United Crew Refused to Allow Daughter of 94 Year Old Grandma to Assist Her Mother
#211
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA MileagePlus (Premier Gold); Hilton HHonors (Gold); Chase Ultimate Rewards; Amex Plat
Posts: 6,642
That's awesome - I'm glad you are the kind of person that would help others when they need it. So would I. But no offense, I wouldn't trust that the random person next to someone they don't know would help - particularly in an emergency situation where it is very easy to just fend for yourself. In fact, wasn't there a relatively recent evacuation (or maybe it was OZ at SFO, so not that recent), where folks rather than just evacuating as fast as possible, made sure to recover their belongings first?
So yeah, there are nice people for sure who would. But even I've seen a ton of jerks - both out in the public domain in general and while flying - UA and other carriers. So no, I wouldn't just trust that a random person would help. Family - yes, obviously they would.
So yeah, there are nice people for sure who would. But even I've seen a ton of jerks - both out in the public domain in general and while flying - UA and other carriers. So no, I wouldn't just trust that a random person would help. Family - yes, obviously they would.
Of course, if the daughter does, in fact, have enough money for two J tickets, then I'd have to question her decision to allow her mother to sit only next to strangers. If my parents were 94, I certainly wouldn't put them in the J cabin and sit back in Y, but then again, I have money to purchase multiple J tickets. But in this situation, given that the grandchildren pooled their money to purchase the single J ticket, this family does not appear to have the funds for it.
1) the probability of this actually mattering is incredibly tiny -- odds are much greater that the old woman chokes to death on the bread, or just croaks of natural causes
2) If both of them were in business, they would both be in the way of everyone else trying to get out, so even in the case of 1), what difference does it make?
Using a standard of safety with no logical limits, airlines should make all the passengers prove they're able to evacuate without getting in the way or needing help. 3 push-ups and lift this 15 pound weight 3 times in 30 seconds, or go back home.
2) If both of them were in business, they would both be in the way of everyone else trying to get out, so even in the case of 1), what difference does it make?
Using a standard of safety with no logical limits, airlines should make all the passengers prove they're able to evacuate without getting in the way or needing help. 3 push-ups and lift this 15 pound weight 3 times in 30 seconds, or go back home.
#212
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,550
Are you saying that SQ, LH, etc. have already treated the elderly in this way, or are you just supposing that they would because it just sounds like something they'd do?
I've seen the same logic applied to the UA3411 case: "Well, if you question a AA or DL gate agent, they'll have you roughed up too." The problem is...they don't. And maybe AA and DL are secretly breathing a sigh of relief that it didn't happen to them, but the fact remains...it didn't. (And presumably won't now.)
#213
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: New York, New York
Programs: AA Gold, Alaska MVP; Free Agent Super Duper Diamond Treasure Chest ;)
Posts: 4,682
#214
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Cleveland, OH
Programs: UA-GS 1MM), Hertz Pres Circle, Starriott Titanium)
Posts: 1,966
Anecdotal, yet nevertheless it clearly DOES happen. Hell, even United allowed it on the outbound.
#215
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,781
You're right, they wouldn't. And wouldn't need to. Because their F/A do their Job...
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 19, 2017 at 5:51 pm Reason: Using symbols, spaces or other methods to mask vulgarities is not allowed
#216
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,781
Nah, just require everyone who flies anywhere get "evacuation certification" within 5 years of flying. Use an old airplane fuselage, and buckle the person into a seat farthest from the exit door. Debris and mannequins should be tossed all over the floor to make escape as difficult as possible. Smoke should then start to pour into the cabin and when the bell rings, the person must get up and make his/her way to the exit door, then open the door and descend via the chute, within 30 seconds. If successful, the person gets the certificate and is allowed to fly. If not, try again or go home.
#217
Join Date: Jan 2014
Programs: Amtrak Guest Rewards (SE), Virgin America Elevate, Hyatt Gold Passport (Platinum), VIA Preference
Posts: 3,134
I know that VA wouldn't...for them, the barrier between Business and Economy is about as close to a hard one as can be imagined. But again, VA's service is impeccable.
#218
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SFO/SJC
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 14,877
By that argument, why do we have seatbelts on a plane? Or have to keep tray tables up during takeoff/landing, etc?
Yes, obviously emergencies are rare and low probability. But they do happen, and that doesn't mean we don't have measures in place in case they do happen.
Yes, obviously emergencies are rare and low probability. But they do happen, and that doesn't mean we don't have measures in place in case they do happen.
#219
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,368
Seat belts prevent many injuries (and even deaths) during turbulence, aborted takeoffs, tarmac collisions, etc. They're not just for crashes.
#220
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,402
Apart from maybe individual ejector pods, I don't see much alternatives that would offer high chances of survival in the aforementioned scenarios where a seat belt is not going to help much.
#221
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,550
#222
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: YYC
Programs: AC Basic, UA MP Gold, Marriott Gold Elite, SPG Gold, Amex Platinum
Posts: 3,008
(1) What's interesting is that MEL-LAX it wasn't a problem for the daughter helping out 94 yr old grandmother - just the return.
(2) Also, thought I read that the family pooled resources to get grandma's J seat. If that's the case, there wasn't $ for the daughter to also buy J.
Cheers.
(2) Also, thought I read that the family pooled resources to get grandma's J seat. If that's the case, there wasn't $ for the daughter to also buy J.
Cheers.
Further the MEL-LAX flight is a daytime flight while the LAX-MEL flight is night time. This could have played a role in the different crew reactions.
I could also see a situation where the outbound flight the daughter envisioned only needing to provide assistance 3-4 times throughout the flight and communicated the same to the incharge. However once in the air the daughter realized that a lot more assistance was required. The crew was caught in a bad situation because they had previously agreed to the cabin intrusion.
Fast forward to the return flight, daughter boards and explains the expanded list of assistance requirements to the incharge. Upon hearing about all the potential intrusions, the incharge declines the request and presents the ultimatum of either second ticket in J or both pax in Y.
(2) The daughter flew in Y class because she actually took 2 roundtrips LAX-MEL. AFAIK, the daughter is based in LAX and only the grandmother is based in MEL. Furthermore the daughter would not have the expert knowledge to nest the MEL-LAX-MEL flight segment inside the LAX-MEL-LAX segment.
WRT seat adjustment, constant seat adjustment throughout the flight could have been an aggravating factor. Under normal circumstances (i too have flow LAX-SYD/MEL) the seat would be adjusted 4-5 times per flight. But at 94 yrs young I could imagine a seat adjustment every 10-15 minutes.
Maybe they should soften the rule to say, you may not be allowed to visit somebody in a higher cabin if it creates a disturbance. A couple of well behaved children giving their mommy or daddy a hug and a kiss in the middle of long flight shouldn't disturb anybody. And in this case walking your 94 year old mom to the bathroom and checking on her shouldn't be a problem.
A month later, I was on an AC flight MUC-YYZ. I was a middle aisle bulkhead seat in a row of four. Seated next to me were two 4-7 yo kids and their father. The kids were fine (a little squirmy, but altogether well behaved) and were engrossed in the IFE. The father was pretty relaxed and let them be for the most part. No issues. However, apparently Mom was seated in the back of the bus. The ENTIRE flight while the seatbelt light was off, she came up to check on the kids every 5-10 minutes. She would bring up baggies on snacks and insist they eat them. She would see if they wanted their shoes off or their special socks. Did they need to go potty? Did they want more juice? She was loud and in no way subtle either... she disturbed pretty much every pax in a three or four row radius-- many who were asleep. A true helicopter mother...
I my instance, only me (UA Gold) and my daughter (5yrs old) could be upgraded, but my wife had an E+ aisle seat. The deal prior to boarding was that the parent taking care of the kid got the upgraded while the other parent got Y class but no other parental duties for the 2.5 hour SFO-YYC flight. Wife chose to remain in E+ and read her Cosmo magazine for the flight.
With Daddy daughter time going great in F class, wife/mom got bored and decided to cross the curtain to see what all the excitement was about. Then wife/mom could see that daughter needed to use the lav and decided to join in the festivities at the front of the cabin. In the first instance the FA was okay with the situation, but by disturbance #3 the FA told wife/mom to remain in her ticketed cabin.
In both our situations mom/wife got bored once relieved of all the motherly duties and decided to create her own excitement.
I my case a long conversation was had on the ground where in wife was told to abide by her end of the bargain and remain in Y cabin. Otherwise I would only upgrade me and stiff the kid with the wife in E-.
For international trips, it was determined the airlines had to provide deeply discounted tickets instead of true one person one fare policy.
For both international and domestic trips, the assistant had to be in the same ticketed cabin as the semi ambulatory pax. Further one person one fare provisions excluded the F/J cabin and only applied to the Y cabin.
The CTA watched the initial implementation closely and customers attempting to "game the system" was of paramount concern. Consequently the prohibition on free J/F class ticket for the attendant was implemented after the initial policy roll out. Also, the eligibility rules were tightened in response to initial abuse of the system.
Applying the CTA rules to this instance, the best the 94 year old and her family could hope for was a deep discounted (read Z or P fare) business class fare for both grandma and the daughter. the 94yr olds 3500 ticket would mean that the family would be out probably 8-9,000 based upon 2 business class round trip tickets (deeply discounted) plus 1 repositioning flight in Y class for the daughter.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 19, 2017 at 5:54 pm Reason: repaired quote
#223
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: RNO
Programs: AA/DL/UA
Posts: 10,764
The FAA has to balance potential improvements for safety over cost, even though it means a few people die in the process. Sometimes things change, such as ValuJet where a suggested safety improvement costs 10 cents per person and it was initially rejected as uneconomical. THOUSANDS of dollars for "safety" when it's more likely to find a bunch of oxygen canisters in the hold? Nope, no way. May as well just shut down every airline because no one has a zero probability of crashing. It is impossible.
Last edited by Kevin AA; Apr 19, 2017 at 4:10 pm
#224
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Brunei
Programs: Enrich Sapphire. Kris Flyer Silver.Le Club Accorhotels,Starwood.
Posts: 2,201
How did discussing FA's not wanting to help an elderly lady have a meal, or recline her seat or go to the toilet involve costs and emergency equipment?
#225
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
I expect we will hear more about "common sense" when United does its much discussed April 30 policy changes.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 20, 2017 at 12:39 pm Reason: Discuss the issues, not the poster