Passenger Bill of Rights for air travel

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

XYZ Corp put a harmful additive in the vitamin pill, Plentipoop,that sickened a few dozen people. They have offered to reimburse the sick people with the price of the vitamins and offered a new bottle of vitamins, without the harmful ingredient. They said they were sorry and that adding the harmful ingredient was just a bad decision. Ocassionally this harmful ingredient shows up in other brands of vitamins.

Some people say that it is the risk in taking vitamins, while others want legislation to make all ingredients safe. Some people say it's not serious and don't get alarmed, while others see it as a joke.
 
But, to say that they should have done things differently without the benefit of hindsight might be a bit unfair.
If they'd waited a couple of hours before requesting assistance, maybe - but five hours before giving in and asking for evacuation - cannot agree.
 
I agree with you OGD. Tis was an unfortunate incident but I would bet that if the weather had broken and the passengers had been able to leave because they were ready to go, there would not have been such an uproar.
 
OHGoDive:
Sorry for your inconvenience. But your story has contradictions...

You say there was no air? There was. Or just not the ideal temperature for you?

You say there was no water? There was water, you just didn't approve of it. The tap water was unsafe? Or just not your ideal brand of bottled water?

You say there was no food? There was water, you just didn't approve of it.

There were blankets too, but it sounds as if you just didn't get one.

It was unfortunate, and I hope you were compensated for it, I know I would have been. But, it was a delay for safety reasons. They could not have forseen the circumstances that brought you to a forced landing in a foreign country. Or prepared a lavish feast and accomodations for you. Sounds like they did what they could and people accepted it.

You were (and still are) bothered by the incident, rightfully so. But, you weren't injured. Just delayed and inconvenienced. It's these types of reactions to incidents that fuel the hysteria over air travel. Lost luggage is "devastating". Sitting in an airplane for hours is "cruel and unusual". I don't get it.

No laws need passed.

Telling how you did not see it.

You said *You say there was no air? There was. Or just not the ideal temperature for you?*

I said "There was NO air on the BUS.

So to make it more realistic for you NOT ENOUGH SEATS so there people standing, really crowded. NO AIR, WINDOWS DO NOT OPEN, AND THE DOOR IS CLOSED under armed guard (of course he was on the outside.

I don't drink bottled water I am not that fussy, but I refuse to put my mouth under a toilet tap that is for public use after they have just took a dump.

If we had been allowed the use of the terminal I would have gladly paid for my own food, but if you are going to keep me under lock and key then you had dam well better provide reasonable food and refreshment.

I think you would be upset if you were elderly and could not beat the young bucks to the seats, blankets and had to sleep on a concrete/tiled floor.

Yes I was compensated 13,000 FF miles that I did not expect. It was more than adequate for being delayed, but did not come anywhere near compensation for being locked in a room with substandard conditions.
 
Diver Dennis:
I agree with you OGD. Tis was an unfortunate incident but I would bet that if the weather had broken and the passengers had been able to leave because they were ready to go, there would not have been such an uproar.

Doppler radar showed the front stalled over that area in a very wide ban and forecasts predicted it would not clear for a long while. In fact, this front stretched the whole eastern coast and tracking showed it moving VERY slowly. If this happended in 1938 one could understand it, but in 2007? Nope, no excuse! :(
 
pilot fish:
Doppler radar showed the front stalled over that area in a very wide ban and forecasts predicted it would not clear for a long while. In fact, this front stretched the whole eastern coast and tracking showed it moving VERY slowly. If this happended in 1938 one could understand it, but in 2007? Nope, no excuse! :(


I didn't know that. Why did the tower let the planes leave the gate or tell the airlines the weather was not going to let up? Planes need tower clearance to leave the gate don't they? If the radar showed the situation was not going to get better, did the airlines get that information?

So it boils down to the fact that there was not enough gates for the incoming planes and the outgoing planes could not leave.

Were the other airline's planes evacuated sooner or were all these planes JetBlue?
 
Diver Dennis:
I didn't know that. Why did the tower let the planes leave the gate or tell the airlines the weather was not going to let up? Planes need tower clearance to leave the gate don't they? If the radar showed the situation was not going to get better, did the airlines get that information?

So it boils down to the fact that there was not enough gates for the incoming planes and the outgoing planes could not leave.

Were the other airline's planes evacuated sooner or were all these planes JetBlue?

Some, smart ones, did not leave the gate, some others returned. I'm not sure but I think you do not need tower clearence to leave gate, but you do need it to go onto runway, they were just on the apron, and for take off. They wanted to keep thier place in take off line and did not want the expense of reticketing and rebooking. They also did not want to cancel the flight because they would lose passengers on the other end. They sacrificed passenger for their bottom line. Not new.
 
I can understand the general public thinking this is not a major issue but we divers, [most of us lucky ones, which is a vast majority on this Board], travel by plane many many times a year, so this happening to us is not that far fetched, or rare. Why some divers on the Board think this is not a biggy is puzzling? Maybe they don't travel by plane much?
 
Some of the things that go on we don't want to know.

On a recent trip Tampa-Memphis-Milwaukee. There was a delay at Tampa something about a light in the cockpit that would not come on or go off I'm not sure, then were off. On arriving at Memphis we circled the airport for a long time and did a fly by down the runway at about four hundred feet. As we were going on on the same plane I asked the attendant if we should get off the plane or stay on. He said there was a problem with the plane and he thinks it was going to be grounded. So we got off the plane and I went to a bar to have a smoke where I ran into the attendant and he told me about the light in Tampa and the flyby was to make sure the landing gear was down. He also told me the pilot was complaining long and loud about the old aircraft falling apart.

On the way back, Memphis get on the plane, now get off and get on another plane
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/swift/

Back
Top Bottom