitive while failing to listen to facts.

tmac100

This is just another first world problem from what I have read. Inconsequential when compared to drug-rehabilitation issues and unemployment issues and homelessness issues and ....

Yup - fly "for free" but there are rules for exercising that "freedom".

The Eagles sang it really well: "Every form of refuge has it's price."

Typically, folks want their cake and want to eat it too..... Sheesh

fredc84

Well, said. I was in a very bad car accident across the country two years ago and needed to get back to New York, they treated me very well when I non-Rev'd....no worry about dress code then...even let me on with my neck brace, LOL.

fredc84

And just in time....

Mom Outraged at TSA, Claims They Treated Her Young Son and Family 'Like Dogs' https://www.yahoo.com/news/mom-outra...162200952.html

now maybe leggings-gate will die down!

tmac100

I encourage you to send this to the BIG media (NY Times and CNN, and ...) and give your real name and contact info, From personal past experience (in Canada) they will NOT post personal contact info, nor your complete name if you do NOt want them to.

Yes, this story does not acknowledge the UA side of providing "free transport" but requiring some adherence to company rules. See my previous post...

pinniped

Meh. Nonstory. Mom flipped out cause kid got his first TSA groping. TSA groping stories were hot a few years ago ("don't touch my junk"). They don't generate many clicks today, especially in cases where the TSA appears to have followed protocol and it's the mother who went nutjob about it.

(Don't get me wrong - I don't care for the TSA's procedures and eagerly read stories when they misbehave. This one isn't it.)

But what's the real United angle here? Kid got sick in China...I'd say there could be a story there, except Shanghai likely has advanced medical facilities and treated the child similarly to how a western hospital would. Airline operates flights from Shanghai every day, and eventually brought the kid home. (For free? Waived change fees?) If UA did something above-and-beyond for the child, kudos to them, but if there's any juice to the story it sounds like it's more about the doctors and/or Chinese medical system than the airline. Unless I'm missing something?

spin88

If you replaced "caused the problem" with "got the ball rolling" I would 100% agree.

United has a policy which prohibits non-revs from wearing " Form-fitting lycra/spandex tops, pants and dresses." I have my doubt that "leggins" w/o some more information fit within the policy, but absent a picture, I have no way to know if these were "lycra/spandex" pants or the very different type of causual leggins that one might wear on a flight to MSP in March.... But the issue is sort of irrelevant, because UA has repeatedly backed the gate agent to the effect that Leggings are inappropriate. You may hear something else, but I'll tell you that 99% of people only are hearing "United things Leggins on girls is inappropriate."

It is a very good example of what not to do in the social media environment we all live in. It was not a good message to be sending for a travel company. IMHO Delta's response ""Flying Delta means comfort. (That means you can wear your leggings. ��)" was a far better one....

satish_ny

1. Non revenue travel does not mean FREE TRAVEL which many of you have implied.
2. cv11nyc - Please feel free to give all the facts of the story you have posted above about a medical evacuation, not just convenient bits and pieces. Please accept my sincere sympathies that you work for United. Have you posted that as a justification of United's sexist and biased dress code? Is that dress code published? Is there one for male non-revs?

fredc84

It can, we fly free in domestic coach for active employees, fee for higher class...which my SO prefers, lol.

jspira

For airline employees and immediate family members, it does indeed mean free travel although some airlines charge a fee for premium cabins (while others have discontinued charging a fee). On some international flights, employees must cover taxes and airport fees.