I do not blame Air Tran one bit
 

I think there ought to be kid free airlines or parents should have to put a "Get Smart" cone of silence over their kid's head and their head - let them fukcing listen to that :mad:

AirTran Backs Decision to Boot Family From Plane After Toddler's Tantrum
Tuesday , January 23, 2007

ORLANDO, Fla. — AirTran Airways on Tuesday defended its decision to remove a Massachusetts couple from a flight after their crying 3-year-old daughter refused to take her seat before takeoff.

AirTran officials said they followed Federal Aviation Administration rules that children age 2 and above must have their own seat and be wearing a seat belt upon takeoff.

"The flight was already delayed 15 minutes and in fairness to the other 112 passengers on the plane, the crew made an operational decision to remove the family," AirTran spokeswoman Judy Graham-Weaver said.

Julie and Gerry Kulesza, who were headed home to Boston on Jan. 14 from Fort Myers, said they just needed a little more time to calm their daughter, Elly.

"We weren't given an opportunity to hold her, console her or anything," Julie Kulesza said in a telephone interview Tuesday.

The Kuleszas said they told a flight attendant they had paid for their daughter's seat, but asked whether she could sit in her mother's lap. The request was denied.

She was removed because "she was climbing under the seat and hitting the parents and wouldn't get in her seat" during boarding, Graham-Weaver said.

The Orlando-based carrier reimbursed the family $595.80, the cost of the three tickets, and the Kuleszas flew home the next day.

They also were offered three roundtrip tickets anywhere the airline flies, Graham-Weaver said.

The father said his family would never fly AirTran again.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,246000,00.html

no kidding.

i mean, they got reimbursed, and they got 3 free round trip tickets to anywhere. sounds like they got a sweet deal.

my favorite part:

are you ****ing kidding me? somebody call supernanny.

It was pretty generous of the airline to offer them free round trip tickets anywhere they wanted to go.

this is why i can't have kids. they would probably turn into spoiled brats, get that spoiled brat attitude, and then i'd just have to kill them. i can't STAND bratty little kids. they aren't precious. they're just proof that the world is overpopulated.

vomit.

i've never even heard of airtran, but i would fly them every time if they'd make it policy to kick kids who make noise [read as: all of them] off their flights.

There's some lawyer somewhere waiting to sue AirTran I'm sure.:laugh:

Exactly. Fricking little brat.

dude. people feel so ****ing entitled these days. it pisses me off. flying on an airplane is not a right, it's a privilege. if you and yours cannot conduct yourselves in a civil manner, then bye-bye birdie!

I'll just not speak up I suppose... other than to say we have a sweet welbehaved son of 17 months, but even taking HIM on a flight with all the overstimulation, the air pressure changes, the cramped quarters and the grouchy airpersonel....

We kept him quiet, contained, entertained, even gave him benadryl to have him sleep a bit (the flight was to Amsterdam from here), we gfave him snacks and a massage, and he was quiet and good but MAN we both were exhausted after that flight. I was so tired and frustrated I could have wept.

Just saying. It was a titans job to make sure our normally sweet child was NOT a brat. I would certainly cut those parents AND the tot some slack, having been there.

Sasja

I think it's ridiculous. These people are trained to face hijacks or disasters and can't handle a child?

Romy

Does the airline really care that the couple are threatening to never fly with them again - I doubt it...

i think there's a huge difference between 17 mos and 3 yrs ... and there's also a huge difference between a child getting bored/frustrated on an airplane and a child out of control to such a degree that she's hitting her own parents. :shrug:

The difference being that really, the airline isn't allowed to do anything with someone else's child.
I don't care much about the child crying and whatnot, cause kids cry, but those parents should have been able to get that child in her seat at least. That was the reason they couldn't take off.

Yes, they should but it's quite impressive that an airline can't even manage these kind of things without kicking out a family. I bet the lunch was great though. ;)

Romy

As my dearly departed...
 

from this existence much too early due to medical negliegence Mother would say :

"Spare the rod, have a child grow to be a pussy"

I am unsure exactly how they would "handle it" if they aren't really supposed to interfere. It looks like they gave the family 15 minutes or so to handle it themselves. That should be plenty of time, IMO.

I think this story gives the image of a giant with feet of clay. You just cut and repay what doesn't work as rules said instead of working out on a solution.

Romy

True. And that is better, because god knows how many lawsuits the airline would get if they started doing anything at all with people's kids in any way at any time. Which is perfect, as beyond flying the kids, the kids are not their responsibility.

Yes, but they're a service, they have to fly people (and their children) who pay the ticket but they didn't in that case. What if Airlines started to cut out other categories of people because they aren't in their standards?

Who puts the limits?

Romy

the family wasn't removed because they had a child, they were removed because their child was unruly and wouldn't allow them to take off. they do provide a service, but they are not obligated to fly people who don't abide by their rules. airlines also disallow people to fly for breaking other rules, like drinking before they are scheduled to fly. it's about the behavior, it's not discrimination.

The only limit they impose is that everyone is in their seat for take off. I don't think this is a case of "where to draw the line". If an adult wasn't in their seat at takeoff, they should have to leave the plane, too. It's not unreasonable to ask everyone to be in their seat, child or not, and it isn't exclusionary to take anyone off the plane who wasn't in their seat. Heck, they gave the parents several minutes. I don't think someone not being in their seat is a "category of person" so much as a "category of rules that has to be followed by everyone".

Their child was unruly? You mean she skipped the how to fly correctly lesson? Zero tolerance in US for the three year olds?

Romy

yeah, i think hitting your parents and refusing to sit in your seat is unruly. so sue me.

oh wait, that's such an "american" thing, nevermind. sorry to offend your much more patient and kind european sensibilities ... :rolleyes:

c'mon.

I don't think it's much about European sensibilities (it's a well hidden secret: we haven't none actually, and save our faces importing them from China ;) ) but more about American paradoxes. After all it went in the news even in your Country so I guess not everybody considered what happened so normal.

Romy

i don't think it's "normal"; it certainly doesn't happen every day. but i do think it's reasonable. i mean, you said you thought they should've been able to reach a solution - what kind of solution are you suggesting? i'm not trying to be an asshole, i'm really curious. because aside from giving the family extra time to get their child to sit, which they did, what else could they do?

Exactly. The are ever more strict rules for flying, now. If a parent can't control his/her child, then they must exit the plane. Seems pretty simple to me. And delaying flights as a result of the child, certainly isn't fair to the other passengers.
Maybe the airline should provide duct tape, free of charge.:D

Waiting till the child was calm enough to be seated by their parents, maybe helping them to distract her, instead of creating more tension in front of the child who clearly was frightened?

Romy

there is nothing I hate more than trying to calm my patient's CHILD down while I'm trying to work and do my job. It's not my responsibility to do a little jig, hold up flashcards, and do magic tricks to calm YOUR child down.

It takes away from the real duties I'm supposed to be doing-which doesn't include "babysitting"

They already waited. They were already late.

Well, it can happen, it's not a crime to be late if there's a problem. I'm not a parent but it wouldn't have been terrible for me to wait till the child was calm, imperfection is part of life, right? And according to what the parents say the passengers weren't particularly troubled from all this.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/AmericanFa...2815486&page=1

Romy

I guess my question is why wasn't at least one of the parents sitting with the child?

I've flown Air Tran and you're lucky to get lunch. Also they're not on time a lot.

Oh, so maybe they were trying a record. ;)

Romy

I guess I disagree. With the amount of time that should be waited. It is odd to me that some parent can't get their kid into a seat within 20 minutes. You just grab them and put them in their seat and make them stay there. I know, she was under the seat...if I can get my stupid cats out from under my bed, I'm suprised they couldn't get her out from under that seat. Clearly they are the kind of parents who have allowed their child, in a scant three years, to evolve into someone who would hit her parents and throw very long tantrums. Just saying. :laugh:

"according to what the parents say...."
mmm. I dunno, if some kid was screaming for like a half hour on a plane, my nerves would wear. I guess it is possible none of the passengers were bothered. :shrug:

Anyway, they got replacement tickets and free round trip tickets for another trip, so I think they were pretty well compensated.

Apparently, they weren't allowed to move to hold and console the child. By the way, now I know what American airline to avoid, hope they don't give free chocolate cookies. :D

Romy

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Maybe they were.

I didn't see that anywhere in the article.

I could have misundertood but I read it here:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas...temper_flares/

Romy

Don't forget the horrible legroom- the whole experience makes Southwest seem like first class service in comparison.

For those of you here who do not have children, and don't understand that a tantrum can come from no where, I hope you never have children. You'll never last. Sometimes, the tantrums are unavoidable. Sometimes, there's nothing you can say or do to calm them. I understand that the flight was delayed, I understand they had another 100+ paying passengers who were expecting to be on time to their destination, but those folks who were booted were paying customers also. Were they well compensated? Sure they were, and I think the airline did the right thing by offering round trip tickets to anywhere. However, sometimes tantrums happen. We all have ****ty days, or major meltdowns, and so do children. Sometimes, 15 minutes isn't enough. Whatever they are throwing a tantrum about is as real to them as whatever pisses us off is real to us. Cut the little kids some slack. Just because they throw a tantrum dosn't mean they're spoiled little brats. And kids don't understand "civil manner". It's all about them. That's just the way every toddler's mind works.

Ya, I've been there done that also, with a 5 year old. She does well in those situations, and I could only imagine flying to Amsterdam... we only flew to Phoenix, which was 4 hours. She carried a back pack on with coloring books, snacks, music, Game Boy, little toys, card games... and a DVD player. For a 4 hour flight!!! It is hard to keep 'em entertained. I was real impressed with how she behaved herself. I applaud you for doing it with a 17 m/o on a much longer flight. I was wore out after 4 hours!!