I feel I should make the argument that one’s civil rights can be violated by an individual or a company; it doesn’t have to be the government. There are lawsuits and/or criminal charges all the time based on a person or corporation violating someone’s civil rights. For instance, Federal prosecution of Klansmen in Mississippi under civil rights laws, because it was clear they couldn’t be convicted in a state court on murder charges.
Actually, not only is this unclear, but at best the guess is that she had just finshed work, as the flight was over. But I do not know, nor does anyone else here.
The bag was brought on the plane, and taken off the plane, in full view. It was wheeled through the airport in full view of anyone. People do not put stickers on items because they won’t be seen, they put them on things so they will be seen. I don’t know how there can be any dispute over that - the intent of putting a sticker on your luggage, car, or house is so people will see it and take note.
I would like you to answer my question above - whose responsibility is it, in the three cases I put forth - who is responsible for the FA being disciplined if, and I repeat if, they in fact broke a regulation - me for pointing it out, or her for breaking it?
By this standard, and the other you put forth earlier, we can therefore never make a complaint about someone unless and until we can determine their financial status, family status, buying habits, and complete background.
And as a result, it means you can’t complain about anyone, anywhere, regardless of merit.
All I can do is apologize to you, elucidator, for not being able to explain my reasons. I have tried, and tried, and tried, in multiple posts, and I am at a loss to explain it better than I already have. So I’m not ignoring this query; I simply do not know how to explain it better than I have already attempted. 
However, in the example you gave, the “civil right” was not freedom from government intervention in speech, (nor was it actually based on the Coinstitution, but on a Congressionally passed law from the 1860s or 1870s).
In addition, cases involving deprived rights have to do with actions taken outside the employment contract. Dress codes and similar actions are well within an employers right to impose rules, providing they are not imposed after the hiring.
However, in the example you gave, the “civil right” was not freedom from government intervention in speech, (nor was it actually based on the Coinstitution, but on a Congressionally passed law from the 1860s or 1870s).
In addition, cases involving deprived rights have to do with actions taken outside the employment contract. Dress codes and similar actions are well within an employers right to impose rules, providing they are not imposed after the hiring.
That is not Anthracite’s problem, nor her responsibility.
When I was 20, I had some root canal work done. About halfway through the procedure, the dental assistant had to squirt some kind of liquid onto my gums. It didn’t get onto my gums. It went straight down my throat. I threw up. Not in the chair and on myself; I had time to get up and lunge myself at the sink.
“That stuff went right down my throat,” I said, as I settled back into the chair.
“No, it didn’t,” said the assistant. “You must be having a bad reaction to the tranquilizer.” Yeah, all of a fucking sudden. I mean, I didn’t use an accusatory tone; I didn’t insult or challenge her. All I said was “That stuff went down my throat”, and instead of saying “I’m sorry”, she kept insisting that it hadn’t happened. So I finally had to lie back and let the dentist continue, except I was now swallowing compulsively, when I had no saliva.
My mom said afterwards, “Maybe she’s made mistakes before, and this would have been the mistake that would have gotten her fired.” But she made the mistake(s)! I wasn’t trying to get her fired, but if she was on such thin ice, then there must have been a good reason for it. And if that was the first and only mistake she’d ever made, then presumably it would not have put her job in jeopardy. All I know is what happened to me: I threw up and got a sore throat when neither of those things should have happened. I could have forgiven her mishandling of the dental device, but I did not forgive her weaseling.
I just don’t understand why it’s up to the consumer to protect the worker’s job. If you want to keep your job, then do it properly.
And let me say this pre-emptively. A while back, I posted in the thread about the woman who filed suit because airport security hauled out her dildo in public and made crude remarks. I pointed out that doctors and nurses see all kinds of weird shit, and they don’t make fun. I was promptly mocked out by someone who made the excuse that airport security don’t have the same level of training as medical personnel. Please do not bother pointing out to me the discrepancy between a dental assistant’s responsibilities and training, and those of a flight attendant. Both of them have a responsibility not to piss people off. You don’t have to go to school for that.
I’m seeing an upsetting trend here: a mindset that anyone associated with air travel is now above reproach, and should never be reprimanded for behavior that would be unacceptable in any other profession. That is not the way to keep the air travel industry solvent.
That’s true, but again it has nothing to do with the first amendment itself, because the first amendment isn’t a grant of power. Civil rights laws, when applied to an individual or a company, are generally justified through the commerce clause. to have a violation of the first amendment you have to have some kind of state action.
Well, slap my ass and call me a tool of The Man, but I don’t see how ANY of this applies to Anthracite’s situation.
Uh huh. By the very nature of putting a sticker on a piece of luggage, it’s impossible to decide who gets to see it and who doesn’t. Having someone react the the message said sticker expressed (and it was meant to make people react, no?) should have been an eventuality the FA should have realized (as long as we’re assigning "should"s here).
Irrelevant. If her job is that close to being tossed in the crapper, wouldn’t it be in her best interests to avoid anything that would place it in jeopardy? And yes, asserting that the President of the United States was aware of, and allowed, a deadly attack is indeed something that could place your job in jeopardy. Sorry.
Nonetheless, I can’t see why you need a full demographic profile of a person before evaluating their behavior.
elucidator, I didn’t like Bush much before any of this happened and I still don’t care for him. I do have respect for how he helped the country through this time, though.
But…even if I agreed with the flight attendant, the bottom line is that it is inappropriate in the context (the context that she is a person whose job it is, is to make travelers feel comfortable).
How hard is that to understand? I agree with anth that some of you seem so disconnected from the realities of the working world, it amazes me.
Oh, be assured I form judgements as readily as the next fool, I have no special dispensations. I am smarter than most, wiser than none.
But a wise man once suggested to me that as I cringe from suffering, so should I cringe to inflict suffering.
Law above force, justice above law, mercy above justice, love above all.
Rather simple, really. Except for being nearly impossible.
If you ask me, the FA is asking to have “suffering” (or at least a reminder that her sticker is inappropriate) inflicted.
She’s in uniform. She’s on the airport premises. She took that suitcase on the plane. It surely isn’t anth’s fault.
As for the “what if it was on her car?” No one gives a shit if it’s on her car. She ain’t taking her car on the flight…
So I pose this question to you, elucidator, what do you do when you get shitty service? Nothing?
What if I don’t cringe?
Oh, I’m sure he wasn’t talking to you, Scylla. You are not a fool, like myself, what need have you for such counsel? It is only lesser persons, like myself, who require such admonishments.
Hmm. Great way to sidestep questions.
[puts on the Sparticus Mind-Reading Helmet© ]
I get the feeling you were ratted on for providing bad service too. [/takes off the Sparticus Mind-Reading Helmet©]
Great goobledy-woobledy.
This isn’t a hard concept, folks.
Does the flight attendant have the right to his/her opinion? Of course.
Does the flight attendant have the right to a possibly inflammatory opinion that could negatively impact the public perception of his/her employer? Of course.
Does the flight attendant have the right to broadcast his/her potentially inflammatory opinion to customers? Yes – provided he/she doesn’t care about keeping the job.
As has been pointed out earlier in the thread, we don’t know if the flight attendants in question were “on the clock” when they were wheeling their luggage through the airport. However, common sense tells you that if you’re in uniform, in the area where you work, the public will perceive you as “on duty.” As such, you have a responsibility to represent your employer with professionalism and decorum. The flight attendants in question, in my opinion, weren’t doing that.
Shoot, people whose job it is to broadcast their opinions sometimes get canned for doing so when the opinion isn’t popular. Witness Bill Maher. Or the recent “firing” of Ann Coulter by a newspaper.
Why is this so hard to grasp?
elucidator must be Governor Briscoe. How’d you do in the re-election after that whorehouse business?