SkyIsKing

I am not an employee or crew of any airline but I know that I have to obey crew instructions when flying. This includes staying in one's seat when the Seatbelt sign is on; no matter the conditions. If this woman had been allowed to ignore the Seatbelt sign; sustain an injury then she would be suing the airline. The captain doesn't turn on the Seatbelt sign for fun but for safety.

If you have a physical condition that may affect your flying, then take precautions but once on board a plane, the crew is the law whether one likes it or not. Seatbelt sign on = stay in your seat with the seatbelt fastened. This woman might want to invest in wearing adult incontinence garments on flights but blaming the airline for not allowing you to violate the rules don't cut it.

Catbert10

I can't believe that some posters think it's OK to be asked to pee in a cup in a crowded, public place. Urinating may be natural and part of the human condition, but what would people think if I just whipped it out and urinated on the side of a building? Seriously, people. How would you like to be sitting next to someone squatting in their seat and filling up a cup? How do you think the woman felt, urinating in public?

I see people getting up to use the restroom when the seat belt light is on. All. The. Time. Heck, FAs use the lav when the seat belt light is on during descent on nearlt every flight. 99% of the time the FA is human and understands that if ya got to go, ya got to go.

TravelingNomads

I couldn't agree more. She had to have had her seatbelt off one way or the other which would have been a violation. Why not just let her do her business in private for her sake and everyone around her?

fly18725

I think the real issue is a dispute about when this happened. If it was during he service, as the passenger claimed, the crew should have been more accommodating. There's lavs at the front and back, so carts should not be an issue. If this occurred during decent as claimed by the FA, I have less sympathy for the passenger as using the lav is not safe for anyone.

DirtyDan

Pictures or it didn't happen

kenziid3

I wonder if this women purchased a P fare?

TravelingNomads

I might be mis-remembering, but I thought they were on the ground, but still technically moving to the gate. I think the "danger" at that point would have been pretty minimal.

MSPeconomist

Could the truth be both or somewhere in between? How about the scenario where the woman asked to use the lavatory during the service and was denied, but then urinated into the cups during descent?

fly18725

Passengers are required to be seated for the airplane to taxi.

There's so much conflicting information about when/how this happened, it is difficult to determine United's culpability.

What we can conclude is that passengers are responsible for taking reasonable steps to manage their own medical conditions.

pinniped

The devil's in the details...

When exactly did this happen? 30 minutes before touchdown, in the earliest part of descent? 30 seconds before touchdown with the runway in sight?

What was the attitude of the FAs? A polite explanation that going into the lav right now is quite dangerous because, y'know, we're going to *land* in 30 seconds? Or a snotty here's-your-f***ing-cup-now-go-away response?

Was the seatbelt sign *off* for a period of time, with the customary "now's a good time to go to the loo" announcement that happens on normal flights? We've all been on flights where it doesn't turn off, sometimes simply because the pilot forgets, and we wonder to ourselves "is it safe now?" Usually it is.

I have a hard time condemning the FA without knowing more. It could have been a genuinely dangerous time (final approach) to use the lav, the woman could have sounded like she *really* wanted a cup, and the FA was just trying to oblige to minimize the level of embarrassment and/or mess involved. Woman barks I NEED A CUP at you, and you quickly respond without thinking...sure, here's a cup...

It is possible that this was not malicious.

hlblyflyr

I was just on a flight when a woman came running down the aisle while we were on the taxiway and she was not removed so I guess it all 'depends'.

MSPeconomist

If the FA handed the passenger a cup, it was during a part of the flight where the FAs were up and about the aircraft. This would not be during the last stages of the flight (final approach and touchdown) not during extremely bad turbulence (which wasn't mentioned).

notquiteaff

Courts were able to make decisions for hundreds of years before cellphones were invented. A video that shows a portion of an interaction can be helpful, but also misleading. For example, a video clip here wouldn't necessarily show whether this happened midflight or when the plane was preparing to land. Video clips aren't scripted documentaries.

This carrier, technically, was Mesa. Much maligned by many FTers. While I agree with the sentiment that UA must fundamentally own customer service issues on their contractors' aircraft, when you are talking about corporate culture it is worth keeping in mind mind that Mesa and United are separate companies with separate cultures. Regional crews tend to fly for different brands, and I think it is doubtful that FAs swap our their "culture" when they fly for AA vs UA.

Furthermore, I maintain that we have heard contradicting statements so far, with no way to really know what happened.

laxmillenial

While I agree that the "danger" at the point would have been minimal if still technically moving to gate, the airline is merely enforcing an FAA rule?

To the best of my knowledge, the FAA doesn't play around with rules. It creates these rules that airlines must abide by and henceforth must enforce onto the passengers. For some rules, there is very little room for interpretation. The FAA requires that all passengers be seated with safety belts on during movement on the surface.

For example, the pilot 10 hour minimum rest period. It's a rule in black and white. It doesn't matter (does it?) if the pilot volunteers and says he's feeling fit and fine with 9.5 hours of rest and could operate a flight safely for the good of the passengers and/or the airline.

Say United let this woman use the restroom, then got a huge FAA fine for the violation or sued if the woman injured herself (accidentally or not). Who's at fault? The airline is merely enforcing rules set forth by another body.

laxmillenial

If you ring the call button during takeoff/landing, a FA will usually follow up with "If this is a medical emergency, please ring it again and we will come to your seat".

Since the woman did state it was a medical condition, she could have rung the call button again.