Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-18-2021, 11:10 AM   #1  
Line Holder
Thread Starter
 
jDSTJD's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2018
Posts: 89
Default Delta to Permanently Ban “Unruly” Passengers

https://onemileatatime.com/delta-ban-rude-passengers/

I understand and agree that something must be done to address the growing problem of unruly passengers (and crew for that matter) on aircraft, but will there be an objective standard for what constitutes “respect” and “civility”? Without a standard established in the policy I can see this creating chaos and leading to a lot of ridiculous litigation. Thoughts?
jDSTJD is offline  
Old 01-18-2021, 11:52 AM   #2  
Perennial Reserve
 
Excargodog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 5,784
Default

I agree. For all the claim that the airlines are private entities that can do anything they want, that really has never been the case. While no longer QUITE regulated like public utilities, they aren’t going to be able to get away without a process of some kind where those ‘unruly’ passengers can challenge the result, especially if it involves anyone who claims a special status, like 2% Cherokee on my mother’s side...
Excargodog is offline  
Old 01-18-2021, 12:43 PM   #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
velosnow's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,032
Default

Don't be an a-hole and behave like a normal human being? It isn't that hard.

Sure, there's room for subjectivity but with phones and plenty of witnesses there should be plenty of available evidence if airlines want to get serious about in flight safety.
velosnow is offline  
Old 01-18-2021, 01:26 PM   #4  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 28,518
Default

Non-issue.

Businesses can chose not to serve anyone, as long as it's not BECAUSE they are a protected class. You can choose not to serve a protected class, it just has to be for some other reason.

The recourse is a civil suit, but that won't succeed unless there are legal grounds, and the pax would have to prove the airline banned them for being gay, or brown or something legally protected. The airline actually doesn't have to "prove" they had sufficient cause, they can chose not serve you for almost any reason they like.

And they have to do something about it, if they let pax get away with it it will just encourage more of the same and if the crews feel like the airlines don't have their back it's going to be diversion city at the first hint of trouble $$$$.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 01-18-2021, 04:04 PM   #5  
Line Holder
Thread Starter
 
jDSTJD's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2018
Posts: 89
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
Non-issue.

Businesses can chose not to serve anyone, as long as it's not BECAUSE they are a protected class. You can choose not to serve a protected class, it just has to be for some other reason.

The recourse is a civil suit, but that won't succeed unless there are legal grounds, and the pax would have to prove the airline banned them for being gay, or brown or something legally protected. The airline actually doesn't have to "prove" they had sufficient cause, they can chose not serve you for almost any reason they like.

And they have to do something about it, if they let pax get away with it it will just encourage more of the same and if the crews feel like the airlines don't have their back it's going to be diversion city at the first hint of trouble $$$$.
I’m with you on the legal standard. The problem is going to be that when people are thrown off and banned under the policy, folks are going to be humiliated and furious and they are going to want to go after Delta for what they perceive to be “harm”. So even if the suits get tossed, it will be after the airline has had to go through the headache of answering the suits and getting them dismissed. Then there is the PR aspect which carries its own soft costs to the airline. In any event, I’m sure the savvy and well paid attorneys for Delta will make sure the policy will be put together soundly enough to fend off as many lawsuits as possible.
jDSTJD is offline  
Old 01-18-2021, 04:42 PM   #6  
Junior Senior
 
LNL76's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Whiskey Papa
Posts: 2,704
Thumbs up

I'm not a big Delta fan, but congrats to them for having the stones to implement this!
LNL76 is offline  
Old 01-18-2021, 06:38 PM   #7  
Line Holder
 
Chipjumper's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Position: Mooney driver
Posts: 37
Default

Odd how fast they are to ban certain travellers but not others (emergency exit escapees, drunken ragers, etc). Maybe in lieu of a ban they could put a passenger on probation etc.
In response to the poster who mentioned being part Cherokee Indian, what bearing would that have in regards to one being banned for unruly behaviour?
Chipjumper is offline  
Old 01-19-2021, 08:26 PM   #8  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 28,518
Default

Delta's not the only one...

https://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/no...sengers-banned

In fairness, I spent a couple months last year hauling BLM protestors/rioters between DC and the west coast. It was obvious who they were by their dress code and age and the fact that they were going to DC in large groups during the height of covid, but they behaved impeccably. Never had a hint of trouble.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 01-28-2021, 11:10 AM   #9  
Line Holder
 
Chipjumper's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Position: Mooney driver
Posts: 37
Default

In all fairness, I think we all could agree that 99% of travellers supporting all political microcosms act in a civil manner when travelling. Banning a few thousand idiots from the 1.8M who fly commercially per day is a drop in the bucket. I doubt such hitlist will last forever though due to litigation.
Chipjumper is offline  
Old 01-28-2021, 12:02 PM   #10  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 28,518
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chipjumper View Post
In all fairness, I think we all could agree that 99% of travellers supporting all political microcosms act in a civil manner when travelling. Banning a few thousand idiots from the 1.8M who fly commercially per day is a drop in the bucket. I doubt such hitlist will last forever though due to litigation.
It probably sobers up a few thousand more who might be otherwise inclined to go off the rails. If it reverses a trend, it's worth it.

Again, very difficult to sue and prevail on this. Airlines have the tight to refuse to serve, the plaintiff would have to show that they violated some federal law on protected classes. "It's not fair" is insufficient in this case.
rickair7777 is offline  
 
 
 

 
Post Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Delta Hiring News WARich Delta 11220 06-10-2020 08:42 AM
Delta loves UND crxpilot Delta 32 02-11-2020 09:44 AM
Delta deal could become model for scope Bill Lumberg Major 71 06-13-2012 09:36 AM
Re: RAH Quagmire Major 253 04-16-2011 07:19 AM
Delta to Airtran: no deal anymore RockBottom Major 0 09-15-2006 10:50 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:21 PM.