Here we go again: "Delta worker to dad: Give up the seat you bought, or go to jail!" (1 Viewer)

[shuke]

If he bought 4 seats, he then took the 4th seat for his older son and bought him another seat on a different plane. Because they didn't pay a change fee to transfer the seat the 4th seat they "bought" was a no show. They incorrectly assumed since they bought 4 seats anyone can use those 4 seats.

Federal law requires the person who's name is on the ticket, sit in the seat. Since they checked in with only 3 people they lost that 4th seat per airline policy, and it was given to a standby. There was no way any airline could allow anyone else to sit in that seat. 

Thanks.  So he was in the wrong.  But the airline handled it completely wrong with incorrect information which compounded the problem.

 

[Harry Manback]

Thanks.  So he was in the wrong.  But the airline handled it completely wrong with incorrect information which compounded the problem.

Most likely. 

 

[Nick Vermeil]

There was no way any airline could allow anyone else to sit in that seat. 

Nonsense. They filled it with someone else.

 

[Harry Manback]

To summarize:

They bought 3 tickets (mom, dad, eldest son, 2 year old in arms)

They then bought a 4th ticket on a different flight to send their son wherever they were going earlier. They didn't want to pay a change fee to move the 3rd ticket to the new flight, they incorrectly assumed they could use this seat for their 2 year old.

Since this 3rd seat was a no show, as the eldest son was not present, Delta sold it to a standby. The standby person went to their seat to find a 2 year old in it. Commence outrage from family. Commence terrible PR moves by Delta employee.

 

[Harry Manback]

Nonsense. They filled it with someone else.

Someone who bought the seat with their name. 

 

[Harry Manback]

Nonsense. They filled it with someone else.

The seat the family felt they 'owned' belonged to their eldest son, not to their 2 year old. Unless they re-purchased that seat, the only person delta could allow to sit their from their family was their eldest son.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Nonsense. They filled it with someone else.

Right. When someone doesn't show up for their seat on a full flight, a standby passenger gets that seat. 

 

[Harry Manback]

Right. When someone doesn't show up for their seat on a full flight, a standby passenger gets that seat. 

Sucks when you already lit your torches and grabbed your pitchforks and have to put them back.

Sure they handled it bad, they should have explained this better. But the family is/was in the wrong.

 

[gianmarco]

To summarize:

They bought 3 tickets (mom, dad, eldest son, 2 year old in arms)

They then bought a 4th ticket on a different flight to send their son wherever they were going earlier. They didn't want to pay a change fee to move the 3rd ticket to the new flight, they incorrectly assumed they could use this seat for their 2 year old.

Since this 3rd seat was a no show, as the eldest son was not present, Delta sold it to a standby. The standby person went to their seat to find a 2 year old in it. Commence outrage from family. Commence terrible PR moves by Delta employee.

This is pretty much it.  Except I didn't see outrage from the family.  I see confusion from a lack of understanding of how losing the seat to standby works.  If you assume that he didn't understand how the seat gets lost to standby, you can 100% understand his position and frustration with being told his younger son couldn't sit there since a proper explanation wasn't given.

Now, if the guy did know the rule, then I have virtually no sympathy for him.  But I don't think that guy is buying another ticket for his eldest son on another flight when he already has a seat with his family if he knows that he's going to lose the seat on the family flight.  That just doesn't make sense.  Which is why I think it's pretty obvious that he didn't understand how it works.

And, if Delta had just explained that to him from the start and he still kept arguing, then once again, I'd have no sympathy for him.  But they didn't, which makes their actions to me far worse. 

 

[MarvinTScamper]

To summarize:

They bought 3 tickets (mom, dad, eldest son, 2 year old in arms)

They then bought a 4th ticket on a different flight to send their son wherever they were going earlier. They didn't want to pay a change fee to move the 3rd ticket to the new flight, they incorrectly assumed they could use this seat for their 2 year old.

Since this 3rd seat was a no show, as the eldest son was not present, Delta sold it to a standby. The standby person went to their seat to find a 2 year old in it. Commence outrage from family. Commence terrible PR moves by Delta employee.

naturally, it was a union employee?  You can't fire Sally/Dave for being a complete sonofa#####, they have tenure.

 

[massraider]

naturally, it was a union employee?  You can't fire Sally/Dave for being a complete sonofa#####, they have tenure.

Yeah, let's talk about unions in here!

 

[MarvinTScamper]

Yeah, let's talk about unions in here!

sorry, I just think it hurts them.  They should fire this person who threatened this passenger, but probably can't.   

 

[massraider]

sorry, I just think it hurts them.  They should fire this person who threatened this passenger, but probably can't.   

I was joking about the whole let's talk about unions thing.

 

[Doug B]

The seat the family felt they 'owned' belonged to their eldest son, not to their 2 year old. Unless they re-purchased that seat, the only person delta could allow to sit their from their family was their eldest son.

Thinking fast: Wonder if he could have just said his two-year-old WAS the name on the ticket? Not like toddlers have ID.

I am thinking I might have had to have a copy of my daughter's birth certificate on me back on that 2004 flight I mentioned above. Can't recall ever showing it to anyone, though. Been long enough that I really don't remember. But it was after 9/11, so maybe they were more persnickety about confirming things than I recall.

 

[sbonomo]

Anecdote time. My wife and two kids and I missed a flight because we were stupid. I knew we would miss it so I called the airline. The ###### who answered the phone told  me it would cost me 1200 to rebook.  We rushed to the airport, missed the flight, and the woman who helped us was excited when she heard my son was born on Christmas and rebooked us for free.  The rules are stupid. Airlines can accommodate but they have lost their purpose we all need to push back until they figure it out again   

Now i see why you keep arguing a bad point.  Do you know how many calls they get a day exactly like yours?  The caveat is that most of them are jagoff's that are trying to change for some other reason.  This is the same reason that if you want to catch an earlier flight, most of the time it will cost you the fare difference to change.  You know why, scammers buy the cheapest flight at odd ball times and try to catch the more expensive convenient flight.  Out of curiosity, are you a millennial (not that it matters one way or the other)?   

 

[sbonomo]

I wonder if the family purchased the infant a seat on the United flight the next day?  Something tells me probably not.  

 

[EYLive]

I'm taking full credit for this.  

Bah. People have been eating ##### since the Mesozoic era. In fact, they've been eating bags of them.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

This the new thing now - trying to get gotcha footage of airline employees?

hopefully

 

[MarvinTScamper]

Bah. People have been eating ##### since the Mesozoic era. In fact, they've been eating bags of them.

Not that there's anything wrong with that

 

[Sheriff Bart]

Back in my day we all wore suits and were served a decent hot meal complete with metal utensils.

 

[Thunderlips]

The guy has a flat brim on that hat. That doesn't help his cause in the intelligent publics opinon. 

 

[Nick Vermeil]

Now i see why you keep arguing a bad point.  Do you know how many calls they get a day exactly like yours?  The caveat is that most of them are jagoff's that are trying to change for some other reason.  This is the same reason that if you want to catch an earlier flight, most of the time it will cost you the fare difference to change.  You know why, scammers buy the cheapest flight at odd ball times and try to catch the more expensive convenient flight.  Out of curiosity, are you a millennial (not that it matters one way or the other)?   

Not a millennial. God I wish.  I'm old and remember when airlines gave a crap. My point with my annecdote was not that they should cater to every jerkoff but Was in response to the comment "The FAA rules won't allow blah blah blah."  Airlines can do what they want. This story did not need to happen, the airline could have and should have accommodated this guy. I hope they eat it for being jerks. Period. Guy paid for the seat.  Let him use it. 

Eta. You didn't say anything about the FAA, wasny trying to pin that on you but that is where the conversation in the thread was that led me to that story. The airlines and airports have gotten away with #### service and blamed it on security and federal rules. And the traveling public pays for it. It's madness. 

 

[IrishTwinkie]

This the new thing now - trying to get gotcha footage of airline employees?

This is the new thing. Flew to Phoenix last week. Plane was completely full, early morning craziness, every one tired... Flight attendant comes down holding two boarding passes. Starts talking to a passenger who then gets up and heads to the front of the plane. I hear a couple of super angry voices "WAIT, WHAT JUST HAPPENED!??!!?! Grumble grumble mumble" 

Well, what just happened was the dude had put in for an upgrade at the gate, in the craziness of the full flight and early morning, his name got mangled on the board and he thought he didn't get the upgrade and simply took his purchased seat. Attendant was fixing the problem for the passengers involved. The only clowns involved where the hyper-sensitive jerks who had the come-at-me schitck rocking at 5:45am who were looking to misinterpret anything and everything to make a scene.

 

[culdeus]

I dont see anything that says they booted them for wrong name on ticket. 

 

[Sand]

Best explanation here.  Summation:

My opinion is that Delta snatched defeat from the jaws of victory here.

Brian was in the wrong. Once he admitted that his 18 year old was not there, the gate agent should have tagged one carseat to go under the plane and Brian should have been told the only way he was going to fly is if they hold their 1 year old as a lap child.

However:

1. The Delta gate agent messed up by allowing them to board with 2 carseats and not informing him that he had forfeited the 18 year old’s seat.

2. The Delta flight attendant’s foster care threat was beyond the pale.

3. Delta’s Jenna needs to learn actual FAA regulations and not spew totally made up lies which were not even relevant to why they had to give up the extra seat.

The power trip that some of Delta’s agents were on led them to say the most ridiculous things and makes the incident look so much worse for Delta.

And so now we have the United dragging incident (and official report+settlement), the American stroller incident, and the Delta foster care incident. Just unreal.

I guess we’ll see what airline craziness next week brings…perhaps it’s time to start flying with body cameras until the FAA decides to require airlines to install surveillance cameras on all planes?

 

[sbonomo]

Not a millennial. God I wish.  I'm old and remember when airlines gave a crap. My point with my annecdote was not that they should cater to every jerkoff but Was in response to the comment "The FAA rules won't allow blah blah blah."  Airlines can do what they want. This story did not need to happen, the airline could have and should have accommodated this guy. I hope they eat it for being jerks. Period. Guy paid for the seat.  Let him use it. 

Eta. You didn't say anything about the FAA, wasny trying to pin that on you but that is where the conversation in the thread was that led me to that story. The airlines and airports have gotten away with #### service and blamed it on security and federal rules. And the traveling public pays for it. It's madness. 

As a frequent flyer i disagree (and we can agree to disagree).  People IMO can't accept rules.  This particular guy also caused the entire plane to be significantly delayed (i am assuming it took a while to get the police there) which pisses me off even more.  I hope they had a terrible night for the generally purpose of being a complete DB.  

 

[sbonomo]

The guy has a flat brim on that hat. That doesn't help his cause in the intelligent publics opinon. 

Welcome to the OC (pretty sure they said this guy is orange county) - home of the complete DB.  

 

[sbonomo]

I dont see anything that says they booted them for wrong name on ticket. 

I am sure he was booted because he refused to move his kid.  

 

[Sand]

As a frequent flyer i disagree (and we can agree to disagree).  People IMO can't accept rules.  This particular guy also caused the entire plane to be significantly delayed (i am assuming it took a while to get the police there) which pisses me off even more.  I hope they had a terrible night for the generally purpose of being a complete DB.  

As someone who travels a good bit I'd be pretty pissed about waiting for this, particularly if I had a connection.

That said the Delta folks were being douches.  

 

[sbonomo]

As someone who travels a good bit I'd be pretty pissed about waiting for this, particularly if I had a connection.

That said the Delta folks were being douches.  

I don't disagree with you however, outside of explaining the situation to him better, what else should they do?  You have a passenger that refuses to give up a seat to a point that a police officer has to escort him off the plane.  

 

[Harry Manback]

Thinking fast: Wonder if he could have just said his two-year-old WAS the name on the ticket? Not like toddlers have ID.

I am thinking I might have had to have a copy of my daughter's birth certificate on me back on that 2004 flight I mentioned above. Can't recall ever showing it to anyone, though. Been long enough that I really don't remember. But it was after 9/11, so maybe they were more persnickety about confirming things than I recall.

Don't you need to put in a date of birth as well or at least an age when buying a ticket?

 

[gianmarco]

I don't disagree with you however, outside of explaining the situation to him better, what else should they do?  You have a passenger that refuses to give up a seat to a point that a police officer has to escort him off the plane.  

If the passenger thinks the seat is rightfully his because he paid for it and he's not given a proper explanation why that isn't the case, I don't blame him at all for sticking up for himself.

The responsibility of knowing the rules is ultimately on Delta and they need to communicate that.  And they didn't know the rules either.  You say "outside of explaining it better", they were fine, but that's the major problem.  They had a legitimate reason why he needed to give up the seat but gave him a complete bull#### reason instead and he rightfully wasn't going to listen to that ####ty reason as a reason to comply.

 

[MarvinTScamper]

Are we going to keep finding reasons for why breaking the rules is just fine?  2 wrongs don't make a right, but I have no sympathy for this guy. 

 

[Sand]

I don't disagree with you however, outside of explaining the situation to him better, what else should they do?  You have a passenger that refuses to give up a seat to a point that a police officer has to escort him off the plane.  

They could start by not threatening foster care.

 

[Badm]

I didn't exactly agree with the asian on United, but this is ridiculous. These guys are just making up rules as they go along. The dad was the most patient person, I would have been super pissed.

 

[culdeus]

I had this exact thing happen to me once:

Jenna says, “It’s not a Delta rule, it’s an FAA rule, because he’s 2 and under…he can’t sit in a carseat. That’s the purpose of infant in arms. He has to sit in your arms the whole time. Technically he couldn’t even be on a seat…And he can’t be in a carseat because he’s an infant in arms…He can’t be in a seat at all because he’s 2 years and younger and that’s FAA regulations.”

Brian rightfully protests that he flew to Maui with his kids in a carseat while Jenna says it’s unfortunate that they violated FAA regulations. She is arrogant and condescending and goes down a power-tripping rabbit hole full of lies and fake sympathy. She continues to make up rules that are totally contrary to FAA policy and saying how she wishes they were not like that. Except they’re not like that. Not at all.

FAA regulations say that any child of any size can be in a carseat, so Jenna was dead wrong about that. If you buy a seat, you can put any aged child in it.

FAA regulations also say that only children under the age of 2 can be a lap child. A 2 year old is not allowed to be held by a parent during takeoff or landing, exactly the opposite of what Jenna claimed. A 2 year old must be in a carseat or airplane seat.

I brought a carseat for the purpose of taking a <2 yr old (13 mos or so at the time) on the plane.  

Carseat was the right length (22 inches) and FAA ready.

First they said the carseat wasn't good, I said measure it.  They backed down, then tried this exact line about lower age limit for car seats.  I wasn't prepared for this, and at the time there wasn't a great way to google stuff like this in a hurry.  I put up a fight about this because they wanted her in the seat belt which was absurd considering the carseat fit fine, and was next to me in the window.  They brought me some manual and was like deal with it.

They never went so far as to say they could throw me off the plane, but it was clear they weren't going to back out of the gate with my kid in a car seat next to me.  Ended up giving in because whatever.  

It was so odd because it wasn't really doing any harm to anyone.  Some of these FA/GA types just love the power they have.  

 

[flapgreen]

Don't blame the guy. Screw Delta

 

[Chapelboy]

As much as these events are becoming common-place, and so much speculation is involved, I'm going to ask the obvious question:  How do we not have a FBG who works in this industry and can weigh in?! 

Unless there IS, but they choose not to identify themselves as such...

Anyway, very disappointing.

 

[fatness]

They bought 3 tickets (mom, dad, eldest son, 2 year old in arms)

They then bought a 4th ticket on a different flight to send their son wherever they were going earlier.

You're at least the second person who has said (they bought 3 tickets on one flight and 1 ticket on another flight) this but I have not seen it in a news article. Got a link?

 

[Sweet J]

The guy has a flat brim on that hat. That doesn't help his cause in the intelligent publics opinon. 

this x1000

 

[culdeus]

You're at least the second person who has said (they bought 3 tickets on one flight and 1 ticket on another flight) this but I have not seen it in a news article. Got a link?

They bought 5 total tickets. 4 one one flight and 1 on another. 

 

[Sweet J]

You're at least the second person who has said (they bought 3 tickets on one flight and 1 ticket on another flight) this but I have not seen it in a news article. Got a link?

I think that this is a decent inference, no?  Otherwise, the dad wouldn't have any support for his moral outrage.  He keeps saying: "I paid for this seat!"  I have no doubt he did.  I have no doubt that he paid for that seat for his 18yo, and then paid for the 18yo to take another flight, and then thought "I'll just keep this seat," because that is logical thinking.

Except the law, regulations, and airline policy don't work using "logic."  It is a rule, possibly illogical, that says "only the person who's name on the ticket can have the seat."  This is an infuriating rule that makes no sense here, other than help the airline keep order and make money.  But it's a rule nonetheless that most people understand (even if they don't agree with it).

Hell, it sucks that if I buy a ticket for my son to go with me on a cool father/son getaway for the weekend, and he gets the flu or something, I can't just swap in my daughter for him without paying some sort of penalty.  Possibly I'd have to buy a whole new ticket for her.  That sucks bigly.  And I'd be super pissed at the airline, but what I wouldn't do is show up at the airport with her with anything more than a prayer that we could slip her through without anyone noticing.  And I certainly wouldn't film myself arguing about it.

anyway. . . . . I think I responded to more than your question. 

 

[Sweet J]

They bought 5 total tickets. 4 one one flight and 1 on another. 

right.  I forgot they have another kid. 

 

[gianmarco]

I think that this is a decent inference, no?  Otherwise, the dad wouldn't have any support for his moral outrage.  He keeps saying: "I paid for this seat!"  I have no doubt he did.  I have no doubt that he paid for that seat for his 18yo, and then paid for the 18yo to take another flight, and then thought "I'll just keep this seat," because that is logical thinking.

Except the law, regulations, and airline policy don't work using "logic."  It is a rule, possibly illogical, that says "only the person who's name on the ticket can have the seat."  This is an infuriating rule that makes no sense here, other than help the airline keep order and make money.  But it's a rule nonetheless that most people understand (even if they don't agree with it).

Hell, it sucks that if I buy a ticket for my son to go with me on a cool father/son getaway for the weekend, and he gets the flu or something, I can't just swap in my daughter for him without paying some sort of penalty.  Possibly I'd have to buy a whole new ticket for her.  That sucks bigly.  And I'd be super pissed at the airline, but what I wouldn't do is show up at the airport with her with anything more than a prayer that we could slip her through without anyone noticing.  And I certainly wouldn't film myself arguing about it.

anyway. . . . . I think I responded to more than your question. 

This is pretty reasonable.  The ONLY difference in your example is the fact that his younger child doesn't have to otherwise pay for a ticket.  They ride for free.  That's different than trying to swap for an older child that you'd have to actually pay for a ticket (assuming in your getaway that your daughter is > 2 yrs old).  And that's a big difference because an older child would never be able to get past check in while the infant obviously does and the option always remains that the younger child can ride on a lap.

So, if you don't know that standby gets that seat when the older son is a no-show, then I can see how you would think you still have that seat.  As I mentioned earlier, if the flight wasn't full and there were no standby passengers, that seat would have remained open and he could have put the infant seat there without any problems.  I just don't understand why Delta seemingly didn't just explain that to him and instead threatened jail. 

 

[nysfl2]

This is pretty reasonable.  The ONLY difference in your example is the fact that his younger child doesn't have to otherwise pay for a ticket.  They ride for free.  That's different than trying to swap for an older child that you'd have to actually pay for a ticket (assuming in your getaway that your daughter is > 2 yrs old).  And that's a big difference because an older child would never be able to get past check in while the infant obviously does and the option always remains that the younger child can ride on a lap.

So, if you don't know that standby gets that seat when the older son is a no-show, then I can see how you would think you still have that seat.  As I mentioned earlier, if the flight wasn't full and there were no standby passengers, that seat would have remained open and he could have put the infant seat there without any problems.  I just don't understand why Delta seemingly didn't just explain that to him and instead threatened jail. 

How do you know that they didn't? I would assume that they started with explaining the check-in rules, and when the dad refused to give up the seat, it escalated to jail threats for refusing to obey the lawful orders of the flight crew.

I don't think we've seen any video of the beginning of the encounter.

 

[Sweet J]

I just don't understand why Delta seemingly didn't just explain that to him and instead threatened jail. 

the more I think about it, the more nutso that flight attendant's behavior it.  Threatening that he'd go to jail and the kids would be in foster care is really incredible. 

 

[gianmarco]

How do you know that they didn't? I would assume that they started with explaining the check-in rules, and when the dad refused to give up the seat, it escalated to jail threats for refusing to obey the lawful orders of the flight crew.

I don't think we've seen any video of the beginning of the encounter.

Well, I did put "seemingly" because I can't be completely sure.  So, it is definitely an assumption and maybe it will be more clear at a future time.  That said, here are my reasons for why I think they didn't:

1)  The guy doesn't seem like a nutcase.  He didn't seem out of control.  There is no language barrier.  My guess is that if it was explained that a seat will go to a standby passenger when the original passenger doesn't check in, he wouldn't have continued saying "but I paid for that seat" over and over.  A reasonable person would take that new information and be able to understand where he went wrong.  He seems reasonable from the several minutes of video we watched. 

2)  We watched several minutes of video where, instead of laying out that position (which is all that needed to be explained), they threatened jail and they used a reason that the young child couldn't sit in a seat alone with a car seat.  Based on that, I don't think they gave him the legit reason to start and then moved onto nonsense and rules that don't exist.  If you put yourself in the position of the Delta rep, you stick with the actual reason, if you had provided it, instead of moving onto something else. 

Based on those two reasons, I think it's more likely than not that he wasn't told the real reason why they lost the seat.  And, if they did give him the proper explanation to start, then I have very little sympathy for him even with Delta escalating it even further than they should have.

 

[[icon]]

Flight attendants are obsolete. Staff each flight with a doctor and a security guard and move on with our lives.

Who's going to get me my bourbon? 

 

[MarvinTScamper]

Who's going to get me my bourbonS? 

fixed

 

[[icon]]

fixed