Posted on 06/20/2011 12:42:46 PM PDT by Red Badger
>>>The Morris family told 7NEWS on Sunday night, when they arrived from Dallas that they are now planning legal action.
Insert sound effect of slot-machine payoff....
The pilot is an ignoramus. Should undergo remedial training in the transport of people with disabilities. Then should apologize in person to Morris.
>>Flying isn’t a right, and you fly on a Captain’s aircraft at his discretion. It is in the Federal Air Regulations, spelled out very clearly.<<
I think we have a classic clash of laws here. The state goal of the ADA is to make sure that, as much as possible, the disabled be treated and have access to facilities as much the able-bodied. Of course, we have to deal with “reasonable accommodation” in this case.
I am not an ADA lawyer but have been a witness in some ADA lawsuits (as an administrator in the State of California). Not pretty and not fun. It ain’t gonna be fun for the airline, either.
>>This passenger shouldn’t have been carried the first time, he should have flown on an “air ambulance” flight. Those aircraft are staffed and equipped to handle passengers in this condition.<<
Those things are expensive and I don’t think they are available for pleasure trips. I could be wrong, but I doubt it...
Since he decided that tying this man’s extremities to the seat with seat belt extensions “might” just hamper an emergency evacuation of both this man, his family, and everyone else around him.... I’ll fly with this heartless ash hole any day, over the second Captain who shrugged and decided to let fate take its course, because what could possibly go wrong....
Name another class of passengers who are permitted to fly if they cannot use the FAA approved safety equipment onboard in the manner for which it was designed.....
That is the trouble with a little or a lot of authority. Small people use it to cow others. The bureaucracy is full of them.
vaudine
Everything he did was legal, but just because you can doesn’t mean you should. Sounds like he was on some power trip............
Yes, the captain does have that right as pilot-in-command. However. This is an act of unsound judgment IMHO, and that should cause Frontier to question his fitness for the left seat. He saw only one course of action and I believe that he did not give due consideration to mitigating factors. That kind of tunnel vision, when dealing with passengers, is unfortunate and unpleasant. When dealing with an inflight emergency the consequences can be far more grave in nature.
If his judgment is poor in regard to pax, how might it be when confronted by an engine fire or an autopilot failure on an approach to minimums? I would not choose to fly with him under those circumstances.
“Paging capt moron paging capt moron “
rom frontier terminal loud speakers
I suppose one could call it playing the odds. We don’t crash everyday, and airliner crashes are even rarer than others, so rather than make an arrogant stink about it, number 2 did what I would have done. That said, number one was within his authority, he just wasn’t able to sell it, since the passenger had just recently flown the other half of his roundtrip.
The airline pretty much muted number ones decision by allowing number 2 to make his. It’s a judgement call and pilots make them everyday. Not knowing all the circumstances I can’t judge the man completely anyway. Armchair pilot is easy, but pilots do it anyway to stay in practice.
“It was completely inappropriate of this captain to escalate ... the situation to the level that he did by calling the police,”
Guess he saw the guy as a real threat............
Mrs. Prince of Space
All we have is the version of the story from the Denver media. And those of us from Denver know how thorough and accurate the Denver media is.
“The pilot-in-command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.”FAR 121.535 (d) further states:“Each pilot in command of an aircraft is, during flight time, in command of the aircraft and crew and is responsible for the safety of the passengers, crewmembers, cargo, and airplane.”
So in your perfect world, no one with any disabilities could fly. What about children, only one per parent/adult/guardian?
That is generally understandable. In a crash Morris would be completely helpless.
On the other hand, there are plenty of old passengers who would be equally helpless in such an event. Do you think a 90 y/o grandma has any chance of leaving the wreckage on her own, ripping chairs out of the floor like a cyborg? Why do they fly, then?
There is yet another consideration, however grim. In a crash the people around Mr. Morris can be hurt and become quadriplegic; but Mr. Morris is immune to that danger.
All in all, I think the police this time demonstrated better judgement in supporting the patient's right to fly. They know that life is full of risks, and you can't be ever safe. A quadriplegic person can't stay "safe" locked in his cell room 24/7/365 - travel is one of few ways to live that remain available to him. Tt's the best if he travels among healthy people, not on a special flight that costs a fortune and can be rarely afforded.
That is the real problem. The Airlines have been hit with incredible fines for "violations" that they did not even know were violations. Most of the violations were in paperwork. The captain of that aircraft most certainly knew he could safely fly with that passenger. The captain of that aircraft most definitely did not know if he would have been in violation of some obscure law that could cause massive fines to his employeer, Frontier Airlines.
Also from what was written in the article we do not know if he would or would not been in violation of FAA rules.
That is the real problem. The Airlines have been hit with incredible fines for "violations" that they did not even know were violations. Most of the violations were in paperwork. The captain of that aircraft most certainly knew he could safely fly with that passenger. The captain of that aircraft most definitely did not know if he would have been in violation of some obscure law that could cause massive fines to his employeer, Frontier Airlines.
Also from what was written in the article we do not know if he would or would not been in violation of FAA rules.
As usual, some VERY important parts of the story are missing.
What type of aircraft was he denied from, and is it the same type as he flew on before?
Where in the aircraft was he sitting, and would a delay caused by evacuating HIM cause a delay/endanger other pax??
Is he too big for the FA’s to chuck out the door on to the slide in an emergency?? (For Example, imagine trying to chuck a 300lb. quad out of the wing window exit on a 50-passenger commuter jet? And while keeping the other passengers behind him from burning alive?)
In the end, it comes down to the CAPTAIN’S decision. The safety of the aircraft, and the pax are his responsibility, and it’s clearly laid out in the regs.
“number 2 did what I would have done.”
Unless you were, say..., trapped in a plane that just crash-landed in the Hudson River, stuck behind this guy as the water rises above your waste, as the rear of the aircraft sinks....
Well lets have absolute safety.. don’t let the plane in the air then it can’t crash in to the Hudson or anywhere else for that matter.
If the airline only wants perfect physical specimens make it a regimental to buy a ticket that each be so.. oh wait a lot of guys in the gliders on D-day died on impact... and they were all in pretty darn good shape.
There is no excuse none for how this pilot acted.
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.