ne52

Throwing a tantrum and attacking someone at the Orange Julius doesn't put 150 other people's safety in jeopardy. She's shown she doesn't have the adult judgement to avoid doing it in flight.

Not just the safety aspect but think of the potential cost to the airline and other passengers if she does this again and they must land en route to remove her. Even this incident on the ground probably cost US in terms of rebooking delayed passengers.

I wouldn't want to deal with the risk of carrying her again so wouldn't blame US and any others that ban her.

youreadyfreddie

Better call Saul!

akelkar

^

GAC

Not sure how 150 other people's safety was in jeopardy unless if you mean what might of happened if the fight would have happened in flight and somehow both flight crews got involved and could no long fly the plane and.....

But then again I still don't get the special rock start status some give FA but that's a different subject for a different place.

coachrowsey

+1 for a ban. I just wish I could be sure US would do it.

wrp96

It doesn't matter if it was an FA or a passenger, again it's the lack of self control on the plane that's the issue.

DCGooner

I own a business and I've been a supervisor or an employee in many others. If I'm the boss and a customer punches one of my people, you can be sure that he or she would no longer be a customer. And if I were an employee and my company failed to take that step to protect me, you can be sure I wouldn't be working there much longer.

US is perfectly justified in banning this cretin from its services. This has nothing to do with federal law or whether the cabin door is open or closed; nor does it have anything to do with giving or expecting rock star status. It's just basic respect and good management.

GAC

Umm, maybe. But a suspension from US may be more reasonable. But there was a call to be on the no fly list which means no more flying anywhere with any airline.

In your example it's like if you owned a restaurant and the puncher could never eat out again.

Sorry, hitting a FA does not call for such a gross over reaction. No matter how some may love them they are just not THAT special.

DCGooner

If you're going to restate my argument, at least do me the courtesy of doing it correctly. Where exactly did I say that she should be banned from flying altogether? What I said was that US (accepted shorthand for US Airways on this forum) is justified in banning her. At no point did I advocate placing her on a general no-fly list (although it wouldn't particularly bother me if she were). Instead of building up a straw man and knocking down, you're welcome to argue that someone who punches a waiter at Chili's shouldn't be banned chain-wide. I'd disagree, but at least you'd be on target.

And no, it's not a gross overreaction. You hit an employee, you shouldn't be welcome in that business. And it's the manager's job to make employees secure in the knowledge that assaults will be dealt with most severely.

It's the same for a bar, supermarket, what have you. It just so happens that US is an airline and a ban would hit harder than if she couldn't go to a particular chain of restaurants. However, that's the consequence you face.

GAC

I will give you $1000 for every instance you can find where I said that you did if you give me just $100 for every time it was suggested and agreed too.

Read what I actually said. I'm not defending the punch. Or removal. Or even criminal charges.

Putting on the No Fly List. Damn right I think it's stupid and uncalled for. Sad that it would not bother you but hope you will still pay up despite getting all mad about misquoting while doing the exact same thing.

Or is it that you don't know what happens to those on the list?

toomanybooks

I see you guys have idiot judges too.

BoeingBoy

You seem to be confusing the government's No Fly list with a specific carrier's no fly list. Any business has the right to forbid someone from using that business again - IIRC, US did it with a passenger who picked up and slammed an agent on the floor, putting him in the hospital for a few months.

Jim

DCGooner

Juvenile argument tactic aside, here goes:

You quoted my post and then said "In your example it's like if you owned a restaurant and the puncher could never eat out again." [bold added] So you're either 1) stating that I advocated a blanket no-fly prohibition (analogous to your blanket dining-out prohibition); 2) making the reader assume that you really meant "eat out at whatever specific hypothetical restaurant you're referring to" or 3) taking gibberish.

And you should learn the difference between advocating for something and being indifferent to it. They're not the same.

Oh, and did you actually say that you're against criminal charges in the case of assault and battery? You've pretty much argued yourself out of being taken seriously on the topic.

GNRMatt

Yes, you would almost definitely be banned from that specific mall if you started a fight there. Also, if that mall is a "chain", which most are now, you probably would be on a banned list for all of their malls.

Would this really be enforced? Probably not as easily as an airline can do it since they have to get your name when booking a ticket, but your photo would be in that security office for people to keep an eye out for.

GAC

4) used your story about your business and what your policy's would be. In other words, used context. Look it up.