File: 1500579516823.png (178.7 KB, 499x360, Screen Shot 2017-07-20 at 20.3…)
I really want to open a discussion on this, as I keep seeing on facebook and there seems as though most support the airlines decision.
>child is kicking a passengers seat after the passenger asked him to stop>the parents refused to do anything>the passenger asked the parents to tie the child's shoe laces together to prevent the child from kicking >the parents made a violent threat to the disturbed passenger>family get removed from the plane
What do you think? Should people just tolerate other children's beahviour? Or were the airline in their rights?
There seem to be a lot of mothers pardoning the (imo poor) parenting. I side with the airlines. I think the parents are irresponsible and should have just controlled their brat.
Not just any criminal history, the guy purposefully got men addicted to opiates so he could extort sex from them. He wasn't even taking advantage of existing addictions, he pre-meditatedly planned to get these people addicted.
Vile, vile man.
The airline is within their rights. Their kid was bothering other people and they threatened another passenger when confronted on it.>>199197>>199147
Ok but what does that have to do with the airline being rude and showing unnecessary force to a customer/passenger?
Firstly. A cop came to speak to him for 15 minutes, asked him politely probably 10 or 11 times to leave the aircraft with him so they could take off.
He refused, he also jumped on his phone and pretended to be speaking to "his lawyer", he also kept referring to the fact he was a doctor, as if his profession should shield him from rule another 4 people on-board begrudgingly but peacefully accepted. That's a big insight into his character, he's arrogant and believes that he's losing face over it all.
Secondly. The mistake in that case lay with the ground crew who allowed everyone (minus 4) to check in. Not anyone on board the planet, nor security for that matter.
Thirdly, there's a whole load of misinfo spread by propagandists surrounding this case, such as the (bullshit claim) that the other four people were also all Asian (they weren't). Or that this David Dao isn't actually the same David Dao who got people addicted to drugs and then tried to fuck them for their addiction (how the fuck is he still practicing medicine in any capacity?) Or the whole "they kicked them out to make way for other travelers!" bullshit (they kicked them out to make way for staff travel who needed the flight to reach another flight they were due to work on)
The people who employed unnecessary force were the airport security, and even then it's debatable. The guy tried to break free of security and run back onto a packed aircraft he'd previously delayed for an hour or more. In the sort of security environment we live in right now I'm surprised he wasn't tazed or something similar.
We both know if this guy was white it wouldn't have gotten 1/10th of the sympathy.
More to the point this sets a really bad precedent moving forward, that some random guy can just hold up an airplane for an hour, refuse to get off, have to be dragged off and then win an out of court settlement because social media kicked up a big fuss about it.
The moral of all of this is that the captain's word is law on a plane. If he asks you to vacate, you fucking vacate. The David Dao case is textbook of how outrage culture can influence events in a negative and tribal way.
in this case it does sound like the mother was trying to control the child so its sort of excusable except for the peppa pig playing full volume>>199267
interesting, thanks for this
>they finally got caught doing it.
What do you mean finally got caught? Overbooking has been a thing for years. And if they get rid of it they'll just tinker with the booking system to sell less tickets, slightly pushing up the price.
>kicking paying passengers off for staffers
Happens all the time and will not change in the near future. Staff always have priority. Always. And that's not going to change because airlines have sophisticated logistical procedures in place to shuttle them about to meet other work commitments.
And Dao's precedent doesn't establish anything against staff travel, it just establishes that people can throw temper tantrums on planes now.
>You bet if anyone had anything important to do
He didn't. He was allowed to practice medicine on a very limited basis (God knows why) which didn't entail him dealing with serious patients of any kind.
>It's not that guy's fault for delaying the plane
Yes it is. The other passengers left begrudgingly when asked. It was him and him alone that held the flight up, and part of me thinks he did it for those reasons.
Be advised by supporting Dao you're playing into a media narrative that racialized the entire thing and turned it into a white vs. black issue (something that gained a lot of traction back in China too), despite the issue having nothing to do with race and the security who dragged him off both being black.
>You sound like you have family who work for airlines.
I'm actually more annoyed that it got turned into yet another outrage politics moment and an excuse to pile onto white people yet again.
Depends on the airline, all of them will comp you in some capacity - at the very least rebooking your ticket. If you have to stay overnight they'll pay for the hotel room too. Some go further and offer cash/other benefits, which is what he was offered (but refused).
Dao was pure theatrics. You can see this from when he is being dragged off the plane and is pretending to be unconscious. You can see it's a pretense because he's gripping his smartphone tightly.
The man is just a giant drama queen.
The problem is the uncertainty principle. They're not sure when and where they'll need those seats exactly, because of things like delays and rescheduling. In the case of the UA flight, the issue was something like the other UA flight at the point of destination that the staff needed to reach was due to depart very to the time of arrival for the UA flight Dao was on.
Because of this, the ground crew stupidly didn't let passengers know BEFORE boarding (standard practice) and instead allowed them to partially board the plane (boarding is defined as doors being closed). That's where the real fault lies here. Dao's behavior was still disgraceful and unjustifiable however. He's a grown man behaving like a little baby.
Like I said if he were an old white boomer we'd have either never heard of the case or all we'd have heard would have been a bunch of stuff about how he was an entitled white asshole etc.
The running back on the plane is something that's often left out.
It's a huge no-no in today's security environment. After you've just had to be de-boarded by force, attempting to forcibly reboard an aircraft really is liable to get you shot.
I'm sure if he was a younger, stronger looking man he would have got a lot worse.
>>199267>More to the point this sets a really bad precedent moving forward, that some random guy can just hold up an airplane for an hour, refuse to get off, have to be dragged off and then win an out of court settlement because social media kicked up a big fuss about it.
Not at all. The only reason why this even happened in the first place was the airline staff not following standard procedure, like sorting the issue out at the gate prior to boarding the plane or offering the maximum in compensation first. Not only that, but how tf does a 60 year old dude escape security and manage to run back on the plane? Airline staff and security bungled this at every step. Dao may be some kind of sex pervert drama queen, but ultimately the airline created the situation and thus were responsible for it.
The only precedent this sets is airline staff triple checking every rule in the book and following procedure so as to not create a similar situation in the future. And maybe security hogtying people so they can't run back onto the plane.
File: 1500752524224.jpg (94.7 KB, 1600x1000, feet-jetblue-airplane-.jpg)
I won't try to hide the fact that I work for an airline, so if I sound biased, that's why. Yet I will say: Even before I started working for one I never tolerated uncouth people letting their kids cause trouble and then blaming everyone else for when they get called out.
>Should people just tolerate other children's beahviour?
I think everyone expects a child to behave like a child, but there's no reason why we can't expect parents to act like parents. I think some have just grown used to others disciplining their children for them, or tolerating the bad behavior. So they get shocked when they are personally criticized, or in this instance, given consequences for the shitty behavior their kids normally get away with.
>were the airline in their rights?
Yep, no doubt. The parents made physical threats and were not complying.
Restaurants have that right too. It's just that a restaurant would suffer more if the entitled parents went after them with lawyers, whereas a major airline like JetBlue has a company division dedicated solely for handling lawsuits. They deal with this shit all the time, the tickets are worded like contracts so the airline will always win.
It's a huge security and flight risk as well to let passengers escalating fights remain on the plane anyway. Would you want a physical altercation breaking out next to you while you're cruising 39,000 feet in the air in a metal tube? Prolly not. It is scary.
Flight attendants are taught how to restrain and tie up drunk/freaking out passengers for this purpose. It's even more serious now since 9/11.
Problem is, more poorly behaved people will be flying now because tickets are at an all-time low. I fully expect more stories like these to be hitting the news as the peak summer season leads on and more trash will be flying on less than $100-$200 fares.
Thanks for the intel and perspective.
I knew everyone here would agree with the airline, im just so shocked that there is so many mommas defending the shitty parents.>>199395
I didn't realise overly lax parenting was peaking right now.
children have little impulse control, which is why you can sit them down in front of a marshmallow and even telling them if they wait a solid 5 minutes, they get 1 or 5 more (it doesnt really matter) they just take the thing and stuff their mouth with it.
this is the reason why parents with obese children are at fault and it's also the reason why parents are responsible to control their child, teach them manners and social norms. so yes, if they have a child that does not behave and are not able to control it, an airline can refuse to transport them.
It's mostly people who have never traveled before or who haven't traveled in years who cause the most issues. They don't really know how the air travel industry works, so they go in with certain expectations (because a $200 ticket to them is a lot of money) without reading the airline rules, looking up travel tips, or reading reviews of airports.
These people don't know that the airlines can legally change or move their seats for any reason, for example. They don't know that if there are delays or cancellations due to weather, the airline isn't legally obligated to compensate them or give them hotel or meal vouchers.
I've had people ask me to explain how TSA works and how they go through the security checkpoint. How they should file a claim with their trip insurance. Documents questions. All these things that could be answered with a Google search or a call to an embassy. I'm being generous tho, most of those people ask me "What's an embassy?"
Sorry for the ot rant.