The National (US) Chapter of the NAACP issued an advisory statement warning African Americans of discrimination issues when travelling with AA. Is this a first?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/video/peoplean ... ocid=ientp

Print article:

http://abcnews.go.com/Lifestyle/wireSto ... s-50705351

Definitely looks like the other one was deleted. Interesting...

I'll state it again - as an AA ExecPlat with 100k+ BIS miles each year, for the last 10 years, with the majority of those being on AA metal...I haven't had any problem. But I obviously cannot speak for anyone else who may have.

Can't wait for this to be deleted too.

How can an organization legally be allowed to publicly slander a company in this way without needing to provide evidence?

I'm somewhat surprised with this, having flown an awful lot of AA miles over the years. I hope the NAACP did its homework on this -- the cases cited are real cases (though I scoff at the one where they moved her seat -- that was Ann Coulter's bonehead complaint too). But were non-Black patrons also subjected to poor treatment on occasion by the airline? Were they subjected to poor treatment at the same rate?

My antennae are raised, but I need answers to more questions.

RIDICULOUS.....most of the examples that are given are rather pathetic to be accused of racism.

But I will admit, this one

One involved the head of the North Carolina NAACP, the Rev. William Barber, who sued American after being removed from a flight last year. Barber said police were called and removed him from the plane after he asked a flight attendant to tell a white passenger behind him to quiet down.

Barber accused the other passenger of making a comment about having a problem with "those people."

...let's just say I'd like to hear more details. Because on the surface, that looks bad.

727LOVER wrote:

RIDICULOUS.....most of the examples that are given are rather pathetic to be accused of racism.

But I will admit, this one

One involved the head of the North Carolina NAACP, the Rev. William Barber, who sued American after being removed from a flight last year. Barber said police were called and removed him from the plane after he asked a flight attendant to tell a white passenger behind him to quiet down.

Barber accused the other passenger of making a comment about having a problem with "those people."

...let's just say I'd like to hear more details. Because on the surface, that looks bad.

More complete story of the Barber incident in the link below. Happened on a DCA-RDU flight. He praises AA employees for their help in getting him home quickly after being removed.

http://abc11.com/news/nc-naacp-presiden ... u/1294714/

Well, everyone will talk on how the party was depending on how he felt.

Being the first airline to hire an African American pilot, it's pretty much off limits to accuse AA of "racism". t's absurd to attack an airline of racism just because you were too sensitive or on a bad mood. But as 727LOVER says, there's got to be more to be heard in order to establish a right judgement.

I generally support the NAACP but this advisory is just stupid...

Last week I posted a topic about an AA captain inserting himself into a customer service issue between an agent and a African American passenger. He told the agent not to board the young lady. She claimed it was racially motivated.

The topic was deleted and no reason was given. However, it appears there are more instances that have created this travel warning.

AASAP777 wrote:

Well, everyone will talk on how the party was depending on how he felt.

Coming from the first airline to hire an African American pilot, it's pretty much off limits to accuse AA of "racism". t's absurd to attack an airline of racism just because you were too sensitive or on a bad mood. But as 727LOVER says, there's got to be more to be heard in order to establish a right judgement.

If AA truly started harboring a culture of racism, it would never, ever be "off limits" to accuse AA of racism. Just because you were groundbreaking in the past doesn't mean you can't change for the bad.

But I don't feel AA is in this boat.

sw733 wrote:

AASAP777 wrote:

Well, everyone will talk on how the party was depending on how he felt.

Coming from the first airline to hire an African American pilot, it's pretty much off limits to accuse AA of "racism". t's absurd to attack an airline of racism just because you were too sensitive or on a bad mood. But as 727LOVER says, there's got to be more to be heard in order to establish a right judgement.

If AA truly started harboring a culture of racism, it would never, ever be "off limits" to accuse AA of racism. Just because you were groundbreaking in the past doesn't mean you can't change for the bad.

But I don't feel AA is in this boat.

Right! Especially having a quite important workforce of African Americans in the US and hundreds of employees of African heritage on international stations, I guess two or three schmucks don't establish a policy, and for sure this must be thoroughly checked.

AASAP777 wrote:

Being the first airline to hire an African American pilot, it's pretty much off limits to accuse AA of "racism".

Why?

I'm not commenting on the specifics of the article because I have no personal experience with the topic, but just because an airline was the first to hire an African American pilot decades ago doesn't mean the airline can't have race issues today.

ty97 wrote:

AASAP777 wrote:

Being the first airline to hire an African American pilot, it's pretty much off limits to accuse AA of "racism".

Why?

I'm not commenting on the specifics of the article because I have no personal experience with the topic, but just because an airline was the first to hire an African American pilot decades ago doesn't mean the airline can't have race issues today.

Because that shows that racism is not a"corporate practice". If someone is racist, it is because he's got issues and I certainly hope someone like this should be fired because it is unacceptable that at this time and day someone still thinks about being disgusted about skin color or ethnic stuff. I was an AAer for 15 years, and many African Americans wore the double A logo with pride. Even in my home station (SAP) we had Honduran staff of African heritage, not to mention all those stations in the Caribbean. Racism in AA is unacceptable, and if someone still has those kinds of ideas, they ought to be terminated.

mcdu wrote:

Last week I posted a topic about an AA captain inserting himself into a customer service issue between an agent and a African American passenger. He told the agent not to board the young lady. She claimed it was racially motivated.

The topic was deleted and no reason was given. However, it appears there are more instances that have created this travel warning.

Your topic was never deleted. It quickly derailed and turned political, so it was moved to Non Aviation.

AASAP777 wrote:

Well, everyone will talk on how the party was depending on how he felt.

Being the first airline to hire an African American pilot, it's pretty much off limits to accuse AA of "racism". t's absurd to attack an airline of racism just because you were too sensitive or on a bad mood. But as 727LOVER says, there's got to be more to be heard in order to establish a right judgement.

Huh?

First, it would be interesting to know what percentage of passengers who are kicked off flights are white, black, and Hispanic, and compare those rates to the percentages for all passengers.

Second, I've dealt with a lot of employees of color at AA over the years, from ticket agents to gate agents to baggage services to flight crew. I really don't think their is a culture of racism.

Third, airlines in the post 9/11 era are more willing to boot a passenger than they were before 9/11. If a plane has to divert, it costs time and money, disrupts the travel plans of other passengers, and requires the crew (and passengers) to answer questions from law enforcement.

Fourth, a friend of mine is an AA captain and once kicked off a passenger before departing ORD, because he threatened to strike another passenger who declined a request to change seats. (When the passenger threatened to slug the other passenger, 4 F/A call buttons were pushed, almost simultaneously.) CSAs and a supervisor took over the situation, because of the passenger hit or shoved an F/A or pilot, then the Chicago Police Dept. had to be called, and the passenger would have wound up in federal custody, pursuant to federal law. Of course, that would mean the crew and passengers being interviewed by law enforcement and the cancelling of the flight.

As it was, the crew had to fill out incident reports during sit time at LAX. Oh, and the passenger booted of the plane was white, and had AAdvantage status. He was removed, because my friend was concerned that a second incident in the air would require a diversion.

Brickell305 wrote:

AASAP777 wrote:

Well, everyone will talk on how the party was depending on how he felt.

Being the first airline to hire an African American pilot, it's pretty much off limits to accuse AA of "racism". t's absurd to attack an airline of racism just because you were too sensitive or on a bad mood. But as 727LOVER says, there's got to be more to be heard in order to establish a right judgement.

Huh?

See my point. If AA was corporately racist, that "first" (which ocurred over half a century ago) would have never happened. This is an issue of individuals with issues or people who were too sensitive. It happens. If you have an uneventful experience, you won't complain. If it was great, you will praise. If the flight was uneventful, but you came to be on a schmuck's way, then the rest of the experience was blown because someone with issues came along, not to mention if that includes someone with a KKK mind.

Like I said before, this issue should be seriously addressed by Mr. Parker, because it's simply unacceptable.

Yahoo gave a couple of resons for the advisory, but cannot find the story in there at this time. Two of the examples that were given was the flyer and her friend that had 1st class tickets, she was moved to coach and the friend was allowed to stay. The second one was about a stroller; IIRC it was about putting it in the overhead bin and not wanting to check it with the gate agent.

ckfred wrote:

Fourth, a friend of mine is an AA captain and once kicked off a passenger before departing ORD, because he threatened to strike another passenger who declined a request to change seats. (When the passenger threatened to slug the other passenger, 4 F/A call buttons were pushed, almost simultaneously.) CSAs and a supervisor took over the situation, because of the passenger hit or shoved an F/A or pilot, then the Chicago Police Dept. had to be called, and the passenger would have wound up in federal custody, pursuant to federal law. Of course, that would mean the crew and passengers being interviewed by law enforcement and the cancelling of the flight.

As it was, the crew had to fill out incident reports during sit time at LAX. Oh, and the passenger booted of the plane was white, and had AAdvantage status. He was removed, because my friend was concerned that a second incident in the air would require a diversion.

I agree with your comments about offloading pax post-9/11 but I hope you're not comparing your story to the Rev. Barber incident. It looks like the passenger behind him making comments was not the nicest person and he admitted his wisest course was to comply with the flight crew and police and then deal with complaining about the incident later. He took the correct action while on the aircraft.

AASAP777 wrote:

ty97 wrote:

AASAP777 wrote:

Being the first airline to hire an African American pilot, it's pretty much off limits to accuse AA of "racism".

Why?

I'm not commenting on the specifics of the article because I have no personal experience with the topic, but just because an airline was the first to hire an African American pilot decades ago doesn't mean the airline can't have race issues today.

Because that shows that racism is not a"corporate practice". If someone is racist, it is because he's got issues and I certainly hope someone like this should be fired because it is unacceptable that at this time and day someone still thinks about being disgusted about skin color or ethnic stuff. I was an AAer for 15 years, and many African Americans wore the double A logo with pride. Even in my home station (SAP) we had Honduran staff of African heritage, not to mention all those stations in the Caribbean. Racism in AA is unacceptable, and if someone still has those kinds of ideas, they ought to be terminated.

As I said, I know nothing about these specific incidents.

But AA hired the first African American pilot in 1964. Corporate culture can change in 50+ years. I'm not saying that it has, but using that hiring as an argument that AA can't possibly be racist fails a basic logic test. But again, I'm not saying AA is racist, I have no clue.

mcdu wrote:

Last week I posted a topic about an AA captain inserting himself into a customer service issue between an agent and a African American passenger. He told the agent not to board the young lady. She claimed it was racially motivated.

The topic was deleted and no reason was given. However, it appears there are more instances that have created this travel warning.

Here's my issue with the incident, as alleged by the passenger. As I mentioned in another post, any sort of altercation with flight crew, whether failing to obey directions or any sort of physical contact (pushing, slapping, hitting, etc.) is a federal offense. The passenger will be arrested by local police and turned over to federal custody, and all witnesses will be interviewed by law enforcement.

If there is some sort of issue on the ground, flight crew are instructed to stay out and let CSAs and other airline personnel deal with it. Certainly, crew will know what is going on, and the captain has the final word on whether the passenger flies or not.

But, if the captain inserted himself as the passenger suggests, he didn't follow company policy. Forget the question of racism. Why is the captain getting involved? If the passenger gave him a push or slap to get him out of the way of her getting on the plane, she would have been arrested, and the flight would have been delayed or canceled, while law enforcement took the captain's statement.

This is why I'm hesitant to believe the passenger. It only makes sense, if the captain didn't follow policy.

AASAP777 wrote:

Brickell305 wrote:

AASAP777 wrote:

Well, everyone will talk on how the party was depending on how he felt.

Being the first airline to hire an African American pilot, it's pretty much off limits to accuse AA of "racism". t's absurd to attack an airline of racism just because you were too sensitive or on a bad mood. But as 727LOVER says, there's got to be more to be heard in order to establish a right judgement.

Huh?

See my point. If AA was corporately racist, that "first" (which ocurred over half a century ago) would have never happened. This is an issue of individuals with issues or people who were too sensitive. It happens. If you have an uneventful experience, you won't complain. If it was great, you will praise. If the flight was uneventful, but you came to be on a schmuck's way, then the rest of the experience was blown because someone with issues came along, not to mention if that includes someone with a KKK mind.

Like I said before, this issue should be seriously addressed by Mr. Parker, because it's simply unacceptable.

You're making the assumption that corporate culture doesn't change. Corporate culture can change massively in the matter of a few years, let alone several decades. Again, I don't think AA has...but it certainly can.

Having a 'little' experience in politics and how it works, and especially with first hand knowledge of civil rights groups and their methods of operation, This sounds to me very similar to the 'shake down' attempts by various 'civil rights' organizations against public companies. They make outlandish racial claims then go back and tell the company, you need to have some 'advisers' look at your company because its hostile to XXX (blacks, minorities, women, etc.) Then these 'advisers' are chosen from the approved list given to the companies by the offending party. Of course no company wants to be labeled raciest, so they hire these individuals for millions of dollars. Then its pretty standard the report by the 'advisers' and the 'shake down' continues.

OA412 wrote:

mcdu wrote:

Last week I posted a topic about an AA captain inserting himself into a customer service issue between an agent and a African American passenger. He told the agent not to board the young lady. She claimed it was racially motivated.

The topic was deleted and no reason was given. However, it appears there are more instances that have created this travel warning.

Your topic was never deleted. It quickly derailed and turned political, so it was moved to Non Aviation.

Then please share a link of it in Non-Av, because I sure as heck don't see it. Will wait as long as necessary...

polywad6963 wrote:

Yahoo gave a couple of resons for the advisory, but cannot find the story in there at this time. Two of the examples that were given was the flyer and her friend that had 1st class tickets, she was moved to coach and the friend was allowed to stay. The second one was about a stroller; IIRC it was about putting it in the overhead bin and not wanting to check it with the gate agent.

The NAACP gave several examples of customer service issues where the passengers involved were black, but they are accusing AA of having a systematic culture of racism. That has yet to be proved.

Doug Parker/AA response:

http://time.com/4996949/american-airlin ... arker-ceo/

Letter to employees:

Dear Fellow Team Members,

Of all the really important things our team members do – and that list is long – bringing people together is at the top. We fly over borders, walls and stereotypes to connect people from different races, religions, nationalities, economic backgrounds and sexual orientations. We make the world a smaller, more inclusive place. And we do it professionally and safely every day for more than 500,000 customers across five continents.

So, we were disappointed to learn of a travel advisory issued by the NAACP regarding American Airlines. The mission statement of the NAACP states that it “seeks to remove all barriers of racial discrimination.” That’s a mission that the people of American Airlines endorse and facilitate every day – we do not and will not tolerate discrimination of any kind. We have reached out to the NAACP and are eager to meet with them to listen to their issues and concerns.

As we work through this in concert with the NAACP, please keep doing the great and noble work you always do: treat our customers and each other with respect; connect diverse groups of people with each other and allow them to see the world; make the world a smaller and more open place; and do it professionally and safely.

izbtmnhd wrote:

Doug Parker/AA response:

http://time.com/4996949/american-airlin ... arker-ceo/

It's a good response.

Some people on this thread should take notice.

D L X wrote:

izbtmnhd wrote:

Doug Parker/AA response:

http://time.com/4996949/american-airlin ... arker-ceo/

It's a good response.

Some people on this thread should take notice.

Agreed.

sw733 wrote:

OA412 wrote:

mcdu wrote:

Last week I posted a topic about an AA captain inserting himself into a customer service issue between an agent and a African American passenger. He told the agent not to board the young lady. She claimed it was racially motivated.

The topic was deleted and no reason was given. However, it appears there are more instances that have created this travel warning.

Your topic was never deleted. It quickly derailed and turned political, so it was moved to Non Aviation.

Then please share a link of it in Non-Av, because I sure as heck don't see it. Will wait as long as necessary...

Maybe you were using the search tool at the top? That will only search the forum you're in. You can search by the user's posts. It took be about five seconds to find it.

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1376551

AASAP777 wrote:

Brickell305 wrote:

AASAP777 wrote:

Well, everyone will talk on how the party was depending on how he felt.

Being the first airline to hire an African American pilot, it's pretty much off limits to accuse AA of "racism". t's absurd to attack an airline of racism just because you were too sensitive or on a bad mood. But as 727LOVER says, there's got to be more to be heard in order to establish a right judgement.

Huh?

See my point. If AA was corporately racist, that "first" (which ocurred over half a century ago) would have never happened.

AA is corporately completely different than 50 years ago. Nobody in charge then is still around today, and AA's corporate culture today is closer to US's than legacy AA's.

That said I agree that AA does not appear to have systematic racism, although I can't say I am qualified to speak on the matter.

D L X wrote:

izbtmnhd wrote:

Doug Parker/AA response:

http://time.com/4996949/american-airlin ... arker-ceo/

It's a good response.

Some people on this thread should take notice.

It's a great response, and it makes me wonder even more why there is a travel advisory.

727LOVER wrote:

RIDICULOUS.....most of the examples that are given are rather pathetic to be accused of racism.

But I will admit, this one

One involved the head of the North Carolina NAACP, the Rev. William Barber, who sued American after being removed from a flight last year. Barber said police were called and removed him from the plane after he asked a flight attendant to tell a white passenger behind him to quiet down.

Barber accused the other passenger of making a comment about having a problem with "those people."

...let's just say I'd like to hear more details. Because on the surface, that looks bad.

Trust me as someone who lives in the same town as him, Rev. Barber has a long history of claiming people said something racist to advance his cause. Interesting that he said it was a "white passenger". Could have simply said "passenger"...

I-ll say it again, it's a shake down out of Rev. Jackson's Rainbow Coalition playbook.

727200 wrote:

Having a 'little' experience in politics and how it works, and especially with first hand knowledge of civil rights groups and their methods of operation, This sounds to me very similar to the 'shake down' attempts by various 'civil rights' organizations against public companies. They make outlandish racial claims then go back and tell the company, you need to have some 'advisers' look at your company because its hostile to XXX (blacks, minorities, women, etc.) Then these 'advisers' are chosen from the approved list given to the companies by the offending party. Of course no company wants to be labeled raciest, so they hire these individuals for millions of dollars. Then its pretty standard the report by the 'advisers' and the 'shake down' continues.

I have also seen this taking place over the years

I find the accusation to be disgusting. AA also employs a large amount of African Americans. The NAACP is hurting their own. Shame on the NAACP!!

727200 wrote:

Having a 'little' experience in politics and how it works, and especially with first hand knowledge of civil rights groups and their methods of operation, This sounds to me very similar to the 'shake down' attempts by various 'civil rights' organizations against public companies. They make outlandish racial claims then go back and tell the company, you need to have some 'advisers' look at your company because its hostile to XXX (blacks, minorities, women, etc.) Then these 'advisers' are chosen from the approved list given to the companies by the offending party. Of course no company wants to be labeled raciest, so they hire these individuals for millions of dollars. Then its pretty standard the report by the 'advisers' and the 'shake down' continues.

This post is inflammatory, without evidence, and off topic.

The capacity of users to dismiss the concerns of a major civil rights orgnaisation, and by extension to attempt to simplify and brush aside the complexities and realities of racism in aviation (as in every industry), is disheartening in a moment when we need more listening across difference, not less.

Nice response from Mr Parker.

RDUDDJI wrote:

Interesting that he said it was a "white passenger". Could have simply said "passenger"...

As the article is written, Rev. Barber does not identify the passenger as white. The person who wrote the story does.

atcsundevil wrote:

sw733 wrote:

OA412 wrote:

Your topic was never deleted. It quickly derailed and turned political, so it was moved to Non Aviation.

Then please share a link of it in Non-Av, because I sure as heck don't see it. Will wait as long as necessary...

Maybe you were using the search tool at the top? That will only search the forum you're in. You can search by the user's posts. It took be about five seconds to find it.

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1376551

Indeed, it's still on the front page in that forum. Just scroll, and you'll find it near the bottom.

D L X wrote:

izbtmnhd wrote:

Doug Parker/AA response:

http://time.com/4996949/american-airlin ... arker-ceo/

It's a good response.

Some people on this thread should take notice.

Agreed! That's the proper response to this sort of thing. Otherwise, I'm pretty disappointed in the responses I'm seeing here regarding the NAACP and minority individuals, as well as the use of scare quotes around civil rights.

What reason would NAACP have to single out AA if they didn’t have a at least semi legitimate concerns?

thekorean wrote:

What reason would NAACP have to single out AA if they didn’t have a at least semi legitimate concerns?

I am thinking the same thing. If it's a "shakedown" as some people are implying would it not be smarter to call the whole industry out and extort money from all the US airlines.

Also if some are going to claim that the NAACP is extorting companies currently, some examples would be great.

ITT: Exactly why discussions of institutionalized racism are so fraught with challenges.

I'm astonished that someone would actually use the "we were the first to hire a black pilot" line. Did the CEO have black friends, too? Perhaps we'll be told how the crew enjoy R&B music on their layovers as evidence of the NAACP's folly.

F9Animal wrote:

I find the accusation to be disgusting. AA also employs a large amount of African Americans. The NAACP is hurting their own. Shame on the NAACP!!

I don't understand this statement at all. Are you saying that a company that hires black people can't be racist? Or that because they hire black people that some racism can be looked over because addressing it may hurt the black people it employs?

seat24charlie wrote:

ITT: Exactly why discussions of institutionalized racism are so fraught with challenges.

I'm astonished that someone would actually use the "we were the first to hire a black pilot" line. Did the CEO have black friends, too? Perhaps we'll be told how the crew enjoy R&B music on their layovers as evidence of the NAACP's folly.

Oh yes, because AA hiring the first black pilot means that racism is imagined and the NAACP is blowing smoke up all of or backsides. I appreciate the response from DP, addressing matters of race can be uncomfortable. But, it needs to happen. I'm also disappointed in some members on here, we all have our opinions, some sentiments however are expressed uglier than others.

-Rowen

axiom wrote:

727200 wrote:

Having a 'little' experience in politics and how it works, and especially with first hand knowledge of civil rights groups and their methods of operation, This sounds to me very similar to the 'shake down' attempts by various 'civil rights' organizations against public companies. They make outlandish racial claims then go back and tell the company, you need to have some 'advisers' look at your company because its hostile to XXX (blacks, minorities, women, etc.) Then these 'advisers' are chosen from the approved list given to the companies by the offending party. Of course no company wants to be labeled raciest, so they hire these individuals for millions of dollars. Then its pretty standard the report by the 'advisers' and the 'shake down' continues.

This post is inflammatory, without evidence, and off topic.

The capacity of users to dismiss the concerns of a major civil rights orgnaisation, and by extension to attempt to simplify and brush aside the complexities and realities of racism in aviation (as in every industry), is disheartening in a moment when we need more listening across difference, not less.

Nice response from Mr Parker.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Many are becoming more assertive of any slight, open or perceived discrimination as to race, gender, GLTBQ status, ethnicity and religion, with those involving flying and elsewhere in society becoming more commonly known due to the immediacy of social media. Enforcers like Pilots, cabin crew and local police won't take any abuse or bad behavior either out of fear of something getting worse or a real threat but often make it worse with poor communication and de-escalation skills. Of course some will make a scene using their background or appearance to get better treatment than they should expect or paid for.

I think the NAACP is a bit disingenuous here. You have a few incidents that serve as anecdotes, then pre-judge a global company based on the perceived wrong actions of a few.

In my eyes it is no different than how we are always quick to remind those who post, "I was on XXX flight a month ago and the plane seemed really full, must be a successful route." that this is not necessarily the case.

I would have more respect for the NAACP if they had called for a meeting to discuss their grievances with AA PRIOR to calling for a travel advisory.

As a long-time employee, AA may be many things, but it is the furthest from discriminatory. To me, this is an area where the company has excelled over the years.
I am really perplexed by their warning.

izbtmnhd wrote:

thekorean wrote:

What reason would NAACP have to single out AA if they didn’t have a at least semi legitimate concerns?

I am thinking the same thing. If it's a "shakedown" as some people are implying would it not be smarter to call the whole industry out and extort money from all the US airlines.

Also if some are going to claim that the NAACP is extorting companies currently, some examples would be great.

No, you target a single mark, Jackson perfected it in the early 80's after Reagan ended his PUSH government grant money gravytrain that got started under Carter. REagan had more than enough to throw him injail but just cut off the money and declined prosecution due to the fear of racial trouble. His first mark was Coca Cola after the gov't grants were cut off. The NAACP is simply taking a page from Jesse's playbook now that he's mostly retired.

You can not separate politics from a discussion from anything that involves the NAACP. It is inherently political in nature.

The first step has been won, now comes the meeting where AA gives gifts. Someone gets a paid advisory gig, some funding for something that only lines the exec's pockets or those associated with them.

It's a tried and true method.

There are 3 sides to every story yours mine and the truth....I have a feeling AA will be throwing some free flights at them to shut them and this just creates bigger problems just like the DAO effect rewarding people for bad behavior. And with the capt inserting himself in the argument with the passenger and agent we where not there to see but if I'm walking by and I see a passenger that will be on my ship verbally abusing an agent on the ground I do not want that kind of behavior 30,000FT up so I would not let her fly on my ship.

WaywardMemphian wrote:

izbtmnhd wrote:

thekorean wrote:

What reason would NAACP have to single out AA if they didn’t have a at least semi legitimate concerns?

I am thinking the same thing. If it's a "shakedown" as some people are implying would it not be smarter to call the whole industry out and extort money from all the US airlines.

Also if some are going to claim that the NAACP is extorting companies currently, some examples would be great.

No, you target a single mark, Jackson perfected it in the early 80's after Reagan ended his PUSH government grant money gravytrain that got started under Carter. REagan had more than enough to throw him injail but just cut off the money and declined prosecution due to the fear of racial trouble. His first mark was Coca Cola after the gov't grants were cut off. The NAACP is simply taking a page from Jesse's playbook now that he's mostly retired.

You can not separate politics from a discussion from anything that involves the NAACP. It is inherently political in nature.

The first step has been won, now comes the meeting where AA gives gifts. Someone gets a paid advisory gig, some funding for something that only lines the exec's pockets or those associated with them.

It's a tried and true method.

So why single out American and not United, Delta or Southwest? Also can you cite a current example of this "extortion". I really don't have time, right now, to verify anything you posted but most of the actions you're talking about happened 30+ years ago.