CatIII From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 2279 posts, RR: 3 Posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11567 times:
"An AirTran Airways flight was delayed about two and a half hours in Atlanta after a passenger refused to get off the cell phone. Houston-bound Flight 297 was scheduled to leave Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport at 4:40 p.m. Tuesday.
The crew member asked several times, but the passenger refused to get off the phone. After several failed attempts to end the conversation, the captain turned the flight around and returned to the gate, White said."
WNCrew From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1317 posts, RR: 9 Reply 2, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11522 times:
When you take a shower... you first remove your clothing and then you get into the shower. Most, if not all people have mastered the skills in this order and know that removing your clothes is part of the process of taking a shower.
When you get on a plane... you first turn off your phone and then the plane departs. Most people have mastered the skills in this order and know that turning off your phone is part of the process of flying.
These rules aren't new, and they aren't up for debate. Please just do what you already know you should and turn your phones etc off.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
AznMadSci From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 3542 posts, RR: 5 Reply 3, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11481 times:
Quoting WNCrew (Reply 2): When you get on a plane... you first turn off your phone and then the plane departs. Most people have mastered the skills in this order and know that turning off your phone is part of the process of flying.
The rules aren't new, but not everyone turns off their mobile phones, especially upon descent you hear a chorus of mobile ringtones up in the overheads or among the passengers prior to touchdown.
The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
I totally agree with what you are saying, but when fast food chains have to put "caution its hot" on their hot beverages it makes you wonder how bright people really are...
WNCrew From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1317 posts, RR: 9 Reply 5, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11421 times:
Quoting YYZALA (Reply 4): I totally agree with what you are saying, but when fast food chains have to put "caution its hot" on their hot beverages it makes you wonder how bright people really are...
Haha! True... now don't get me wrong, I love my job and almost ALL of my passengers are truly a pleasure to serve...but sometimes when I'm watching people try to stow luggage or open or close the lavatory door or they want to know if "occupied" means it's available for use I think to myself "these are the doctors, lawyers, and teachers of America...best of luck to all of us"... and I giggle a little. Of course I don't say this in a hateful way but you have to be able to laugh.
[Edited 2009-11-17 19:16:11]
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
AFGMEL From Australia, joined Jul 2007, 734 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11276 times:
Quoting WNCrew (Reply 5): they want to know if "occupied" means it's available for use I think to myself "these are the doctors, lawyers, teachers or America..
That's a bit rough. While I have a dim view of the general knowledge of most Americas pertaining to anything outside their borders, I have met many professional Americans who are very bright and well informed.
As for Cell-Phone Cecil, I think he should have been charged.
WNCrew From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1317 posts, RR: 9 Reply 7, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11248 times:
Quoting AFGMEL (Reply 6): I have met many professional Americans who are very bright and well informed.
DId I state anything to the contrary? Not that I recall...... I also made sure to state that almost ALL of my pax were a pleasure to serve. This does not change the fact that many people still have problems with simple things. Obviously this isn't indicative of their true intelligence, we all know that, but it doesn't mean we cant laugh at the situations we encounter everyday.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
Denverdanny From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 227 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11150 times:
So, not only did the cell phone passenger get booted off his flight, but the other passengers were delayed two and a half hours?? All because he refused to get off his phone! Unreal. I bet that guy was GLAD to be booted off the flight, before the passengers could get their hands on him. I would be so peeved. You'd rather miss your flight than get off your phone? Sheesh. I can't stand peeps who are so attached to their cell phones. I would have grabbed it out of his hand and broken it in half. If ever there was a moment to do something like that, this was it. I have to admit I have fantasies of doing that to someone's cell when they won't stop talking. Sorry!
AFGMEL From Australia, joined Jul 2007, 734 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11046 times:
Quoting WNCrew (Reply 7): I also made sure to state that almost ALL of my pax were a pleasure to serve. This does not change the fact that many people still have problems with simple things.
I understand and agree, but I doubt professional types wouldn't understand the word "occupied", but these days, who knows?
ASFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 889 posts, RR: 4 Reply 10, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10789 times:
Quoting AFGMEL (Reply 9): I understand and agree, but I doubt professional types wouldn't understand the word "occupied", but these days, who knows?
Oh really? I can't count the numbers of times a "professional type" went to the bathroom door and started tugging on the ashtray that was on the wall next to the door, in an attempt to open it. Or they just stand there and look at the door as if they are willing the door to open. These same types look at the occupied sign on the door and then ask if the lav is empty.
I would go on out on a limb and a say a good 50% of the people that go to the bathroom on an airplane have difficulty figuring out how to open the door using the handle.
This may not reflect how smart that person really is but it certainly makes one wonder.
Rgreenftm From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 272 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10755 times:
Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 10): I would go on out on a limb and a say a good 50% of the people that go to the bathroom on an airplane have difficulty figuring out how to open the door using the handle.
This may not reflect how smart that person really is but it certainly makes one wonder.
I've flown 70,000 miles this year, most of those miles on AS, and even though they have a single fleet type, they do have 2 variety of doors, and I occasionally have to take a half a second to remember to push in at the right spot to open it.
I'm willing to bet most of these confused pax are ones who fly to grandma's house for thanksgiving and for family vacation once a year, and that about concludes their flying for the year. To be unfamiliar with the workings of the door - which don't have a traditional handle, isn't to be unexpected to them.
The lav door isn't really the issue here, and so I digress. If it wasn't for the tremendous amount of bad PR airTran would get for suing him, I'd be inclined to sue him for the costs of the flight delay - fuel, crew times, missed connections (if any), etc. Not that I'd expect him to ever be able to pay those costs, but it might be enough to scare people into complying more with crew member instructions!
Woof From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10606 times:
I'm wondering if I was a passenger on that flight and missed a vital meeting because of that passenger's actions, causing me direct, considerable costs, if I might have grounds to sue them (the passenger)? After all, it wasn't a delay caused by traffic, engineering, weather etc - it was purely down to one individual breaking at least 2 laws (using mobile on an aircraft with door closed and not obeying a crew member).
I'm all against petty lawsuits, but in the case I think such action would be perfectly valid. Anyone know what the law might say in this context?
LTC8K6 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 427 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 10437 times:
Quoting YYZALA (Reply 4):
I totally agree with what you are saying, but when fast food chains have to put "caution its hot" on their hot beverages it makes you wonder how bright people really are...
Ridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 915 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 10278 times:
Quoting AFGMEL (Reply 9): understand and agree, but I doubt professional types wouldn't understand the word "occupied", but these days, who knows?
I was recenlty in SLC, for a company meeting with a technology supplier, and one of these "professional types"..( He just happened to be the IT director at a major SLC area located comany) threw the drivers side door open on his BMW, in the parking lot of his company, so hard and without care, that the wind blowing at the time took his door and hyperextended it around to the left fender of the car. To his amazement, he said he thought the door was designed to take more abuse than that. So your statement about professional types understanding simple everyday things, such as "occupied" , confirms yor last words... "but these days, who knows".
Cgnnrw From Germany, joined May 2005, 1077 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 10072 times:
In the article Fox News of Houston reports the pax STOOD UP while trying to take a photo!!??!!
WTF??
As someone already mentioned I would be livid had I been on that plane. I'm really surprised none of the other paxs made any effort to get themessage clear to the guy. I'm not talking becomming violent but if he was in a group surely someone in the group should have been able to communicate the message to him.
As posted more than once on this site: enter airport, turn off common sense
ATAflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 79 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 9864 times:
Quoting WNCrew (Reply 7):
I also made sure to state that almost ALL of my pax were a pleasure to serve. This does not change the fact that many people still have problems with simple things.
I understand and agree, but I doubt professional types wouldn't understand the word "occupied",
Well after 21 years of being a flight attendant, you would be surprised at the number of people who call the lavatory the 'Occupied', as in " Is it okay to use the occupied on the ground?"
So go figure....
Bri2k1 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 988 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 9029 times:
Quoting ATAflyer (Reply 16): surprised at the number of people who call the lavatory the 'Occupied'
Way, way off topic, but... I bet some of them are being tongue-in-cheek. This is a somewhat well-known parody of inexperienced ship and train passengers who probably had their first experiences with a lavatory that could be marked "occupied" on those vessels, long before aviation came about. I can't remember what show it was, probably Green Acres or something, that had an episode like that; someone hid a farm animal on a train, and when asked about its whereabouts, he responded, "I hid him in the occupied."
Back on topic: this kind of insolence really grinds my gears. I was on MQ LRD-DFW and a passenger with some sort of brace on his leg was sitting in the exit row. This was an E145 with only one exit row seat on one side and two on the other, and because of his leg injury, he had presumably requested and received the exit seat from the ground personnel. Just as we started to taxi out for departure, the lone FA observed his brace and asked him to move because she didn't want an injured person in the exit row. He protested a couple of times, and finally, she called the cockpit and they halted the taxi (off the taxiway). At that point, I and several other passengers who had tight connections on the other end began to strongly suggest that he relocate himself immediately. He eventually did, and we only lost a couple of minutes. I guess the moral of the story is this: if you see a passenger clearly failing to comply with the regulations, don't be afraid to remind him or her. The FAs can't be everywhere at once and have many things to get done to ensure an on-time departure. On more than one occasion, when I've seen a passenger ignoring safety regulations and ignoring my reminder, I've waited until an FA passed and notified him or her discreetly, hoping to avoid a delay by bringing attention to the problem quickly.
Whether you agree with the rules or not, and whether you believe there is a safety hazard or not, are irrelevant. If the plane can't depart with you on the phone, then you hang up. Same goes for wearing your seatbelt, or taking your laptop out of the seat pocket, or putting your huge roll-aboard into the overhead such that it can't close. On the few occasions I've made some effort to help other passengers comply so we could all leave on time and the FAs noticed, I was always thanked, and often with a complimentary cocktail.
Passengers can be so inconsiderate. I've seen passengers refuse to let someone up to use the lavatory, during cruise flight with no seatbelt sign on, and in smooth air. Once I advised the offending passenger that there were two choices: the passenger could urinate there in the seat, or get up and use the lavatory, and it was up to the offending passenger. He pretty quickly got up and let the poor old lady out to pee. I didn't mind watching him be uncomfortable trying to avoid me (from across the narrow aisle) for the rest of the flight, either.
SPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2097 posts, RR: 10 Reply 18, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 8677 times:
Quoting Woof (Reply 1): Why no charges filed? Was this passenger really that much more important than anyone else?
Why didn't the other passengers make this person miserable? Physically if necessary.
At least rip the phone from his hand and break it.
I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
AirNz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 8483 times:
Quoting Woof (Reply 12): I'm wondering if I was a passenger on that flight and missed a vital meeting because of that passenger's actions, causing me direct, considerable costs, if I might have grounds to sue them (the passenger)?
Nclmedic From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 326 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7798 times:
I remember an early episode of The West Wing where one of the characters is using his mobile phone mid-flight. Of course, the FA speedily tells him that this is completely unacceptable and he needs to turn it off etc etc. The reply is one I've always wondered about: "You think Boeing spent billions of dollars designing this plane for it to fall out of the sky due to me using a cellphone"?
Now obviously, this isn't an attitude I echo at all, but I do wonder (from any pilots/Mx folks out there) what actual issues/potential issues cell phone usage can cause - whether on the ground or airborne?
I've heard crew use all sorts of bizarre explanations as to why we need to keep our phones off, and I'm not sure all of them are completely factually true! Would be good to hear an actual expert on the subject!
I fully support the idea that crew member instructions to pax are there for a reason, but in an era where airlines are considering introducing the use of phones on board, is this really a problem any more?
Bri2k1 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 988 posts, RR: 4 Reply 22, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7799 times:
In the USA, anyone can sue anyone for anything. Maybe it's different where you're at, but this kind of thing wouldn't surprise me at all. It's a financial question; how much would the passenger's willful and deliberate conduct in violation of Federal and other laws cost to defend, versus how much would it cost to settle without admitting guilt?
Luv2cattlecall From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1648 posts, RR: 2 Reply 23, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6949 times:
Quoting Ridgid727 (Reply 14):
I was recenlty in SLC, for a company meeting with a technology supplier, and one of these "professional types"..( He just happened to be the IT director at a major SLC area located comany) threw the drivers side door open on his BMW, in the parking lot of his company, so hard and without care, that the wind blowing at the time took his door and hyperextended it around to the left fender of the car. To his amazement, he said he thought the door was designed to take more abuse than that. So your statement about professional types understanding simple everyday things, such as "occupied" , confirms yor last words... "but these days, who knows".
Not to go to far OT, but that's not really ignorance on his part. BMW's are built like tanks (1 series and X6 aside) and it must have been a gale force wind to do that to the door. I've had the door open and leaned on it (outwards) without a budge.. On the factory tour, the showed us an unwelded hinge set and massive is an understatement - they said the door could support 1,200 lbs.
Mercedes even had a commercial where a guy sat in the window frame of the front door..
When you have to breaststroke to your connecting flight...it's a crash!
Olympic472 From United States of America, joined Jun 2008, 406 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6873 times:
Please put this guy on the "No Fly List"!
Civil Aviation has a "Need for Speed"!
25 Skyhawk62507: While it's probably smarter to tiptoe around this subject, as others have... let me be the first to say, unequivocally, I wish someone would have phys
26 Bigsky09: Hopefully you don't live inside of the borders of America then!
27 ASFlyer: Yes, and the bi-fold doors (despite the very big sign in a contrasting color that says PUSH HERE) only add to the complexity of opening a door. For y
28 Dl767captain: I wonder what he was talking about on the phone that was so important that he couldn't get off the phone. Now if he was trying to close some multi bil
29 Bri2k1: In theory, mobile radio transmitters/receivers like mobile phones could interfere with other radio systems, such as navigation and communication radi
30 PGNCS: Thanks, WN. That makes them wrong too. If you are IN the air and someone turns on the phone, you still have to land, if you are on the ground, you DO
31 Slcdeltarumd11: I read a story it was either somewhere in Park City or Aspen A guy on the gondola would not stop talking on his cell phone in the packed gondola. A gu
32 Nclmedic: Thanks so much for this! I sort of thought this would be the case, but much better hearing it from someone who knows what they're talking about!
33 Kaiarahi: Why is that? Breach of statutory duty + economic loss = liability.
34 AirNz: I correctly gave a very short answer to a straightforward question as in the context in which it was asked. Don't be overestimating yourself in imply
35 Junction: Was wondering if this logic would also apply if someone wanted to sue the airline for a missed meeting. I was under the impression people frequently
36 413X3: Most of this can be applied to the simple fact that under stress and pressure people do not act properly. People are for the most part, stressed out
37 Cytz_pilot: Sadly, I think that is about 10 times more likely. Your travel contract is with the airline, not with the idiot passenger. It's certainly not fair th
38 Railker: I'm truthfully surprised no one did. There's nothing quite as motivating as 130 humans worth of peer pressure to GTFO your cell phone, especially for
39 Silentbob: We ferried an airplane yesterday and there was some noise and static on the radio before we took off. I noted the time and after landing pulled my ba
40 Kaiarahi: Contract is not the only basis of civil liability. Breach of statutory liability (i.e. failure to comply with a regulatory requirement to turn off ce
41 Dazed767: For God's Sake, Switch Off Your Damn Cell Phones.. (by Pilotaydin Jan 11 2007 in Civil Aviation) To answer peoples questions about phones inflight...
42 TroutPilot: Did anybody who posted here read the article? I don't support disobeying the flight crew for any reason, but the article makes it sound more like a pr
43 WNCrew: WOW... was everyone else asleep aside from this FA and the "irate" pax? I find it hard to believe all this resulted from one FA's decision... that's
44 LoneStarMike: How do you know he was talking to anyone? Even the AirTran spokesman quoted in the article said it was unclear whether he was talking on the phone, s
46 Woof: The article has been updated (significantly) since DI767 posted that comment. At the time, it pretty much stated that a passenger wouldn't get off th
47 LoneStarMike: Well perhaps that should serve as a reminder to all of us not to rush to judge someone based on "initial" media reports. Often those "initial" report
48 Bri2k1: I read the whole thing but it didn't answer any questions I have. I am particularly concerned about the purported electrical engineer throwing out te
49 LoneStarMike: Question (because I honestly don't know the answer) From reading the article, I don't think the interpreter ever made his presence known during the i
51 Bri2k1: I've seen things like this happen now and then. The FAs have to tell the passenger to remain seated, but I've seen them "forget" to enforce it. Perso
52 WNCrew: The official rule is that the "surface movement" is not allowed without all pax in their seats... so if you need the assistance of someone seated else
53 Jbernie: Not sure if the article was updated but as I read it now there are comments indicating the passenger was using/viewing a camera and it wasn't a cell p
54 AVLAirlineFreq: I was on a DL flight on Tuesday and the pax across the aisle from me (who spoke perfect English) would not turn off his phone, despite being asked spe
55 PGNCS: So despite others who seem quite well informed here disagreeing with you, I am pleased you set the record straight. I had no idea you practiced law i
56 Bri2k1: Last time I rode US anywhere, there they were. It was a "turn off electronic devices" sign, but you get the point. I rarely fly them and it was years
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 2279 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Canada, joined Nov 2009, 152 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jul 2007, 734 posts, 
From Germany, joined May 2005, 1077 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
