The United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has asked airlines to do more to reduce the number of unruly passenger incidents. Well, Delta Air Lines has just made a pretty awesome proposal along those lines.
In this post:
Delta wants a no-fly list for unruly passengers
Since the start of the pandemic we’ve seen airlines create no-fly lists for passengers who misbehave, especially when it comes to mask compliance. For example, Delta has 1,600+ people on its own list, and other airlines have a significant number of passengers on these lists as well.
The way this is structured, passengers on the list can’t fly with the airline at least for as long as the federal mask mandate is in effect. The catch is that these lists aren’t shared between airlines, so passengers are still free to fly other airlines. That could soon change.
Delta is proposing the concept of a national no-fly list for unruly passengers, whereby airlines would share their lists so that passengers on one of these lists couldn’t fly with any airline. As Delta’s SVP of Inflight Service, Kristen Manion Taylor, wrote the following in a memo to flight attendants:
“We’ve also asked other airlines to share their ‘no fly’ list to further protect airline employees across the industry — something we know is top of mind for you as well. A list of banned customers doesn’t work as well if that customer can fly with another airline.”
Currently the only federal no-fly list in the United States is the one that’s run by the FBI to thwart terrorism.
This is a fantastic idea
Earlier this week the FAA asked airlines to make proposals that would reduce the number of inflight incidents. In 2021 alone we’ve seen nearly 4,300 unruly passenger reports — about 75% were related to wearing masks, and 61% of disruptive passengers also used racist, sexist, or homophobic slurs.
At the time I said that I’m not sure there’s a whole lot more airlines can do. Rather I think the biggest areas of improvement are as follows:
- Airport police needs to arrest people who cause inflight disturbances, rather than releasing them immediately
- More people causing inflight disturbances actually need to be prosecuted; currently this is only happening for a tiny fraction of disruptive travelers
That being said, I think Delta’s proposal makes a lot of sense. At the end of the day, temporarily being banned from one airline isn’t that much of a punishment (well, unless you’re a state senator from Alaska), since you can just fly another airline. Essentially threatening to restrict people from being able to travel by air altogether would act as much more of a deterrent, if you ask me.
I’m no lawyer, so I’m not sure what this would look like logistically. Would there be any legal issues with airlines simply sharing these lists with one another, or would the government officially have to be involved?
In the past I would have been worried about airline employees abusing their powers for lists like these, but with the kind of behavior we’ve seen in the past 18 months, I’m much less concerned about that.
Bottom line
Delta is proposing creating a national no-fly list for unruly passengers. Currently each individual airline is maintaining its own list, which just means that someone banned on one airline can fly another airline. I think there’s merit to airlines sharing their list of passengers banned for unruly behavior, so that these people can’t just fly another airline and misbehave there.
We’ve seen some shocking behavior on planes in the past 18 months, and I think the time has come for something like this.
What do you make of Delta’s proposal for a national no-fly list for unruly travelers?
As a retired airline Captain, I love this idea. These problem people are usually repeat offenders, because it's about their "rights".
Let's address a couple things though.
1. The airport police don't arrest these people because it is not their jurisdiction. The offense happens in the air over possibly many states. This is the job of the FBI, which we have seen doesn't do a great job recently.
2. It's great to...
As a retired airline Captain, I love this idea. These problem people are usually repeat offenders, because it's about their "rights".
Let's address a couple things though.
1. The airport police don't arrest these people because it is not their jurisdiction. The offense happens in the air over possibly many states. This is the job of the FBI, which we have seen doesn't do a great job recently.
2. It's great to ask the airlines for ideas, this is a great one, but the Fed has to follow up.
3. Airlines are afraid to put anyone on a no fly, as shown by the whole idea that mask offenders will only be on a no fly until they remove the mask mandate. The offenders have proven that they will not comply with rules and mandates in force, They should be done.
Love the concept, but it up to the fed to do their job.
The Feds need to step up and Just Do It!! Make it easy to put offenders on the list, by means of a police report and make it AUTOMATIC!! Put that Jerk on the Jet Blue Boston to San Juan flight last week on it immediately!
In the meantime, Delta has a great idea to ask others to share their lists with Delta, which I hope all airlines to as a start. Alaska Airlines, please...
The Feds need to step up and Just Do It!! Make it easy to put offenders on the list, by means of a police report and make it AUTOMATIC!! Put that Jerk on the Jet Blue Boston to San Juan flight last week on it immediately!
In the meantime, Delta has a great idea to ask others to share their lists with Delta, which I hope all airlines to as a start. Alaska Airlines, please share yours and do the same by requesting lists from all other airlines!!
Great idea Delta!! Thank You.
@Lucky - what stops my airline from finding out your top 10 flyers and putting them on my no fly list. Now they can't fly you!
Airlines wouldn't do that? Ha. (See the long list of DOT/FAA violations!)
In theory this sounds like a great idea but in practice will never work much like the current no-fly list. Once you make that list just try getting off it, no matter how innocent you are.
My Mexican partner is on the SSSS list which is just one step down. When she asks TSA why, they simply reply that she knows why. Our only guess is because we flew one way to Turkey (using...
In theory this sounds like a great idea but in practice will never work much like the current no-fly list. Once you make that list just try getting off it, no matter how innocent you are.
My Mexican partner is on the SSSS list which is just one step down. When she asks TSA why, they simply reply that she knows why. Our only guess is because we flew one way to Turkey (using miles, of course!) and she got flagged by an algorithim.
Any of these lists should not be enacted unless there is a means for the individual to question their placement and a requirement that the govt provide any and all evidence and not be permitted to hide behind natl security concerns.
Companies already share lists for things like return fraud. There needs to be a firm time period though, not just until mandates end. It’s laughable to call this unconstitutional… a judge would laugh that out of court.
Yep and make the durations meaningful, like 1 yr. for 1st offense, 5 yrs for 2nd, and LIFE for a third offense, and NO appeals. HOWEVER, it should jump immediately to 5 years if it involves the assault of an airline employee..... And Airlines have the right to ban for life in cases of assult. :-)
I wonder how many on that list is toddlers, for not complying with the mask mandate?
Maby the US Airlines should look at the way they approach restrictions as this seems to be a vastly US problem. Which I may add, has been rapidly escalating during covid.
I'm not condoling any kind of bad behaviour by far, but it takes two to tango it seems.
Please keep that list on your side of the pond.
I had a similar idea to this a few months back, and I’m happy to hear similar ideas are gaining traction!
My idea was to make this work sort of like credit reports do. When a passenger’s conduct rises to the point of being banned from an airline, they get an entry on this shared list describing what led to the ban. Airlines can then make the decision if they want to transport these passengers....
I had a similar idea to this a few months back, and I’m happy to hear similar ideas are gaining traction!
My idea was to make this work sort of like credit reports do. When a passenger’s conduct rises to the point of being banned from an airline, they get an entry on this shared list describing what led to the ban. Airlines can then make the decision if they want to transport these passengers. Maybe if they’re banned from one other airline, give them a chance but cut them loose if they become a problem? It usually takes repeated and/or egregious misconduct to get banned from an airline though, so some might not even be that nice.
Can't prevent an imbecile from another airline who decides to go on a power trip.
With your credit report analogy, think of this imbecile rather than doing a hard pull, the imbecile reported you as delinquent.
I'm sure airlines will not disclose what is reported on you (or risk massive lawsuits).
So as another airline would you risk giving them a chance if the report say, intoxicated, stole drinks from the galley, punched a flight crew and shit on the tray table.
I'm all for covidiots being banned from flying. That being said I have scene FAs in the past go on a total power trip, so I am not comfortable in just taking their word for it to ban someone from flying all together. I just don't trust one person to have that much power. Therefore there would need to be some sort of legitimate and impartial appeal mechanism where someone neutral could review a challenged...
I'm all for covidiots being banned from flying. That being said I have scene FAs in the past go on a total power trip, so I am not comfortable in just taking their word for it to ban someone from flying all together. I just don't trust one person to have that much power. Therefore there would need to be some sort of legitimate and impartial appeal mechanism where someone neutral could review a challenged passenger ban. Obviously if someone is arrested and subsequently convicted there is no need for another review nor should there be a review while criminal charges are pending, but in cases where an arrest is not made or an arrest is made but the charges were not subsequently proven there should be an independent review to come off the list.
I’ve a question: can people in the US have their names changed? Let’s say you are Alexander Anderson, a blacklisted jerk, can you change your name to Benjamin Anderson to circumvent the no-fly ban?
Well if you can it isn't that simple. You need to go to court to get your name changed. it isn't like you suddenly can start using a totally different name. It really isn't a realistic solution and if someone is arrested it won't matter what their name is changed to it will still be known by law enforcement.
Changing your name is a very involved process where one has to go before a judge to explain their reasons for the change. Then you must change every legal document in your life - Passport, Social Security Card, Credit Cards, Mortgage, Legal titles to property. It goes on and on. Certainly way too much trouble just to be unbanned from flying.
What a terrible idea. How do you define a "jerk" ? someone who broke the law ? There's no law inforcement or judiciary involved here ? Say a given flight attendant say she doesn't like you and you can't flight any more ? How about those barking, rude flight attendants? Is there a list too ?
Why would a flight attendant say they don't "like you?" That's absurd.
I'd bet you're a difficult passenger / restaurant patron / shopper.
I agree with Craig............... I bet you're a difficult passenger / restaurant patron / shopper!!
Great idea Delta!
No one likes unruly behavior in the air or in the ground. However, this is terrible idea:
Corporations supporting a police state? It would be not much different than the DDR or North Korea....Makes me sick. Whats next ? banning passenger for their attire or believes or political views ?
Shame on Delta.
No one likes unruly behavior in the air or in the ground. However, this is terrible idea that goes against so many American principles.
Corporations supporting a police state? It would be not much different than the DDR or North Korea....Makes me sick. Whats next ? banning passenger for their attire or believes or political views ?
Shame on Delta.
Dear Hug_O,
SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I bet you're a difficult passenger / restaurant patron / shopper that are likely to get banned, like Miguel. This is a matter of safety and that is it!! Follow the rules and all is well, break them and pay the consequences!! Your argument is without merit and train of thought is DERAILED. If you don't like it I suggest you take the train, or better yet the bus!!
@Lucky - What stops UA from deciding you are a pain because you complain too much and banning you. Then the ban expands to all airlines.
Where is the due process?
I am all for banning the real a-holes, but this gives way too much power to a FA/flight crew/airline.
Now if we can create a banned list of power tripping FA's we really have something!
Agreed Sam. I'm all for them being banned too but we can't give a single FA that much power over people without some sort of review, especially if this would get applied to all airlines.
This is a powerfully bad idea, despite our frustration with irresponsible passenger behavior.
It amounts to private companies—acting in concert in a way that in most contexts we would see plainly as improper collusion—to limit an individual’s freedom of movement.
The only venue by which this kind of coercive policy could or should be enforced is by government, operating in a legal context with judicial and legislative oversight.
The kind of list-sharing Delta is...
This is a powerfully bad idea, despite our frustration with irresponsible passenger behavior.
It amounts to private companies—acting in concert in a way that in most contexts we would see plainly as improper collusion—to limit an individual’s freedom of movement.
The only venue by which this kind of coercive policy could or should be enforced is by government, operating in a legal context with judicial and legislative oversight.
The kind of list-sharing Delta is proposing is likely unconstitutional.
It is very easy to imagine abuses or someone being improperly grounded due to a misunderstanding or some asinine bureaucratic error.
Please reconsider your support if it.
Don't jump to conclusions John, there will not be willy nilly banning of passengers, otherwise it would lead to potential legal issues....... Jerks that break the rules need to be held accountable and banned, PERIOD.
GREAT IDEA Delta, I hope the Feds move it forward!! In the meantime, all airlines need to share their lists and keep these rule-breaking from flying and causing safety situations in the skies.
One question John: Are you a Covidiot??...
Don't jump to conclusions John, there will not be willy nilly banning of passengers, otherwise it would lead to potential legal issues....... Jerks that break the rules need to be held accountable and banned, PERIOD.
GREAT IDEA Delta, I hope the Feds move it forward!! In the meantime, all airlines need to share their lists and keep these rule-breaking from flying and causing safety situations in the skies.
One question John: Are you a Covidiot?? Just asking, because you sound like one!!
It is completely appropriate for each airline to determine who they want flying on their airline. However, sharing lists across airlines would be a bad idea, and here is why.
Suppose you write a blog, make a facebook post, or tweet your bad experience with an airline. That airline could ban you for whatever reason they wish to based on their banning criteria. If they share lists, you are now banned from flying ever...
It is completely appropriate for each airline to determine who they want flying on their airline. However, sharing lists across airlines would be a bad idea, and here is why.
Suppose you write a blog, make a facebook post, or tweet your bad experience with an airline. That airline could ban you for whatever reason they wish to based on their banning criteria. If they share lists, you are now banned from flying ever again. Sound fair? Who is the final judge? Is their standards and life experience the same as yours? What if one airline has bias against a race or religion and uses that to ban?
As well intentioned as it seems, this is a very slippery slope that has no good outcomes.
Clark............ NO, NO, NO, the lists are for violations of safety rules, not a person's "free speech" statements of dissatisfaction for whatever. Come on man, don't be stupid!
It seems to be a worldwide problem, unfortunately as ID isn’t required to either book or board an aircraft in Australia it is impossible to monitor, Ive never understood why this practice ceased after many years.
Just here to see all the angry (but quite impotent) boomer types freak out over having even a tiny amount of accountability.
Dan,
You are So, So, So correct. It's all about accountability, and too many people today think they have the right to do whatever they want, including assault, make their own rules, and demand things they are NOT entitled to just because they purchased a $39 or more airline ticket!! Me, Me, Me, that's all I hear these days.
Thank you for your injection of intelligence. :-)
Ben are you bat shit crazy? You cant have an organization put together and share lists. Hey, they can ban you if they feel what is in your blog is offensive. If they lists passengers they have to list employees. The main reason is that they have empowered FA's to be the mask Nazis.
on my flight last Sunday from Philly to Vegas the flight attendant mentioned the word "mask" 17 times from when...
Ben are you bat shit crazy? You cant have an organization put together and share lists. Hey, they can ban you if they feel what is in your blog is offensive. If they lists passengers they have to list employees. The main reason is that they have empowered FA's to be the mask Nazis.
on my flight last Sunday from Philly to Vegas the flight attendant mentioned the word "mask" 17 times from when the door was closed to when we where just over Harrisburg, PA....what 110 miles? You should be promoting open boarders and mask optional flights. You mindset is keeping conference planners like me unemployed
No no. You are mistaken. COVID-19 keeps conference planners unemployed, and jack***es refusing to either vaccinate or mask up drive the surges.
Given your attitude, are you one of those? If yes, you keep yourself unemployed. Sad, huh?
@magice AA has banned you for your language. It is inappropriate. And now you are banned from all airlines. With no recourse.
Good luck.
@Bob Eldridge
You are a good advocate for freedom.
You should be promoting open relationship and clothing optional conferences. You [sic] mindset is keeping divorce lawyers (not me) unemployed.
But I'm definitely not going to recommend you to be a conference planner.
Your talent is too narrow, your only specialty seems to promoting open boarders. Is that like the freedom to use Skateboards, Snowboards, Surfboards?
Way to demonstrate why a no-fly list is needed. The use of the term "mask Nazis" really makes me think a no-fly list for anti-maskers is in our national interest.
Bob, Bob, Bob........
Speaking of BSC, I'd relook at your post and then the mirror!!
NO, NO, NO, the lists are for violations of safety rules, not a person's "free speech" statements of dissatisfaction for whatever. Come on man, don't be stupid!
If people would follow the rules, the Flight Attendant wouldn't have to mention the FEDERAL LAW 17 times........... Dah! It is the entitled-minded Dumb-A*% Jerk passengers who think they are above the law...
Bob, Bob, Bob........
Speaking of BSC, I'd relook at your post and then the mirror!!
NO, NO, NO, the lists are for violations of safety rules, not a person's "free speech" statements of dissatisfaction for whatever. Come on man, don't be stupid!
If people would follow the rules, the Flight Attendant wouldn't have to mention the FEDERAL LAW 17 times........... Dah! It is the entitled-minded Dumb-A*% Jerk passengers who think they are above the law that are causing all the problems.... Which makes me think you might be one of them. Are you BOB??
Bet you are a Covidiot too.......... Or are you vaccinated and wear your mask in accordance with Federal Law(mask wearing on planes or other public transportation methods)?
As usual, Delta wants to get ahead of the story. I believe that Delta is one of the unnamed airlines being investigated by the DOT over the COVID refund policy’s. Delta management laid off a lot of the airport workers at the start of the pandemic and now can’t hire enough back for customer service at the airport. I’m sure quite a few airline attendants are upset with with the mandatory vaccine requirement such as...
As usual, Delta wants to get ahead of the story. I believe that Delta is one of the unnamed airlines being investigated by the DOT over the COVID refund policy’s. Delta management laid off a lot of the airport workers at the start of the pandemic and now can’t hire enough back for customer service at the airport. I’m sure quite a few airline attendants are upset with with the mandatory vaccine requirement such as United or royally pissed off at Delta management for the $200 health insurance increase starting November 2021 if unvaccinated—and you want these biased employees to put someone on a national no fly list? The airlines are partially to blame for this behavior.
I support this with the caveat that the bar should be higher for inclusion on the unified list.
Something like “caused an incident requiring police to escort them off the plane or meet them at the gate.”
It is a slippery slope with "hate crimes", "no fly list" etc. Crime is crime, and the federal "no fly list" should make us all wonder if a person is too dangerous to be on an airplane, he should be too dangerous anywhere else in American society.
Make in flight unruliness a violation of federal law and prosecute the behavior to the fullest extent of the law and publicize it and the problem will...
It is a slippery slope with "hate crimes", "no fly list" etc. Crime is crime, and the federal "no fly list" should make us all wonder if a person is too dangerous to be on an airplane, he should be too dangerous anywhere else in American society.
Make in flight unruliness a violation of federal law and prosecute the behavior to the fullest extent of the law and publicize it and the problem will take care of itself. It should be a federal crime so that leftist states like California don't let them off the hook, (like they do almost every other criminal)!
If there were consistent standards such as a police report, then I would support a unified list.
Given that airlines use considerably different criteria to decide who they want to accept as passengers again, the process cannot reasonably be unified.
And there also needs to be a formal appeal process. If someone accuses you of something, there must be a mechanism for a defense. Also, some airlines simply do a better job of...
If there were consistent standards such as a police report, then I would support a unified list.
Given that airlines use considerably different criteria to decide who they want to accept as passengers again, the process cannot reasonably be unified.
And there also needs to be a formal appeal process. If someone accuses you of something, there must be a mechanism for a defense. Also, some airlines simply do a better job of de-escalating situations. There needs to be data showing the number of complaints of unruly passenger per enplaned passenger - no different than denied boardings.
Granted, there is an abundance of cell phone video which eliminates the ability to defend anything some people do but there are a whole of other customers about which it isn't as clear whether they would have been banned on every airline.
We live in a nation of laws, if unjustly accused by a Police power there are rights and recourse in theory. It is dangerous to put such powers in the hands of any random airline employee that is not a Government employee. I am a mild mannered person of short non imposing stature and I was threatened by a Delta Cabin attendent for waiting near the lav to help my wife if she had door...
We live in a nation of laws, if unjustly accused by a Police power there are rights and recourse in theory. It is dangerous to put such powers in the hands of any random airline employee that is not a Government employee. I am a mild mannered person of short non imposing stature and I was threatened by a Delta Cabin attendent for waiting near the lav to help my wife if she had door issues. Later, the same attendant passed my row, misheard something I said and gave me a "final warning".
The path proposed is fraught with danger.
This seems like a pretty reasonable take.
@Donato, I hope you reported that FA to Delta!
This won’t work, just like banning jerk drivers from being off public roads won’t work. At least roads actually have police, who’s gonna serve that capacity in flight? That lazy flight attendant? The TSA? Ironic because the posters cheering for something like in the comments sections seem to be a bunch of self-righteous assholes that I would like to ban from the internet. Let’s keep the no-fly list to actual felons and terrorists, not mere “jerks.”
Jan, we absolutely do have a mechanism in place to ban “jerk” drivers from our roads…get enough traffic tickets and multiple points, or just one ticket for reckless driving, and your drivers license is suspended. Drive again on the suspended license and you go to jail. Additionally, your automobile is subject to seizure/forfeiture laws in most states, depending on the severity of your actions behind the wheel.
Exactly Matt.
Yes, decided by the police, and eventually a prosecuted and a judge. Personnel who are likely qualified to enforce and interpret the law. And even then, as you brilliantly spelled out, it would probably take multiple and rather harsh offenses to get an equivalent of being in a “no-drive list.” This is not the same as, like I said, a lazy FA deeming a passenger to a “no fly list” because said passenger wouldn’t mask up between bites of food. It’s extremely different.
Let's see what the whole proposal looks like before we panic.
It's good to have a no fly list. The problem would be finding an independent organization oversee it.
My biggest concern over this is the misuse of the list by abusing power.
It's one thing to get kicked out of a flight from desecrating the holy authoritarian.
It's another thing to get kicked out of one airline from desecrating the authoritarian judge...
Let's see what the whole proposal looks like before we panic.
It's good to have a no fly list. The problem would be finding an independent organization oversee it.
My biggest concern over this is the misuse of the list by abusing power.
It's one thing to get kicked out of a flight from desecrating the holy authoritarian.
It's another thing to get kicked out of one airline from desecrating the authoritarian judge jury executioner.
It's a real problem if you are not allowed to fly because an imbecile from another airline decides to go on a power trip.
The consequences? Well imagine race card being as common as scratch cards. Many flyer will miraculously develop some asymptomatic problems and being protected by the disability act.
Time to start applying for an airline frontline employee job. You are all now called magistrate.
Great idea! Flying is a privilege, not a right, and there should be standards for conduct, as there are for driving. Or maybe we could create a new airline just to serve all the jerks? Trouble is, no flight attendant would ever want to work there.
You are absolutely correct Marielle, on all accounts!!
Thank you. :-)
It is sad to watch Ben become more politicized. The enthusiasm for travel and balanced writing were always areas where this blog was differentiated. We knew how Ben/Lucky felt without being beat over the head with his politics. Once you lead with the term Jerk, you are taking sides on a topic that is 100 percent politicized in American culture. One man’s Jerk is another man’s freedom fighter. Ben is smart. Really smart, actually, and...
It is sad to watch Ben become more politicized. The enthusiasm for travel and balanced writing were always areas where this blog was differentiated. We knew how Ben/Lucky felt without being beat over the head with his politics. Once you lead with the term Jerk, you are taking sides on a topic that is 100 percent politicized in American culture. One man’s Jerk is another man’s freedom fighter. Ben is smart. Really smart, actually, and should not get a pass on the subtext he is pushing. If we want a bombastic know-it all peddling inflammatory click bait, we have Gary.
Then don’t read it. It must be working for him in some capacity otherwise he’d stop.
You keep coming back as well.
A jerk is a jerk. Pretty clear definition. Whether you're a "freedom fighter" or not, that's unrelated to being a jerk. One thing has nothing to do with the other.
So asking people to have even a small amount of decorum while traveling is partisan?
Nice self-own there.
Sorry but someone who is going to flip out about having to wear a mask on a plane and refuse to do so is a jerk and they are violating federal mandates. The science is clear. The only people making this stuff political are the anti-maskers.
January 6 insurrectionists - terrorists (aka "jerks") or just "freedom fighters"? Inquiring minds want to know.
I'm sure Ben will give you a refund on your OMAAT membership if you want to go elsewhere. As always, "Right Wing Conservative Travel Blog" is a massive whitespace opportunity for anyone willing to start it up...yet they never do.
Miamiorbust,
You are a blithering idiot, maybe even a Covidiot..............!!!!
Let me explain it in simple words, it's very simple.: Obey the rules, be polite, wear your mask and you can fly, if NOT, you can walk because you still can't take the train or bus because the rules apply there too.
Great idea from Delta! Just the existence of this list and it’s potential to keep jerks off flights for however long they determine with be a huge deterrent. Just as with your personal credit report, if you’re a deadbeat, everyone with lending power has the ability to see your past behavior and deny you credit if they choose. If there’s no accountability, the problems will continue to escalate.
I disagree. Deadbeat is easily defined, late on payments. Bad behavior is something that an attendant can decide or make up on the fly. If there were protections, such as requiring a legal conviction, I would be onboard.
The problem is that we have let stupidity be elevated to a badge of honor. We need to cut this kind of behavior off at the knees. Just like all opinions are not equal, alternative facts are not facts. Let's corral back into common sense.
I think this is a terrible idea, for the same reason the federal no-fly list was and is a terrible idea. How many innocent people have been denied the right to fly because of inept record keeping, ignorance about non-western names, and sheer confusion? The benefits pale in comparison to the harm this will do.
On the surface great idea. Enforcement seems daunting. I was once labeled unruly for refusing to sit next to a bloodied passenger - would this have landed me on the list, thus “firing” me from my job that requires travel?
A great first step. Bring it on -- but don't stop there. More, please.
I support the idea of a no-fly list for dangerous and violent passengers (let's stop using gentle terms like "unruly" or "jerks"). However, I wonder how much being banned from all airlines would impact the the type of people who are causing flight disruptions. I would assume most of these people are the exact same bores who argue with TSA agents about how they didn't realize they can't take a full sized shampoo bottle in...
I support the idea of a no-fly list for dangerous and violent passengers (let's stop using gentle terms like "unruly" or "jerks"). However, I wonder how much being banned from all airlines would impact the the type of people who are causing flight disruptions. I would assume most of these people are the exact same bores who argue with TSA agents about how they didn't realize they can't take a full sized shampoo bottle in their carry-on. For that reason, I think we also need to have heavy fines that are actually imposed, rather than these people simply being escorted off the plane and released. Being banned from flying doesn't mean anything if you're someone who only leaves your home town once a decade.
What an awful and counterproductive idea.
Let's just get rid of judges and juries too, and have the cops throw anyone they want in jail for life.
My, oh my, you escalated that quickly to nonsense
When did suggesting due process was valuable and potentially necessary become nonsense? You either aren’t thinking this through or aren’t much of a thinker. This is an idea that may be necessary but questioning whether implementation will trample due process and snag far more people than delta suggests is not nonsense.
There would need to be an official mechanism in place to put a passenger on a no fly list, some kind of committee with representatives from all participating airlines chaired by an independent adjudicator where a full case history can be reviewed along with documented evidence and the passenger given the opportunity to put their case forward, otherwise as another poster commented, the crew will be judge, jury and executioner.
It seems, everything needs to be explained to folks who have already made up their mind. Delta’s proposal is only an option and not a framework. So, it’s safe to assume, there will likely be an appeal process, being able to get off the list, aka a process will be put in place before someone is added to this list. So to assume this would be arbitrary or Dao would be on the list is...
It seems, everything needs to be explained to folks who have already made up their mind. Delta’s proposal is only an option and not a framework. So, it’s safe to assume, there will likely be an appeal process, being able to get off the list, aka a process will be put in place before someone is added to this list. So to assume this would be arbitrary or Dao would be on the list is plain stupid.
As far as rights are concerned, constitution guarantees right of movement and not right of movement by a particular mode of transport. So folks on no fly list can still drive to LA from NY provided they have valid driving license.
A little more emphasis on responsibilities and less on rights will definitely Make America Great Again.
This! Immediately the screaming and hollering, "due process," "rights," "rabble, rabble, rabble"! Of course there will be a process with parameters all around it. Although, personally, as far as I'm concerned, they shouldn't have to. A private company can decide who they serve without any explanation, just like a store or a restaurant can set their own rules, as long as it's not due to a protected class, etc. "We reserve the right to serve...
This! Immediately the screaming and hollering, "due process," "rights," "rabble, rabble, rabble"! Of course there will be a process with parameters all around it. Although, personally, as far as I'm concerned, they shouldn't have to. A private company can decide who they serve without any explanation, just like a store or a restaurant can set their own rules, as long as it's not due to a protected class, etc. "We reserve the right to serve people with a red shirt." If that's the policy, that's the policy. Flying is not a right. Drive or take the train or walk. And while we're at it, go ahead with a no-eat list for restaurants, no-buy a list for stores, etc.
But anyway… I agree that it's logical there will be a process. They will move to protect themselves as much as they can and avoid frivolous lawsuits as is customary in this country. Yes, the issue is that people nowadays don't care about responsibilities and feel that why should they have to sacrifice or be responsible. It's my life, and I do what I want, and I shouldn't have to worry about anybody else because it's my life, and I have rights. Ridiculous!
You might be correct when referring to a small shop operating on private property. I am not sure the same applies to Airlines operating with authority of the USA, in government owned facilities.
So does that give passengers a right to behave as they please? Rights and responsibilities go together. To varying degree Airlines already enforce certain policies that many may consider as “violation of their freedom”. And to assume, such no-fly list will be completely owned and maintained by airlines is absurd. The FAA will have an equal say in it, or more likely FAA will own it.
You are missing the point. It isn't one private company. They are talking about a single employee at one company being able to identify you as someone who should not fly and all the other airlines banning you from flying as well. That is a tremendous restriction on an individuals freedom of movement and we can't just take their word for it there would be due process. I'm all for these idiots being banned but...
You are missing the point. It isn't one private company. They are talking about a single employee at one company being able to identify you as someone who should not fly and all the other airlines banning you from flying as well. That is a tremendous restriction on an individuals freedom of movement and we can't just take their word for it there would be due process. I'm all for these idiots being banned but there has to be real check and balances for something like this to make sure it is not abused.
There should be a system in place to penalize passengers who do not conform to Mask wearing. I’ve seen numerous examples of clowns paying games with aircraft staff thinking they are being clever. Airlines should prosecute and not pass the buck. They take the easy option of putting names on lists, and not thinking it through. As these lists spread I can see legal issues, and these idiots will walk away with $$$ in compensation.
I don't think it is stupid to be concerned about this being arbitrary at all. We have seen numerous abuses of power since the country was founded. I wouldn't just assume there would be a check on this as a default position.
Ole, you are a wise person!!
Others like Miamiorbust, Bob Eldridge, Hug_o and many more, NOT so wise. Some are definitely borderline Jerks, Covidiots, etc., based on the reactionist babble they have written in their comments.
Come on people, the lists are for violations of Federal laws, airline safety rules, and in some cases common courtesy, NOT a person's "free speech" statements of dissatisfaction for whatever. Too many people these days feel a high degree...
Ole, you are a wise person!!
Others like Miamiorbust, Bob Eldridge, Hug_o and many more, NOT so wise. Some are definitely borderline Jerks, Covidiots, etc., based on the reactionist babble they have written in their comments.
Come on people, the lists are for violations of Federal laws, airline safety rules, and in some cases common courtesy, NOT a person's "free speech" statements of dissatisfaction for whatever. Too many people these days feel a high degree of entitlement and just because they purchased a $39 saver ticket, they can do whatever they want, whenever they want and to whoever they want..... Those are the true Jerks!
Really disappointed in the lack of thought and critical thinking behind this post, Ben.
This is just one of many mechanism which will eventually be politicized/weaponized to disenfranchise "unruly" pax. Who get to make this determination for the entire US aviation industry of what's unruly? It's one thing for a private company to decide who they want to do business with and a totally different thing to apply this to aviation in general. *mega facepalm*...
Really disappointed in the lack of thought and critical thinking behind this post, Ben.
This is just one of many mechanism which will eventually be politicized/weaponized to disenfranchise "unruly" pax. Who get to make this determination for the entire US aviation industry of what's unruly? It's one thing for a private company to decide who they want to do business with and a totally different thing to apply this to aviation in general. *mega facepalm* People are always quick to cheer disenfranchisement until it's THEM that are the ones that are the target.
How about you actually fine the people involved the maximum within the mechanism in place and make them pay it? Creating another list with more costs and bureaucracy will not make things better.
I do not like such a list because it would make flight attendants have the power of judge, jury, and police. Ban from one airline is ok, though. So is arrest, fine, and jail for a bad offense.
I think the issue becomes the government does not have the resources to be prosecuting every idiot who refuses to wear a facemask on a plane. Honestly the government has limited resources and they are dealing with major drug traffickers, violent felons, terrorists, etc. No need to be clogging their courtrooms with these jackasses.
It'll happen. Already happens with car rental companies who share DNR (do not rent) lists with each other. They have a process whereby each person is vetted thru their legal depts for adding. There's an appeals process. It passed antitrust concerns. I'm sure airlines will take the same approach. At the end of the day, these are private companies and they can ban whoever they want. The only issue with sharing individual lists with others...
It'll happen. Already happens with car rental companies who share DNR (do not rent) lists with each other. They have a process whereby each person is vetted thru their legal depts for adding. There's an appeals process. It passed antitrust concerns. I'm sure airlines will take the same approach. At the end of the day, these are private companies and they can ban whoever they want. The only issue with sharing individual lists with others are having a reasonable process for people to appeal it.
Would suck to have a common name and be mistaken for a baddy. Could they use photographs to confirm identity? I don't even think birthdates are enough...
This is an unwise idea, as many others have pointed out. Airline employees are not always right (ditto passengers), and banning people from air travel with no due process will have undesired side effects.
It also likely violates laws like the ADA. What happens the first time that an airline bans a passenger because, say, their autistic toddler has trouble wearing a mask? (This has already happened; it is not hypothetical.)
This is a perfect opportunity to start an airline that caters to these "jerks". Con Air is very appropriate. fares will be 3x more than the average, and all FA are highly trained with hand to hand combat.
And the airlines decide who can fly with anyone. The ultimate power trip to the flight attendants to rule over people in the cabin. Gate agents that can decide and threaten you to obey or risk being on "the list". Sounds awesome.
Delta can ban anyone but do you not see the problem using the federal government to ban all people Delta or their employees deem "jerks" from ALL flights by ALL airlines.
Next it will be you. Guaranteed.
On the one hand the idea sounds nice on the surface..."no more troublemakers on plans". On the other hand, I changed my mind upon reading what Gary Leff had to say: https://viewfromthewing.com/delta-proposes-banning-accused-mask-non-compliant-passengers-from-all-air-travel/. He presented fairly well the problems with this proposal and I think this could result in a lot of people being banned from flying who didn't really deserve it.
I wholeheartedly support the creation and maintenance of a national "No Fly Jerk List", but I think it's going to have to be collated and run by someone like the FAA. And, there will need to be some mechanism in place to get off the list like a time period (measured in years; not months), completion of an anger management program, or something similar.
But I would think something like this would be doable.
So you're in favor of taking away people's rights without due process? It's one thing for a company to choose not to do business with an individual again, but colluding with competitors via the government to strip their rights? Not a good idea. Some of these incidents are not as cut and dry as can be seen in a 10 second phone video clip. Will the person have any right to sue if it turns...
So you're in favor of taking away people's rights without due process? It's one thing for a company to choose not to do business with an individual again, but colluding with competitors via the government to strip their rights? Not a good idea. Some of these incidents are not as cut and dry as can be seen in a 10 second phone video clip. Will the person have any right to sue if it turns out the accusations were false? If it's like any of our other federal government oversteps, very unlikely.
Air travel is a right? Entering into a transaction with a common carrier is a right? So you can behave however you want within that contract and the other party has no reciprocity, because it's your *right*?
Will, is buying food at a grocery store a right? Should grocery store be allowed to collectively ban you from buying food? Shopping is not a right. No need for due process. You can discover a love of gardening. To intentionally blur the lines between individual groups setting standards and groups colluding to ban access is not cool.
You have no right to fly on a commercial aircraft.
Due process isn’t applicable to commercial transactions.
You’d know that, if you weren’t an idiot.
Airline industry is heavily regulated and bailed out by the government. They asked for financial help during the pandemic. They are controlled by the government and partially funded by tax payers, and as a result should provide service to all residents who isn't a danger to others
you have no constitutional right to buy bread so we will all show up in your neighborhood until all the grocers won't sell to you.
See how that escalates?
Wait what? Getting on an airplane a right? Are we making up rights now? Because I have several for the list!
Stupid idea. David Dao would also be on this list if he wasn't filmed
Excellent point about David Dao.
Disagreements between a company's employees and its customers happen.
The customer is not always right, but nor are the employees always right.
Better to enforce the fines for not wearing masks, and other criminal offences; and publicise the punishments.
Those are subject to due process.
If it's really important to make the messaging more urgent, throw some extra resources to speed up the court processes for...
Excellent point about David Dao.
Disagreements between a company's employees and its customers happen.
The customer is not always right, but nor are the employees always right.
Better to enforce the fines for not wearing masks, and other criminal offences; and publicise the punishments.
Those are subject to due process.
If it's really important to make the messaging more urgent, throw some extra resources to speed up the court processes for those.
E.g. In the UK when there was rioting a few years ago, the courts sat on Saturdays to sentence rioters for behaviour on Friday nights.