Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
WN Staff Member Takes Terminally Ill Child's Chair  
User currently offlineKarlB737 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3123 posts, RR: 10
Posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 20126 times:

There have been recent instances of passengers kicked off Southwest flights for various reasons. There have been overweight passengers that have needed two seats. One can overlook much of these incidents as unfortunate and maybe policy needs to be relooked at as these issues have come to pass. I travel on Southwest from time to time so I am not for the record a hater of Southwest in any fashion.

We have a very young kid that has batten disease and he is terminally ill. He has a small chair because he is small that assists him in keeping himself upright because he is unable to do it for himself.

A Southwest staff member takes the chair away from him. If I were the parents I would be furious. If that kid that cannot support himself to be upright is removed from the only chair that will keep him upright I believe the line is crossed by the Southwest staff member.

With these recent incidents and now this I now have to wonder. Yes they have safety rules. This is different. What medical background does the Southwest staff member have to overtly take away this kids chair. With this overt act if I were the parent and any harm came to that kid that staff member would be in litigation forever and Gary Kelly would be included.

Courtesy: MyFoxBoston

Southwest Staff Member Takes Terminally Ill Child's Chair

http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/...rminally-ill-childs-chair-20111224

104 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinexjramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2462 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 20095 times:

I am confused. The parent's gave up the seat because the flight attendant wanted to make sure that it was FAA approved. I can't believe I am defending WN, but quoting the article "When his parents strapped him into his protective seat, an airline staff member approached the family concerned that the chair may not be FAA approved to be on the plane."

There are certain seats that are not FAA approved. It sounds like the F/A was just making sure that it was FAA approved, the family doesn't question it (even though the article says "relented" and they "gave up the seat" meaning the airline didn't "take" the seat).

There are two sides to every story and this story seems fishy and somewhat sensational. Id like to know what happened before everyone jumps on the hate WN for a story that doesn't add up.

/defending WN



Look ma' no hands!
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23148 posts, RR: 20
Reply 2, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 19913 times:

Quoting xjramper (Reply 1):
I am confused. The parent's gave up the seat because the flight attendant wanted to make sure
that it was FAA approved.

Me too. From the extremely sketchy details in the article, I see no evidence that WN did anything wrong.

For the record, I have a family member who is confined to a wheelchair, and it's probably been close to a decade since he has traveled with any carrier other than WN. From checkin to bag claim, the experience for disabled customers (or, at least, his experience) is head and shoulders above any other carrier.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3184 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 19886 times:

There goes the media spin again with their title. The title makes it look like the staff member stole the chair from him, when in reality the staff member was covering his ass because the chair might not be safe to be strapped in an airline seat in case of an incident - its basically a damned if you do damned if you don't situation.

Believe me I feel bad for the kid and family and I understand because my father is handicapped, so bad that he cannot fly on a plane because we are worried that the airline bag handlers would damage his electric wheelchair that costs as much as a small car. My dad couldn't sit up straight in an airline seat either and would need a seat that leans back or he gets all kinds of health problems (his wheelchair tilts back)

I take it this happened at MCO, since they said they were on their way home from Disney World and haven't heard anything about this here.

Like I said its a damned if you do damned if you don't situation:

A. If he allows the chair. something happens in flight like a hard landing, turbulence and the chair not FAA approved falls out and the kid gets hurt parents sue Southwest - he loses his job because he allowed it.

B. Being that he doesn't - parents run to the media, media makes him look like a villain. He also looks like he doesn't have good customer service skills - of course the Boston Media spun it like he stole the seat from the kid, which in reality he just said the seat isn't FAA approved and they had to check the seat in luggage, where Southwest wouldn't even charge him for checking it, while other airlines probably would have (and I am not sticking up for Southwest because I really am not a big fan of them either).

Also- without this chair, would the kid be in harm sitting in the airline seat? So either way there is a potential for lawsuit

Honestly - it was an honest mistake, mainly on the parents end but also excuseable mistake. If anything it is the FAA. Everything has to be FAA approved. Someone I know tried shipping a couple dogs, the kennels weren't FAA approved so they had to run out and buy FAA approved containers. The parents probably should have checked ahead to see if this chair was safe to fly. However with a terminally ill kid you have to take care of 24/7, it is hard to think of other issues like that.

This brings up the next question - they said the kid was flying home from Disney World? Does that mean that the chair was approved for the flight down? Did they fly another airline or go down by a different means ie drive? Why was this chair ok to get down but not ok to come back?

What should have been done was go to the airport a couple days ahead, talk to someone from Southwest management to get chair approved and have that person sign a waiver.


User currently offlineKarlB737 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3123 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 19886 times:

Quoting xjramper (Reply 1):
I am confused

The first sentence of the writeup:

"A terminally ill New Hampshire child on a Southwest Airlines flight was removed from his protective travel seat by an airlines staff member."

I stress this:

was removed from his protective travel seat and by whom according to the above sentence. Notice this seat is for his protection.

I have made my point and will leave it alone for the rest to comment.

[Edited 2011-12-26 15:27:16]

User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23148 posts, RR: 20
Reply 5, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 19798 times:

Quoting KarlB737 (Reply 4):
"A terminally ill New Hampshire child on a Southwest Airlines flight was removed from his
protective travel seat by an airlines staff member."

I still see no problem. If the seat was not FAA-approved, he should have been removed. End of story.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3184 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 19706 times:

Quoting KarlB737 (Reply 4):
"A terminally ill New Hampshire child on a Southwest Airlines flight was removed from his protective travel seat by an airlines staff member."

Again that sounds like media bias spin to me. Just look at the sentence and tell me it doesn't look like an idiot wrote it.

Basically what that sentence says is that the staff member physically lifted the kid out of his seat and took his chair away. What parent at that point wouldn't open a can of whoop ass on that staff member for physically touching their kid? Right there you know you have a clueless reporter writing -you can't legally touch someone's kid - hell let the media reporters there spin their story to turn this staff member into a pediphile now too.

If this happened at MCO, I would have heard about it because Orlando Police would have been called in for a disturbance because if anyone grabbed a kid and pulled him out of his seat there would be a major physical altercation between the parents and the staff member, and even more likely a law suit

I don't know what else there is to comment on - this is a bad reporter.

This is more likely what really happened. It happened before they got on the plane. They were waiting to board, the gate agent said "Ma'am this seat is not FAA approved, we cannot allow your child to fly in it. Let me check with the captain"

Doesn't say if the captain came out or not, but wouldn't surprise me because this reporter sucks and is just looking for sensationalism. The captain would have final say whether the kid could use the chair or not. The captain probably agreed that it wouldn't be safe for that chair, Southwest then offered to check the chair for free - or it probably could have been stowed in the overhead even because it looks small enough.


User currently onlineJetBlueGuy2006 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1662 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 19680 times:

I am a little confused though. Apparently the family had no issues on the way to Florida, presumably flying WN; so did an employee not do their job on the way down?


Home Airport: Capital Region International Airport (KLAN)
User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3184 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 19572 times:

Quoting JetBlueGuy2006 (Reply 8):
I am a little confused though. Apparently the family had no issues on the way to Florida, presumably flying WN; so did an employee not do their job on the way down?

I brought that same thing up too - did they drive down? Fly another airline? Is this their first ever flight with this terminally ill boy?

If this bad reporter would have brought up that the family had no issues flying down with Southwest, then this would have somewhat changed my oppinion of this article, I'm really surprised this writer has a job because he/she made a lot of rookie mistakes. If they had no problem flying down and you really want to villainise this MCO SWA staff member then you think they would have brought that up that he is the cruel oddball that didn't allow the kid to fly.

There definitely have to be FAA approved chairs for kids with this or a similar problem where they cannot sit up straight. Terminally ill kids travel every day for Make a Wish Foundation trips, BA has its Dream Flight to Disney, Air Canada has a similar trip to Disney etc - I am sure a lot of those kids would need special chairs too. The parents probably should have done some research before flying.

With my dad the way he is, he can't get into bed from his chair without a lift - so my mom has to call hotels if she travels with him (its amazing he can still travel, but my mom is not willing to give up travelling) to see if the hotels have beds with the open area beneath them so the lift can go under the bed.


User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3706 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 19401 times:

http://ourpromisetonicholas.com/wp-c...ntent/uploads/2011/12/IMAG0222.jpg

This isn't acceptable, and I was all ready to defend WN on this one....



PHX based
User currently offlineEASTERN747 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 548 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 19366 times:

It has "always" been the airline policy that any disabled passenger who can't deplane the aircraft in case of an emergency, be accompanied by someone who can take charge of them. F/A's must be there for everyone and not dedicate themselves to just one person. Was the child flying alone? How big is this chair/seat--ie overhead? If there was any emergency and the disabled person was hurt or killed, because of the disability, the lawsuits would come the next day.

User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7311 posts, RR: 85
Reply 11, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 19343 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This isn't surprising, but I was on an AA flight from FCO to ORD a few years back and there was a disabled passenger that needed a seat to get back for treatment and the captain kicked a flight attendant's husband off the flight so the child could fly. Both the FA and her husband where on passes used for holiday and the FA got in a heated argument with the Captain over booting her husband. She ended up leaving the a/c with her husband and the Captain got a standing ovation for his actions in helping the family of the ill child.


I miss the old Anet.
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23148 posts, RR: 20
Reply 12, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 19277 times:

Quoting 777STL (Reply 10):
This isn't acceptable

Why not? This is easy. Travel with an FAA approved chair/seat - just like tens or hundreds of thousands of other parents do each and every day.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineEASTERN747 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 548 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 19202 times:

The person traveling for treatment was another pass rider or full fare? Either way, Capt was right. Keep the husband in his seat and let the F/A ride on a jump seat. Sounds like more to the story here......

User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3706 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days ago) and read 19149 times:

"Why not? This is easy. Travel with an FAA approved chair/seat - just like tens or hundreds of thousands of other parents do each and every day."

Yeah, no. I'm pretty sure this kid was safer in whatever seat he was sitting in rather than sitting slouched in his seat with his belt around his upper stomach/lower chest. This is one of those instances where it helps to use a small bit of common sense instead of seeing everything in black and white.

And this isn't a normal kid, so perhaps being a decent human being and exercising some compassion instead of being a by the book a-hole is in order, no?



PHX based
User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7311 posts, RR: 85
Reply 15, posted (2 years 10 months 3 days ago) and read 19002 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 777STL (Reply 15):
And this isn't a normal kid, so perhaps being a decent human being and exercising some compassion instead of being a by the book a-hole is in order, no?

I'm sure we aren't getting the entire story as is so popular, but I would have given up my seat for either the ill passenger or the employee going to work.



I miss the old Anet.
User currently offlineJerseyguy From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2033 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 18222 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 777STL (Reply 15):
And this isn't a normal kid, so perhaps being a decent human being and exercising some compassion instead of being a by the book a-hole is in order, no?

And if something happened and the FA was fired or sued, I guess all that would be reversed because well he was just using some common sense. I'm sorry these days with the sue happy society we live in common sense does not apply anymore.



Frontier Early Returns Ascent Status| Webmaster of an unoffical TTN page see profile for details
User currently offlineDaysleeper From UK - England, joined Dec 2009, 863 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 18085 times:

I feel sorry for the cabin crew as this was a no win situation for them, had they let him use the seat and he got hurt somehow then the headlines would have been “Southwest lets terminally ill child travel in unsafe seat”. In a situation like that I think it’s best to just stick to the letter of the law / regulation.

I’m also surprised the parents hadn’t checked before travelling that it was okay to use the seat in the cabin. I’d have thought it common sense too.

[Edited 2011-12-26 18:20:25]

User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13649 posts, RR: 62
Reply 18, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 18054 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KarlB737 (Reply 4):

The first sentence of the writeup:

"A terminally ill New Hampshire child on a Southwest Airlines flight was removed from his protective travel seat by an airlines staff member."

I stress this:

was removed from his protective travel seat and by whom according to the above sentence. Notice this seat is for his protection.

And I stress this - as a trained ACAA Complaint Resolution Official for a major U.S. air carrier - safety comes first, and if the child's seat is not FAA-approved, despite how comfortable, protective, or necessary it may be for him, he cannot travel in it aboard a commercial air carrier.

Full-stop.

End of story.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineah414211 From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 222 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 17817 times:

Quoting 777STL (Reply 15):
And this isn't a normal kid, so perhaps being a decent human being and exercising some compassion instead of being a by the book a-hole is in order, no?

I'm not sure I would call someone who is following FAA regulations a by the book a-hole. Like it or not, the FAA regulations are very clear, and if the crew chose to not abide by them then they could all be held personally liable for that decision. Nothing against the child at all, but rules are rules. I'm not sure why everyone thinks they should be the exception to the rule.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 20):
And I stress this - as a trained ACAA Complaint Resolution Official for a major U.S. air carrier - safety comes first, and if the child's seat is not FAA-approved, despite how comfortable, protective, or necessary it may be for him, he cannot travel in it aboard a commercial air carrier.

Full-stop.

End of story.


  


User currently offline777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2505 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17571 times:

Could this problem have been resolved when the child/family checked in on the outbound leg of their trip? Seems to me that regardless of the point of embarkation, the problem could have been mitigated at several points along the way, beginning as early as the reservations agent (example: the parents could've given a heads-up and/or sought clarification as to whether or not the chair would be permitted), to the check-in agent(s), station manager(s), or gate agent(s). No doubt the FA was probably only covering their ass, but from my distant vantage point, it appears that they were the last line of defense along the way.

777fan



DC-8 61/63/71 DC-9-30/50 MD-80/82/83 DC-10-10/30 MD-11 717 721/2 732/3/4/5/G/8/9 741/2/4 752 762/3 777 A306/319/20/33 AT
User currently offlinechrisnh From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4133 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17480 times:

How did the child manage to get from Manchester to Orlando in the first place, in a 'non-approved' seat?

User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13649 posts, RR: 62
Reply 22, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17361 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 23):
How did the child manage to get from Manchester to Orlando in the first place, in a 'non-approved' seat?

It's quite possible that WN's dropping of the ball actually occurred when the child was allowed to travel outbound in the non-approved seat in the first place. However, you can't selectively disregard FAA regulations on the return because someone neglected to catch the issue on the outbound flight.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offline2175301 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 1074 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17458 times:

The issue that I see here is that I doubt that this chair is a normal child seat - and it is more likely to be a piece of medical gear.

How many medical devices are FAA approved. I cannot imagine the medical supply companies submitting their equipment to the FAA for approval.

Have a great day,


User currently offlineATCtower From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 544 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17184 times:

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 24):


Not sure, but I dont recall WN asking me if I required separate seating the last time I booked a flight.

All this is, is another BS reason for someone to complain because a corporation isnt 'sensitive' to the needs of everyone else. I can assure you that if any 'reasonable' accommodation could have been made for this child to travel MEETING ALL FAA guidelines, and in accordance with FAA part 121 procedures, WN would have been more than willing to oblige.

The unfortunate fact remains that no matter what WN did in this instance it was wrong. If they were to allow the child to travel in a seat not approved, they could be cited, fined, and summoned by the FAA and forced to comply. Denying the child their seat gets the sympathetic ear of every liberal media outlet who will listen, and thus vilify an otherwise legitimate, reputable carrier in an attempt to slander their image to that of an 'unwilling' discriminate.



By reading the above post you waive all rights to be offended. If you do not like what you read, forget it.
25 Tbone354 : ATCtower: I think you have intercepted the localizer and glide slope here.
26 Mir : Whether he'd be safer or not is, unfortunately, irrelevant. If the seat is not FAA approved, the airline cannot accept it for travel - to do so would
27 geezer : After having read all 17 replies, I must say, I wasn't there so I really have no idea what did or didn't happen. If I allowed myself to get all upset
28 wnflyguy : FAA approved chair/seat NEEDS to be just that. The FAA is also just Black and White and a little outdated. If we let a parent or anyone traveling with
29 milesrich : The parents should have made sure the seat was FAA approved before beginning their trip. PERIOD. Why should WN risk getting fined? This story is unfor
30 b727fa : I wondered how long it would take for someone to bring up the CRO. Thank you! A "decent human being" doesn't hold up in court.
31 wn700driver : This is aviation. You cannot use "common sense" as you put it. I'm not joking either. The reason is that regulations exist for a purpose, and at no t
32 ODAFZ : It must have been a very awkward if not tragic incident. But 2 things come to mind : rules are rules and they must be enforced , the link comes from F
33 aztrainer : Damned if you do and damned if you don't situation for WN and the FA. I am wondering if the seat is similar as the one on the video. If it is I would
34 Cubsrule : Don't child seats have to (per the FARs) go in window seats for that very reason? On WN, I'm certain they do, but I've never flown with a child seat
35 b727fa : I have strong feelings about CRS' not being in a window seat. I think they should ALWAYS be on the window. However, there is no specific FAR on it--it
36 Post contains links bwaflyer : At the airline I work for (governed by the UK CAA rather than the FAA) we would not accept this seat for travel. The seat could not be securely attach
37 Post contains links KarlB737 : It is now possible to take the MyFox Boston reporter out of the equation since an additional report from the Boston Globe adds a little more informat
38 av8orwalk : The good news is this seat will not be aboard any more Southwest flights. I appreciate the flight attendant that finally caught the violation. As a fr
39 Cubsrule : So two wrongs make a right?
40 Post contains links justplanenutz : Difficult situation for all involved. As some have said here, WN was damned either way and I am sure the FA took no pleasure in ordering the child rem
41 rcair1 : While it does not apply to this case, such a blanket statement requires a clarification. There are situations where a pilot/crew member is allowed to
42 Mir : There might be. But you'd be looking at a fairly long approval period, methinks. No, it wasn't. The fact that the crew let it go (or didn't notice it
43 jkudall : I am surprised the media would write such an article with such little information, incredibly biased, and what seems to be motivated only for dramatic
44 justplanenutz : How exactly does that work?
45 jkudall : Simple. The first article (assuming anything in it is correct) said the family, instead of missing their flight, "relented and handed over the chair"
46 justplanenutz : And then they get back to New Hampshire how?
47 jkudall : Last time I checked, there were other modes of transportation besides airplanes. If it were my kid and I were truly concerned my child would be in se
48 justplanenutz : Doesn't sound so "simple" after all.
49 scntekir : The parents should have contatced the airline prior to arriving at the airport to detail the special need requirments of their child.
50 Mir : I don't know of any policy that allows crews to start a flight operating contrary to regulations. Yes, the captain can decide to deviate from regulat
51 jkudall : I wasn't trying to imply making a drive home would be "simple". What should be simple is the decision to get off the plane and choose another way hom
52 aztrainer : I do not know, but if you look at the picture of the child in the seat he is sitting in a middle seat as the mom's arm is coming in from the right wi
53 justplanenutz : That no doubt might have avoided the situation, though we don't know that they didn't from the story. After all, they were allowed by the airline to
54 BrianDromey : I know it seems harsh, but if the airline requires FAA certification then there is not a lot to add. The past instances were oversights or mistakes an
55 willy550us : NOW Southwest has gone way to far. I like the airline but I must agree policies do need to be looked over. Poor kid this makes me so angry that I migh
56 justplanenutz : I agree with you and I believe WN simply enforced the rules as required (well, the 2nd time around). Where I disagree with folks in this thread is th
57 richierich : I completely agree...however this article has the makings of a PR nightmare. Oh boy!
58 Post contains links Mir : A look at Southwest's website isn't really specific here about non-wheelchair devices that are going to be used (as opposed to stowed) in the cabin:
59 PVDCMHOZ : Another example of irrational, snap judgement that has caused PR backlash made by line staff. Critical thinking should be part of an airline's hiring
60 ah414211 : Unfortunately it's lose, lose for the airline. If they had allowed him to travel and there was an FAA inspector onboard and they got fined, the media
61 EA CO AS : No, it was a violation of FAA regulations that was accidentally overlooked by the crew on the outbound. You clearly are aware of that, but don't like
62 nws2002 : It is not just an airline policy but a Federal Aviation Regulation. WN as the air carrier, and the flight attendants personally, could be fined if th
63 707lvr : If you step back from this, you realize just how insane our culture has become. The child is terminally ill. That means he WILL DIE, sooner than later
64 wn700driver : There are. But even then there are guidelines and alternate procedures available for just about anything you can think of. I once worked at an airlin
65 EA CO AS : There have been times where cases like this have been accommodated, usually by permitting the customer's seat to remain fully reclined for the entire
66 dashman : Airlines, FA's, Pilots, Mechanics don't get to interpret regulations. Local and reginal FAA do that. So what the FA did was correct. I'm guessing the
67 silentbob : This is actually a very interesting situation. I know that my airline allows adults to use what we call "orthotic positioning devices" but there is n
68 Post contains images cmf : Probably time for the manufacturers of these seats and FAA to get together and figure out how to solve this. So fox (link in OP) is now liberal Maybe
69 NASCARAirforce : If the Myfox Boston reporter would have reported that, that would have clarified a lot. Yeah the MyFoxBoston reporter needs to be taken out of the eq
70 777STL : Look at the picture I posted. How is that following FAA regulations? That's the hypocrisy here. By following the supposed rules here, they made this
71 Post contains links KarlB737 : Would you make the same recomendation for Tim Buckland of the New Hampshire Union Leader. He provided even more details in his writeup: Flight Home A
72 Post contains images richierich : Actually, driving 26 hours or so is one of the most dangerous things you can do, far more dangerous than flying commercially!
73 Mir : The child is in the seat, secured by the seat belt. Both of which are approved for use. Thus, that is compliant with regulations. Whether that's the
74 Post contains images EA CO AS : As a father-to-be, I'm also a bit taken aback at the decision to take a photo of their son in that position, as it clearly wasn't taken to be a nice
75 Cubsrule : No, indeed. People forget that in terms of child restraints, airplanes are much more like buses than like cars - there's no requirement that any chil
76 silentbob : Love this quote from the union leader article: The captain doesn't get to intentionally violate the FARs in regards to seat safety while you're on the
77 b727fa : Actually, the FAA and the courts would support that in a court of law. The seat (airline) and belt (airline) were the only FAA approved restraint for
78 trooper508 : I could be way off base here, but does anyone know what type of seat it really was? Was it actually a car seat, or a positioning device???? From JetBl
79 justplanenutz : While that is very reasonable advice, particularily in the abstract, the reaility is that the family not only previously contacted the airline, they
80 silentbob : The fact that they flew on the airline previously isn't all that relevant. There are a lot of flight attendants that do not know a lot of FARs, or ch
81 rampart : This is telling. My original suspicion was that a medical device that did not interfere with the usual restraint system (the seatbelts) should be OK,
82 Mir : That's also assuming that the device would have been permitted on JetBlue, which we don't know for sure - they state that there are certain requireme
83 EA CO AS : Not sure how it works with those sort of chairs, but just because one airline accepts a unique device doesn't automatically mean acceptance is univer
84 TheCol : FAA approval is always specific to the individual carrier and specific to the device that is to be used. Just because B6 has been certified by the FA
85 cmf : Which brings up; why isn't it?
86 rampart : See, I would have assumed it was. That would make me in the wrong if I attempted to use a seat on Southwest that was approved by JetBlue. I'm not obs
87 justplanenutz : While it is not relevant to whether the seat is legal or not, it absolutely is relevant to the notion that a little more diligence by the parents wou
88 silentbob : And if the denial had been on the first leg, we would have had the same media blame-game. The fact that they ran into a crew that apparently didn't k
89 justplanenutz : Bob, I don't disagree with your advice, just your certainty that a simple call ahead would have avoided the problem (which we don't know that they did
90 Mir : And this is why it's a bad situation all around. On the one hand, the crew are bound to follow the regulations as best they can, and in this case tha
91 WNCrew : That's just it though, the regulations AREN'T complex and varied. If the seat in question isn't FAA Approved for Aircraft Use, then it's not approved
92 justplanenutz : I think we are talking apples to oranges here. While the rules for Child Restraint Systems ("carseats") may be black and white, I do not believe that
93 rcair1 : Which is why I said. --- Thank you. Fox hardly has a lock on poor reporting. Particularly restrained as shown. IMO - this is a case where a "reasonab
94 Mir : The child, perhaps. But we don't know about the other passengers on the plane. Nor was the choice solely between in the device or in the seat - the t
95 2175301 : I believe you, and several others, miss the point: It is very likely that no one is asking SW (or anyone else) to break a regulation. 1) There is a F
96 rcair1 : There are always choices that can be made - some equally good, others clearly superior or worse. I've seen no evidence that the device posed an unrea
97 Mir : rcair1 certainly was, by saying that the FA should have said "the child is probably safer in this device than in the seat, so I'm going to let them u
98 Post contains links justplanenutz : Alright, so here is the FAA order on "Orthotic Positioning Devices:" http://fsims.faa.gov/WDocs/Bulletins...%20Bulletins%20(FSAT)/FSAT0501.htm Jetblue
99 2175301 : This picture from Post 9 shows the aircraft seat belt around the waist of the boy. Hence he was primarily restrained by the seat belt. This sure seem
100 Mir : Someone was not in danger at the time the decision was made. Someone might have been in danger later on if the airplane had gone flying with the devi
101 EA CO AS : The FAA holds that it is the responsibility of each air carrier to do their own assessment and determination for whether a PED can be used on their a
102 Post contains images rcair1 : Please do not put words in my mouth. I did not say this. If you want to paraphrase somebody, or claim that they intended to say this - that is fine -
103 Cubsrule : Why is "reasonable and prudent" the appropriate standard for safety?
104 Mir : You said that a reasonable and prudent standard should have been applied. Which is all well and good, but if there are regulations and or policies in
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
LCC Staff Member And Radio Host In Altercation posted Mon Oct 11 2010 21:26:49 by cpd
Fedex Flies Terminally Ill Girl Home posted Wed Sep 30 2009 07:42:30 by JakeOrion
Special Meals For Standby Passengers (Staff Member posted Thu Sep 29 2005 02:03:32 by 744
WN Staff....I Need Your Help posted Mon Apr 28 2003 06:36:28 by LV
WN Takes Child Away After Being Slapped By Mother posted Tue Aug 17 2010 11:19:23 by LAXDESI
ISP Takes IT On Chin From WN posted Fri Oct 12 2007 05:11:01 by Lowecur
LTU Takes Over Air Madrid Routes/Staff? posted Tue Jan 9 2007 10:09:21 by N1786b
So Pic Of The Ill-fated WN 737 On 08DEC posted Tue Jan 3 2006 01:21:50 by Jetjack74
WN Should Fire Its PR Staff And Advisors posted Fri Dec 9 2005 15:18:46 by Wjcandee
WN Takes Wright Fight Message To TV Ads posted Mon Aug 1 2005 05:26:49 by SWALoveField