A WOMAN on a United Airlines flight was allegedly made to move seats as two Pakistani men could not sit next to her.
Mary Campos was boarding a flight from California to Houston when she said she was told her pre-booked seat had been changed.
The explanation was because she had been booked into a seat next to two passengers whose cultural beliefs meant they were unable to sit next to a woman.
She says she was also told that the men were unable to be served by female staff.
Although she was shocked, she said she had no choice but to take the new seat.
The men were described by Ms Campos as “Pakistani monks” who were wearing long orange shirts.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1896484/p ... h-a-woman/
--
This is a situation where the airline being way to much to accommodate these passengers, they should have told the passengers to sit down net to the women and be served by women or get off the plane. I can understand that such practices are normal on PIA flights as its there national airline, their right and all, but this a US airline in the US so they should understand that in North-America we do things differently. As much as I would respect their religions and beliefs if I visited their country, I expect the same from them.

mmmm, careful when reading the Sun/ Or better known as "The Scum"

I am waiting for male Muslim passenger, who refuses to sit next to a lesbian and obese women.

Im pretty sure thats not what happened period. We can discuss fiction on this forum but im pretty sure time is better spent elsewhere.

But yes, i wonder why the airline choose to move the lady instead of the two men.

Here's a better article:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/california- ... se-gender/

Interesting given how some Muslim passengers have been treated by the airlines, but this seems to be going in the other direction. I've heard issues with some Orthodox Jews who refuse to sit next to a woman and some airlines have bent over backwards to accommodate them.

LeCoqFrancais wrote:

This is a situation where the airline being way to much to accommodate these passengers, they should have told the passengers to sit down net to the women and be served by women or get off the plane. I can understand that such practices are normal on PIA flights as its there national airline, their right and all, but this a US airline in the US so they should understand that in North-America we do things differently. As much as I would respect their religions and beliefs if I visited their country, I expect the same from them.

And if the woman had asked them to be moved or to move her to another seat, then what? the story would not have made it to print. If I were the woman I wuld have been happy to have been moved away from them.

Its an airlines job to accomodate customers whenever they can within their limits, if the flight was full this might not have happened, but with there being space, she accomodated their request, like any good airline or cutomer service organisation should.

No mainstream Muslim group wears bright colours, its not acceptable, not saying they werent Muslim but likely from some deviant sect.

Interesting that people already started forming the opinion that the because they are from Pakistan, hey must be Muslim.

Well, they weren't. They were monks. There are no monks in Islam. Being a monk is forbidden in Islam. They had to be Buddhist.

I would imagine that in the heat of the moment with the crew just trying to make an on-time departure happen they determined that it was simpler to move the one pax rather than the two others. However when purchasing a ticket on a North American carrier you have to accept sitting next to someone you find objectionable is something that may happen, and if it's too much to bear well you don't have to fly at all!

Being a United Frequent Flyer, I'm not surprised. They tend (in my experience) to make decisions on a more fast and loose basis than the old Continental regarding seating, boarding, upgrades, etc. That's solely my personal experience and opinion, but it's based upon more CO/US flights than I can count over the past 15-20 years. I agree with MKEdude on why this probably occurred, but it should not have happened. We live in a supposedly inclusive society and everyone - everyone - needs to accept that they will come into contact with persons of different cultures, backgrounds, etc. If the gentlemen in question could not sit next to a woman, then airline travel isn't for them.

The word Monk was used by the feminist to describe them, the paper is quoting her, Pakistani Bhuddists are an extremely small community not even visible unlike Hindus, Sikhs and Christians or even the other extremely small community of Zorastrians, what made her conclude they were from there?

An airline accomodating a request from Orthodox Monks, Rabbis, Preists, Imams, Pandits etc. is not an issue if seats are available, and it shows they still respect clergy.

what made her conclude they were from there?

CanadaFair, this is the relevant line in the article: "Campos was told the men were Pakistani monks who were wearing long orange shirts. She said the female flight crew was not allowed to serve the men."

So, it seems as if someone from United told her that. Interestingly, based upon the information in the CBS news article, she seems to live about two miles down the road from me!

An airline accomodating a request from Orthodox Monks, Rabbis, Preists, Imams, Pandits etc. is not an issue if seats are available, and it shows they still respect clergy.

I would argue that it is an issue in the USA. We're constantly being told here by the politically correct crowd that we have to accommodate others of different beliefs, persuasions, and so on. However, if someone willingly comes to this country, shouldn't they be the ones to accommodate themselves to the host country's social norms? I think that's the real issue, and it's one that the airlines and other business institutions are going to have to address. Out of curiosity, I'd personally like to see what United's official written policy is on this, or if they even have one. Does anyone know?

Aptivaboy wrote:

I would argue that it is an issue in the USA. We're constantly being told here by the politically correct crowd that we have to accommodate others of different beliefs, persuasions, and so on. However, if someone willingly comes to this country, shouldn't they be the ones to accommodate themselves to the host country's social norms? I think that's the real issue, and it's one that the airlines and other business institutions are going to have to address. Out of curiosity, I'd personally like to see what United's official written policy is on this, or if they even have one. Does anyone know?

This: Yes, we are to be tolerant of others and do our best to accommodate. But, we should not have to tolerate the intolerance of others.

It has to be a meeting in the middle, or at least acknowledgement by the party imposing their beliefs on others when there is no plausible middle ground, that they understand and appreciate the sacrifice we are making for them. It used to be called "courtesy" and people asked/explained to the other person.

Have a great day,

The airline did great accomodating their request within limits, good customer service, if the woman didnt want to be seated next to them I would expect the airline to accomodate her as well, as mentioned before had the flight been full the three of them would have been seated together be it in the US or anywhere else in the world.

If these men had created a scene and demanded the woman be removed from her seat then it would be news worthy, right now its not.

cloud4000 wrote:

I've heard issues with some Orthodox Jews who refuse to sit next to a woman and some airlines have bent over backwards to accommodate them.

I've witnessed such issues first hand. There's a good write up from last year here.

There are no Muslim monks.Who is the joker that started this Thread?

Remember that it is a seat assignment. While you can choose your assignment ahead of time for the most part, it is still completely up to the airline regarding who sits where and they can change your assignment for whatever reason. Choosing your own seat online is a courtesy the airline provides, but in no way guarantees that specific seat at departure time.

bobnwa wrote:

There are no Muslim monks.Who is the joker that started this Thread?

I never used the word muslim in my post, only the newspaper did. I used the words Arabian Countries and last time I checked Pakistan falls in that category. So I do not think I said anything factually wrong in my post.
--
As for others saying that the airline did the correct thing, they did not, it was up to the Pakistani passengers to tolerate the other sex because they are in North-America and this is how we do things here, they were not forced to visit the US but they came so they should try and be respectful of how we do things here. Just like I don't expect certain things if I visit their country and that I will try and respect their beliefs and traditions.
--
Also, if airlines can say that can not accommodate for passengers with severe allergies they should be able to say that can't accommodate passengers for religious beliefs.

LeCoqFrancais wrote:

bobnwa wrote:

There are no Muslim monks.Who is the joker that started this Thread?

I never used the word muslim in my post, only the newspaper did. I used the words Arabian Countries and last time I checked Pakistan falls in that category. So I do not think I said anything factually wrong in my post.
--
As for others saying that the airline did the correct thing, they did not, it was up to the Pakistani passengers to tolerate the other sex because they are in North-America and this is how we do things here, they were not forced to visit the US but they came so they should try and be respectful of how we do things here. Just like I don't expect certain things if I visit their country and that I will try and respect their beliefs and traditions.
--
Also, if airlines can say that can not accommodate for passengers with severe allergies they should be able to say that can't accommodate passengers for religious beliefs.

Airlines can't accommodate for severe allergies because airlines cannot control the type of foods and other germs brought onto the aircraft by other passengers. The airline absolutely can control where someone sits, however.

2175301 wrote:

This: Yes, we are to be tolerant of others and do our best to accommodate. But, we should not have to tolerate the intolerance of others.

It has to be a meeting in the middle, or at least acknowledgement by the party imposing their beliefs on others when there is no plausible middle ground, that they understand and appreciate the sacrifice we are making for them. It used to be called "courtesy" and people asked/explained to the other person.

Have a great day,

1) Passenger says "I cannot sit next to women because I'm sexist."
2) Passenger says "I cannot sit next to women and I won't say why."
3) Passenger says "I cannot sit next to women because I'm Catholic, and I believe Catholicism says I should not".
4) Passenger says "I cannot sit next to women because I'm Orthodox Jewish."

Which request do you honor?

Look at the TV interviews folks. She did not asked to be re-seated, the airline did so because two men stated their religious beliefs prohibited contact with women.

If someone's religious beliefs have that issue, they need to fly private or rent a car. We are talking about commercial air transport here. What United did is "bend over backwards" to "accommodate" someone's religious issue and in the process then engaged in gender discrimination against a million mile frequent flier. Well played UA.

LeCoqFrancais wrote:

I used the words Arabian Countries and last time I checked Pakistan falls in that category.

Pakistan is not Arabian.

NYCRuss wrote:

LeCoqFrancais wrote:

I used the words Arabian Countries and last time I checked Pakistan falls in that category.

Pakistan is not Arabian.

Correct, it is in the Indian Subcontinent.

LeCoqFrancais wrote:

bobnwa wrote:

There are no Muslim monks.Who is the joker that started this Thread?

I never used the word muslim in my post, only the newspaper did. I used the words Arabian Countries and last time I checked Pakistan falls in that category. So I do not think I said anything factually wrong in my post.
--
As for others saying that the airline did the correct thing, they did not, it was up to the Pakistani passengers to tolerate the other sex because they are in North-America and this is how we do things here, they were not forced to visit the US but they came so they should try and be respectful of how we do things here. Just like I don't expect certain things if I visit their country and that I will try and respect their beliefs and traditions.
--
Also, if airlines can say that can not accommodate for passengers with severe allergies they should be able to say that can't accommodate passengers for religious beliefs.

United gave excellent customer service to foreign guests from a different culture, honouring and respecting them, just like a customer service organisation should have done anywhere in the world.

CanadaFair wrote:

United gave excellent customer service to foreign guests from a different culture, honouring and respecting them, just like a customer service organisation should have done anywhere in the world.

On International flights to/from Pakistan (per ex.)? OK, I agee with that.
On domestic/Intra-North America flights? Eh, nope.
On domestic flights, who will fly more often, the international passenger or the domestic one? The domestic one, of course, so you are better off giving that passenger what he/she wants/paid for over the international passenger.

LeCoqFrancais wrote:

bobnwa wrote:

There are no Muslim monks.Who is the joker that started this Thread?

I never used the word muslim in my post, only the newspaper did. I used the words Arabian Countries and last time I checked Pakistan falls in that category. So I do not think I said anything factually wrong in my post.
--
Really? You checked and rechecked and you came up with the conclusion that Pakistan is an Arabic country. May i ask where did you get this information?

BTW there is nothing called Pakistani or Muslim monk, and for sure Muslim Imams do not wear orange shirts, are you sure they were not cricket players or such?

LeCoq, Thats how customer service is done around the world, be it for a domestic flight.

CanadaFair wrote:

United gave excellent customer service to foreign guests from a different culture, honouring and respecting them, just like a customer service organisation should have done anywhere in the world.

Not in my book - nor, I hope, my country. I would be appalled if anyone tried such sexism here.

mariner

Too bad, but thats how good customer service works all over, respecting the customer, that woman was caused no offence other than her feminist ego getting hurt.

Umm, no. Hard to imagine someone being more wrong than canadafair is now.

If the airline didn't accommodate them, then a long delay, angering other pax, and public lawsuits. I suspect this is getting worse due to greater dissertation of religious rights, especially in the USA, more crowed planes making accommodation more difficult, each seat with their own price, with many even if need accommodation due to religion just buying the cheapest seats.

Jpete, No its just insulting to some peoples bloated egos, thats the only issue here.

LeCoqFrancais wrote:

I never used the word muslim in my post, only the newspaper did. I used the words Arabian Countries and last time I checked Pakistan falls in that category. So I do not think I said anything factually wrong in my post.

I must be going blind. I have read your post a number of times (and it does not appear to have been edited) but I can't see any reference to Arabian Countries at all. Beyond that, Pakistan is most definitely not Arabian, either in terms of geography or language and culture.

As to the newspaper quotation, unless it has been edited since first posting, it does not refer to Muslims at all. It states:

They may have been Hindu monks who, along with nuns, take a vow of celibacy which means they cannot communicate with members of the opposite sex, but this is unconfirmed.

So, it appears that you are factually wrong on three points: what the Sun wrote; what you wrote; and the status of Pakistan.

Ammad wrote:

I am from Pakistan and now hearing for the first time "Pakistani Monks" -- Author of this Article needs to put in Jail for some days.

Surreal. So tolerant man..

Were you on this flight?

CanadaFair wrote:

Too bad, but thats how good customer service works all over, respecting the customer, that woman was caused no offence other than her feminist ego getting hurt.

Her inability to sit in the seat of choice is a product of her feminist ego?

As an atheist male, I would tell these two men to take their mythical beliefs and shove it. Sit in your assigned seats with the public around you or don't fly. We don't care what century you live in. If you don't want to participate in the 21st, just stay home.

CanadaFair wrote:

Too bad, but thats how good customer service works all over, respecting the customer, that woman was caused no offence other than her feminist ego getting hurt.

She - the female customer - wasn't "respected," nor was any female flight attendant on the plane if they were not allowed to serve these men. What would have happened with a female captain?

Gender discrimination is unlawful in my country. We are respectful of people coming here as long as they, in turn, are respectful of the laws of the country they are visiting.

mariner

You werent the airline agent and obviously clueless to customer service when handling foreign guests of different cultures, and creating a good image of your company and country/people, go tell the agent that and United Airlines, bet you would get fired had you been in that job, keep your ego and bigoted attittude, racial and other biases to yourself when working in such a field.

Everyone here knows it customer service means pleasing customers within limits, I do not think their request not to be served by women was accomodated nor should it have been in any society.

Woman got another seat, she wasnt humiliated in front of fellow travellers by being asked to leave her seat and move elsewhere nor was she told not to sit next to the men when she boarded, there was no ugly exchange between the two parties at the airline counter, she wasnt bumped to another flight/ Maybe the men could have been sat another place at best, and the woman gets a coupon.

United did what any one else would have done around the world.

Ammad wrote:

I am from Pakistan and now hearing for the first time "Pakistani Monks" -- Author of this Article needs to put in Jail for some days.

And that's why most of the west doesn't want you near them -.-

CanadaFair wrote:

You werent the airline agent and obviously clueless to customer service when handling foreign guests of different cultures, and creating a good image of your company and country/people, go tell the agent that and United Airlines, bet you would get fired had you been in that job, keep your ego and bigoted attittude, racial and other biases to yourself when working in such a field.

Since I'm quite happy to deal with women in any circumstance and any role, I don't think I'm the one who's bigoted - LOL.

I live in an entirely successful multicultural and multi-gender society and we hope to keep it that way.

CanadaFair wrote:

Everyone here knows it customer service means pleasing customers within limits, I do not think their request not to be served by women was accomodated nor should it have been in any society.

(a) "within limits" being the key and (b) If they were served by women why did the airline accommodate one thing but not the other?

CanadaFair wrote:

Maybe the men could have been sat another place at best, and the woman gets a coupon.

Then we'd all have been happy. But if the men were seated somewhere else - the most logical thing - I'm not sure why the woman would get a coupon?

mariner

Aptivaboy wrote:

what made her conclude they were from there?

CanadaFair, this is the relevant line in the article: "Campos was told the men were Pakistani monks who were wearing long orange shirts. She said the female flight crew was not allowed to serve the men."

So, it seems as if someone from United told her that. Interestingly, based upon the information in the CBS news article, she seems to live about two miles down the road from me!

An airline accomodating a request from Orthodox Monks, Rabbis, Preists, Imams, Pandits etc. is not an issue if seats are available, and it shows they still respect clergy.

I would argue that it is an issue in the USA. We're constantly being told here by the politically correct crowd that we have to accommodate others of different beliefs, persuasions, and so on. However, if someone willingly comes to this country, shouldn't they be the ones to accommodate themselves to the host country's social norms? I think that's the real issue, and it's one that the airlines and other business institutions are going to have to address. Out of curiosity, I'd personally like to see what United's official written policy is on this, or if they even have one. Does anyone know?

I don't know who this politically correct crowd is, but whenever I hear slogans like that I know the issue is politicized and that the application of a policy or principle is going to be judged by one's personal beliefs or prejudices, and without necessary consistency.

We switch seats for many reasons. Parents want to sit with kids, or keep kids together. I given up an aisle seat to a man who couldn't get one but had a serious bladder issue and said he would have to go to the lav multiple times. I've been between two people who wanted to talk to each other, so I offered to switch so I wouldn't be in the middle of their conversation. Now maybe they were being rude by holding such a conversation with me in the middle, but it was no big deal for me to move. But every so often we see or are involved in situations which somehow offend a political or moral view of ours and we dig in our heels. If the woman didn't pay extra for a premium seat, it was no big deal to switch seats. If I were the crew, and had space in First, I would have offered it to her as a special consideration for being flexible, but the whole thing sounds like a tempest in a teapot. Unless she was specifically disadvantaged in some way, she was just being as culturally obtuse as she believed they were.

A Buddhist monk and doesn't matter from which country can normally not sit next to a female same as a female can't touch the monk.
If there is no other option a female can sit next to a monk as long they don't touch each other which could be the problem in a air plane.
The female FA can serve the monks but there is not direct contact allowed, So when she places the drink or food on the seat table this is fine as long she doesn't give it directly to the monk.
I live in Thailand and we are Buddhist and visit many temples and monks and the monks don't have any problems with females as long they don't touch the monks.
Normally if my wife wants to give something to the monk she will place it on a ground (as they sit normally on the floor) in front of the monk afterwards he will pick it up. Simple as that.

LeCoqFrancais wrote:

A WOMAN on a United Airlines flight was allegedly made to move seats as two Pakistani men could not sit next to her.
Mary Campos was boarding a flight from California to Houston when she said she was told her pre-booked seat had been changed.
The explanation was because she had been booked into a seat next to two passengers whose cultural beliefs meant they were unable to sit next to a woman.
She says she was also told that the men were unable to be served by female staff.
Although she was shocked, she said she had no choice but to take the new seat.
The men were described by Ms Campos as “Pakistani monks” who were wearing long orange shirts.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1896484/p ... h-a-woman/
--
This is a situation where the airline being way to much to accommodate these passengers, they should have told the passengers to sit down net to the women and be served by women or get off the plane. I can understand that such practices are normal on PIA flights as its there national airline, their right and all, but this a US airline in the US so they should understand that in North-America we do things differently. As much as I would respect their religions and beliefs if I visited their country, I expect the same from them.

WE have become the only country in the world where our cultural beliefs have to take a back seat to everyone else, in our own country. The better solution would have been to tell the Pakistanis that if they cannot conform to our culture, kindly leave and go back to that paradise known as Pakistan.

LeCoqFrancais wrote:

I can understand that such practices are normal on PIA flights as its there national airline, their right and all, but this a US airline in the US so they should understand that in North-America we do things differently.

I've had the pleasure to work with PIA for a number of years, not once did I encounter a male passenger refusing to sit next to a woman. I also sincerely doubt this is a normal practice on domestic flights in Pakistan.

Martijn

LeCoqFrancais wrote:

bobnwa wrote:

There are no Muslim monks.Who is the joker that started this Thread?

I used the words Arabian Countries and last time I checked Pakistan falls in that category. So I do not think I said anything factually wrong in my post.

Go ahead and check again.

thaiflyer wrote:

A Buddhist monk and doesn't matter from which country can normally not sit next to a female same as a female can't touch the monk.
If there is no other option a female can sit next to a monk as long they don't touch each other which could be the problem in a air plane.
The female FA can serve the monks but there is not direct contact allowed, So when she places the drink or food on the seat table this is fine as long she doesn't give it directly to the monk.
I live in Thailand and we are Buddhist and visit many temples and monks and the monks don't have any problems with females as long they don't touch the monks.
Normally if my wife wants to give something to the monk she will place it on a ground (as they sit normally on the floor) in front of the monk afterwards he will pick it up. Simple as that.

I actually doubt they were Muslim, "Arabic" or even Pakistani. Hare Krishna or Buddhist monk, as you suggest, fits the description better, but with the amount of ignorance displayed so far in this thread and the report that started it, I wouldn't be surprised if they turn out to be Pastafarians from Iceland... :rolleyes:

I do not really understand this thread. The woman was not moved, she got a new seat assignment before boarding. An explanation was given for the new seat assignment. What is the problem? Seat assignments are changed all the time.

Varsity1 wrote:

CanadaFair wrote:

Too bad, but thats how good customer service works all over, respecting the customer, that woman was caused no offence other than her feminist ego getting hurt.

Her inability to sit in the seat of choice is a product of her feminist ego?

As an atheist male, I would tell these two men to take their mythical beliefs and shove it. Sit in your assigned seats with the public around you or don't fly. We don't care what century you live in. If you don't want to participate in the 21st, just stay home.

I'm also an atheist male, and I have ZERO tolerance for religious crap.

Women's rights and gay rights trump any cultural/religious/you name it self-imposed rubbish. Anyone discriminating or looking down on women or gays has to come and see me first.

Cavemen and bushmen belong in caves and bushes.

In years gone by flying was elite and glamourous. These days it is mass transit. You may be seated next to the obese person who encroaches on your personal space, the person with a personal hygene problem, the parents with a screaming kid etc. In Y at least, the airline's responsibily is to get you to your destination safely and if possible, punctually, nothing more. If you want special treatment, give NetJets a call.

LeCoqFrancais wrote:

A WOMAN on a United Airlines flight was allegedly made to move seats as two Pakistani men could not sit next to her.
Mary Campos was boarding a flight from California to Houston when she said she was told her pre-booked seat had been changed.
The explanation was because she had been booked into a seat next to two passengers whose cultural beliefs meant they were unable to sit next to a woman.
She says she was also told that the men were unable to be served by female staff.
Although she was shocked, she said she had no choice but to take the new seat.
The men were described by Ms Campos as “Pakistani monks” who were wearing long orange shirts.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1896484/p ... h-a-woman/
--
This is a situation where the airline being way to much to accommodate these passengers, they should have told the passengers to sit down net to the women and be served by women or get off the plane. I can understand that such practices are normal on PIA flights as its there national airline, their right and all, but this a US airline in the US so they should understand that in North-America we do things differently. As much as I would respect their religions and beliefs if I visited their country, I expect the same from them.

My next flight is booked on AA. I think I shall object to sitting next to black people and white people and Jewish people- perhaps I could get the airline to give me a whole cabin to myself....

LeCoqFrancais wrote:

bobnwa wrote:

There are no Muslim monks.Who is the joker that started this Thread?

I never used the word muslim in my post, only the newspaper did. I used the words Arabian Countries and last time I checked Pakistan falls in that category. So I do not think I said anything factually wrong in my post.
--
As for others saying that the airline did the correct thing, they did not, it was up to the Pakistani passengers to tolerate the other sex because they are in North-America and this is how we do things here, they were not forced to visit the US but they came so they should try and be respectful of how we do things here. Just like I don't expect certain things if I visit their country and that I will try and respect their beliefs and traditions.
--
Also, if airlines can say that can not accommodate for passengers with severe allergies they should be able to say that can't accommodate passengers for religious beliefs.

I think you need a new map if yours show Pakistan in Arabia