Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airline Sued Over Sex Toy  
User currently offline727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 6631 posts, RR: 21
Posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 28890 times:

A gay couple was horrified seeing a dildo taped to their luggage on arrival at IAH

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ked-luggage.html?ito=feeds-newsxml




http://ww.queerty.com/mortified-gay...tting-sex-toy-on-display-20120828/

[Edited 2012-08-29 11:04:42]


I feel woozy....what did you put in that Pudding Pop?
79 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 1, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 28872 times:

Ok, after reading said article, this is what disturbs me the most:

Quoting Article (Thread starter):
Regardless, United/Continental should have immediately conducted an investigation to find the guilty party and terminate them.

How do we know that it is UA's fault that this happened? How do we know it was the TSA? How do we know if it was really the CBP Agents? Sure, UA was the carrier.... but what proof does this couple have that it was UA Rampers that did this unforgiving act?

The only reason why the couple blamed UA for the embarrassment only because they FLEW on UA. So it must be UA's fault.

WTH?!   

Quoting Article (Thread starter):
As Hamar points out, “If ‘someone else’ vanadalized the bag, why didn’t Continental personnel—the last to handle it— simply put the bag in a box and avoid the spectacle? Or better yet, why [wasn't] the bag simply zipped closed? The zipper is still 100% functioning.”

Couldn't answer that question, I honestly do not know. If it was the TSA or the CBP that did this, how did they get access to the CO tape? Why couldn't they use their own tape that has the TSA logos or CBP logos on it?? But then again, we do not know who really did it and why.

Quoting Article (Thread starter):
At the very least these guys deserve free first-class tickets to Australia for Sydney Mardi Gras.

I disagree. We don't know who really did that. An investigation will not turn up any results, IMO. Sickening, yes, but there is really no recourse from here.

And some of the comments on the article on the bottom are a bit over the top. However, the couple should have LOCKED their luggage once they were done being inspected at CBP in IAH to prevent this from happening. IMO, this is their own damn fault. They could have packed the "dildo" in their carry-on.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11719 posts, RR: 60
Reply 2, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 28827 times:

Looks to me like the bag may have burst. Still, if it really was displayed like that on the carousel, then it's pretty dumb of whoever did it. Can't see how they can have known the couple were gay mind.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4152 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 28636 times:

The zipper doesn't look intact to me. As stated above, the bag appears to have burst. It happens. Maybe the zipper could be fixed but it's not the job of the rampers to do that nor do they have the luxury of time. More than anything else it looks like a sloppy tape job.

As for the dildo hanging out, if I were in that situation, I wouldn't be overly concerned with carefully concealing it under the other bag contents. Looks like it was the one item that fell out, and so it was visible when stuck back in the bag. It's nobody's fault but the couple's that they ran the risk of bringing a dildo along when one must always assume accidents can happen.

As for the blurb about it only happening because someone saw a male name on the bag's tag, I call BS. Straight couples use sex toys too and the same thing would have happened either way.


User currently offlineajd1992 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 28555 times:

  

As embarrassing as this is, I can't help but laugh. It sucks for them but if it was an accident they have no case.


User currently offline135mech From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 412 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 28447 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 2):
Can't see how they can have known the couple were gay mind.

The absence of female clothing most likely gave it away...


User currently offlinep201055r From Ireland, joined Sep 2011, 32 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 28427 times:

One is tempted to say that it may be "hard" to get to "the bottom" of this!

But seriously, folks, whatever the orientation of the individuals, no-one deserves this kind of abuse.
Of course they could - as some people would - have brazened it out, tucked the offending item back deep into the bag and with heads held high walked away from the baggage carousel. They didn't, choosing instead to make an issue of this, thus we have a debating topic and the airline a potential problem.

I can't say what the exact legal position is, but it seems to me that if we hand over our luggage, for temporary safe-keeping and transit, to an airline, then the airline is responsible, unless they can show unequivocally that TSA, CBP or some other legitimate agency or a particular individual interfered with the baggage, ultimately causing this embarrassment.
On the facts presented, it appears to me that the airline is quite likely culpable in law, but from my own experience it would be a safe bet that the real culprit(s) may never be found.

Don't bring anything embarrassing in hand luggage and now, don't put it in checked bags. Whatever next?


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 7, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 28364 times:

Quoting p201055r (Reply 8):
unless they can show unequivocally that TSA, CBP or some other legitimate agency or a particular individual interfered with the baggage, ultimately causing this embarrassment.

As stated in the article, the couple were flying into IAH on an international inbound meaning that CBP in IAH would be handing the bag more than UA would have combined. That is why I think CBP is at fault here, not UA.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineatcsundevil From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 1230 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 28213 times:

Quoting Article (Thread starter):
SO EMBARRASSED, ABSOLUTELY MORTIFIED...

Their logic makes no sense. Why would they do interviews and share their story, identity, and photos with the media if they are so embarrassed and mortified? If they just dealt with United directly like 99.999% of customers, they would have only been embarrassed by the four people at the carousel who may have seen the....device.

Instead, they file a completely frivolous lawsuit that will ultimately gain them little to nothing. If they hadn't filed suit and simply went to the media to ask for an apology, I would have completely understood and respected their motivation. Filing a lawsuit? Whatever..


User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 9, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 27863 times:

A) Assumption the first - the bag did not break

Of all the people likely to be responsible, UA is at the "bottom" of the list.

TSA and CBP both were very likely to have "gone deep" into the luggage as part of their routine duties, and, as such, were far more likely to be the culprits.

B) Assumption the last - the bag did in fact break open

Its entirely possible and even likely that, in the process of "shoving it in", the "baggage handlers" just did what they could to "make it fit" and then taped it up when they were done. Sure they could have done a better job of concealing it, but that's definitely not their job to do.

Its possible, but less likely, that they intentionally made it obvious. But still hardly a crime.

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 2):
Can't see how they can have known the couple were gay mind.

Fact - girls are physically incapable of accommodating a device of that magnitude. Guys, however, have no practical depth limit.

NS


User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1828 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 27852 times:

Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 10):

   If you were embarassed about it being shown on the carousel, you would absolutely NOT have allowed those pictures posted of it and yourself all over the internet.

I digress.


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 11, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 27755 times:

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 13):
you would absolutely NOT have allowed those pictures posted of it and yourself all over the internet.

Now that you mention it, that looks like CLEAR tape. The article mentioned that it was CO packing tape. I don't see any CO packing tape in that picture...... at all. With this in mind, this looks like a couple who just wants to make a quick buck (money grabbing) via the courts.

I say dismiss this and blacklist the couple from flying on UA from this point on.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4152 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27690 times:

The article references clear tape with CO logos on it. Which wouldn't be apparent from that picture which was of pretty shoddy quality.
Sounds like UA needs to update their supplies to me.


User currently offlineflashmeister From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2903 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27663 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting p201055r (Reply 8):
But seriously, folks, whatever the orientation of the individuals, no-one deserves this kind of abuse.

I think it's pretty clear that this wasn't abuse. From the photos I've seen, that bag burst open. It's not the responsibility of United, TSA, CBP, or anyone else to clean up a mess because these guys crammed too much crap into a bag.


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 14, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27612 times:

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 15):
The article references clear tape with CO logos on it.

Can anyone confirm that CO does or did, in fact, had packing tape that is clear with the CO logos on it? Because I have not seen such packing tape at all at UA.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlinetonystan From Ireland, joined Jan 2006, 1448 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27519 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 1):
How do we know that it is UA's fault that this happened? How do we know it was the TSA? How do we know if it was really the CBP Agents? Sure, UA was the carrier.... but what proof does this couple have that it was UA Rampers that did this unforgiving act?

Actually, regardless of who may have caused this it is ultimately UAs responsibility as per conditions of carraige.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 1):
However, the couple should have LOCKED their luggage once they were done being inspected at CBP in IAH to prevent this from happening. IMO, this is their own damn fault

If it was TSA, they will simply break the lock. However if you had actually looked at the picture you would see it appears that the zip on the bag seems to have failed.

Quoting ajd1992 (Reply 5):
As embarrassing as this is, I can't help but laugh


As a gay fella myself I admit, THIS IS FECKING HILARIOUS!!!!!!! Iv no need to carry such an item but if that was me I think id just have to laugh at the situation and see it for what it is...massive cock-up!!!


But lets face it, that was deliberate! It was probably loaders or security who saw an oppurtunity to have a laugh and they took full advantage! Id probably have done the same! lol



My views are my own and do not reflect any other person or organisation.
User currently onlinequestions From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 857 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27508 times:

Quoting gigneil (Reply 12):
Fact - girls are physically incapable of accommodating a device of that magnitude. Guys, however, have no practical depth limit.

Umm... can't a girl put it where a guy would, therefore having similar depth limit?

Back on topic, while they were embarrassed, humiliated, they should not have been traveling with that in their bag. You should never put anything in carry-on or checked luggage that you do not want lost, stolen, or for others to see.


User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 17, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27491 times:

Yes, as gent of the gent-loving persuasion, I would have also likely fallen out of a cargo hold onto the ground and died - of laughter.

NS


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 18, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27456 times:

Quoting tonystan (Reply 18):
Actually, regardless of who may have caused this it is ultimately UAs responsibility as per conditions of carraige.

In your opinion, but CBP was the last agency to "fondle" with that bag in depth, as others have stated. So the blame is on them AND the pax, who did not pack the bag properly. The pax has no case.

Quoting tonystan (Reply 18):
If it was TSA, they will simply break the lock.

Not if you buy a TSA approved lock.

Quoting tonystan (Reply 18):
However if you had actually looked at the picture you would see it appears that the zip on the bag seems to have failed.

I already have. That bag should have never traveled to begin with and was massively OVERSTUFFED! So, the bag is the pax's fault not UA's.

Quoting tonystan (Reply 18):
It was probably loaders or security who saw an oppurtunity to have a laugh and they took full advantage! Id probably have done the same! lol

So did everyone else on this thread!   



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineQatarA340 From Qatar, joined May 2006, 1883 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27399 times:

The real question is: Why bring in a dildo, where they could enjoy the real thing?  


لا اله الا الله محمد رسول الله
User currently offlinetonystan From Ireland, joined Jan 2006, 1448 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27352 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 21):
In your opinion, but CBP was the last agency to "fondle" with that bag in depth, as others have stated.

Eh no, Not "in my opinion" at all....legally as per conditions of carraige!!! UA are responsible for it pure and simple. The only removal of responsibility is if a TSA letter is placed inside the luggage to advice the passenger that the bag was opened for inspection by them FACT! I have worked in lost/damaged/delayed luggage claims for a major airline and a lot of that time was dealt with the legal side.

There are plenty of technicalities that the airline can use to admonish it of responsibilty however but I shant go into that.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 21):
Not if you buy a TSA approved lock.

And regardless of whether it was or was not, that does not change the fact that you said "they should have locked it"!!! What difference would it make then? Now you are being pedantic!

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 21):

I already have. That bag should have never traveled to begin with and was massively OVERSTUFFED! So, the bag is the pax's fault not UA's.

Is it now? You can tell that from the above picture??? Because I cant! And Iknow a "stuffing" when I see one!

I just think you dont like the individuals involved! Oh yeah, I went there!!!!



My views are my own and do not reflect any other person or organisation.
User currently offline135mech From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 412 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27355 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting QatarA340 (Reply 22):
The real question is: Why bring in a dildo, where they could enjoy the real thing?

HAHA... BUT...did you see the SIZE of it??? They like the "Super-Size" me version!

I also think this is just a ruse for a quick buck and call the "B-S" on the Horrified and Mortified...as said before...if you felt that way... then you WOULD HAVE kept quiet and "run home" with it re-buried in the bottom of the bag.

They are free-loaders looking for their 15 Min!

The bag looks like it's sitting on a bed comforter...THIS is NOT a photo from the airport baggage claim! And as KCTopBoom said:
"But really, this 'incident' happened more than a year ago, on May 21, 2011. Why are they bringing it to light now? In this story they identify the airline as CO, not UA, which it was in May 2011. This has "I want lots of money from you" (extortion?)painted all over it. I also wonder if the airlines will 'black list' them from flying on any airline in the US."

These people are staging this and wanting massive amounts of $$$...

[Edited 2012-08-29 14:32:32]

User currently offlinecomair25 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27407 times:

To me it looks the zipper broke. They taped the bag shut and the dildo just happend to be on top. It looks like they placed the dildo out of the bag when they took the picture to make it look more "dramatic".

User currently offlinetonystan From Ireland, joined Jan 2006, 1448 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27386 times:

Quoting comair25 (Reply 25):
It looks like they placed the dildo out of the bag when they took the picture to make it look more "dramatic".

I wonder if it was reported there and then as it appeared to the ground staff as that is the only way I can see them having any leg to stand on from a legal perspective!



My views are my own and do not reflect any other person or organisation.
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 24, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27403 times:

Quoting tonystan (Reply 23):
UA are responsible for it pure and simple. The only removal of responsibility is if a TSA letter is placed inside the luggage to advice the passenger that the bag was opened for inspection by them FACT!

Not true. It is not UA's responsibility for the breakage of an OVERSTUFFED bag, like in this case, in the event that it bursts open. That would be a limited liability right there off the bat. Look at the picture in the article.

Quoting tonystan (Reply 23):
And regardless of whether it was or was not, that does not change the fact that you said "they should have locked it"!!! What difference would it make then?

First, they should have used another bag. Second, they should have not used a defective bag. Third, they should have not OVERSTUFFED said bag. Forth, they should have used a "TSA APPROVED" lock.

Quoting tonystan (Reply 23):
Now you are being pedantic!

Whatever the hell that means. But I stand by my points.

Quoting tonystan (Reply 23):
Is it now? You can tell that from the above picture??? Because I cant! And Iknow a "stuffing" when I see one!

You really need to look at that picture again, seriously.

Quoting tonystan (Reply 23):
I just think you dont like the individuals involved!

Ok, now you are crossing the line. That is completely uncalled for and inappropriate. I think you violated a forum rule here: Don't talk about the user.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
25 Post contains images Rwy04LGA : And an even more embarrassing situation! It means 'One who stands by his points' (It doesn't really)
26 B727FA : It's everyone's right to carry any toy they want. After the initial embarrassment of seeing it come on the belt, just pretend it's not yours until oth
27 Post contains links and images KC135TopBoom : They could have flipped a coin to see who had the pleasure of having it 'packed' in him. But really, this 'incident' happened more than a year ago, o
28 135mech : "Excuse me sir...we're going to have to do a full-body scan...WHOA!!!"
29 rampart : Both articles state that the zipper was intact and working, not broken, before or after. In that case, I think the picture is not related, maybe stag
30 Post contains images B757forever : I can only assume their vacation activities in Costa Rica somehow involved pleasuring sea mammals???
31 Post contains images 135mech : LMAO!!! Do humpback whales live there, or Sperm whales?
32 RDH3E : Would you want to touch that thing with your hands? No way in hell would I that is for sure, probably not even with gloves on. I would do the bare mi
33 HBGDS : When was the last time you locked luggage after inspection? Inspection happens after it's been checkied in at most airports, and locks are simply bus
34 135mech : Perfect posting... it doesn't matter what gender...if the users are not sanitary, these items can and do carry "problems" and can transmit infections
35 Post contains images PlymSpotter : I've carried some pretty odd things for (female) other halves over the years. Still don't think they can prove it was a motivated attack. Slightly to
36 speedbrds : This incident of whether it was the TSA, United Airlines or other airport staff, it is very embarrassing. Perhaps having the media involved was not su
37 Post contains images AirframeAS : July 2012 in SEA with my gun case after I noticed something hanging out of the case. Not unless you have a TSA Approved lock like I said in reply 27.
38 KC135TopBoom : Lighten up. It is these two guys who decided to put the image in the press, and the press put it on the internet. I find what they were, and are doin
39 Post contains images B757forever : Agreed 100%. I don't know about the rest of you, but I laughed A LOT!
40 gigneil : No you do not. And that is extremely important. NS
41 Post contains images flyingsux : Because they are looking fo $$$ - just as a lot of others have said. Would you care to explain what part of the COC are you referencing? Are you sayi
42 canoecarrier : I'm 100% sure this has happened before. When I worked at SEA (an airline that will remain unnamed) did the same thing to a pax around '01 or '02. You
43 Post contains links AA94 : A larger version of the photo is available here It seems pretty clear to me that the zipper was busted open at some point, and I think any reasonable
44 flightsimer : TSA couldn't have done it... They don't have the brain power to have cocked up such a cockamamie idea... I'm sorry, but this is absolutely hilarious.
45 kiwiinoz : The customer's relationship is with UA. I would certainly tyhink it is UA's responsibility to conduct the investigation. Where the fault lies as a re
46 HPRamper : I think they went to a friend who was a blogger and *he* posted everything online and possibly encouraged them to go to the press. It does look like
47 Aesma : First, I must now leave the internet as I had too much laugh for one day ! Exactly what I thought. Same.
48 Post contains links gaystudpilot : I'd like to add my two cents. 1. The article states, "The zippers on the luggage were intact and working fine." According to this photo, also mentione
49 CONTACREW : This story is over a year old. There was a post about it over on flyertalk, and someone had posted a link to there website, and if you zoom in on the
50 mplsjefe : Oh, so now it says you joined today... so clever.
51 Post contains images AirframeAS : Id have to agree, with that in mind, if it was modified and the picture taken at home on their bed....then they lose all the rights to sue. This shou
52 phxa340 : Hahaha , priceless comment # 1. Priceless comment # 2. And .... priceless comment #3 . I had a bad day at work but wanted to thank you three for a so
53 Post contains links CONTACREW : Here's the website I was referring to: http://www.plight2171.com/Portfolio.html
54 AirframeAS : Thanks for that, but I am still not buying it. They left the airport without reporting it to BSO, therefore, they forfeit the right to make a claim.
55 CONTACREW : Oh I know that, I was just simply pointing out that this happened last year, and not this year as the article states.
56 Deltal1011man : And I'm sorry, I'm NOT about to touch that thing. I would likely call my lead because I don't know who's it is or where its been. It looks like the b
57 EA CO AS : Does the ramper know there's not another matching bag somewhere in the hold that isn't full of female clothing? Point being, just because this one ba
58 Post contains images enilria : QUESTION If it was so humiliating for a few people to see this at baggage claim, isn't it far more humiliating for the whole world to now see it? If
59 KC135TopBoom : Correct Correct The tape in the white sink looks like it has a rubber stamped, or drawn logo on it that resembles the UA logo, and I only see that lo
60 JONC777 : excapt that I would say. . .that if the bag was placed on the carasouel by a ua employee looking like that, then UA participated. . .someone whould h
61 FlyingSicilian : It wasn't CBP at IAH. In the article it states they reclaimed in customs at IAH and the bag was fine, they dropped it off at recheck then found it in
62 enilria : Again, this lawsuit really puts it on display. Do we really think the harm from that was greater than this??
63 brilondon : Yet again another mark against one of the world's worst airlines. Does UA culture foster the habit of making themselves look bad in the eyes of the pu
64 Post contains links alberchico : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qtfnwBIr_A&feature=plcp good video discusses the situation.
65 RDH3E : You sir, posted without reading the thread, and baselessly defamed what will be one of the best carriers in the world, just as soon as we getting our
66 LipeGIG : To all and please, Keep the focus of the discussions on the topic thread. These discussions outside of the aviation situation herein related will not
67 peachair : You hit the nail on the head - I was thinking the exact same thing. Exposure .... but I think this situation is a losing battle for these guys.
68 brilondon : When you say "nothing to see here", then there is always some thing to see. If you think for one moment that I did not read the entire thread, you ar
69 VC10er : You are entitled to your opinion of United, but after 2.5 million miles on United I wholeheartedly disagree. But as many people have said throughout
70 fdxgirl : what is wrong with using shipping companys nowadays? its probably cheaper than the airlines handling the luggage
71 KC135TopBoom : In some cases it is, but then you don't have the same convenience of your bags arriving at the same time you do. What I don't understand is why they
72 Maverick623 : Locks don't stop anything. Either they're TSA-approved locks that can be opened by anyone, or TSA cuts the locks off. Agreed, but it looks more like
73 WarmNuts : I think the moral of the story is that if you don't pack your bags carefully, no matter where you're flying, you might end up going to Bangkok.
74 AirframeAS : Actually, after the bag clears customs, it goes back to the rampers to be delivered to the claim area back to the customer. The TSA doesn't do anythi
75 Maverick623 : I'm referring to checked bags, which this was. The process for the checked bag is as follows (US only): 1) Rampers offload the plane, and drop the ba
76 brilondon : Obviously I am not entitled to my opinion. You could fly a billion miles on United/Continental and my opinion would not change because I don't fly th
77 Post contains images AirframeAS : You basically repeated what I just said.
78 Maverick623 : No, you said: Which is wrong. The order is ramper > customs/passenger > recheck > TSA > rampers > flight > final destination carous
79 AirframeAS : Not how it's done in DEN. We return ALL begs back to the customer after customs check. Yes, all bags. If connecting in DEN, then the customer re chec
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...
Midwest Airlines Sued Over 2 MD-80s Leases posted Wed Nov 12 2008 15:57:29 by MKE22
Qantas Being Sued Over A330 Plunge posted Wed Nov 5 2008 23:30:32 by Chrisrad
AA Being Sued Over Diversion And Delay posted Wed Jan 2 2008 09:32:40 by Contrails
B6, TSA Sued Over Arabic T-shirt Incident posted Fri Aug 10 2007 19:00:52 by PROSA
Airline Queried Over Treatment Of Women Staff posted Thu Feb 15 2007 23:42:19 by Bilalaman
Jennifer Lopez Sued Over Jet Bills posted Sat Oct 7 2006 05:04:50 by FlyingTexan
Bombardier, GE Sued Over 2004 NW Crash posted Wed Jan 11 2006 00:22:59 by Premobrimo
A Second Airline Has 2 Over-wing Exit A319's posted Thu Sep 8 2005 03:23:56 by Bomber996
AA Sued Over HIV Tests For Applicants posted Mon Mar 7 2005 09:32:59 by 777ER
AA Sued Over Crash In Kirksville posted Sat Jan 29 2005 03:06:41 by Qqflyboy