burlax

It is pure speculation.

Unfortunately, as it is, we don't really know what happened onboard and who said what.

All we know is that there was a legally blind man with a service dog, the flight was full, there seemed to be an issue over the service dog, then the flight was cancelled, and US transported pax to the destination by bus.

As some posters implied above, if the issue was lack of space for a dog, then whatever FA said could have easily been perceived as 'discrimination' whereas FA could simply have been following the rules.

If you were FA, you certainly wouldn't like what would have happened to you had you broke the rules and then something happened. Imagine FA doing the blind man a 'favor' and letting the dog stay in the isle and then the dog and pax getting injured or killed when someone wearing high heels trips over ( again, pure speculation ). Think everyone, including the lawyers, would say - oh, it's ok that you broke the regs, you were just trying to accommodate the blind man?

BoeingBoy

burlax,

You are missing one little piece - dispatch is the source and keeper of the flight paperwork. If dispatch cancels the paperwork, the Captain can't just say "we're taking this airplane anyway", at least legally. A situation that takes some imagination but that's why I have side that dispatch is the only one with the authority to cancel a flight. If dispatch doesn't cancel the flight the captain can't cancel it (assuming something doesn't change for the worse and affect dispatch's decision) and if dispatch cancels it the captain can't un-cancel it.

The blog, if read in it's entirety, is basically correct - the captain and dispatcher discuss the situation and arrive at a joint conclusion. It's just that the dispatcher has the final word if there's a disagreement. I remember one flight CLT-DFW when a line of thunderstorms moved into the DFW area - inbound airplanes where holding all over the place. We got a message from the dispatcher with a synopsis of the situation and ending with "Divert to MEM." Feeling my oats a little, I started sending messages about other places to divert - "San Antonio has nice hotels, how about there", and the like - all the while descending into MEM. The dispatcher's last message was an unequivocal "LAND AT MEM". Of course, the reply to that was "we're out of 20,000 inbound to MEM" - hopefully he got a chuckle out of it in the end.

Jim

burlax

Never said captain could uncancel it. My point was - we don't have enough information, but, regardless, the captain couldn't have cancelled the flight.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter much who cancelled the flight. What really matters is what FA said and did. I doubt we'll know though.

BoeingBoy

You are absolutely correct. My point was to the "joint decision" - it's not necessarily so "joint". If the dispatcher says the flight is cancelled, the flight is cancelled, if the reverse the flight isn't cancelled. The "joint decision" definitely comes into play with less black and white situations - fuel loads, weight/balance, loading, etc.

Jim

BeatCal

Boeing,
I think you are arguing for the sake of argument

I conceded that it is usually a joint decision. My original point was (and is) that the Captain can refuse to fly - or can remove a FA - for safety reason without intercourse of anyone! If the airline can fix the problem and a second pilot accepts the fix, the flight can still be flown (which assumes you are in a big enough place to have a second crew available). Otherwise, despite whatever dispatch has to say, the flight is cancelled.


According to my chief pilot friend retired from Delta, Chicago (and they use carpet dance too,). While the action must be explained, all the Captain has to say was she did not feel it safe - and she is protected by your union.

In the situation at hand, the Captain refused to fly for safety reasons - be those reasons the FA, the passengers or both. Dispatch did not overrule HIS decision and find another crew - hence HE canceled the flight.

BoeingBoy

If you look back, your original point was that the Captain can cancel a flight, which is wrong. It's really not a joint decision if the flight is on the ground. As I've explained and you apparently cannot grasp, in reality only the dispatcher can cancel a flight - the most the Captain can do is create a situation where the dispatcher has little choice but to cancel. But given the broad array of options available to dispatch, up to and including chartering an airplane to get crewmembers/parts/mechanics in position, those situations are very very rare and it is still up to the dispatcher whether to cancel the flight or find some option that allows the flight to be operated.

So: ONLY THE DISPATCHER CAN CANCEL A FLIGHT!

Jim

BeatCal

Thank you.
That is exactly my point. You have been arguing semantics. My post above conceded dispatches role.

More to the present case.

In looking at US Airs rules of tariff (effective 13 Sept 13): rule 200 applies to animals and states that they must be under a seat. However it specifically excludes "working animals". Rule 57 only states that such may not be ON a seat.

FAA states that a "service animal may accompany a qualified individual ... In any seat ... unless the animal obstructs an aisle or any other area that must remain unobstructed in order to facilitate an emergency evacuation"

Unless I am missing something, it sounds like the passenger was correct and once again we have a FA who was making up her own rules!

BoeingBoy

No, you conceded that it was "usually a joint decision" - when it's the dispatcher's decision. Again, ONLY THE DISPATCHER CAN CANCEL A FLIGHT.

Let's just say you're missing the forest for the trees again. You quoted the FAA as saying that a service animal may not be in the aisle - boarding/deplaning obviously excepted - then turn right around and say something to the contrary.

Perhaps you should stick to what you know and stop telling people who do this for a career how they're screwing up their jobs. At least I know enough to know what I don't know and would never presume to tell you how you're screwing up an operation.

Jim

BeatCal

Jim my young "friend"

If you cannot understand my writing, please tell me and I will try to do better, I often am not as specific as I should be.

As I understood the OP, the FA told him the rules say the dog is supposed to be under the seat, He said she was wrong and US Air's and the FAA rules say she was wrong. Do you disagree with this?

Second. I said the Captain may cancel the flight. It may well be de facto as the dispatcher has to write the order - but the fact remains that it is canceled. Again your quote: "the dispatcher has little choice but to cancel". The bottom line is the flight is canceled by the Captain's actions - I will agree that the "official act" is written by a company exec.

Along the same line, I was on a flight where a gentleman was having a heart attack, I advised the Captain to divert. He did BUT requested authorization and where to go from his superiors (as he was descending). Semantics: his decision or dispatches? If dispatch had refused his decision and the passenger died - I would hate to be the airline in the resulting law suit.

Jim, I would love to quibble semantics with you off line or at a club bar, but enough on here

bkafrick

Dude. You got to give this a rest. Going around and around on this is just proving to others that you have an ridiculous notion to always having to be right, and continuing to argue until no one cares anymore. Jim (BoeingBoy) spent his entire career as a pilot for US and affiliated companies. I (and most of us) believe him until the cows come home, time and time again, over you and your "Delta Pilot Friend".

Move on.

BoeingBoy

First, the OP only gave a brief tease and a link to an article. The OP said nothing about where the dog was, where it could be allowed to be, etc. So I'm not sure what you're asking me if I disagree with.

[quote]Second. I said the Captain may cancel the flight. It may well be de facto as the dispatcher has to write the order - but the fact remains that it is canceled. Again your quote: "the dispatcher has little choice but to cancel". The bottom line is the flight is canceled by the Captain's actions - I will agree that the "official act" is written by a company exec.{/quote]

Note my quote - "little" choice isn't "no choice". In any kind of abnormal situation on the ground (the only place flights are cancelled), the dispatcher has lots of tools at his/her disposal so doesn't have to cancel any particular flight. Delay it waiting for contract maint, for parts coming in on another flight, even chartering a plane if necessary. But the dispatcher is almost never in the position of having to cancel a particular flight. Heck, European flights have left 12 or more hours late but weren't cancelled. BTW, no "company exec" writes anything about cancelling or delaying a particular flight. I don't know what's so hard to grasp but the dispatcher, using computerized programs, does the paperwork and then signs it as well as transmitting it to the appropriate station. The captain reviews the paperwork and if he/she agrees with it the flight is released. Like I've already said, if the captain wants something on the paperwork changed - fuel load, MEL, whatever, the captain and dispatcher discuss it and normally the dispatcher agrees.

Once the captain and dispatcher agree on the paperwork it's the captains plane EXCEPT FOR CANCELING THE FLIGHT ON THE GROUND. Inflight diversions are usually a shared responsibility but in a life and death situation the captain is God. US uses a company called MedLink for medical advice/assistance inflight. That was probably requesting authorization from. Time permitting, "talking" to dispatch is also a good idea since they can suggest possibly better diversion points, weather updates for the diversion airport, arranging medical assistance on the ground, etc. Not at least advising the dispatcher of the diversion and reason deprives the captain of a lot of resources and assistance.

I find it hard to comprehend that you consider "ONLY THE DISPATCHER CAN CANCEL A FLIGHT" to be mere semantics.

Jim

CarterS

Anyone else hear the interview on Sean Hannity tonight about this?

PanAmFT

No, was it with the woman who sat next to him? I read what she had to say.

Which leads me to ask you airline employees: where does your foot space end and the aisle begin when you're seated in the back row center seat (5 across vs. 4 in all other rows) with no seat in front of you? According to her, that's where the blind man was, she made room at her feet so the dog could go behind a seat, and despite that the dog only stuck her head between her master's legs, the FA still interpreted that as being "in the aisle".

I understand why both pax disagreed since I do, too, but I defer to the experts.

BoeingBoy

Based on your description of the dog's position, it's something of a gray area - service animals can't protrude into the aisle but where does the aisle start in this case. Given that where the passenger was sitting was in a seat that doesn't exist in any other row, I'd say that the aisle starts even with the back of the seats in the next row forward - just as a normal 2x2 row has the aisle starting at the inboard edges of the aisle seats. So if the man's feet, with the dog's head behind his legs, didn't extend past that imaginary line the aisle was free. But the FAA inspectors are notorious for nit-picking and there is some logic behind the thought that the dog's head would/could cause the man's feet to partially/completely block access to the aisle. Being blind, it's a reasonable expectation that he wouldn't be the first in that row to start rushing up the aisle without his dog. So the further his feet protrude forward the more they block other's access to the aisle.

Jim

Michael El

Just saw Mr. Rizzi on Hannity and I believe his story. The FA picked the fight and needs to go!