Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
18-month Old Child On "Do Not Fly" List!  
User currently offlineRP TPA From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 852 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 6783 times:

Well, this is one of the better stories I've heard. A JetBlue family was removed from a flight. Not because of anything the parents did....it because their 18 MONTH OLD DAUGHER was supposedly on the "Do Not Fly" list.

Well, at least JetBlue admitted it was an error.   

Courtesy of CNN.com:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/10/travel...o-fly-toddler/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5569 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 6633 times:

For the record, it was her name that matched a name on the no-fly list. Happens more often than you think.


"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineLimaFoxTango From Antigua and Barbuda, joined Jun 2004, 783 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 6429 times:

Interesting how the parents not show their faces "for fear of repercussions" yet parade their poor child on national TV.


You are said to be a good pilot when your take-off's equal your landings.
User currently offlineBureaucromancer From Canada, joined Feb 2010, 165 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 6346 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 1):

And its usually cleared up without pulling people from flights, and without the TSA trying to pin the problem on the airline.


User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12410 posts, RR: 37
Reply 4, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 6296 times:

Quoting RP TPA (Thread starter):
Well, this is one of the better stories I've heard. A JetBlue family was removed from a flight. Not because of anything the parents did....it because their 18 MONTH OLD DAUGHER was supposedly on the "Do Not Fly" list.

So, do I understand this right: despite it being recognised that their daughter was 18mos old and clearly NOT the person on the no-fly list, they were STILL kicked off the plane?

This is absolutely ridiculous. Surely someone among the security staff with half a brain would have noticed "this clearly isn't a terrorist and take the required decision?


User currently offlineoldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2077 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 6270 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 4):
This is absolutely ridiculous. Surely someone among the security staff with half a brain would have noticed "this clearly isn't a terrorist and take the required decision?

As a TSA agent, you can't know. Perhaps after the discovery of the alleged underpants, this toddler could have been famous for her explosive Pampers.
 



Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9167 posts, RR: 29
Reply 6, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 6236 times:

I was going to say that as well. I mean, after all, there was a suspicious brownish mass found in the toddler's underwear which had to be tested by the authorities. I hope they had small enough hand cuffs for proper arrest procedures.


E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently onlineEBGflyer From Denmark, joined Sep 2006, 998 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 5854 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 4):
This is absolutely ridiculous. Surely someone among the security staff with half a brain would have noticed "this clearly isn't a terrorist and take the required decision?

It's just another story that unfortunately tells a lot about the TSA and their rigid procedures. It seriously is a pain going through security in the US and I doubt their rigid approach actually makes flying safer. I would say on the contrary. Resources are spent the wrong place - obviously here on a baby. Well done TSA.



Future flights: CPH-BRU-CPHx2; CPH-BKK-MNL; MNL-GUM-HNL-LAX
User currently offlinevarigb707 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5647 times:

"Up to this point in her life, Riyanna had only ever dropped bombs in her diaper, but that wasn’t fooling the TSA:
- Dropping bombs on her diapers...   


User currently offlineLimaFoxTango From Antigua and Barbuda, joined Jun 2004, 783 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5303 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 4):

So, do I understand this right: despite it being recognised that their daughter was 18mos old and clearly NOT the person on the no-fly list, they were STILL kicked off the plane?

They were not kicked off the plane. They were asked to disembark while the issue was sorted out. They chose not to re-board once the issue was resolved.



You are said to be a good pilot when your take-off's equal your landings.
User currently offlineCairnterriAIR From United States of America, joined Jun 2008, 401 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4822 times:

Well I knew it!!! I knew one of these days that Stewie Griffin kid would finally get in trouble!

User currently offlinespeedbird203 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 295 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4333 times:

I've heard it all now.. Age no longer matters. But i agree with the above, Surely something could of been done so they didn't get kicked off, But then that could risk a delay of flight which no airline is going to put up with just for a couple passengers.


Metro Tower 135.0
User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21474 posts, RR: 60
Reply 12, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3993 times:

Lap-terrorists are a growing threat. Good job TSA and jet blue for not caving to the Coucil for American Infant Relations


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineksanCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 43 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3662 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 1):

For the record, it was her name that matched a name on the no-fly list. Happens more often than you think.

It really does. I can tell you that when I was younger, both my sister and I were on the no-fly list. This was around 2005, luckily we were able to clear it up and proceeded with our journey. TSA and CO were both amazing and helped us out.



Work Hard. Fly [W]Right.
User currently offlineTbone354 From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 76 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3489 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

TSA and airline paranoia is only one of hundreds of reasons I choose to no longer fly unless I absolutely, no way around it must. It simply is not worth all the hassle! I recall the days when the flight to and from my destination was more than half the fun Beam me up!

User currently offlineHBGDS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2797 times:

Quoting oldeuropean (Reply 5):
As a TSA agent, you can't know. Perhaps after the discovery of the alleged underpants, this toddler could have been famous for her explosive Pampers.

I can top that. My 4-month old daughter flew with us out of MDT in September '03. Thorough search of course, and then, though she was asleep in my arms as we went through both metal detector and wand (without beeping), the TSA guy insisted on checking the diapers. I only wish this had come five minutes later, so he could have experienced her explosive delivery (by then into the re-sealed diaper). I didn't bother complaining. I figured that's one for family lore I can embarass her with when she's a teen...


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31667 posts, RR: 56
Reply 16, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2552 times:

Quoting Tbone354 (Reply 14):
TSA and airline paranoia is only one of hundreds of reasons I choose to no longer fly unless I absolutely, no way around it must.

Have heard a lot of the TSA overthe top reactions.....what is the cause of this....Is the training causing them to be extra vigilant or are they just unprofessional....



Think of the brighter side!
User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9167 posts, RR: 29
Reply 17, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2538 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 16):
Have heard a lot of the TSA overthe top reactions.....what is the cause of this....Is the training causing them to be extra vigilant or are they just unprofessional....

When they report for work the have to complete a check-list which starts with

Go by the book tick yes

switch of your brains: tick yes

apply common sense tick no

go by the book tick yes

make own decisions based on situation. tick no


could be carried on.......

  



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31667 posts, RR: 56
Reply 18, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2437 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17):

sounds more point by point rules rather than common sense this TSA folks follow.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9167 posts, RR: 29
Reply 19, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2249 times:

That fits the topic, go to üpictures 3 and 4

Translation: are the underwear bombers among us?

http://www.welt.de/satire/article106...e-Freibeuter-Norbert-Roettgen.html



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 20, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2084 times:

Quoting EBGflyer (Reply 7):
It's just another story that unfortunately tells a lot about the TSA and their rigid procedures. It seriously is a pain going through security in the US and I doubt their rigid approach actually makes flying safer.

Which is why when planning longhaul, i.e., South Pacific/Australia, even if it costs more, I choose a routing that avoids ConUS and Hawaii. Europe is easy.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17):
When they report for work the have to complete a check-list which starts with

Go by the book tick yes

switch of your brains: tick yes

apply common sense tick no

go by the book tick yes

make own decisions based on situation. tick no

   At work, our own security people are more robots than humans. And no sense of humour, except amongst themselves. Perhaps they get a chuckle recounting how many people they've ticked off today.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineBureaucromancer From Canada, joined Feb 2010, 165 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2063 times:

You know, at the end of the day I can understand pulling the people from the flight assuming they hadn't actually confirmed it was only a name match. Quite frankly from someone at the TSA level there is no real reason to discount someone as a threat due to age - how hard would it really be to hide a bomb in a diaper. Frankly it sounds like exactly the kind of loophole that can make an apparently protected against attack work.

To me the problem here is that this wasn't flagged an handled before boarding, and even worse given that in any human system mistakes will be made that the TSA couldn't just admit that a mistake was made. Seriously, even if you think an apology could constitute an admission of some sort of liability (and it usually doesn't) how hard is it to say something to the effect of "our mistake, have a nice day". Basic civility and human behaviour, even when following idiotic (or otherwise unpleasant) regulation to the letter goes a long way.


User currently offlineblueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3936 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1900 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The reason this kind of incident can happen in the US isn't because airline employees or TSA agents are thoughtless automatons (contrary to popular belief) but because processes often matter as much as, if not more than, outcome, and the people (said airline employees and TSA agents) who are in the position to avoid ridiculous outcomes such as this one often do not have the power to deviate from the process.

One needs only read jetBlue's statement to see that it is indeed the case. Their employees followed "the appropriate protocols" and so therefore are shielded from blame, at least as far as the airline is concerned. That these protocols were followed is more important than the end result. In fact, if employees had deviated from these protocols, they might have been disciplined, just as jetBlue might be fined for not following the "appropriate protocols" to deal with a match on the No-Fly-List, no matter how ludicrous that match might be.

Checklists, processes, protocols, standard operating procedures... They all have their place in the appropriate settings, but in the US, they have replaced independent thought and individual judgement far too often, in large part because deviations can be sanctioned even if they make sense to most reasonable people.

After all, what else can we expect when a criminal can be set free because evidence was "tainted" by the failure of a police officer to file the right form at the right time...



I've got $h*t to do
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...
Pax With TB On Do Not Board List Flies US PHL-SFO posted Tue Jan 12 2010 10:42:33 by FATFlyer
Why AM/MX Do Not Fly To Bolivia? posted Fri Jul 7 2006 10:05:22 by AR385
Do Not Fly Lists posted Tue Aug 12 2003 17:24:31 by Cmckeithen
Two-Year Old On No-Fly List posted Thu Jan 5 2006 21:09:39 by PanAm747
6 Y.o Girl On U.S. Homeland Security's No Fly List posted Wed Jun 30 2010 02:13:46 by OEH68
Why NWA Do Not Have TV Or Radio On 757s And A320s? posted Sat Oct 3 2009 20:55:42 by 747400sp
No Fly List: What To Do? posted Mon Jun 30 2008 15:30:48 by Crewchief
Why Do CO, NW, DL, US Not Fly To More Cities in France? posted Wed Jun 13 2007 19:50:54 by LH506
World Focus On Behalf Of TK, Where Do They Fly? posted Mon Dec 26 2005 00:39:02 by Airevents
No-Fly List Does Good On Korean Air Diversion posted Thu Jun 9 2005 09:49:27 by NYCFlyer