Man pulled off plane for tweet...

[sunshinehighway]

I said I believed some of his story but if you don't think there is more to it then i 'm not going to try to convince you, believe what you want. I most certainly think he'd delete the tweet if it meant he could get back on the plane, being an arrogant jerk doesn't equate to being stupid.

It's not that I don't believe there's more to the story. I just find the more irrelevant. The only things that matters to me is he was pulled off and then allowed to reboard once he did what they wanted.
They want to pull him off, OK, then stand behind it and keep him off.

 

[topolino]

So basically the policy of the airline is now: "We will control all you do while on our planes, boarding our planes, etc. You will not be allowed to tweet, facebook, or use other social media in a negative way about our airline or we will remove you from the plane" I mean they aren't really writing or saying that but basically they are showing it that way.


Wooooowwwww. Makes me glad I don't fly. He made a tweet about a rude employee. He wasn't a "security risk" that's stupid.

He may have been much more of a jerk than he lets on in the article but she is the professional and should have acted as such. Instead she acted like a spoiled brat that pulled him off the flight to get her way.

I don't think he was ever considered a danger in and of himself, but his tweet put the gate agent at risk. That is why they let him back on after he deleted it. Would you want someone to notify millions of people at once that you treated them rudely and then pinpoint your name and exact location? It would make you an easy target. His tweet did just that.

Like someone else noted, I respect a company that sets their employeees' safety as a priority.

 

[Hrhpd]

I don't think SW has seat assignments, so the further back you are in line, the less likely you are to sit together.

If he was that worried, he could have booked Business select for he and his children. That would guarantee priority boarding and he would have had the whole plane to choose from. The only people that would have boarded in front of him would have been the A-Listers and those with a blue handicap sleeve.

 

[gwynne]

I don't think SW has seat assignments, so the further back you are in line, the less likely you are to sit together.

Ummm..yes. Southwest doesn't have seat assignments. And if you're not an A-lister, you don't get A-list status. The children in question appear to not be A-listers.
So, This A-Lister parent basically had four options:
1. Get on the plane as an A-Lister, and let the kids fend for themselves in the gate area.
2. Make a huge stink and demand extra special perks because they think they are very extra special.
3. Board with their kids at their kids boarding numbers.
4. Book Business select for the kids and they would be on the A-list, too for this trip.

I think the passenger should have just gone for option 3 and called it a day.

 

[AnAmericanInDisney]

If he was that worried, he could have booked Business select for he and his children. That would guarantee priority boarding and he would have had the whole plane to choose from. The only people that would have boarded in front of him would have been the A-Listers and those with a blue handicap sleeve.

But if his kids had been allowed to board with him previously, he wouldn't have thought that was necessary.

 

[gwynne]

It's not that I don't believe there's more to the story. I just find the more irrelevant. The only things that matters to me is he was pulled off and then allowed to reboard once he did what they wanted.
They want to pull him off, OK, then stand behind it and keep him off.

Airlines can pull people off, and let them back on at their discretion. It's not a hard and fast, if you're pulled off, you're off.

 

[Hrhpd]

But if his kids had been allowed to board with him previously, he wouldn't have thought that was necessary.

Again, this guy had to have flown 50 flights in a calendar year to earn the A-List preferred status.

There is absolutely NO way that a regular customer like that does not know the rules of his A-List status.

He knew it was a gamble to ask if his children could board with him. Being an arrogant jerk has worked for him before. He got caught this time by a gate agent that enforced the rules.

If he absolutely wanted to guarantee priority boarding for his children, he has enough experience to know he has to book Business select for his kids.

 

[gwynne]

But if his kids had been allowed to board with him previously, he wouldn't have thought that was necessary.

Really? He's flown 50+ one way qualifying flights in a year and he's totally befuddled about Southwest Airlines boarding process? All those letters and numbers are so confusing that he didn't understand?
I don't buy it.

 

[AnAmericanInDisney]

Again, this guy had to have flown 50 flights in a calendar year to earn the A-List preferred status.

There is absolutely NO way that a regular customer like that does not know the rules of his A-List status.

He knew it was a gamble to ask if his children could board with him. Being an arrogant jerk has worked for him before. He got caught this time by a gate agent that enforced the rules.

If he absolutely wanted to guarantee priority boarding for his children, he has enough experience to know he has to book Business select for his kids.

You don't think he flew all those flights with his kids, do you? If SW enforced its rules consistently, there would not have been this problem.

 

[Hrhpd]

You don't think he flew all those flights with his kids, do you? If SW enforced its rules consistently, there would not have been this problem.

You don't have to fly all the flights with kids to know the rules of your A-List status.

He knows how and why he earned it and he knows who it applies to.

 

[gwynne]

You don't think he flew all those flights with his kids, do you? If SW enforced its rules consistently, there would not have been this problem.

A-listers generally board A-1 through A-16. When they are called for boarding, They just say A-1 through A-16 now boarding.
The gate agent does not say:
A-1 through A-16 and anyone and everyone you want to bring along with you that has a higher boarding number.

This is not confusing or difficult.

 

[Wendy31]

I'm thinking there's probably more to the story than just his side of the story as well.

Otherwise, the airline would have done more than "Whatever, dude. Here's a $50 credit. See ya!"

I don't like rude, arrogant jerks who think they deserve & then demand entitled treatment.

 

[NHdisneylover]

You don't have to fly all the flights with kids to know the rules of your A-List status.

He knows how and why he earned it and he knows who it applies to.

and best on his tone in what I read, I would bet that if he were flying without his kids and another A lister got on with kids ahead of him and took the seats he wanted (bulkhead, maybe) he would get pushy about that and how kids do not qualify to board.

Honestly, I can understand possibly not knowing or understanding the rule (but I doubt that was the case) or even just asking if they could board with him (politely asking), but when he was told "no" he should have left it at that and followed the rule he now knew.


I am still guessing that whatever was tweeted was much worse than he says and that is why it caught someone'S attention and he was told he needed to remove the threat.

Also, sometimes people who are borderline are removed from a flight and then spoken to and allowed back on (or allowed on a later flight). It is certainly possible that if the tone of his post was angry or threatening, security wanted to question him and ascertain his mental state before determining that he was not going to go off the deep end mid flight and was safe to allow back on.

I assume Southwest cannot violate his privacy by releasing the exact tweet or explaining further who made the call to remove him or why and why he was allowed back on--but I sure wish someone had caught the tweet and would contact the news.

 

[LilyWDW]

If he had written anything threatening, he wouldn't have gone on GMA.

That's actually sort of funny.

There was a woman who lied to multiple agencies and news sources about how she was in one of the buildings on 9/11.

There was a woman who lied to multiple news sources about not being tipped because she was gay.

And there have been plenty more examples.

So yes, I do think he could be lying or stretching the truth about what happened. I also do think he comes off as a jerk in the article even though it is written to make him look like the victim.

 

[NHdisneylover]

That's actually sort of funny.

There was a woman who lied to multiple agencies and news sources about how she was in one of the buildings on 9/11.

There was a woman who lied to multiple news sources about not being tipped because she was gay.

And there have been plenty more examples.

So yes, I do think he could be lying or stretching the truth about what happened. I also do think he comes off as a jerk in the article even though it is written to make him look like the victim.

More recently there was the woman who lied to the media about her granddaughter being asked to leave KFC due to a scar fro ma dog bite.

People mislead the press all.the.time trying to get sympathy.

 

[Metsfan520]

That's actually sort of funny.

There was a woman who lied to multiple agencies and news sources about how she was in one of the buildings on 9/11.

There was a woman who lied to multiple news sources about not being tipped because she was gay.

And there have been plenty more examples.

So yes, I do think he could be lying or stretching the truth about what happened. I also do think he comes off as a jerk in the article even though it is written to make him look like the victim.

That's what I keep thinking about this - I wouldn't be shocked to find out he is stretching the truth.

 

[sunshinehighway]

and best on his tone in what I read, I would bet that if he were flying without his kids and another A lister got on with kids ahead of him and took the seats he wanted (bulkhead, maybe) he would get pushy about that and how kids do not qualify to board.

Honestly, I can understand possibly not knowing or understanding the rule (but I doubt that was the case) or even just asking if they could board with him (politely asking), but when he was told "no" he should have left it at that and followed the rule he now knew.


I am still guessing that whatever was tweeted was much worse than he says and that is why it caught someone'S attention and he was told he needed to remove the threat.

Also, sometimes people who are borderline are removed from a flight and then spoken to and allowed back on (or allowed on a later flight). It is certainly possible that if the tone of his post was angry or threatening, security wanted to question him and ascertain his mental state before determining that he was not going to go off the deep end mid flight and was safe to allow back on.

I assume Southwest cannot violate his privacy by releasing the exact tweet or explaining further who made the call to remove him or why and why he was allowed back on--but I sure wish someone had caught the tweet and would contact the news.

I've read a little more on it and it appears it was all the gate agent. She knew about the tweet because he told her he was going to treat about her being rude. Hewas confronted by her when he got off the plane, not security.

 

[NotUrsula]

Just goes to show that Grandma was right: "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.:" ... At least not until your trip is over. ANY frequent flier knows that since 9/11, challenging airline personnel, however mildly, is simply asking for major embarassment and inconvenience. They now have the power to punish you for arrogance, and at least 50% of the time, they will choose to use it.

When it comes to customer service issues, Twitter and Youtube should be the court of last resort. Just like back in the stone age, the first thing you should do is to PRIVATELY contact mgmt. with your concerns, and escalate only when that route fails. He arrogantly went right to the nuclear option when he was still in a vulnerable position, and he paid for it. The airline is punishing his choice of complaint avenue. "The customer is always right" is a razor's edge in the age of social media; no matter how logical the company's response, unless they publicly grovel they are now seen as being unfair to the little guy, even though the little guy chose to shoot the company in the back rather than stand up and civilly ask for reasonable redress.

As someone else noted, he knew the rules. This is just like telling a state trooper that you shouldn't get a ticket for going 70 in a 55 zone because, "none of you has ever stopped me before when I went that fast here." Do that and you are lucky they don't throw you *under* the jail.

 

[maxiesmom]

You don't think he flew all those flights with his kids, do you? If SW enforced its rules consistently, there would not have been this problem.

So now airlines can't bend the rules when they feel like doing so, as they may not be able to do that all of the time? Don't be nice at all if you can't be nice all of the time? That is bull. It should be Be Grateful When The Rules Are Bent For You, But Don't Expect It All Of The Time.

People have forgotten how to be grateful when something nice is done for them. They now expect it.

 

[topolino]

I've read a little more on it and it appears it was all the gate agent. She knew about the tweet because he told her he was going to treat about her being rude. Hewas confronted by her when he got off the plane, not security.

In other words, you read more about his account of the incident. Southwest is not releasing details.