Apparently when the Frontier FA told a North Carolina woman that it "Isn't my job" to address the fact that her kid was sitting in vomit remnants left from a prior flight, the woman "became disruptive" and was removed by law enforcement.

A witness across the aisle from the arrested woman confirmed her story and disputes Frontier's statement to the effect that their FAs were helpful little angels and did everything perfectly while the Mom was unreasonable.

Should FAs have passengers arrested when passengers get upset? Generally and/or when their kid sits in vomit because the seat wasn't properly-cleaned. Kindly discuss.

Article: https://abc11.com/travel/durham-woman-a ... t/5269018/

There has to be a lot more to the story. If the cabin door wasn't closed, it is up to the gate agent to re-seat. F/As handle food/drink, they don't clean hazmat in most situations. As to the question as to if F/As should "get passengers arrested" because they become upset? No. Should the F/A's ask for the police to be called and leave the decision up to law enforcement when the behavior of a pax becomes abusive/disruptive to the flight? Yes. And what happens from there depends on how the passenger handles the interaction with law enforcement. In my experience, Airport cops are highly, highly likely to just accept a passenger apology and move on in all but extreme situations. If a passenger is actually ejected from the aircraft, there is more to the story.

Unfortunately, we will never learn the full story in most of these situations. Passengers love to go to the media when they're tossed off a jet, but only very rarely does it turn out to be a situation that favors the passenger's version of events over the cabin crew's.

wjcandee wrote:

Apparently when the Frontier FA told a North Carolina woman that it "Isn't my job" to address the fact that her kid was sitting in vomit remnants left from a prior flight, the woman "became disruptive" and was removed by law enforcement.

A witness across the aisle from the arrested woman confirmed her story and disputes Frontier's statement to the effect that their FAs were helpful little angels and did everything perfectly while the Mom was unreasonable.

Should FAs have passengers arrested when passengers get upset? Generally and/or when their kid sits in vomit because the seat wasn't properly-cleaned. Kindly discuss.

Article: https://abc11.com/travel/durham-woman-a ... t/5269018/

However flight attendants DO need to keep with FAA mandated FDA health directives, because they serve both food & beverages airlines need to meet a minimum standard to keep sickness from spreading.

There was something that came up with QX not having a galley sink & the passenger sink in the bathroom was deemd inadequate for hand washing & presto QX flight attendants were in plastic gloves if flying on the Q-400 fleet. But it is the carriers responsibility to provide clean equiptment. A great example of how this carrier does not work as a team & takes no pride in the appearence to the grossed out customers.

Lastly, seasoned parents know to carry an excessive amount of disinfectant wipes along with baby wipes & although it's not their responsibility, the parents could have cleaned it themselves to spare the child a ride sitting in barf. Any caring parent would do that, grudginly maybe but this is something that went to far, the F/A could have tried o be reasonable but I doubt she gives a frig.

Did QX install sinks with running water , or are the FAs still wearing plastic gloves during service on them? How they keep people on the job there is beyond me.

At least Frontier owns it in their own public statement: After the flight attendants decided that the mother was "disruptive", "The flight attendants determined that the mother and daughter should be deplaned and accommodated on another flight."

Wow. The flight attendants made that decision. And then called the cops on her. Wow.

I really think that the FAA "it's illegal to disagree with us and the cops will enforce it" rule has to be changed, because even after Dr. Dao, flight attendants continue to abuse this rule.

wjcandee wrote:

At least Frontier owns it in their own public statement: After the flight attendants decided that the mother was "disruptive", "The flight attendants determined that the mother and daughter should be deplaned and accommodated on another flight."

Wow. The flight attendants made that decision. And then called the cops on her. Wow.

I really think that the FAA "it's illegal to disagree with us and the cops will enforce it" rule has to be changed, because even after Dr. Dao, flight attendants continue to abuse this rule.

Police themselves abuse that rule in their everyday work, you will always get bad apples and poor judgement. But for the general safety of the flying public, you can't have passengers think they can argue and not comply with the FAs. I guess you could say its a my way or the highway policy and grieve it later (from the interior of the airport because you are not flying). No one has time to second guess when planes have to get out. Argue with management in the terminal and let them make it right if it needs to be made right.

RWA380 wrote:

Lastly, seasoned parents know to carry an excessive amount of disinfectant wipes along with baby wipes & although it's not their responsibility, the parents could have cleaned it themselves to spare the child a ride sitting in barf. Any caring parent would do that, grudginly maybe but this is something that went to far, the F/A could have tried o be reasonable but I doubt she gives a frig.

This is for sure true. We had my first son on 50 flights before he was 2 and we always had disinfectant wipes with us. Normally we aren’t really germaphobes either, but the wipes on the flights always seemed to be needed for one reason or another.

All that being said, my guess is this parent didn’t quite react the way they should have, but seeing barf in a seat and not having the airline care to clean it up is pretty bad.

Utterly ridiculous. I don't care how upset the woman, Frontier needs to clean their planes properly. You shouldn't be deplaned and arrested for complaining about a serious and real cleanliness issue. Absent the pax throwing punches, spitting, hurling racial insults, etc., the seat needed to be cleaned, or taken out of service and the passengers reseated.

I agree with prior sentiment that we don't always know the whole story. However, usually in situations like these there are witnesses who come forward to explain what happened, or cell phone video if the offender was on a long, ranting tirade. Just check Youtube for some seriously hilarious videos of passengers going berzerk, and some of crew members being total jackas*es. In this case, absent more information I'm going to take the passenger's side. At a minimum, it looks like Frontier seriously overreacted. Kick her off of the plane? Maybe. Arrest her? Oh wow, no way. From a PR standpoint, this is not good. My prediction is that Frontier will quietly drop the charges and hope that this will go away, because if there is any additional evidence supporting the mom's version of events, there isn't a jury in the country that will convict her.

Aptivaboy wrote:

Utterly ridiculous. I don't care how upset the woman, Frontier needs to clean their planes properly. You shouldn't be deplaned and arrested for complaining about a serious and real cleanliness issue. Absent the pax throwing punches, spitting, hurling racial insults, etc., the seat needed to be cleaned, or taken out of service and the passengers reseated.

I agree with prior sentiment that we don't always know the whole story. However, usually in situations like these there are witnesses who come forward to explain what happened, or cell phone video if the offender was on a long, ranting tirade. Just check Youtube for some seriously hilarious videos of passengers going berzerk, and some of crew members being total jackas*es. In this case, absent more information I'm going to take the passenger's side. At a minimum, it looks like Frontier seriously overreacted. Kick her off of the plane? Maybe. Arrest her? Oh wow, no way. From a PR standpoint, this is not good. My prediction is that Frontier will quietly drop the charges and hope that this will go away, because if there is any additional evidence supporting the mom's version of events, there isn't a jury in the country that will convict her.

Thank you for some sense here. The airline cannot expect people to sit in vomit and not complain or expect cabin crew to sort the issue for them.

Notwithstanding this particular apathetic crew, I'm trying to understand how you think FA's could have someone arrested. Removed from the aircraft? Absolutely. Request LEOs? Yup. Actually have someone arrested? Uh, no. The police make that call. Do I think F9 handled this properly? I don't know. But the question was should FA's be allowed to have passengers arrested- the short answer is, they can't.

Spacepope wrote:

The big question to me here is whose vomit was it?

I mean it's not like you can dust for vomit.

It's one of those cases where the police said, you know, "best left unsolved"...

I wonder if Spinal Tap is still touring...

Seriously, though, vomit happens all the time on airplanes. I'd like to hear from other flight attendants what standard procedure is when a passenger-contact location like a seat is covered in spew. It has to be reported, right? Was that the case here? Or did the flight crew before not notice? Or care?

If a flight attendant told me my choices were to sit in vomit or get arrested, I'd get arrested. I shouldn't need a hazmat suit to board an airplane. Now, if it happened mid-flight, yeah, I'm stuck. But before leaving the gate? Hell no!

The cabin crew cannot have someone arrested. The cabin crewcan make a complaint to the police and the attending officer decides if there is a necessity to make an arrest if he suspects the person to have committed a criminal offence. Irrespective of the circumstances of the reason the passenger is kicking off, they must be commiting a criminal offence to get locked up. (or have previously committed or about to commit)

That is how it is in the UK anyway and surely it is the same in the US.

Airlines should clean their aircraft, and passengers confronted with a dirty aircraft should not kick off but ask to be seated elsewhere.

ScorpioMC3 wrote:

Notwithstanding this particular apathetic crew, I'm trying to understand how you think FA's could have someone arrested. Removed from the aircraft? Absolutely. Request LEOs? Yup. Actually have someone arrested? Uh, no. The police make that call. Do I think F9 handled this properly? I don't know. But the question was should FA's be allowed to have passengers arrested- the short answer is, they can't.

Police have to make a quick judgement in a situation where there isn't an even presentation of the facts. Lets be real, the airline's/FA's story is the one that gets communicated to the cops in this scenario. You're arguing semantics. The police always have to make a judgement when arresting someone as most people can't just order someone arrested. But who is presenting (and how) the facts changes the likelihood of charges (and an arrest).

The application of justice (where both sides can present facts) happens in the courtroom. Everything before that is largely at the discretion of law enforcement. And you're kidding yourself if you think that law enforcement wouldn't err on the side of the airline most of the time.

PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:

Spacepope wrote:

Seriously, though, vomit happens all the time on airplanes. I'd like to hear from other flight attendants what standard procedure is when a passenger-contact location like a seat is covered in spew. It has to be reported, right? Was that the case here? Or did the flight crew before not notice? Or care?

At my airline we have BFCUKs (Body Fluid Clean-Up Kits) on board, which contains gloves, absorbent powder, disposal bags, etc, and as FAs it is absolutely expected of us to utilise it if necessary. Obviously this is only a "quick fix" solution until we're somewhere with proper cleaning services, then the location of the "incident" would be relayed to ground crew for a deep clean to also take place.

klakzky123 wrote:

ScorpioMC3 wrote:

Notwithstanding this particular apathetic crew, I'm trying to understand how you think FA's could have someone arrested. Removed from the aircraft? Absolutely. Request LEOs? Yup. Actually have someone arrested? Uh, no. The police make that call. Do I think F9 handled this properly? I don't know. But the question was should FA's be allowed to have passengers arrested- the short answer is, they can't.

Police have to make a quick judgement in a situation where there isn't an even presentation of the facts. Lets be real, the airline's/FA's story is the one that gets communicated to the cops in this scenario. You're arguing semantics. The police always have to make a judgement when arresting someone as most people can't just order someone arrested. But who is presenting (and how) the facts changes the likelihood of charges (and an arrest).

The application of justice (where both sides can present facts) happens in the courtroom. Everything before that is largely at the discretion of law enforcement. And you're kidding yourself if you think that law enforcement wouldn't err on the side of the airline most of the time.

Oh, I definitely think LEOs err on the side of the airline most of the time since I work for an airline. But, speaking for my own experience, no one who is taken away in handcuffs at the gate is behaving like they should be allowed to stay on the aircraft, or in gate area. Police aren't called often, usually the Ground Security Coordinators who work for the airline are able to diffuse the situation to where LEOs don't need to be called at all.

This is a situation that the truth is probably in the middle. Not making any excuses for Frontier.

I bet the FA did give a "not my job" answer/attitude
I bet the customer did create a scene on purpose

Both parties should have handled this better. It was pretty unacceptable for Frontier to not be apologizing, this lady should have not been disruptive.

ScorpioMC3 wrote:

Notwithstanding this particular apathetic crew, I'm trying to understand how you think FA's could have someone arrested. Removed from the aircraft? Absolutely. Request LEOs? Yup. Actually have someone arrested? Uh, no. The police make that call. Do I think F9 handled this properly? I don't know. But the question was should FA's be allowed to have passengers arrested- the short answer is, they can't.

Obviously, the FA can't arrest someone, but when the police arrive at the gate and the FA says "Officer, this person failed to comply with our safety instructions and became belligerent when asked to leave" what do you think the LEO is going to do?

I though there were 'seat covers' available for this sort of thing.

FAs make lousy cops, and I suspect most FAs absolutely do not want to be cops

Passengers have no reasonable redress for most of the lousy things that happen on flights. There need to be an equivalent of small claims courts. Awards for damage and inconvenience should be cash or check, not a $100 off your next flight.

Moose135 wrote:

ScorpioMC3 wrote:

Notwithstanding this particular apathetic crew, I'm trying to understand how you think FA's could have someone arrested. Removed from the aircraft? Absolutely. Request LEOs? Yup. Actually have someone arrested? Uh, no. The police make that call. Do I think F9 handled this properly? I don't know. But the question was should FA's be allowed to have passengers arrested- the short answer is, they can't.

Obviously, the FA can't arrest someone, but when the police arrive at the gate and the FA says "Officer, this person failed to comply with our safety instructions and became belligerent when asked to leave" what do you think the LEO is going to do?

Speaking as a former FA and my experience, the police are going to question the person. Not immediately haul them away in handcuffs- especially if they are not being belligerent in that moment.

Police have to make a quick judgement in a situation where there isn't an even presentation of the facts. Lets be real, the airline's/FA's story is the one that gets communicated to the cops in this scenario. You're arguing semantics. The police always have to make a judgement when arresting someone as most people can't just order someone arrested. But who is presenting (and how) the facts changes the likelihood of charges (and an arrest).

Bingo.

The police are also not going to interview every passenger to sort of who is telling the truth. Remember that case when passengers actually got off of the plane in protest over the cops removing someone? They didn't take the other passengers' words, just the cabin crew's, so in essence the flight attendants, pilots, gate agents, etc., can effectively have someone arrested.

https://www.13wmaz.com/article/news/fro ... /268105092
https://www.wtae.com/article/passengers ... ht/7480957

Hmmm... Frontier again, too.

BAeRJ100 wrote:

PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:

Spacepope wrote:

Seriously, though, vomit happens all the time on airplanes. I'd like to hear from other flight attendants what standard procedure is when a passenger-contact location like a seat is covered in spew. It has to be reported, right? Was that the case here? Or did the flight crew before not notice? Or care?

At my airline we have BFCUKs (Body Fluid Clean-Up Kits) on board, which contains gloves, absorbent powder, disposal bags, etc, and as FAs it is absolutely expected of us to utilise it if necessary. Obviously this is only a "quick fix" solution until we're somewhere with proper cleaning services, then the location of the "incident" would be relayed to ground crew for a deep clean to also take place.

At my old airline we would occasionally get a RON that arrived with vomit on the floor. There would be absorbent powder and maybe a piece of paper on top of it, covering it up. Overnight part time outstation ground handlers making minimum wage are not going to be deep cleaning vomit. We would vacuum up the powder and call it good. There was always still a stain on the floor. That still smelled. It was always considered the hub's responsibility to do any deep cleaning.

Moose135 wrote:

ScorpioMC3 wrote:

Notwithstanding this particular apathetic crew, I'm trying to understand how you think FA's could have someone arrested. Removed from the aircraft? Absolutely. Request LEOs? Yup. Actually have someone arrested? Uh, no. The police make that call. Do I think F9 handled this properly? I don't know. But the question was should FA's be allowed to have passengers arrested- the short answer is, they can't.

Obviously, the FA can't arrest someone, but when the police arrive at the gate and the FA says "Officer, this person failed to comply with our safety instructions and became belligerent when asked to leave" what do you think the LEO is going to do?

Speaking as a former FA and my experience, the police are going to question the person. Not immediately haul them away in handcuffs- especially if they are not being belligerent in that moment.

CobaltScar wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

At least Frontier owns it in their own public statement: After the flight attendants decided that the mother was "disruptive", "The flight attendants determined that the mother and daughter should be deplaned and accommodated on another flight."

Wow. The flight attendants made that decision. And then called the cops on her. Wow.

I really think that the FAA "it's illegal to disagree with us and the cops will enforce it" rule has to be changed, because even after Dr. Dao, flight attendants continue to abuse this rule.

Police themselves abuse that rule in their everyday work, you will always get bad apples and poor judgement. But for the general safety of the flying public, you can't have passengers think they can argue and not comply with the FAs. I guess you could say its a my way or the highway policy and grieve it later (from the interior of the airport because you are not flying). No one has time to second guess when planes have to get out. Argue with management in the terminal and let them make it right if it needs to be made right.

Just a reminder, the proverb is "One bad apple spoils the bunch"...

speedbird52 wrote:

CobaltScar wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

At least Frontier owns it in their own public statement: After the flight attendants decided that the mother was "disruptive", "The flight attendants determined that the mother and daughter should be deplaned and accommodated on another flight."

Wow. The flight attendants made that decision. And then called the cops on her. Wow.

I really think that the FAA "it's illegal to disagree with us and the cops will enforce it" rule has to be changed, because even after Dr. Dao, flight attendants continue to abuse this rule.

Police themselves abuse that rule in their everyday work, you will always get bad apples and poor judgement. But for the general safety of the flying public, you can't have passengers think they can argue and not comply with the FAs. I guess you could say its a my way or the highway policy and grieve it later (from the interior of the airport because you are not flying). No one has time to second guess when planes have to get out. Argue with management in the terminal and let them make it right if it needs to be made right.

Just a reminder, the proverb is "One bad apple spoils the bunch"...

Im using the ancient Nubian proverb, sorry for the confusion.

Alleged video from inside the Frontier Flight

https://youtu.be/m9mUzhbOAvQ

What made me laugh was when he said ‘I can’t come on here and take sides’, then he arrested her.

A strange sort of not taking sides.

bennett123 wrote:

What made me laugh was when he said ‘I can’t come on here and take sides’, then he arrested her.

A strange sort of not taking sides.

He's not taking sides, the part he's talking about is the business dispute between Frontier Airlines and the passenger.

The arrest (crime) is trespassing( misdemeanor committed in the officers presence) He's asking her to get off the plane she didnt, and that's why the arrest took place.

I really can't imagine anyone of us as pax, taking it in a nonchalant way having to seat anywhere near with vomit or vomit stench,evenmore so having your own kid to sit on it..It's disgusting to the core and it would nauseate some people to the point of vomiting themselves..Babywipes might clean it but the stench just doesn't go away that easily..I think the FAs should have been more understanding and i really don't think any of the FAs would want their kid to sit in such a seat and just take it casually without complaining...

With that video... I believe that there is no way she goes to court on this. The charges will be dropped. I also think Frontier has very little to stand on in this case. A lady becoming disruptive because her daughter is seated in vomit... Never should have even happened. They can claim the right to remove a disruptive passenger. But, any court would almost certainly find that the passenger has just cause to be upset. Removing a disruptive passenger for a situation you created does not look very good to anyone.

Have a great day,

Oliver2020 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

What made me laugh was when he said ‘I can’t come on here and take sides’, then he arrested her.

A strange sort of not taking sides.

He's not taking sides, the part he's talking about is the business dispute between Frontier Airlines and the passenger.

The arrest (crime) is trespassing( misdemeanor committed in the officers presence) He's asking her to get off the plane she didnt, and that's why the arrest took place.

That begs the question: is it really trespassing when you have paid to be on the premises? You pay for a service (being transported from point A to point B on date D & hour H on an airplane belonging to company C); all those letters are respected by the passenger, then an employee of C says "get out" and you have to without protesting? You have the right to be there as you paid for it; that's not trespassing.

This is Dr. Dao all over again. Passenger pays for seat on plane (which the law says shall be free of vomit). Passenger is the only person on the plane told they are not going to get what they paid for. Poor reasons are given as to why they can't. Passenger is told to leave and is arrested when they resist.

FAs can chime in, but have airlines not made Dr. Dao a case study and instructed FAs not to toss passengers off for asking for the basic minimum service they paid for?

Regardless the Frontier CEO should be writing the apology now and getting out the company checkbook.

Although I recognize that the video does not include the interaction with the F/A, I have a difficult time reconciling the video with the airline's statement. Based on the statement and the video it's reasonable to conclude that on Frontier anyone who insists that vomit be cleaned up is made to leave the aircraft, and possibly arrested.

The presence of that reasonable conclusion, right or wrong, means Frontier utterly is at a loss for how to effectively deal with this situation. Apparently they know as much about PR as how to get vomit cleaned up.

If this whole situation was just about vomit in a seat , and there were empty seats elsewhere on the plane, why did they not just move her? There has to be more to the story.

Bradin wrote:

Alleged video from inside the Frontier Flight

https://youtu.be/m9mUzhbOAvQ

It's definitely gross to think about finding something like bodily fluids no matter where you're entering. The last thing you want to find in close quarters like a seat, restaurant table, hotel room... wherever...is unknown fluids. I can certainly empathize with anyone who didn't want to be around whatever it was.

Question on the video: Does anyone know if there's clear video of the seat out there? It seemed the passengers had taken their seats in the video. Were they in the "vomit seat?" Why did they sit down?... or had they already moved? I'm surprised someone else didn't notice the nasty seat upon landing or as boarding began. Vomit is typically a little smelly, and cabins are typically not the most open environment. Of course one might also ask... whose vomit was it? Could it be someone aboard the flight in question?

Overall this seems like a bad day we all wish didn't happen.

Although I can't speak for exactly what was said, it does seem from the video that for some reason flight attendants requested the passengers deplane, not that they be arrested/ press charges. I suggest checking/ editing the title for this discussion.

TheOldDude wrote:

Although I recognize that the video does not include the interaction with the F/A, I have a difficult time reconciling the video with the airline's statement. Based on the statement and the video it's reasonable to conclude that on Frontier anyone who insists that vomit be cleaned up is made to leave the aircraft, and possibly arrested.

The presence of that reasonable conclusion, right or wrong, means Frontier utterly is at a loss for how to effectively deal with this situation. Apparently they know as much about PR as how to get vomit cleaned up.

Is anyone stunned to learn that the passenger was a woman of color, and the FAs and arresting officers all white?

SurlyBonds wrote:

TheOldDude wrote:

Although I recognize that the video does not include the interaction with the F/A, I have a difficult time reconciling the video with the airline's statement. Based on the statement and the video it's reasonable to conclude that on Frontier anyone who insists that vomit be cleaned up is made to leave the aircraft, and possibly arrested.

The presence of that reasonable conclusion, right or wrong, means Frontier utterly is at a loss for how to effectively deal with this situation. Apparently they know as much about PR as how to get vomit cleaned up.

Is anyone stunned to learn that the passenger was a woman of color, and the FAs and arresting officers all white?

Although I noticed that in the video, I did not notice evidence that race played a part. Moreover, I have not heard either side claim that race played a part. As I'm sure you are aware, the correlation you point out is not causation.

During the first part of the video, we saw an awful lot of the seat back and there was some guy in red standing in the middle of the picture.

It is true that the passenger was arrested for trespassing, after her license to be on the plane was revoked, meaning her rights under her ticket were revoked. That a freaking FA has the right to revoke your ticket and turn you into a trespasser is just disgraceful. And the Frontier press release admits that it was the flight attendants that determined that the woman should no longer be on the plane. Nobody else. There should be at least a minimum requirement that a manager, if not the station manager, be called to the gate to make these decisions, not the lowest level customer contact employee. And don't say the captain should do it. They are complete wussies when it comes to this kind of stuff, because they have to work with the flight attendants and don't want to develop a reputation. They will take the flight attendants' word 100% of the time, whether they will admit that publicly or not.

KUZAWU08 wrote:

Question [...] It seemed the passengers had taken their seats in the video. Were they in the "vomit seat?" Why did they sit down?... or had they already moved? .

In answer to the question above, the article says that the child had sat in the seat and put her hands on it and realized it was wet, then realized her clothes were wet. Maybe the chunks have been wiped off but they were able to determine from the smell that it was vomit, which was conceded by the airline.

They woman behaved just the way I would. She was calm and reasonable. I can't believe they did that to her when a simple solution of moving to a different seat was available.

RickNRoll wrote:

They woman behaved just the way I would. She was calm and reasonable. I can't believe they did that to her when a simple solution of moving to a different seat was available.

I don't know why airlines continually issue definitive statements about stuff based just on the employee reports. As with Dr. Dao, they are then forced to completely eat it, suck it, and eat it some more when the inevitable video comes out -- this one showing a calm, reasonable woman being arrested by the cop who says that he "can't choose sides" -- meaning he can't make the decision -- because the flight attendants have already revoked her license to be on the plane.

How many times to airlines need to learn this lesson?

SurlyBonds wrote:

Is anyone stunned to learn that the passenger was a woman of color, and the FAs and arresting officers all white?

Really? You're really going there? I hate seeing ignorant comments like these. There have been many cases where the same thing happens to white people. Racism certainly exists, but it's far fetched to claim this incident was race related.

I don't know the whole situation here, but judging from just the video, Frontier looks to be at fault here. For the record, I'm usually on the airline's side in cases like these, but I didn't see the lady do anything that would have warranted her removal from the aircraft. She wasn't going crazy like some people you see. She just wanted to be moved from a seat with vomit in it like anyone would. Looks like the FAs were in a bad mood and didn't want to do their job, so they took it out on this woman.

wjcandee wrote:

RickNRoll wrote:

They woman behaved just the way I would. She was calm and reasonable. I can't believe they did that to her when a simple solution of moving to a different seat was available.

I don't know why airlines continually issue definitive statements about stuff based just on the employee reports. As with Dr. Dao, they are then forced to completely eat it, suck it, and eat it some more when the inevitable video comes out -- this one showing a calm, reasonable woman being arrested by the cop who says that he "can't choose sides" -- meaning he can't make the decision -- because the flight attendants have already revoked her license to be on the plane.

How many times to airlines need to learn this lesson?

The officer is talking about taking sides in the CIVIL matter, flight attendant vs passenger. That's not a law enforcement responsibility to settle civil matters, but once as you said the ticket is revoked and she's refusing to leave it becomes a criminal matter.

LAW Enforcement / criminal part: He did make a decision and arrested her for asking her to leave, and she stayed on board.

I do have a question as to what happened with the child if she was arrested?

I reread the article and the answer is that the child was placed with child protective services. To put the kid through that because some flight attendant has a bug in her butt is beyond disgraceful. At some point, an airline representative should have intervened and requested the police to void the arrest once the woman was deplaned. That they didn't shows what a poorly managed airline Frontier is. I don't usually say this, but I hope the mom sues their ass just because of what happened to her kid.

And, my friend, the whole thing is fundamentally a civil matter, because it grows out of an allegation of breach of contract. I can breach my lease with my landlord to my heart's content, but the landlord can't call the police and have me forcibly removed from my apartment just because the landlord purports to revoke my license to live there. Rather, the landlord has to go to court and follow a formal eviction process. Why? For exactly the same reasons as here: the discretion to turn a civil matter into a criminal one merely by the whim of a flight attendant purporting to revoke my license to be on the plane was just far too readily abused, and there are specific laws to prevent police from being used to intervene in what is essentially a civil matter when it comes to leases. That's why in Chicago right now, the police will absolutely refuse to arrest anybody simply because the airline says that they have decided that the person no longer has a right to be on the plane. They learned their lesson after Dr Dao. Frontier plainly did not.

WayexTDI wrote:

Oliver2020 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

What made me laugh was when he said ‘I can’t come on here and take sides’, then he arrested her.

A strange sort of not taking sides.

He's not taking sides, the part he's talking about is the business dispute between Frontier Airlines and the passenger.

The arrest (crime) is trespassing( misdemeanor committed in the officers presence) He's asking her to get off the plane she didnt, and that's why the arrest took place.

That begs the question: is it really trespassing when you have paid to be on the premises? You pay for a service (being transported from point A to point B on date D & hour H on an airplane belonging to company C); all those letters are respected by the passenger, then an employee of C says "get out" and you have to without protesting? You have the right to be there as you paid for it; that's not trespassing.

Yes its still trespassing as wjcandee explained in detail above.

I don't see this as at all comparable to the United/Dao situation. That was an operational/crew scheduling issue that was certainly mishandled, but the passenger also wasn't in his right mind. He ran back on the plane like a crazy person.

This woman, from what we can see was assertive, but calm. The police seemed to respond relatively respectfully, although I don't understand why an arrest was made. And y'all can lose your shit over it, but considering she appears to be cuffed after deplaning you have to wonder if race was a motivating factor. This woman was traveling with a child who was allegedly covered in vomit not her own. You can all get upset but if this was a 50-something white woman reacting in the same tone it is really questionable if it would have escalated to this point.

wjcandee wrote:

I reread the article and the answer is that the child was placed with child protective services. To put the kid through that because some flight attendant has a bug in her butt is beyond disgraceful. At some point, an airline representative should have intervened and requested the police to void the arrest once the woman was deplaned. That they didn't shows what a poorly managed airline Frontier is. I don't usually say this, but I hope the mom sues their ass just because of what happened to her kid.

And, my friend, the whole thing is fundamentally a civil matter, because it grows out of an allegation of breach of contract. I can breach my lease with my landlord to my heart's content, but the landlord can't call the police and have me forcibly removed from my apartment just because the landlord purports to revoke my license to live there. Rather, the landlord has to go to court and follow a formal eviction process. Why? For exactly the same reasons as here: the discretion to turn a civil matter into a criminal one merely by the whim of a flight attendant purporting to revoke my license to be on the plane was just far too readily abused, and there are specific laws to prevent police from being used to intervene in what is essentially a civil matter when it comes to leases. That's why in Chicago right now, the police will absolutely refuse to arrest anybody simply because the airline says that they have decided that the person no longer has a right to be on the plane. They learned their lesson after Dr Dao. Frontier plainly did not.

Let us forget about simple breach of contract. We have a huge problem with simple codes of human decency.

Bradin wrote:

...
Let us forget about simple breach of contract. We have a huge problem with simple codes of human decency.

And also not forget the even when laws and regulations provide seemingly unrestrained authority (i.e. obey direction from a flight attendant) there are general principles in law that apply to such directives requiring them to be reasonable and lawful in themselves.