Posted on 07/18/2018 6:11:04 AM PDT by simpson96
Apparently the woman doesn’t realize that you get you bags back faster when checking at the gate (you just have to lug them farther to exit). It also sounds like it could have been worse since they mentioned that another passenger had a medical issue while waiting in the terminal. They could have had a nice stopover in Pitt or Philly to kill some additional time. Oh the joy of flying these days!
Skooz wrote: “Can’t imagine why it would take 4 hours to resolve this situation.”
You mean like they did when they forcibly removed a passenger who wound up with a bloody nose? Remember all the complaints about how badly the poor man was treated?
Because that has turned out so well for airlines in the past?
Exactly the right procedure. Stop the problem as early as possible.
...so it was much more pleasant to apologize/accept apology than to cause a possible regrettable situation.
Nobody at the airline wanted to be a main feature in the video, lawsuit, and BLM/Antifa circus that would have followed such forcible removal.
I suspect this was intended as a setup, and the airline refused to take the bait.
She should face a fine, and then placed on the do not fly list, or banned from the airports.
In reading an outside source article on this, as witnessed by a person sitting near the woman, she wasn’t refusing to check the bag, she said she would. She was refusing to take the bag herself, deplane to the gate, and being required to check it there. I have seen bags stored by stews before in this situation without removing the passenger. The passenger may have gone too far, as she “got away” with getting the bag on the aircraft, but she should have considered that she would have to fit within the rules.
I carry a medical bag with me when I fly that contains medication and two medical machines. But I purchased a bag that conforms to airline standards to do it and it goes into the overhead or under the seat in front of me. I do not have a problem.
The main problem that created the opportunity to this is that the gate staff never should have let the bag go down the ramp to begin with if it was oversized. If it was medical, they should have stored it in the cabin as they have places for that. When the new size standard was implemented this year, it is the responsibility of the passenger to conform. And if the bag being used does not conform, it can be stowed inside a place in the cabin. And unless it is completely out of size rules that creates storage problems, and it is a medical bag, they can’t refuse your carrying it on board unless it is a full sized suitcase. But I’ve seen things in my flights that never should have been allowed on board. And we don’t know what was in the bag nor do we even know who the passenger was. Too much lack of info. She could have been within the law and the airline screwed up to begin with and had to CYA and didn’t know how to without looking even worse than they already were.
rwood
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Straightforward solution:
The woman was the problem. The bag was the excuse.
If the woman de-planes to follow her bag, have TSA arrest her as soon as she's off the plane.
Take off ASAP-- with -- or without -- the woman.
Have TSA "dump-search" the bag in detail for any sort of contraband -- especially weapons or explosives. Then...
A. Check the bag (and the woman) through to the woman's destination on the next available flight.
...or...
B. Throw her in the slammer -- if evidence and behavior so dictate.
~~~~~~~~~~
If the woman chooses to stay on-board, have TSA waiting at the woman's destination to arrest her after she de-planes -- holding the woman to re-connect her with her (delayed and checked) bag ...and...
A. Send her on her merry way
...or...
B. Throw her in the slammer -- if evidence and behavior so dictate.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(Note that, in this scenario,TSA (for once) is doing their job, and the airline and the rest of the passengers are minimally inconvenienced... And... the woman is appropriately delayed [or incarcerated-]. If she has a brain, she'll never attempt to disrupt another flight...)
It is high time the airlines revise their baggage policies. Back in the day you could check at least one bag for free, but once the airlines imposed a baggage fee, passengers are bringing on steamer trunks as carry on bags. They either try to stuff these bulging bags into the overhead bins or if the bags are outrageously large get them checked for free at the gate and the retrieve them for free after they deplane and avoid the hassle of waiting at baggage claim. Us shmucks who do not want to be burdened dragging our large bags through the airport are charged to check them and the have to wait for our bags to be unloaded at baggage claim. I have yet to see an airline enforce the bag size for carry on bags. They have those metal cages at most gates so it would be a no brainer to just have passengers with obviously large bags demonstrate they fit in the space allotted. Checking oversized bags at the gate should be subject to a hefty charge. Those of us with prechecked bags and who have paid the fee should get priority boarding. I have long thought the massive satchels jammed in overhead bins are a huge safety hazard and could become dislodgedin turbulence killing or seriously injuring passengers.
Look carefully. At the video and you will notice it’s exactly what I would expect.
Ryan Air has it covered.... just charge a lot more extra money for oversize bags and enforce it strictly...:^)
Check out the costs -
https://www.liligo.co.uk/travel-magazine/flying-with-ryanair-the-low-down-on-luggage-21541.html
I travel with a “carry-on” size bag and it bugs me when other passengers roll down the aisle with giagantic bags that are nowhere close to fitting under the seat as required.
Maybe she has checked things only to have them disappear. My daughter and her family went to Italy, they had a really nice stroller for the baby, which evaporated on the way home. The airlines have been trying to track it with no luck, it seems it was not properly transferred then began a journey of its own to who knows where. Three weeks of nonsense on the phone with 3 airlines over a stroller, now they are going to process it as lost.
Next time someone shuts down a flight because they don’t want to check things it might be my daughter.
"Flight 3708, you are cleared to taxi to runway 21S."
I’m not a huge fan of the airlines, but I think they end up between a rock and a hard place in some situations. This was likely one of them.
If the plane in question was a United Express, then it was probably quite a small plane with limited overhead storage. I recently flew United on one of these planes. They have small overhead storage and passengers being asked to gate-check their carryon luggage isn’t uncommon. Since that’s always a possiblity, I pack accordingly; anything I might need on the flight goes in a large purse or tote bag. I did have to gate check my carryon. I didn’t feel disrespected, discriminated against, or any of that nonsense. Neither did any of my fellow passengers as far as I could tell.
There is ample information available before boarding the flight to indicate what you may or may not be able to carry on.
I may be cynical but I always suspect a scam of some sort. Maybe if you cause enough ruckus and can get the airline to try to have you physically removed, you can get your flight for free.
A few years ago I was staying at a hotel I frequented for business reasons, so I knew the staff pretty well. One morning one of them asked me about noise the night before. I told them I hadn’t heard any, and I’m a light sleeper. It seems that a couple had stayed there overnight. When they checked in, they didn’t get the “discount” they thought that they should have. When they left the next morning, they complained at length about a family staying there with small children- they had been crying, running around the halls, slamming doors, etc. They asked for their stay to be discounted, or made free. The hotel refused.
The couple had called the desk and complained the night before but the clerk could not substantiate their complaint when he went and checked.
Since I was staying just below the family in question, the staff asked me about it. I had not heard a thing, and I would have, if it had happened. We agreed that it was likely an attempt to scam the hotel.
Interestingly, the couple had skin quite a few shades lighter than the family in question. (They had small children but the children were well-behaved as far as I could see.)
They had to deplane because things could get ugly and United doesn’t need to have any more videos out there.
She should have been tazed, beaten with her over-sized bag, then, she and her baggage should have tossed out the rear door onto the tarmac. Enough of this idiocy.
The times when Freepers were upset with airlines involved, as I recall, moving a passenger from an assigned seat or paid for seat that they didn't want to move from. Removing a passenger who refuses to check an oversize bag is not something that any of us would have a problem with. We would want it to be quick, and without brutalizing the passenger, like happened with that Chinese guy. Why the gratuitous attack on freepers?
The terminal might've been understaffed at that hour - shift change or something. Usually these problems are caught when the passenger tries to step aboard the plane and they're held there at the end of the jet bridge until they agree to check the bag.
She needs to be put on a PERMANENT NO FLY LIST. NOW.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.