New York to Dallas passenger removed from flight over mask dispute

[jimntx]

Passenger on NYC-Dallas flight removed for refusal to wear mask. Seems that this happened during boarding or shortly thereafter. It's not clear at what point of the process this occurred. Article says he will be banned from AA flights until masks are no longer required. (I bet he'll just rush down to the airport to book a flight the day he becomes "formerly banned." LOL)

https://ktla.com/news/nationworld/passenger-removed-from-american-airlines-flight-to-dallas-after-refusing-to-wear-face-mask/#:~:text=Passenger Brandon Straka was asked,airline confirmed in a statement.&text=This is the first known,more strictly enforce mask wearing.

 

[1AA]

He is a blogger looking for attention. He got it. Nothing exciting about what he did except grabbing headlines.

 

[swamt]

I would like to add the article below. This is where American screwed up. They allowed him to get on another later flight WITHOUT a mask. Now that's showing them AA. C'mon Man! That's the way to "enforce" the mask and face coverings. Either "enforce" the policies or lose passengers. Now the end result is this guys is banned on all future flights on AA while the mask are required. But they should NOT have allowed him to fly without the mask on a later flight. Grow a pair AA and "enforce" the policies you are saying you are doing when clearly you are not. Now AA will get more and more passengers doing the same and saying, "you let that guy fly without a mask, so how can you deny me now??" Way to go American...

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/conservat...wear-mask-051316419--abc-news-topstories.html

 

[jimntx]

I would like to add the article below. This is where American screwed up. They allowed him to get on another later flight WITHOUT a mask. Now that's showing them AA. C'mon Man! That's the way to "enforce" the mask and face coverings. Either "enforce" the policies or lose passengers. Now the end result is this guys is banned on all future flights on AA while the mask are required. But they should NOT have allowed him to fly without the mask on a later flight. Grow a pair AA and "enforce" the policies you are saying you are doing when clearly you are not. Now AA will get more and more passengers doing the same and saying, "you let that guy fly without a mask, so how can you deny me now??" Way to go American...

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/conservat...wear-mask-051316419--abc-news-topstories.html

And, how do you defend your recommended actions if say he was traveling to his mother's funeral? I think he will be suitably inconvenienced by the fact that he will not travel on AA until masks are no longer required. Also I got the impression from the article that the airlines will share this information with each other, and Mr. Straka will find himself restricted to travel on Greyhound until masks are no longer required.

 

[dfw gen]

Its all for attention, ***** slap his ass and leave him behind.

 

[Duke787]

And, how do you defend your recommended actions if say he was traveling to his mother's funeral? I think he will be suitably inconvenienced by the fact that he will not travel on AA until masks are no longer required. Also I got the impression from the article that the airlines will share this information with each other, and Mr. Straka will find himself restricted to travel on Greyhound until masks are no longer required.

Flying is not a constitutional right.

 

[jimntx]

Flying is not a constitutional right.

Never said it was. I'm referring to the public optics of denying travel at the last minute. Don't misunderstand. As a retired flight attendant, I consider Mr. Straka to be a sterling example of a total jerk. There's just a time and a place to do this stuff. I hope he is restricted to Greyhound (though I bet Greyhound will require masks at some point. The busses don't provide all that much social distancing.)

 

[eolesen]

I'm sure he was fishing for attention, but there are real concerns about wearing masks if you're prone to drops in your oxygen. Who are we to question if he has a medical condition and how many people will now exploit this loophole?

It's not uncommon for people with cardiac and pulmonary issues. My daughter's SpO2 levels are borderline and with a mask requirement she'd need portable O2 and a nasal cannula. Not something we as nonrevs could arrange, and it's not cheap for revenue customers. It's nobody's business as to why, yet I'm sure we'll need to fight that battle if we choose to fly anytime soon (which we rarely do regardless)

 

[swamt]

And, how do you defend your recommended actions if say he was traveling to his mother's funeral? I think he will be suitably inconvenienced by the fact that he will not travel on AA until masks are no longer required. Also I got the impression from the article that the airlines will share this information with each other, and Mr. Straka will find himself restricted to travel on Greyhound until masks are no longer required.

I don't defend them, I hold to them. I don't care where he is going or WHY. Where the mask and he can go. Refuse to wear the mask and don't go. Totally HIS choice rather he makes the funeral or not, NOT Americans, his choice completely, I would still enforce the policies otherwise you will have another 50 people saying the same thing.

 

[swamt]

Maybe this will slow down the chest pounders, civil rights screamers, and just about anyone who thinks they can do as they please on and aircraft. It will get tested and someone will get arrested over it, but the passengers will lose in the end. The ONLY thing that can save a passenger is a "legit" medical reason which has to be accompanied by a Drs note or orders. If they don't have it in writing then it won't fly (no pon there). Just like all medical conditions must be in writing so does the mask and face covering medical releases. If it is so important for you, medically, to NOT wear a mask, then take the time and get your legal medical release, OR you don't fly, period. No legal stance. All airlines need to crack down on this and share with all airlines their lists...

https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-airlines-legal-bar-passengers-193001730.html

 

[1AA]

I wish they would be this aggressive with the ESA and Service animal scammers. Too many scammers with false claims to avoid paying or leaving the dog home.

 

[eolesen]

The ONLY thing that can save a passenger is a "legit" medical reason which has to be accompanied by a Drs note or orders. If they don't have it in writing then it won't fly (no pon there). Just like all medical conditions must be in writing so does the mask and face covering medical releases. If it is so important for you, medically, to NOT wear a mask, then take the time and get your legal medical release, OR you don't fly, period. No legal stance. All airlines need to crack down on this and share with all airlines their lists...

Don't know where you get the idea that a doctor's note or medical release is required by the airlines for someone to fly unless they're a stretcher patient, and the US carriers don't typically accept stretchers (Alaska might).

Frankly, my medical conditions are nobody's business, and airline systems are nowhere near HIPPA compliant, so how do you propose implementing this in a way that's legal? Pandemics don't eliminate existing laws like HIPPA.

If someone says they can't wear a mask for medical reasons, it's going to have to be accepted at face value like airlines do with the need for an emotional support penguin.

 

[Justme]

Don't know where you get the idea that a doctor's note or medical release is required by the airlines for someone to fly unless they're a stretcher patient, and the US carriers don't typically accept stretchers (Alaska might).

No stretchers maybe, but at least under the old FOM US Airways accomodated full body casts if they met certain height requirements.

Had a captain in recurrent class that related a time when, prior to boarding, he and the FO heard a commotion in the galley. He got up to see what was going on and here they were rolling this adult man in a body cast using a hand truck.

Capt was like, umm... I don't think so. As they were waiting for CSR manager/dispute resolution official the guy says, and I'm not kidding, he needed to relieve himself. Long story short he had the Capt maneuver him into the lav and opened whatever needed to be opened and the guy did his thing.

End result was obvious. But if it's a person small enough to lie across a row of seats that would have been allowed. No idea if the new ops manual still allows this. I don't see anything on aa.com other than 'let us know if you need extra space.'