Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Cancels Flight After Pax Protest  
User currently offlineflydeltajets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1893 posts, RR: 2
Posted (11 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 23895 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Last night a US flight between PHL and ISP was cancelled after what appers to be passengers protesting the removal of a blind passenger after a dispute between that passenger and the crew regarding how his guide dog was positined under his seat.

A local Philadelphia ABC Station has the story


Excerpt:

Passenger Frank Ohlhorst described what happened.

"When we, the passengers, realized what was going on, we were, like, 'Why is this happening? He's not a problem. What is going on?'" said Ohlhorst. "And we all kind of raised our voices and said, 'This is a real problem.' The captain came out of the cockpit and he basically asked us all to leave the aircraft."

The airline says both the dog and the unrest among the passengers created a safety hazard as defined by its operating protocols.

The flight was eventually cancelled.


The only valid opinions are those based in facts
74 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMesaFlyGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 3202 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (11 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 23829 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Off topic, but I actually flew on flight 4384 last Tuesday!

I'm waiting to hear the full story before I pass judgement, butit was a BIG dog, I doubt he could've gotten it under the seat. But at the same time, isn't it a safety violation to have an animal on the seat, service or otherwise?

However the incident occured, I hope everybody got to their destinations safely.



\________(---)________/ :) World's most beautiful aircraft: 757-200, MD-88/90, E-190, A321
User currently offlineYQBexYHZBGM From Canada, joined May 2009, 204 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (11 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 23345 times:

I viewed the TV news story. If the behavior of the flight attendant was indeed as described, this incident was offensive and unwarranted, whether "just following company policy" or not. There's no way that dog could fit under a seat. As long as it was on its leash and held by its owner, it should have been allowed. Service animals are not pets. I hope various disability advocacy groups and their lawyers teach the parties involved a lesson.
Al


User currently offlinerampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 3147 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (11 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 23262 times:

No guide dog I've ever met, Labrador, German Shepherd, Golden Retriever, including my own former guide dog, would ever fit UNDER an airliner seat. However, they can fit easily under the passenger's legs and not interfering with other passengers. I think it's an ADA violation to prohibit the guide dog.

-Rampart


User currently offlinedoug_Or From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3424 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (11 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 23063 times:

Quoting rampart (Reply 5):
I think it's an ADA violation to prohibit the guide dog.

ADA does not apply to airlines, that would be the ACAA, which does not trump op specs. I believe most allow the dog to occupy a seat adjoining the person. Not sure if seat is comped or pax is expected to pay for an extra seat.



When in doubt, one B pump off
User currently offlineflydeltajets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1893 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 22833 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rampart (Reply 3):
I think it's an ADA violation to prohibit the guide dog.
Quoting doug_Or (Reply 4):
ADA does not apply to airlines, that would be the ACAA

Correct the ACAA is the federal regulation and it would have been in the airline's best interest to have a CRO present anytime a situation regarding a passenger with a disability is developing.



The only valid opinions are those based in facts
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21691 posts, RR: 55
Reply 6, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 22658 times:

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 4):
I believe most allow the dog to occupy a seat adjoining the person.

No, the dog is not allowed to occupy a seat. It must be on the floor.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 22550 times:

Quoting YQBexYHZBGM (Reply 2):
I viewed the TV news story. If the behavior of the flight attendant was indeed as described, this incident was offensive and unwarranted, whether "just following company policy" or not. There's no way that dog could fit under a seat. As long as it was on its leash and held by its owner, it should have been allowed. Service animals are not pets. I hope various disability advocacy groups and their lawyers teach the parties involved a lesson.

As someone familiar with the situation, you are right that there is no breed of guide dog that can fit underneath a seat. When my family raises guide dogs, they take trips to the airport, and the school arranges flight training occasionally, usually just at the gate but once in a while they actually fly. Never are they asked to try to shove the dog under the seat. Under the legs is what they are trained for.

The dog is trained to guide the blind person, even in an emergency. It's not a hazard because it isn't ever going to be in the way.

US has some splainin to do. While it may be a federal regulation to comply with the flight crew, when the flight crew asks you to do something that isn't possible, it's not lack of compliance when you can't do it. The dog can't fit under the seat, so the FA could ask until he/she is blue in the face. Doesn't change the reality that the dog doesn't fit. Guide dogs have special treatment under the law (not the same as a "helping animal" or a "comfort animal.") They can enter restaurants despite health codes prohibiting dogs. They can go to beaches despite many beaches prohibiting dogs.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlinedoug_Or From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3424 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 22406 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 6):
No, the dog is not allowed to occupy a seat. It must be on the floor.

-Mir

You're correct. This is in our F/A and CS manuals as well. I wonder if this is universal and if so, how the pigs and small horses have gotten on in the past?



When in doubt, one B pump off
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11431 posts, RR: 52
Reply 9, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 22399 times:

I don't know... it sure sounds like some journalistic elements are missing from this story.

Where do guide dogs normally sit on a Dash 8? US Airways is claiming to have been in the right:

Quote:

US Airways transports more than 80 million customers each year and ensures that all customers, including those with disabilities, are treated with dignity and respect. We're particularly sensitive to those customers who travel with service animals since we partner with Assistance Dogs International (ADI), an organization that trains and places assistance dogs around the world. US Airways employees volunteer to travel with and work with assistance dogs in training to help them prepare for travel with disabled partners. Over the past 10 years, US Airways employees have participated in transports everywhere from California to Croatia.

In this instance, Mr. Rizzi became disruptive and refused to comply with crew member instructions when the flight attendant asked him to secure his service dog at his feet. As a result of his disruptive behavior, the crew returned to the gate and removed Mr. Rizzi and his service dog from the flight. The flight eventually cancelled and we transported Mr. Rizzi, his service dog, and the rest of our passengers on the flight to ISP by bus.

We apologize to the customers of the flight for the inconvenience. We are continuing to investigate the incident.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinerampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 3147 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 22233 times:

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 4):
ADA does not apply to airlines, that would be the ACAA, which does not trump op specs.

I stand corrected. Thanks.

-Rampart


User currently offlineTW870 From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 259 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 21949 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Something doesn't add up with this story. When I was a United flight attendant, I had guide dogs on the airplane all the time. Customer service would put the passenger and the dog on a (non-exit) bulkhead, and the dog would be in the floor in front of the passenger. The only breed of guide dog I ever had was a golden retriever. A dog that big would clearly not fit under any seat in any cabin. Unless this flight attendant was brand new, they would have had a vision impaired passenger with a dog before and they would have been used to the procedure. They would also have trained on it, as we certainly did at United in the mockup. I am guessing the media coverage is missing details here.

User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 12, posted (11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 21744 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 9):
Where do guide dogs normally sit on a Dash 8? US Airways is claiming to have been in the right:

The dog should always go under the legs of the blind person. If the F/A was asking him to put his dog under the seat, it would be impossible to comply. If the man was having the dog in the aisle and refused to move it, then he is at fault because it would prevent the F/A from doing his/her job.

Wonder where the truth lies.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlinerwy04lga From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 3176 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 21703 times:

Quoting YQBexYHZBGM (Reply 2):
I hope various disability advocacy groups and their lawyers teach the parties involved a lesson.

Do that and someone will complain that the US is too litigious.



Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
User currently offlinesharktail From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 37 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 21189 times:

This article has more information:

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/14/tr...man-us-airways-incident/index.html

Looks like the man was seated in the middle seat at the back of the plane and therefore the dog could become a projectile.

The flight attendant asked for the dog to move rather than move the man which was wrong. The dog is trained to stay with his master. So he would continue to go back. That caused the issue and and it escalated from there.

Clearly the flight attendant is at fault as well as the gate agent for not reseating the man. The dog did what he was trained to do: stay under the legs of his master. The passenger could not retrain his dog in 5 minutes.

Seems like US skipped the dash flight attendants when training FA's on handling service dogs.


User currently offlineORDTLV2414 From United States of America, joined Mar 2013, 311 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 21127 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

honestly those passengers make me proud to be an american. Good job guys! and is ISP-PHL mainline?

User currently offlineMesaFlyGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 3202 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 17402 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Reply 15):

"Is PHL-ISP mainline?"

HA! I wish man!   No it's all Dash 8's  



\________(---)________/ :) World's most beautiful aircraft: 757-200, MD-88/90, E-190, A321
User currently offlineYQBexYHZBGM From Canada, joined May 2009, 204 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 16330 times:

Quoting MesaFlyGuy (Reply 17):

Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Reply 15):
"Is PHL-ISP mainline?"
HA! I wish man!   No it's all Dash 8's  

It was CRJs until fairly recently, was it not? (If not the regularly-assigned aircraft, I am certain I observed a CRJ at the gate when the flight to ISP boarding in December 2012). I pay attention to these things, since ISP was my "home" airport until I moved away.
Al


User currently offlineC680 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 588 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 15894 times:

For those of you interested in the actual Federal Regulation:

§ 382.37 Seat assignments.
(a) Carriers shall not exclude any qualified individual with a disability from any seat in an exit row or other location or require that a qualified individual with a disability sit in any particular seat, on the basis of disability, except in order to comply with the requirements of an FAA safety regulation or as provided in this section.
(b) If a person's disability results in involuntary active behavior that would result in the person properly being refused transportation under § 382.31, and the safety problem could be mitigated to a degree that would permit the person to be transported consistent with safety if the person is seated in a particular location, the carrier shall offer the person that particular seat location as an alternative to being refused transportation.
(c) If a service animal cannot be accommodated at the seat location of the qualified individual with a disability whom the animal is accompanying (see § 382.55(a)(2)), the carrier shall offer the passenger the opportunity to move with the animal to a seat location, if present on the aircraft, where the animal can be accommodated, as an alternative to requiring that the animal travel with checked baggage.



My happy place is FL470 - what's yours?
User currently offlineluv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12119 posts, RR: 49
Reply 19, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 15641 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The fact that the passengers left with the person and his dog being removed should speak volumes on how he was being treated by this crew.


You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineImperialEagle From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2630 posts, RR: 23
Reply 20, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 15373 times:

Here's the article in Fox this morning.


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/11/15...n-with-guide-dog-kicked-off-plane/

One of the pax was so upset about it he was ready to rent a car and drive the blind man and his dog home!



"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
User currently offlineDL WIDGET HEAD From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2100 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 13846 times:

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 24):
Quoting silentbob (Reply 16):
As I understand it, the passenger refused to move to another seat where the dog could lay under the seat and insisted that he sit in the seat at the end of the aisle where there was nowhere for the dog to legally lay. The article you linked mentions 35 passengers, the aircraft seats 37, so there was obviously an empty seat somewhere. Think about it for a minute, do you really believe that passengers wouldn't offer to change seats with him, but would offer to let his dog lay in their leg room? Especially, if swapping seats with him would give them extra leg room? Even without knowing his history, the story stinks.


Too many people believe everything they read from the media...especially the first reports which are almost universally wrong in some or many ways. Better off not giving a biased opinion until you have the real facts. This story stunk from the beginning and as usual, is biased toward the passenger who has been wronged by the horrible, evil US Airways.



It's hard to believe that the passengers en masse walked off of the aircraft in support of this man if he was the one acting like a jerk or was unreasonable. That doesn't pass the smell test. It does sound much more plausible, that these passengers knowingly inconveinenced themselves in support of this man because they felt strongly that he was mistreated by the US crew. Their actions, en masse, ring true. The US crew, in the very least, needs more training and possibly some disciplinary action.

[Edited 2013-11-15 09:00:24]

User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4076 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11373 times:

Quoting DL WIDGET HEAD (Reply 27):
The US crew, in the very least, needs more training and possibly some disciplinary action.

You don't know that.

It is entirely plausible and quite believable that the passenger group of an aircraft would "en masse" completely misunderstand the situation and band together behind whoever they perceived was being wronged. Perception however does not always reflect reality. Groups of people love to get "outraged" over things.


User currently offlineIndy From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 4570 posts, RR: 18
Reply 23, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11019 times:

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 33):
It is entirely plausible and quite believable that the passenger group of an aircraft would "en masse" completely misunderstand the situation and band together behind whoever they perceived was being wronged.

Or it is a case of an unhappy worker with a god complex. Just think of the miserable security guards you see in businesses. They are unhappy with life, poorly paid, and given authority. It makes for a bad recipe. We could be looking at a jerk FA or a jerk passenger. Either is very possible. But the fact that the passengers were willing to risk their flight in defense of the other passenger says something. It says to me the crew was likely acting with a god complex and nobody cares for that kind of attitude. Or worse... it could have been a jerk passenger and jerk FA. Worst possible combination there. There is no way that one ends up well.



Indy = Indianapolis and not Independence Air
User currently offlineCplKlinger From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 173 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 10899 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 32):
For what it's worth, US Airways' statement named the guy. Sounds like they've had it with him.

Well, if US Airways chooses to relase that info, fine. However, I would say that it is not the authority of some unnamed former employee to release any more information on top of that.


User currently offlineDL WIDGET HEAD From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2100 posts, RR: 5
Reply 25, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11302 times:

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 33):
It is entirely plausible and quite believable that the passenger group of an aircraft would "en masse" completely misunderstand the situation and band together behind whoever they perceived was being wronged.

Not likely on a small, 35 passenger aircraft. No doubt, everyone on that aircraft knew of the altercation within a few minutes. I'm sure that most of them are not robotic stooges just following a crowd expressing righteous indignation over an incident that they did not witness. I surely wouldn't have gotten off that aircraft if I were not deeply incensed at what happened.


User currently offline9w748capt From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 600 posts, RR: 1
Reply 26, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 10815 times:

SO EXCITED AA is merging with this airline!   

User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11431 posts, RR: 52
Reply 27, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 10680 times:

Quoting Indy (Reply 34):
Quoting HPRamper (Reply 33):
It is entirely plausible and quite believable that the passenger group of an aircraft would "en masse" completely misunderstand the situation and band together behind whoever they perceived was being wronged.

Or it is a case of an unhappy worker with a god complex.

Why are you more likely to believe it is a person with a god complex than the blind man being at fault?



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineDL WIDGET HEAD From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2100 posts, RR: 5
Reply 28, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 10590 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 41):
Quoting Indy (Reply 34):
Quoting HPRamper (Reply 33):
It is entirely plausible and quite believable that the passenger group of an aircraft would "en masse" completely misunderstand the situation and band together behind whoever they perceived was being wronged.

Or it is a case of an unhappy worker with a god complex.

Why are you more likely to believe it is a person with a god complex than the blind man being at fault?

After reading several articles about this incident, not one of the blind man's fellow passengers fault him or in any way insinuate that he started this altercation or brought it upon himself.


User currently offlinerobsaw From Canada, joined Dec 2008, 242 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10120 times:

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 22):
Quoting DL WIDGET HEAD (Reply 27):
The US crew, in the very least, needs more training and possibly some disciplinary action.

You don't know that.

It is entirely plausible and quite believable that the passenger group of an aircraft would "en masse" completely misunderstand the situation and band together behind whoever they perceived was being wronged. Perception however does not always reflect reality. Groups of people love to get "outraged" over things.

All sorts of things are "plausible" but that doesn't make them probable. In the domain of reasoned speculation I am going with "The US crew, in the very least, needs more training and possibly some disciplinary action." as MORE probable.


User currently offlineMesaFlyGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 3202 posts, RR: 6
Reply 30, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10068 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting YQBexYHZBGM (Reply 17):
It was CRJs until fairly recently, was it not?

Not for the last few years, sadly.

Quoting YQBexYHZBGM (Reply 17):
If not the regularly-assigned aircraft, I am certain I observed a CRJ at the gate when the flight to ISP boarding in December 2012). I pay attention to these things, since ISP was my "home" airport until I moved away.

They fly to DCA from ISP too, using CRJ-200s (and an extra flight on an ERJ in the Spring/Summer   )



\________(---)________/ :) World's most beautiful aircraft: 757-200, MD-88/90, E-190, A321
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8640 posts, RR: 2
Reply 31, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9990 times:

Quoting MesaFlyGuy (Reply 30):
Not for the last few years, sadly.

A Dash is a much superior ride to a CRJ.

It sounds like PHL ground did not set this up well. Back seat middle is not where the guy should have been.

But, it does suggest a full flight. Therefore he could not have his own row. What to do? Bulkhead.

[Edited 2013-11-15 12:17:16]

User currently offlineeal46859 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 34 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9769 times:

It seems clear from the press release that the passenger became disruptive... for whatever reason..

A service animal such as a Golden Retriever would be physically impossible to go under the seat in front, so unless the seat was un bolted from the aircraft and held up by large supports, the conjecture that the flight crew was insisting that the dog go under the seat is not worth mentioning again since, it is not a physical possibility in reality.

So either the passenger wanted to have the dog on the seat next to him and not under his feet and legs and he refused, or there was some other reason the crew felt he was being disruptive, it was to the point that they cancelled the flight.

If it was because he wanted the dog on the seat next to him and the other passengers felt he should be able to do so, since it wasn't causing an issue in their view, does not make their opinion, resentments or their outrage correct or justified. They just ended up inconveniencing themselves and everyone else on that aircraft.


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11431 posts, RR: 52
Reply 33, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9667 times:

Quoting DL WIDGET HEAD (Reply 28):
After reading several articles about this incident, not one of the blind man's fellow passengers fault him or in any way insinuate that he started this altercation or brought it upon himself.

Okay, I'll play.

How many said it was the FA's fault? How many said it was the Captain's fault? How many said it was the Airline's fault? And finally, how many passengers were quoted as saying that? Because all the stories I read quote the same guy.

Now, I'm not trying to get on your case or anything. I'm just saying that most of the people on this thread have immediately swung to defend the blind guy with a great paucity of information in his support other than his being a blind guy.

The captain and the airline (so far) seem to agree with the F/A so strongly that they outed the guy by name in their press release.

[Edited 2013-11-15 12:39:28]


Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinerampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 3147 posts, RR: 6
Reply 34, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9559 times:

Quoting eal46859 (Reply 32):
A service animal such as a Golden Retriever would be physically impossible to go under the seat in front, so unless the seat was un bolted from the aircraft and held up by large supports, the conjecture that the flight crew was insisting that the dog go under the seat is not worth mentioning again since, it is not a physical possibility in reality.

I'm told that guide dogs are specifically bred to be small for their breed for the exact purpose of fitting in tight public places like airplanes and buses, theater and stadium seats, and restaurant booths. German Shepherd guide dogs I've known are not the hulking police dogs most would imagine, but are petite. I think the small-bred Labs, German Shepherds, and Goldens would at least partially fit under an airline seat as well as under the passenger's legs. That's what I'm told. (And this does correct my statement I made much earlier, when I thought that dogs would not fit under the seats at all.)

-Rampart


User currently offlineMesaFlyGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 3202 posts, RR: 6
Reply 35, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9448 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Flighty (Reply 31):
But, it does suggest a full flight. Therefore he could not have his own row. What to do? Bulkhead.

4384 often goes out full (if not oversold like when I flew it last Tuesday). And I agree, the bulkhead is where he should've been. I flew in 1F last week and that dog could've definitely fit there. (I'm 6'1" and there was room so the dog wouldn't have been too unconfortable).

Quoting Flighty (Reply 31):
A Dash is a much superior ride to a CRJ.

Oh I know, I just meant that it's sad that ISP cannot support something larger to PHL. Maybe after the Dashes are retired.



\________(---)________/ :) World's most beautiful aircraft: 757-200, MD-88/90, E-190, A321
User currently offlineDL WIDGET HEAD From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2100 posts, RR: 5
Reply 36, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9432 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 33):
Okay, I'll play.

How many said it was the FA's fault? How many said it was the Captain's fault? How many said it was the Airline's fault? And finally, how many passengers were quoted as saying that? Because all the stories I read quote the same guy.

You can do your own due diligence. I read 5 different articles about the same incident. I found in those articles 6 of his fellow passengers who are named say that the blind man was not at fault. A few of these same individuals blamed the crew and by extension the airline for their poor handling and judgement in this matter.


User currently offlinewjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5265 posts, RR: 24
Reply 37, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9333 times:

One dimwit FA's "disruptive" is most people's "assertive". The fact is that in most circumstances, passengers become belligerant over stupidities and alcohol and may need to be shut down; even if it might be handled better, it doesn't have to be.

But to think that you can try to take away a blind person's GUIDE DOG and not have them react in a heated manner is just naive. These idiots need to be retrained on procedures with the disabled. "Act as imperious and snotty as you want with most passengers, Barbie, but if it's a disabled person, recognize that THEY have done many more legs with a guide dog than you have, and probably actually know the rules, which you may have forgotten. Treat them like kings and queens and you will be fine."


User currently offlineJBLUA320 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3179 posts, RR: 19
Reply 38, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 8895 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Through three hour tarmac delays and other onboard issues, I have never seen a service dog get restless to the point of disruption nor have I ever known any of my fellow flight attendants to think it's a good idea to toy around with a blind passenger, something we deal with routinely. Airlines instill the fear of God in their crews when it comes to disability compliance and for good reason - it's ethical and the fines the airline can face are tremendous. This whole thing is sketchy for a few reasons:

First...If the passenger was seated in the last row middle seat of the Dash where the dog could become a projectile, then the passenger should have been reseated well ahead of the hour the Dash sat on the ground waiting for clearance. The plane should have not pushed out of compliance, so this should have been caught before the door was ever closed.

Secondly, if that was indeed the passenger's seat, there is NO seat for the dog to hypothetically fit under. You can't get mad about a seat that obviously doesn't exist.

Thirdly, passengers routinely back up fellow passengers even when policy states otherwise, regardless of who is right or who is wrong. With that being said...

Fourthly, I find it hard to believe that 30 passengers decided to get involved in this man's business on the last flight of the evening from PHL-ISP, which was clearly delayed already, after the plane returned to the gate. What sounds more logical to me is that the plane returned (to boot the man or to have him speak to a CRO, who knows) and for operational reasons, US canceled the flight, and presumably, the morning return to PHL if it was a RON in ISP. I don't believe that 30 passengers caused the flight to cancel, nor do I believe that this situation had anything to do with the flight not operating. If all of those passengers refused to board because of this situation, then US would be under zero obligation to provide a bus and the aircraft would have probably ferried to ISP to operate its return segment to keep the crew and aircraft in sequence. That didn't happen and I'd bet good money it was for reasons having almost nothing to do with this man and his dog.


User currently offlineMesaFlyGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 3202 posts, RR: 6
Reply 39, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 8771 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JBLUA320 (Reply 38):
Fourthly, I find it hard to believe that 30 passengers decided to get involved in this man's business on the last flight of the evening from PHL-ISP, which was clearly delayed already, after the plane returned to the gate. What sounds more logical to me is that the plane returned (to boot the man or to have him speak to a CRO, who knows) and for operational reasons, US canceled the flight, and presumably, the morning return to PHL if it was a RON in ISP. I don't believe that 30 passengers caused the flight to cancel, nor do I believe that this situation had anything to do with the flight not operating. If all of those passengers refused to board because of this situation, then US would be under zero obligation to provide a bus and the aircraft would have probably ferried to ISP to operate its return segment to keep the crew and aircraft in sequence. That didn't happen and I'd bet good money it was for reasons having almost nothing to do with this man and his dog.

I never thought of it that way. Thanks for shedding some light on the situation from a professional point of view (professional as in somebody who is part of the profession involved, not as in the posters before you have been unprofessional)



\________(---)________/ :) World's most beautiful aircraft: 757-200, MD-88/90, E-190, A321
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11431 posts, RR: 52
Reply 40, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 8509 times:

Quoting DL WIDGET HEAD (Reply 36):
You can do your own due diligence. I read 5 different articles about the same incident. I found in those articles 6 of his fellow passengers who are named say that the blind man was not at fault. A few of these same individuals blamed the crew and by extension the airline for their poor handling and judgement in this matter.

So, you're not going to show us any of your articles that back up your claim? It would help your argument if you did.

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 37):
But to think that you can try to take away a blind person's GUIDE DOG and not have them react in a heated manner is just naive.

Who said anything about taking away the guide dog?



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1465 posts, RR: 2
Reply 41, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8161 times:

Quoting JBLUA320 (Reply 38):
Through three hour tarmac delays and other onboard issues, I have never seen a service dog get restless to the point of disruption nor have I ever known any of my fellow flight attendants to think it's a good idea to toy around with a blind passenger, something we deal with routinely.

So you have experience with placing the blind passenger into one seat with no seat in front of him and placing the dog than with an other passenger at his feet.

Quoting JBLUA320 (Reply 38):
First...If the passenger was seated in the last row middle seat of the Dash where the dog could become a projectile, then the passenger should have been reseated well ahead of the hour the Dash sat on the ground waiting for clearance. The plane should have not pushed out of compliance, so this should have been caught before the door was ever closed.

How can that be an argument against the blind man? All articles state that the passenger was placed exactly into that seat and not re seated by the flight attendant. So the rest of your arguments go out into the wind because this flight did not do things the way you expected him or her to do it.


User currently offlineDash8Driver16 From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 7698 times:

As a dash 8 pilot who has repeatedly flown that same route in the same plane, that on a whole that route has the most pax issues I have experienced. I have had passengers on arrival in ISP try and force their way past the FA into the flight deck while deplaning so they can complain about something(I.e. Noise, ride quality, FA being mean by making them turn off their phones and music). Now I don't know much other than what I have read I was not working the flight and do not know who the crew was but the dog was probably supposed to stay on the floor by the seats not under them. I have carried military German Shepherds before and what agents try and do is place the owner/handler in 9e the middle seat of the bench and leave the AC or DF side empty so the dog can lay on the floor and not be restricted by other pax feet. Obviously this did not happen and that blame goes to the gate agent Managers in PHL. Discipline the grew because they they removed what they deem a non compliant pax is moronic. That would be like saying if someone got mad at you you would be disciplined. Also an uncooperative pax becomes a safety hazard for all Pax due to not being able to rely on them in an emergency.

Do I think this is wrong? Yes I agree there should have been something done to help mitigate the situation. Whether it was trying to reseat the Pax and accommodate the dog or something else it was extremely poorly handled. But blaming the crew without the facts is dumb yes six people said the guy didn't do anything but what of the other 20 so people. I can probably find six people a flight who thought the flight was crap. It's time to all take a deep breath and look at this in a whole new light, were there regs/rules being violated? Could this have been handled better? After working what May have been a 14 hour day and then being stuck on the Tarmac for an hour and a half with grumpy pax how would you have felt. Think these things over and then majestic your judgement. As we all know the media loves a good aviation bashing story when they can get one (SWA?).


User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 43, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5953 times:

The regulation clearly states the pax and dog be moved, they should not be separated.

Quoting rampart (Reply 34):

Not true. They are not bread with tight spaces in mind. They are bread with lower rear hips and a height so that the average person needs a dog the grip on the harness will be comfortable for dog and person.

Generally the dogs best suited for this purpose are golden and lab retrievers and German shepherds. Outliers are also trained and bred on occasion. Smaller breads like boxers for short people, taller breads or larger shepherds or retrievers for tall people, and certain other breeds that have hair, not fur, for allergic people.

In 20+ years, our family had raised 3 shepherds and 11 retrievers for the guide dog orgs. Only about 1/2 pass their training. The rest become police dogs and other professional dogs (one of ours is an arson dog in Louisiana), companion /therapy animals, breeders(then pets) or just pets.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineJBLUA320 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3179 posts, RR: 19
Reply 44, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5755 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 41):
So you have experience with placing the blind passenger into one seat with no seat in front of him and placing the dog than with an other passenger at his feet.

I actually don't even know how you extrapolated what I said to mean that at all, but I digress...

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 41):
How can that be an argument against the blind man? All articles state that the passenger was placed exactly into that seat and not re seated by the flight attendant. So the rest of your arguments go out into the wind because this flight did not do things the way you expected him or her to do it.

It's not an argument against the blind man. If anything, it's an argument against the airline. Frankly, it's an argument against all of these articles that seem to imply that 30 people rallied behind a blind customer having a crap experience with an airline, causing a flight to cancel because of it, but then miraculously received complementary bus transportation to Islip because they all refused to fly.

Regardless of who is right and who is wrong, the way this whole mess is being portrayed seems like two distinct issues being merged into one because it makes a good news story.


User currently offlinerampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 3147 posts, RR: 6
Reply 45, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5570 times:

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 43):
Not true. They are not bread with tight spaces in mind. They are bread with lower rear hips and a height so that the average person needs a dog the grip on the harness will be comfortable for dog and person.

I don't doubt you. It's probably both. But yes, fitting in small places is relevant to the breeding and training, at least in the organization I'm familiar with. I'm curious if the training you are familiar with did not work on small spaces. I think we have the same background experience. At any rate, I've seen guide dogs fit into small places (under the subway seat, for instance).

-Rampart


User currently offlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1465 posts, RR: 2
Reply 46, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5179 times:

Quoting JBLUA320 (Reply 44):
So you have experience with placing the blind passenger into one seat with no seat in front of him and placing the dog than with an other passenger at his feet.

I actually don't even know how you extrapolated what I said to mean that at all, but I digress...

Read what you have written and I have been quoting and think.

My point is: when the Flight Attendant gets the start of this confrontation wrong, not placing the blind man in a seat where he can have his guide dog placed at his own feet, all the later happenings are just smoke., not relevant.


User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 47, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4552 times:

Quoting rampart (Reply 45):
I don't doubt you. It's probably both. But yes, fitting in small places is relevant to the breeding and training, at least in the organization I'm familiar with. I'm curious if the training you are familiar with did not work on small spaces. I think we have the same background experience. At any rate, I've seen guide dogs fit into small places (under the subway seat, for instance).

I have never heard that "fitting in small spaces" was a primary breeding concern. The hips and overall shoulder height are bred in for better gait and comfort for the average person. Temperament and intelligence are also of paramount importance, as are blood lines that don't exhibit congenital problems.

I'm only familiar with the Seeing Eye and SouthEastern. They do things differently between them. Seeing Eye uses a lot more Shepherds, SE rarely uses them at all. All of our Shepherds were about the same size, we have had very different sized labs and goldens. Some of our labs were anything but compact, others were smaller than average.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineJBLUA320 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3179 posts, RR: 19
Reply 48, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 4352 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 46):
My point is: when the Flight Attendant gets the start of this confrontation wrong, not placing the blind man in a seat where he can have his guide dog placed at his own feet, all the later happenings are just smoke., not relevant.

I'm not going to argue with you, but they are absolutely relevant. Every mistake, every distraction, everything that was said is all relevant to paint the larger picture of what happened. If understanding the big picture didn't matter, Threat and Error Management (TEM) and Crew Resource Management (CRM) would be out the window. The Flight Attendant not moving the passenger earlier is just one layer of a multi-layered mistake on myriad levels.


User currently offlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1465 posts, RR: 2
Reply 49, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 4264 times:

Quoting JBLUA320 (Reply 48):
Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 46):
My point is: when the Flight Attendant gets the start of this confrontation wrong, not placing the blind man in a seat where he can have his guide dog placed at his own feet, all the later happenings are just smoke., not relevant.

I'm not going to argue with you, but they are absolutely relevant. Every mistake, every distraction, everything that was said is all relevant to paint the larger picture of what happened. If understanding the big picture didn't matter, Threat and Error Management (TEM) and Crew Resource Management (CRM) would be out the window. The Flight Attendant not moving the passenger earlier is just one layer of a multi-layered mistake on myriad levels.

Having done that mistake and not correcting it, the flight attendant has derailed the situation. The rest is smoke the result of a wrong situation from the start, if TEM and CRM does not realize that, than there is no help.
When wrong decisions are backed up by absolute authority the situation will go down the drain.


User currently offlineMSJYOP28Apilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 231 posts, RR: 1
Reply 50, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4167 times:

One thing that seems to be lost in this is that US Airways didnt operate the flight and US didnt cancel the flight. Piedmont Airlines operated the flight and cancelled the flight. The decision to cancel the flight would rest solely with Piedmont Airlines. US could have suggested the flight be cancelled but in no way could they cancel the flight on their own.

US Airways didnt train the pilots and flight attendant on this flight. Even with Piedmont being a wholly owned regional, it is still operated as if it were a separate company.


User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2127 posts, RR: 1
Reply 51, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4102 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 33):
The captain and the airline (so far) seem to agree with the F/A so strongly that they outed the guy by name in their press release.

US has put out a much more detailed statement on their facebook page,


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11431 posts, RR: 52
Reply 52, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4010 times:

Who is Albert Rizzi?

He's an advocate for the blind.

http://myblindspot.org
http://myblindspot.org/tag/albert-rizzi/
http://www.gdui.org (formerly on the Board of Directors)



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinejetfuel From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2226 posts, RR: 0
Reply 53, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3958 times:

Quoting silentbob (Reply 51):
US has put out a much more detailed statement on their facebook page,

IMO the airline's response on Facebook is disgusting



Where's the passion gone out of the airline industry? The smell of jetfuel and the romance of taking a flight....
User currently offlinereality From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 498 posts, RR: 0
Reply 54, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3930 times:

This is part of what is on US Facebook page...

• In compliance with the Air Carriers Access Act, and the FAA, service animals must be either under the seat in front of a passenger, on their lap (if equal to or smaller than a lap child), or at their feet … but at no time can they be in the main aisle of the aircraft as that is a primary evacuation route. In this instance, the animal was not able to be secured out of the main aisle, and attempts to work with the customer failed to ensure compliance with this safety rule.
• The customer is an advocate for disability rights, and appears to have forced a confrontation with his disruptive behavior, rather than simply complying with the instruction and securing the dog. Everyone was tired, it was near midnight, and I’m sure patience was in short supply as the aircraft had already been delayed on departure due to a mechanical issue and the animal was restless. We all would be.
• Once that was communicated by the cabin crew to the flight deck crew, the decision was made to return to the gate to remove the customer and calm the situation.
• Several other passengers, upon seeing the customer’s removal from the flight, piled on to the emotional confrontation, making threats to contact media and make an issue of out ‘kicking a blind man and his dog off a US Airways flight.’ This reduced the FA to tears, and they were unable to continue as they believed their safety was in jeopardy. The captain made the decision to cancel the flight and alternate means of transport were secured to get the passengers to their destination


User currently offlinejetfuel From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2226 posts, RR: 0
Reply 55, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3885 times:

Quoting reality (Reply 54):
This is part of what is on US Facebook page...

• In compliance with the Air Carriers Access Act, and the FAA, service animals must be either under the seat in front of a passenger, on their lap (if equal to or smaller than a lap child), or at their feet … but at no time can they be in the main aisle of the aircraft as that is a primary evacuation route. In this instance, the animal was not able to be secured out of the main aisle, and attempts to work with the customer failed to ensure compliance with this safety rule.
• The customer is an advocate for disability rights, and appears to have forced a confrontation with his disruptive behavior, rather than simply complying with the instruction and securing the dog. Everyone was tired, it was near midnight, and I’m sure patience was in short supply as the aircraft had already been delayed on departure due to a mechanical issue and the animal was restless. We all would be.
• Once that was communicated by the cabin crew to the flight deck crew, the decision was made to return to the gate to remove the customer and calm the situation.
• Several other passengers, upon seeing the customer’s removal from the flight, piled on to the emotional confrontation, making threats to contact media and make an issue of out ‘kicking a blind man and his dog off a US Airways flight.’ This reduced the FA to tears, and they were unable to continue as they believed their safety was in jeopardy. The captain made the decision to cancel the flight and alternate means of transport were secured to get the passengers to their destination

Totally overlooking the fact that the F/A was trying to force the dog under a seat that was not near its master. Guide dogs are trained to stay with their owner. How dare they use the fact that the customer is an advocate for disability rights. The they go on to suggest that the customer appears to have forced a confrontation with his disruptive behavior yet there is no evidence, other than the fcat the dog was restless and wantef to stay with its owner.

Time to retrain your F/A team. Any emotional confrontation was initiated by the F/A and not the other 30 odd passengers that US tries to blame
Shame US AIR shame

[Edited 2013-11-16 23:16:52]


Where's the passion gone out of the airline industry? The smell of jetfuel and the romance of taking a flight....
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7757 posts, RR: 18
Reply 56, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 3678 times:

I thought they got rid of the dashes?


Either way, I think they should've reseat the guy in a seat that didn't jut out like that....it was the only seat that was facing the aisle, remember



我思うゆえに我あり。(Jap. 'I think, therefore I am.')
User currently offlinerampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 3147 posts, RR: 6
Reply 57, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3543 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 52):

Who is Albert Rizzi?

He's an advocate for the blind.

The cabin crew unknowingly walked into a mine field on this one. Or maybe they didn't if they've know the individual and already blacklisted him, in which case it's even more stupid on their part. Imagine blacklisting an advocate for women's rights, or minority rights, because that individual might confront you on fair treatment. It's just not done. Advocates can be confrontational, it's part of being an advocate if stupidity interferes with fair treatment. Perhaps he's not a pleasant person, but still, more power to Albert RIzzi. He's right.

And US made it worse by outing the man, via Facebook, as blacklisted. I'd like to find the original Facebook post from US (not just the excerpt above), but I've already waded through 100 posts from irate customers or guide-dog supporters from the last 12 hours and haven't found it. US is wrong and wrong-headed for fighting this. Wrong from a protected rights point of view, from a simple cabin management point of view, and from a public relations point of view.

-Rampart


User currently offlineMesaFlyGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 3202 posts, RR: 6
Reply 58, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3414 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 56):
I thought they got rid of the dashes?

You of all people I would've thought knew that they hadn't!  
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 56):
Either way, I think they should've reseat the guy in a seat that didn't jut out like that....it was the only seat that was facing the aisle, remember

How, though? People with disabilities canot be seated in exit rows, which is what the bulkhead seats are. This was the next best thing. Luckily, the passengers next to the man tried to make room for the dog but the flight attendant handled it poorly from there.



\________(---)________/ :) World's most beautiful aircraft: 757-200, MD-88/90, E-190, A321
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7757 posts, RR: 18
Reply 59, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3331 times:

Quoting MesaFlyGuy (Reply 58):
You of all people I would've thought knew that they hadn't!

Well theyre not in PHX and I don't follow US as much anymore since I moved to Japan   

Quoting MesaFlyGuy (Reply 58):
How, though? People with disabilities canot be seated in exit rows, which is what the bulkhead seats are. This was the next best thing. Luckily, the passengers next to the man tried to make room for the dog but the flight attendant handled it poorly from there.

The sight dog would not have been allowed in a bulkhead seat either. They should've just sat him in a non-exit row, normal seat. Or have him trade places with the woman who offered to let the dog sit under the seat in front of her.



我思うゆえに我あり。(Jap. 'I think, therefore I am.')
User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2127 posts, RR: 1
Reply 60, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3211 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 59):
Or have him trade places with the woman who offered to let the dog sit under the seat in front of her.

You're assuming the passenger was willing to move to another seat. I find it next to impossible to believe that someone was willing to let the dog take up their leg room but were not willing to move to one of the empty seats on the airplane.


User currently offlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1465 posts, RR: 2
Reply 61, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3185 times:

Quoting rampart (Reply 57):
The cabin crew unknowingly walked into a mine field on this one.

If the flight attendant had been sensible, their would have not been any minefield.


User currently offlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1465 posts, RR: 2
Reply 62, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3161 times:

Quoting silentbob (Reply 60):
You're assuming the passenger was willing to move to another seat. I find it next to impossible to believe that someone was willing to let the dog take up their leg room but were not willing to move to one of the empty seats on the airplane.

I am assuming that the passenger would have been willing to move. He sat were he was seated.
You are not allowed to move from your assigned seat and as a blind person it is anyway difficult to know if there are free seats on the plain.
Anyway if the FA would have tried to re seat him, it would have been mentioned in the press release by the airline.


User currently offlinejetwet1 From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 274 posts, RR: 0
Reply 63, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3079 times:

Quoting rampart (Reply 57):
The cabin crew unknowingly walked into a mine field on this one.

I know what you are trying to say, but honestly, there is nothing unknowingly about it. A man arrives at the plane door with a guide dog, at that point (both morally and for self preservation) all bets are off. I don't have to deal with the ACAA, but I do with the ADA, the business I run, along with most I have worked at go above and beyond when it comes to ADA, for the extra little inconvenience it causes the business it just simply, the right thing to do AND it's not worth getting sued by the person with the disability and having the government come pay a visit.

So I tell my employees, put yourself in the persons position AND do whatever it takes to accommodate them.


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11431 posts, RR: 52
Reply 64, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3029 times:

Quoting jetfuel (Reply 55):
The they go on to suggest that the customer appears to have forced a confrontation with his disruptive behavior yet there is no evidence,

Huh? The airline would have most of the evidence, and far more evidence than those of us on this board. The only way you can reach this conclusion is to assume that everything the airline is saying is BS.

Quoting rampart (Reply 57):
And US made it worse by outing the man, via Facebook, as blacklisted. I'd like to find the original

The original facebook post is the one that is up. It did not blacklist the man.

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 62):
I am assuming that the passenger would have been willing to move.

That is a VERY big assumption. All of the posts on here are going well out of their way to assume that the passenger was at all times reasonable, and willing to move.


The more I read about this, the more I have to think it was the guy I ran into a few years ago. It is an assumption, I recognize, but if it is the same guy (an advocate for the blind with a chip on his shoulder), then I do not have much respect for him. Yelling at flight attendants and kicking his dog. He was looking for trouble. You shouldn't assume he's an angel.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1465 posts, RR: 2
Reply 65, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2978 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 64):

But I have to assume the FA can do no wrong.
It is very easy, did the FA seat the blind passenger at a seat were that passenger could have his dog a his feet?
If yes the passenger is at fault.
If the FA did not place the passenger in a seat were he could have his dog at his own feet the FA is at fault, simple really.
Everything else is smoke and mirrors.


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11431 posts, RR: 52
Reply 66, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2820 times:

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 65):
It is very easy, did the FA seat the blind passenger at a seat were that passenger could have his dog a his feet?
If yes the passenger is at fault.
If the FA did not place the passenger in a seat were he could have his dog at his own feet the FA is at fault, simple really.

And which happened here? If you have a source, that would be useful.

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 65):
But I have to assume the FA can do no wrong.

No, in every post, you have assumed that the blind man could do no wrong, which ties your hands. It forces you to believe that it MUST be the FA's fault.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1465 posts, RR: 2
Reply 67, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2666 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 66):
And which happened here? If you have a source, that would be useful.

read the articles yourself.

Do you have a source that the FA tried to move the blind passenger and he denied?

Every article I have read agrees on were the blind man was seated.

I know that the crew is always right. But could that be actually the problem?

Why should we always assume that the papers get it wrong when the they say the crew is at fault?

I am reading enough articles were a disturbing passenger is removed from a plane and good for them, but do I than have to ask me if the paper got it wrong and the crew is really at fault?

And I have the failure, that I assume that when it is written that a handicapped is getting a raw deal, that it is usually true.

And I have not once said that the blind man can do not wrong, but when he is placed somewhere in the plane were he can not keep his dog at his feet, than the crew got it wrong. Have you any indication somewhere that that was not the case?

[Edited 2013-11-17 12:08:35]

User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11431 posts, RR: 52
Reply 68, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2533 times:

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 67):
read the articles yourself.

You get a    for that. If you read an article that says something that backs up your argument, you need to show us that article. "Read the articles yourself" is a cop-out.

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 67):
Do you have a source that the FA tried to move the blind passenger and he denied?

No, but I also don't have a source that said that the FA did not make an attempt to move the passenger. Nor do you.

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 67):
I know that the crew is always right. But could that be actually the problem?

Absolutely. It could be the problem. Or it could be a belligerent advocate. It could be a lot of things, but do we know what yet?

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 67):
Why should we always assume that the papers get it wrong when the they say the crew is at fault?

Two reasons: (1) the papers have shown themselves to lack the desire to do actual investigative journalism, preferring instead to get the emotional tugging sensationalist headline instead. I'm not talking just about this story, but pretty much every story.
(2) The articles I read through yesterday all quoted the same passenger, Frank Ohlhorst.

Now, another article actually admits that Mr. Rizzi got confrontational, saying "you can throw me off the plane" because he didn't like the FA's using the term "stowed" to describe what needed to be done with his dog. This article also says that his request to be reseated was "ignored," though, so there is clearly a fog of war scenario here.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/b...ight-to-li-1.6435447?firstfree=yes



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineJBLUA320 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3179 posts, RR: 19
Reply 69, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2536 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 67):
Every article I have read agrees on were the blind man was seated.

Every article also seems to agree that the FA was trying to force the dog under a seat that didn't exist, so I'm not sure exactly what you're saying here, unless you're suggesting that the media perspective trumps the airline and the passenger both, in which case I have a bridge to sell you...

I'm still trying to figure out why this is even newsworthy beyond the media's fabricated idea that the passengers forced the flight to cancel. There is probably some cause and effect as a result of the RTG, but to suggest that an airline actually cancelled a flight despite sequencing, operational impact and contract stipulations with US due to a passenger revolt (but then bussed them to ISP anyway) is not realistic.


User currently offlineMesaFlyGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 3202 posts, RR: 6
Reply 70, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2505 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JBLUA320 (Reply 69):

I'm still trying to figure out why this is even newsworthy beyond the media's fabricated idea that the passengers forced the flight to cancel.

Because people love a good fight!           



\________(---)________/ :) World's most beautiful aircraft: 757-200, MD-88/90, E-190, A321
User currently offlinejohnboy From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2594 posts, RR: 7
Reply 71, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2429 times:

Quoting reality (Reply 54):
This reduced the FA to tears,

Fantastic. That makes me feel so much safer in a crisis situation.
 


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5675 posts, RR: 6
Reply 72, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2367 times:

Quoting JBLUA320 (Reply 69):
but to suggest that an airline actually cancelled a flight despite sequencing, operational impact and contract stipulations with US due to a passenger revolt (but then bussed them to ISP anyway) is not realistic.

The "airline" didn't cancel the flight because of a passenger revolt. The flight was canceled because the flight crew refused to fly an airplane with 30 aggressively angry New Yorkers on board, as is their right. Even if there was another crew available, it's unlikely they would take the flight knowing what went on.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinebennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7698 posts, RR: 3
Reply 73, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2235 times:

If the blind passenger, (and the bulk of the other passengers) were aggressive, as US seems to say, then why did they arrange alternative transport.

Why was Security/Police apparently not involved.


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8640 posts, RR: 2
Reply 74, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2139 times:

Quoting bennett123 (Reply 73):

If the blind passenger, (and the bulk of the other passengers) were aggressive, as US seems to say, then why did they arrange alternative transport.

Those people bought a ride.

US has certain flexibilities as all airlines do. Needless to say, if a Captain does not feel at ease, the flight will not go. This makes it an operational cancel (not due to weather). That activates US's other irrops stuff like finding a bus, or a hotel, another flight etc. They don't have a blank in the computer system for "passenger revolt."

An important distinction is, the passengers were not arrested. The flight merely cancelled. But, if true major security threats existed, then sure, there is no limit to the steps that can be taken. All the pax can be hauled to Guantanamo by a platoon of Army rangers, if things are really bad.


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 Arrested On US Air Flight For Suspicious Bagel posted Thu Jan 6 2011 08:06:42 by fxramper
US Airways Flight Attendants Protest posted Tue Oct 31 2006 16:32:55 by Wsan581
Captain Cancels Delayed WW Flight Due Pax Fighting posted Tue Jul 5 2005 18:46:06 by UK_Dispatcher
Man Arrested After US Airways Flight posted Mon Aug 23 2004 10:51:23 by 7LBAC111
2013 Q1 China-US Direct Flight Passenger Ststistic posted Thu Oct 17 2013 14:31:36 by dtfg
Pilot Impersonator On US Airways Flight… posted Thu Mar 21 2013 20:27:48 by kiffy
UAL Delays Flight So Pax Can See Dying Mother posted Wed Mar 6 2013 21:08:18 by kkephart13
What Will AA/US Fleet Be After They Merge? posted Sat Jan 26 2013 14:43:29 by cosyr
LO Flight 16 Pax Sue Boeing, Maint Firm posted Fri Nov 9 2012 10:13:25 by MountainFlyer
Ruling For Next Flight After Cancellation posted Wed Aug 29 2012 16:58:08 by shufflemoomin