$2M SUIT VS. JETBLUE

[Guest DanWalloch]

The captain should be fined or fired because he landed with a passenger sitting on a non-approved seat with no seatbelt. As another poster stated, it is illegal for an airplane to taxi, take off and land without all passengers wearing their seatbelt.

[KevinAu 441]

The typical order for standby goes like this at most airlines: 1.Revenue Standby 2.Nonrevenue Standby 3.JumpseatersRevenue standby are regular paying customers who may have showed up earlier than their booked flight and want to get on this flight, or a paying customer who got bumped from a previous flight who is on standby for this one.Nonrevenue standby are the employees and related people who have booked themselves on standby using the various pass classifications which they are entitled to. The highest priority would be the ones using the vacation passes, then the regular personal passes, and then finally the buddy passes that are given to friends or acquaintances of employees. Only employees and their family qualify to use the vacation or regular passes. Within each of those classifications, people are then ranked by their seniority.Finally, jumpseaters are boarded after all rev and nonrev standby passriders have been seated. Only active crew are allowed to list as jumpseaters. The jumpseaters take whatever cabin seat remains or if no cabin seat remains, then any available jumpseat, in the cockpit for the pilots or in the galley for FAs.What most likely transpired was that the FA had originally listed using a vacation or personal pass. With that pass, she was above the buddy pass rider on the priority and ultimately was assigned the last available seat. However, since the jumpseat was still available and the FA was eligible to take that, someone must have gotten the bright idea to ask her to sit in the jumpseat instead and free the cabin seat for the buddy pass man, enabling him to get on board.Where it went from there, is history.

[Jeff Nielsen 1,386]

Yeah, but you can't break the law or bust a reg to do it...wouldn't you agree? I'm pretty sure you would.EVERYONE on board that aircraft while that aircraft is in motion MUST be provided with the appropriate safety equipment...first and foremost.This is taught at the PPL level. It's doesn't matter whether or not the flight was for revenue or not and it doesn't matter whether the person or persons were paying passengers.Whether or not this person is entitled to compensation due to comfort is another story, but he probably has a pretty good safety case even if the flight was conducted in 'clean air' the whole way.

[michal 44]

>Where it went from there, is history.Kevin, I appreciate your thorough explanation. This is the stuff you often can't find in the regular media.Michael J.http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9320/apollo17vf7.jpg

[Guest fullstoplanding]

I started this post, so may I digress a moment and tell you about pass riding in the "good old days." This was before airline deregulation. Some time during the '60s I worked for Eastern Airlines in Miami as a radio mechanic. I was there for about 2-years before I was layed-off. Some said it was the first time Eastern ever had a layoff of mechanics.:-( As I recall, this was their non-rev pass system. The employees and their immediate family, husband or wife and children, and the employee's parents were eligible. It followed the usual priority/standby rules, but the planes were rarely full. Each person could fly one way to anywhere on the Eastern system. Miami to Jacksonville or Miami to New York; it would be the same. Now here's the good part, the fee: $3 for Couch or $5 for 1st Class! A round trip would be $6 or $10. We always thought the extra $2 was for the complimentary champaign served in 1st Class. :-beerchug--Roger

[Roger Mazengarb 0]

>As another poster stated, it is illegal for an airplane to taxi, >take off and land without all passengers wearing their seatbelt.Blanket statements can sometimes be misleading.I can remember when my family flew, our children under 2 yrs old flew for free - but they were not given a seat. We sat with them on our laps and held in our arms.Of course things may have changed over the last 40 years. America also may not allow this. :-)Qantas hold the record for the most passengers aboard a B747. During the evacuation of Darwin in 1974 after cyclone Tracy flattened the city. A B747 took off with an adult in every seat and almost all had a toddler sitting on their lap. Forget the actual figure. Roger

[michal 44]

>another poster stated, it is illegal for an airplane to taxi,>take off and land without all passengers wearing their>seatbelt.Nowhere in the story there is a hint that the passenger in question did not wear the seat belt during those phases of flight. If I read the story and then Kevin's explanation how the seats were swapped - he was only deprived of the seat belt during the cruise portion (which can be illegal too).Michael J.http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9320/apollo17vf7.jpg

[Mike T 208]

Wow! This hits home as an ex airline pilot!!!Let's set the ground rules. It is against FARs for a non crew member to occupy a jumpseat (flight attendant or flight deck). The crew member can be from the airline, or, a pilot from another airline with proper credentials for a flight deck jumpseat, but a flight attendant from another airline cannot ususally occupy a flight attendant jumpseat. A flight attendant cannot get a flight deck jumpseat and a pilot cannot get a flight attendant jumpseat.Airline Non-Revenue (non-rev) Pass priority is governed by: 1. Employee Pass (boarding priority according to the employee's hire date called "seniority"), 2. Family Pass (For immedate family members - husband, wife, children, parents OR in-law but NOT both, employee parents and in-laws usually alternate every year - boarding priority according to the employee seniority) 3. Buddy pass (A pass which employee can give (or sell) to friends or extended family, only a limited amount are given per calender year and the fare is based on 10% of the highest Y Fare - boarding priority according to the employee who gave you the buddy pass' seniority), ID-90 (another airline employee, or authorized pass rider - for instance a FEDEX pilot can ID-90 on Continental or a United Flight Attendant can ID-90 on Delta, or American Airlines pilot's wife can ID-90 on Northwest, etc - Fare is based at 10% of the highest Y fare - boarding priority by check-in time after all employee, family, buddypasses have been cleared).Now, if the flight attendant in question was able to receive a jumpseat pass then that is her seat for the DURATION of the flight. Many flight attendants will take the jumpseat pass first on a full flight (to ensure they at least get on the airplane) and hope that a passenger seat opens up after boarding is completed and he/she can take that EMPTY seat and be more comfortable. However, if a passenger seat does not open up, then they are stuck on the jumpseat. The same goes for pilots with a flight deck jumpseat. As a matter of fact when we had a pilot jumpseating we were praying that a passenger seat opened up to get him the heck out of the flightdeck (unless he was a friend to one of us).Once the flight attendant gave up her passenger seat to sit on the jumpseat, the pass rider is given a passenger seat and unless the pass rider is removed from that seat by the gate agent before the door closes, that is his/her seat for the rest of the flight. Period.Obviously the flight was full, the flight attendant was stuck on the jumpseat and the pass rider was stretched out in a nice comfly passenger seat. At that point, its too bad.What the captain did is 1000% wrong first of all regardless of the pass status of the person he made sit in the bathroom. Second, ALL passengers MUST have a functioning seatbelt. Assuming the bathroom did not have one and the captain engaged the fasten seatbelt sign at anytime during the flight, or for landing, the passenger sitting in the lavatory is now a violation of FARs at the COMMAND of the captain!Additionally, all lavatories should be locked by the flight attendants prior to takeoff and touchdown (you can do this with a pen because on the "occupied" sign there is a hole that allowes you to slide the lock from the outside). NO ONE is allowed in the lavatories for takeoff and landing!Now, understand that buddy pass and ID-90 riders are considered the lowest priority scum-of-the earth on an airplane. This was illustrated at my airline when I would insist that my pass users ask the flight attendants "if there was enough food" before taking a meal. However!Since FARs state that the Pilot In Command is the FINAL authority on an aircraft he/she is responsible for his/her directions to passengers and / or crew.I cannot BELIEVE that a captain made a pass rider do this. It breaks many FARs AND is a total humiliation of the person to whom it was directed. There is no defense. The flight attendant should NOT have taken the pass rider's seat (FIRE HER), and the captain should not have commanded the pass rider to sit in the lavatory (FIRE HIM). I hope this guy get's every cent out of his law suit and then some.

[Guest PARADISE]

After Jetblue ( a joke of an airline, BTW ) forks over the $2mil they better fire that sorry excuse of a "captain" since he busted numerous FAR's.

[Guest Super 27]

Absolutely ridiculous. If this is indeed true, the pilot should face punitive action by both the airline and the FAA, and the passenger should at the very least be refunded the cost of his ticket. $2 million, though, is another story. Frankly, I don't see how this guy suffered any compensible damages. I don't buy the pain and suffering argument for one second. People have become way too quick to sue these days, and while this was an unfortunate incident, I'm not convinced that this guy should be awarded damages through litigation.

[Guest zzmikezz]

Mike T,Captains are paid the big bucks to command aircraft -- to be in command -- to excercise judgment -- to be entirely responsible for -- the safe operation of the flight, and the well being of the passengers.No doubt the captain of that flight was just as aware of the FARs as you are. However, he is not required to be obsessive-compulsive. If the FAA wanted FARs to be followed slavishly, all aicraft would be flown by FMC, and the cockpits would be manned by attorneys, not ATPs.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxMy guess is that the stewardess was ill and needed to come as close as possible to stretching out, which cannot be done in a jump seat, as you well know. It being in the best interests of flight safety to have every crew member functioning as close as possible to peak performance in the event of a landing emergency, I'll guess that what the pilot did was not only excusable, I'll guess that it was the only prudent course of action.If I'm right, the captains only choices of course of action regarding the passenger were a) ask him to occupy the toilet during times when being seated was requred, in nominal violation of FARSs, versus :( inviting a belligerent person of apparent extraction and presumptive persuasion to occupy the jumpseat, not only in violation of FARs but also of common sense cockpit safety precautions.Let's do something novel here ... Trial first, damage award second.

[KevinAu 441]

>Mike T,>>>My guess is that the stewardess was ill and needed to come as>close as possible to stretching out, which cannot be done in a>jump seat, as you well know. It being in the best interests>of flight safety to have every crew member functioning as>close as possible to peak performance in the event of a>landing emergency, I'll guess that what the pilot did was not>only excusable, I'll guess that it was the only prudent course>of action.>>Except that she was not a part of the working crew on that flight.

[Guest zzmikezz]

Except that qualified crew would be put to work in the event of an emergency -- even if they were "off duty".I'll also remark that I'm of an age and era where men regularly gave up their seats to women, often unasked but always when asked -- for the obvious physiological reasons. (And if those reasons are not obvious, or if it is felt that citing them is sexist, that's TFB.)My suspicion is that there was something, , in this man's cultural background that made the very idea of giving up a seat to a mere woman -- a piece of property -- outrageous.

[KevinAu 441]

>Except that qualified crew would be put to work in the event>of an emergency -- even if they were "off duty".>>I'll also remark that I'm of an age and era where men>regularly gave up their seats to women, often unasked but>always when asked -- for the obvious physiological reasons. >(And if those reasons are not obvious, or if it is felt that>citing them is sexist, that's TFB.)>>My suspicion is that there was something, , in this>man's cultural background that made the very idea of giving up>a seat to a mere woman -- a piece of property -- outrageous.No, the outrageous part was the unseating of a non-flightcrew passenger out of a cabin seat into nothingness and placing a nonrevving flightcrew in that cabin seat midflight. Flight Attendants are supposed to sit in jumpseats. That is their lot in life. That is the seat designed, built and installed for them and them only. And for you to think that this man is making this an issue because he might be Muslim shows not only how ignorant of different people you are, but that you have absolutely no idea of what the norms, procedures and etiquette for people that work in the airlines are either. This was purely an example of employees behaving badly in public. Race, age or gender had nothing to do with this, anybody of any color or sex should be outraged if this happened to them. It was a complete violation of procedures and common sense.

[Guest zzmikezz]

KevinAu,I said that mine were suspicions. Unlike you I don't claim to know what happened. And yes, I tiptoed around certain issues, and will continue to do so, because to do otherwise would be unfair to Tom Allensworth, who is hosting this thread in public.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxTrial first, verdict second, is our way ...You see, the press is not after the truth, they are in the business of selling advertisements, literally in that business, and they must therefore pay attention to ratings, and to newspaper physical sales.Fifty years ago they were generally after the truth because, in those days, truth is what sold papers and air time. Today there isn't even much of an attempt to maintain appearances because today's reporter is in it to "make a difference", not to report the news objectively, and TV news departments, and print media, today view themselves as being in the infotainment business, not the news business.(Ask them, they'll confirm it. If it bleeds, it leads, and the current story is a corollary of that posture. If it isn't good television, it doesn't get on television. Charges on page one, above the fold. Subsequent retraction on page 17 because retractions don't sell papers and in fact are a waste of column-inches.)xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxThis is why juries should decide these things, not reporters. Unless one or more of the attorneys in a case are incompetent, the jury will get to hear all available evidence except that barred by the judge as prejudicial or irrelevant.Only when both sides have said everthing that they want to say does the case go to the jury, who do not have ratings/sales/careers at stake, and who therefore are going to give a more impartial verdict than can be achieved by any means other than a complete audiovisual recording of everything that happened with all participants, from initial check-in to the conversations with reporters.I didn't say that what I was suspecting was the truth. I was trying to show that there can be more than one side to a story, and that what makes terrific news in a business sense may actually be rotten history -- as with a certain filmmaker who I don't care to name, out of the same concern for fairness to Tom.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxI'll give you the last word if you care to take it.