As people age the likelihood of back problems increase. Once you have a history of back problems then lifting luggage into an overhead bin is a bad idea. If this happens to a member of the crew the flight is over or seriously delayed. The person injured is risking loss of employment if this happens often.
It would have been a simple matter for the Flight Attendant to ask for assistance so I have a feeling (based on what the passenger posted) that attitude was involved. If that’s the case then there is a Flight Attendant unity of spirit that invites the passenger to use another carrier.
Do you not see a line between not being able (or willing) to provide a service and saying something like “I won’t apologize and I’m not sorry” to a paying customer? If you’re going to be in a customer-facing position, you learn the scripts, and I’m 100% positive that there isn’t a company in this country that would ever tell an employee to say “I won’t apologize” or anything of the sort to a customer who has a complaint, even if the complaint is completely unfounded, which this woman’s was not. If you can’t manage to deal with people diplomatically, don’t work in customer service. That’s a no-brainer.
The temporarily able-bodied are routinely incapable of understanding that such “common sense” solutions are actually an advocacy for the abrogation of the freedoms of people with disabilities. Not unusual, but sad.
You know when else it’s a bad idea? When you have a disabling spinal injury. You know what else is a bad idea? Equivocating between a disabling spinal injury and “back problems.”
Legally speaking, you’re dead wrong. An apology can be seen as a form of admission of wrong-doing and guilt. You don’t apologize for things that were not done improperly, or you’re setting yourself for a fall should there be some form of lawsuit. I’ve had bosses in the past who had the expectation “always apologize if the customer is upset, it doesn’t cost you anything”, and several of them have been bitten in the ass by it later on.
Yup. I suppose it’s rather naive of me, but I had hoped that more Dopers would take notice of that particular “solution” than what I saw in this thread. :dubious:
To Eureka: Your solution of half-price tickets for a companion to take care of any needs “out of the ordinary” is not a solution. From your attitude, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that you’ve never been disabled or known anyone with a disability. Your certainty that the onus is on us to accommodate anything the world cares to throw at us is breathtakingly patronizing. There’s more I’d like to say on the subject, but it’d end up in the Pit.
I would be surprised if that’s what the airline announced; heavy objects are definitely better off on the floor in the event of turbulence, and it’s what I’ve always heard from the airlines and even from at least one aircraft manufacturer! In fact, in the original CRJs, for example, the bins were never designed with the wheeled bags in mind, there isn’t enough room to have one per person and AFAIK the bin door latches are not rated for a shock load from a typical weight wheeled bag.
The space under the seat is small, but that, also, was not designed with these bags in mind. The typical “approved” carry-on wheel bag is much bigger than what was designed for. New aircraft designs are taking this into account, but old ones obviously cannot be expected to.
Of course, most airlines allow the bins in the overheads, since passengers complain about leg room (with cause of course, there really isn’t much!) and everyone has these bags! It isn’t the safest thing to do, though.
There’s a vast gulf of things that can be said between “I apologize” and “I won’t apologize” though. There are many words that can be said to acknowledge the customer’s complaint, indicate understanding of what they experienced and how it affected them, and assure them that the complaint is being passed up the chain or explain “this is policy, and I’m afraid nothing can be done.”
To blatantly say “I won’t apologize and I’m not sorry,” especially when you’re as far down on the chain as a single customer service “supervisor” at one airport location of an international airline and there are people much more senior to you who could address the customer’s issue with a more official response than you’re empowered to give may avoid a liability lawsuit but it’s also a good way to alienate that customer and cost the company money.
There is a huge difference between “can” and are “required to”. While a flight attendant may choose to assist a passenger with baggage, under their union contract they are not required to do so. I can’t point to a site, as they don’t publish union contracts on the interwebs. My cousin who is a flight attendant for Delta, says that this is a common term within all AFA-CWA contracts with airlines.
So it seems grossly unfair to fan the flames of hatred toward United Airlines, when it is the union that has fought and won to keep this provision in their union labor contract.
I’m sorry. I’m sorry I said whatever I said which struck you as breathtakingly patronizing. While I’ve never been seriously disabled, I do have some experience with broken bones and aging grandmothers (which even I can recognize sounds breathtakingly patronizing, so I think I’ll quit before I dig myself any deeper).
I will admit as a general matter of principle that I’m big on people taking responsibility for themselves rather than expecting someone else to make accommodations, and in a world where airlines are always seeking to cut costs and ammenities, I’m uncomfortable with expecting the airlines to be staffed such that accommodating special needs is easy.
On the other hand, after I read the journal article which inspired this, I was appalled at the treatment the person recieved. If someone asserts that they have a disability and need a specific accommodation, they should be given it–unless it violates protocols set up for handling people with their specific needs. Of course, based on my mother’s experiences travelling with her mother, I’d be a little reluctant to assume that all of that person’s traumatic experiences were caused by people thinking she looked young and healthy rather than simple oversight.
I have a very hard time believing that union contracts prohibit a flight attendant from assisting a disabled passenger with their bags. As stated before, the Air Carrier Access Act specifically requires that disabled passengers receive assistance with certain services, such as “Assistance in loading and retrieving carry-on items, including mobility aids and other assistive devices stowed on board in accordance with § 382.41.” Sorry, but employment contracts don’t supercede the law.
I have little doubt that union contracts would provide employees with some protection against able-bodied passengers who are simply to lazy to lift the bag that they themselves packed.
In this situation, I believe the flight attendant was obligated by FAA rules to assist a disabled passenger. I do not believe that there is any reason for a flight attendant to be required assist able-bodied customers in stowing their bags; unless someone is making a hash of it and a FA has to step in to prevent disruptions to other passengers, as common sense would direct.
Huge caveat: after skimming the disabled passenger’s blog, I am strongly inclined to believe that she is more of a pain in the ass than a someone seriously disabled – I’d say a large part of her disability is probably her attitude. However, the flight attendant is a fool to disregard a request for assistance from someone claiming to be disabled.
Again, a HUGE difference between “prohibiting” and “not requiring”. Why would the airline or the union want to prohibit a flight attendant from assisting. However it is not unreasonable to expect that the union would want the contract to contain provisions that would not allow the airline “to require” that flight attendants assist with baggage.
The flight attendant clearly exercised her right within her contract to tell the passenger that she would not assist her. The airline can do nothing about it, as the flight attendant did not violate her contract.
The point is, the specifics of whatever contract are meaningless because FEDERAL LAW requires the airlines to render this assistance to disabled passengers.
True, but all that means is that the flight attendant was obligated to call for a baggage handler to come up onto the plane and stow her bags; not that the flight attendant had to do it herself.
I don’t know what the FA’s contract dictates, nor do I know what United’s policy on offering assistance to disabled passengers is, but I do know what assistance I saw offered to a lady who flew from Lexington to Dallas on the same flight as me on an American flight.
This woman was not technically disabled, but injured and on crutches. She had a wheelchair from the car to the check-in counter, and the same person was wheeling her when they showed up at the gate about 5 minutes after us. Shortly before boarding began two United employees wheeled her to the bathroom and helped her get in the stall, then back out to the gate. She was pre-boarded and wheeled up the jetway, at which point I don’t know if the airline staff or her husband helped her into her seat. When we landed and the doors opened, her wheelchair was waiting, along with all the strollers and such. None of the airline employees acted like this was anything out of the ordinary.
If American can provide that level of service to someone, I’m not really seeing why United can’t even get someone’s bag gate checked for her.
I don’t believe that a flight attendant could, under the law, claim “that’s not my job” and still be in compliance, but in any case, the FA didn’t even call for assistance, so she failed in that respect, too.
United Airlines has put out a few tweets on this subject:
If the facts are as described, it’s very clear that the flight attendant wasn’t carrying out her responsibilities under the law or under company policy. By doing so, the flight attendant has left the door open for either her or the airline to be punished by a fine of up to $10,000. (See 49 USC 46301)
Face it, the flight attendant acted irresponsibly.
I’m glad I read all the way to your post, because I was about to be wrong.
As far as I am concerned, your cite is definitive - United was wrong, and the passenger (and boytyperanma) are correct. Thanks for fighting my (intended) ignorance.
I read the blog, and frankly I’m skeptical that this one-sided account gives us a true picture of what actually happened. If everything went down exactly to the letter like she wrote it, then yes, I’d say United shat on her pretty hard. But did it really?
I’m not calling her a liar, but it does seem as if she decided early on in this ordeal that she was being victimized, and viewed everything through that lens.
Did the flight attendant really say word-for-word “If I helped everyone do that all day then MY back would be killing me by the end of the day! You’ll just have to wait for someone from your row to come back here and ask them to give you a hand.” or did she say “I’m so sorry, but our policy is not to lift passengers’ bags into the overheads due the risk of back injury. I’m sure a fellow passenger will be happy to help you out.” Probably somwhere between the two, and maybe the attendant was having a bad day, but the passenger seemed intent on being insulted.
Further evidence of this comes when she writes of her encounter with Dina the supervisor: “It was obvious to me from the beginning that it was going to be a difficult conversation…” She goes on to say “She accused me of not listening to anything she said, but I cut her off and told her that I understood her perfectly.” She interrupted to make the point that she was listening? Huh. Okay.
Look, I am fortunate and thankful to be able-bodied, and as such I realize I can’t fully comprehend the challenges faced by handicapped people on a daily basis. But I’m fairly certain that carping about people who don’t drop everything to cater to your every need doesn’t help.
ETA: I do think the flight attendant should have taken the initiative to at least find somebody to help, but shouldn’t be required to heft baggage herself.
Lots of poor behavior and attitude displayed by many of the players. But what I took from this was that the disabled can be pains in the asses WRT their carry ons the same as the able bodied! I think they should all be prohibited, thereby resolving this traveller’s problem!
I am very fortunate that I am not in the position that I need to regularly solicit assistance for relatively routine tasks. But if I were, I imagine I would expect people to be generally unhelpful, same as I expect now. And even if I thought I ought to have other alternatives provided, if a readily available option such as checking my bag existed, I suspect I would regularly make use of that.
I probably check my bag 1/2 the time even if it will fit - especially if I expect the plane to be crowded. IME waiting for baggage just isn’t that much of a hassle, and I’m generally not in all that much of a hurry.
Back problems and disabling spinal injury are 2 sides of the same coin. If lifting is not part of the job then the FA can’t be compelled to lift anything.
As to the extent the Airline is responsible for lifting disabled people’s luggage is up for debate. Are they required to lift the person into the seat? Are they required to help them go to the bathroom? Are they responsible for feeding them? There are limits to what the Disabilities Act requires as there are expectations of what the disabled person is expected to do. If this is not a function of the FA directly then the Airline is, at most, responsible for establishing a policy to deal with it which in this case is covered by luggage check-in.
The law and regulations are fairly clear and go into some detail. The airline is required to provide assistance for things such as stowing carry-on luggage, helping a person to the lavatory, and opening packages of food. They are not responsible for helping anyone IN the lavatory, actually feeding a passenger, or providing constant care and attendance.
