24left

A difficult situation for everyone.

Global News - Nov 6 2019

https://globalnews.ca/news/6135935/h...irline-flight/

trooper

Very much so.... a grown man (physically) is a lot more worrying "acting out" than a toddler... simply due to size and strength. No doubt the mother was correct that he wouldn't threaten anyone else.... but how can anyone else not familiar with him know that?

rickg523

That's true, sort of. But dumping them at the airport and refusing to rebook them is out of bounds in these circumstances. This isn't some obnoxious drunk (who they'd more than likely rebook). This is a medical condition. I get that particular crew didn't want to go with them, but they've flown before, so not all crews are so fragile.

trooper

OR...he hadn't acted up on those flights.....

rickg523

Again, true. We weren't there to see what it looked like. But even if it was really bad, what's with just dumping a special needs family in the terminal, even initially fighting them over ab simple refund? What kind of people are in charge over there?

FlyerTalker70

I'm surprised the action taken by WS does not violate a Federal law. Surely there are rules on the book which prohibit airlines from discriminating passengers who have a physical/mental disability? Suppose, hypothetically that WS would not allow a wheelchair bound passenger to board a Q400 because they didn't have enough space on board to stow the wheelchair. Would they then be justified? Where does this all end?

Sure, the passenger had spasms but they were involuntary - he couldn't control it. It would be one thing if he was on a prior flight and became unruly, violent and became a safety threat. So far as I can tell from the story this is not the case at all. Give the gentleman the benefit of the doubt and if it becomes an issue well we cross that bridge when we get there.

If WS pulled the same stunt in the US they would have been slapped with a major fine by the DoT for violations of ADA amongst other things and could have been exposed to civil liability for similar reasons. It's stories like these that really make you question if the laws on the books are suitable for the air transportation system we have today.

-James

trilinearmipmap

Why does this sort of person always have to claim to be "in shock" whenever something doesn't go their way? Why can't the woman just say she was displeased?

arttravel

It is not so cut and dry in the US -- first of all the ADA does not apply, it is the ACAA (Air Carrier Access Act) -- but there is a provision in the act that allows refusal to transport if the passenger is a direct threat to the safety and health of others. Family friends have a non verbal disabled son who would hit himself and flail his arms -- once he reached a certain age and strength they would no longer fly with him -- this was by their choice.

It is a terrible situation for a parent to be in. If the son is pulling the hair and hitting the mother as reported it is not surprising that there would be concern if it was a prolonged behavior. The airline should have just refunded the money.

Fiordland

I would have expected the correct process would have been for the airline to ask for a letter providing a medical clearance. If he has been cleared by an MD to fly I think it clear the airline should accommodate. Given Air Canada was willing to take him later in the day there is something weird with WS decision making.

It is disappointing the WS (operating under their Swoop banner) still believes it is OK to refuse to provide passenger passage and at the same time keep the passengers money. It is not. If it unilaterally decided to not fly a passenger it should be forced to buy a ticket for the customer on the competition or refund the money.

Error 601

I have a very hard time believing this represented a completely unmanageable situation but I have seen special needs adults and their caregivers hassled by flight attendants on many different airlines.

It just seems to be a situation that universally generates a BSOD in the minds of flight attendants.

Sopwith

A few years ago I was on a WS flight seated next to a father with a child ~4 years old who started "acting out" after boarding was complete, waiting for pushback. The kid was screaming, kicking, thrashing around to the point where the father couldn't get him belted in. I wasn't comfortable sitting next to them, but didn't really feel threatened. The FA's were quite patient as they all tried to belt the kid in, but after about 10 minutes they offloaded the pair and said once the kid calmed down they'd be booked on a later flight. As it turned out, the flight departed over 30 minutes late and several pax then missed their connection to LAS, and were understandably PO'd.

All in all, I thought the FAs handled it professionally and as best they could, taking all aspects into account. I made a point of taking the lead aside and telling him so.

This is a no win for the crew. Leave them aboard and other pax are affected and possibly feel threatened at a time when they can't do much about it, or offload them and they go running to the media.

While I sympathize with the mother, I would prefer they offload rather than have to deal with an incident in the air.

FlyerJ

I don’t think an MD letter could come into play here. He was removed due to violent behaviour. An MD letter might have been able to justify or explain the underlying reason for his behaviour — but the core issue is still his violent behaviour.

And the article makes it clear that this 21 year old man was exhibiting violent behaviour — not simply spasms or thrashing about. Even his mother - who’s now blaming Swoop - admitted that. She tried to appease the cabin crew by assuring them that he’d only try to hurt her, but would not hurt anyone else. He was hitting his mother and pulling her hair.

I certainly would not have allowed my family to sit in an adjacent row, as it’s reasonable to think that others nearby could have been in harms way. Even though it was due to this man’s disability, the violence that the FAs witnessed could reasonably have put other passengers at risk during the flight.

I absolutely feel for the mother in this case — you can’t help but feel for her. But the FAs has a tough call to make, and - based on what’s been published - I think they did the right thing.

A passenger exhibiting violence is a serious issue while in flight — and it’s an issue regardless of the underlying cause for that behaviour. If what they saw on the ground was indicative of what could have happened in-flight (in a small metal tube, 30,000 feet in the air, without medical or security assistance until landing) ... they made a really tough call, but the right call. And I don’t see how their actions could be deemed discriminatory, as some are alleging.

Why did AC accept him? None of us here can know, but I’d assume it was because his behaviour had changed by that time. The mothers comments did indicate that his violent outbursts tended to be periodic rather than all of the time. I really don’t think AC would have allowed him to travel either had there been any indication that he would be violent to anyone on board.

As for the refund? Of course Swoop should have just done it on the spot. It’s silly that Swoop and WS are both so single-mindedly focused on unwavering enforcement of fare rules and revenue ‘protection’ in situations like this. They need to figure out how to be flexible in helping their customers in extreme cases like this — both because it’s the decent thing to do, and because the cost is minor compared to the negative press that seems to constantly surface for WS.

Sopwith

This is one of those situations where it’s better to offload them and be wrong than to not offload them and be wrong.

Error 601

Are there a lot of flights being diverted because handicapped adults are having violent outbursts and injuring other passengers?

This is unfortunately an issue where I have just seen too many overreactions on too many different airlines not to give the individual and their caregiver the benefit of the doubt.

Sopwith

I guess I lean in favour of giving the benefit of the doubt to the crew who have to make a difficult decision based on absolutely no information other than what they’ve seen and heard in the last five minutes.

Having said that, I will agree that the prevalence of power-tripping FAs is higher than it should be, especially on US airlines.

Again, it’s a no win situation for all concerned.