Delta Air Lines wants unruly passengers put on federal 'no fly' list

[marmar]

Delta Air Lines asked the U.S. Department of Justice on Thursday to add unruly passengers to the national "no fly" list, saying there needs to be "zero tolerance for any behavior that interferes with flight safety."

In a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, company CEO Ed Bastian said "the rate of incidents with unruly passengers on Delta has increased nearly 100 percent since 2019" and such federal action is greatly needed.

Bastian wants "any person convicted of an on-board disruption on a national, comprehensive, unruly passenger 'no-fly' list that would bar that person from traveling on any commercial air carrier."

"This action will help prevent future incidents and serve as a strong symbol of the consequences of not complying with crew member instructions on commercial aircraft," the airline chief added. .................(more)

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/delta-airlines-wants-unruly-passengers-put-federal-no-fly-list-rcna14947

[I_UndergroundPanther]

1. Good

Those narcissistic fucks need consequences that hurt.

[Wounded Bear]

2. K & R...sounds good to me...

people who disrupt flights in the air should be grounded, if not permanently then for a good long time.

All the airlines should be coordinating and sharing their lists. The FAA should step in and help them punish the abusers.

[Ocelot II]

3. Damn right.

[dchill]

4. So do I.

"Shoulda been done long ago."

[hlthe2b]

5. Good, Delta. So do I.

[Enter stage left]

6. JFC... That's a no brainer. I've been saying this since the VERY FIRST time it happened...

Also ban them from Amtrak & interstate bus lines.

MAKE THE WALK wherever they want to go. This shit would end tomorrow!

[Delmette2.0]

7. You beat me to it.

We need to protect passengers and carriers on all public transportation.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

8. Who decides what's unruly behavior, though?

A jury of peers, or an irritable flight attendant who didn't get enough sleep and who snaps at a passenger asking too many questions?

Banning someone from all flights seems harsh unless the evidence is crystal clear.

Here's an example involving Southwest that's not obvious to me, since the person who filmed the black woman's tirade stated, "I felt the airline was discriminating only because they did not give her a fair chance to comply, simply resorted to removing her and her guest from the plane. There were no other passengers actively not wearing their masks but I did witness and hear multiple occasions where passengers were given a chance to correct their face covering versus being removed from the plane."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9516395/Screaming-black-passenger-accuses-Southwest-Airlines-racism-ordered-flight.html

[kacekwl]

9. All you have to do is follow the rules

do as instructed by airline crew and behave like a adult. Anything else is disruptive.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

11. Sure, but it's also illegal to resist arrest by a cop..

... who's squeezing your nut-sack while giving you orders to stop resisting.

[Ocelot II]

10. Go back and read what Bastian said:

"Bastian wants "any person convicted of an on-board disruption on a national, comprehensive, unruly passenger 'no-fly' list that would bar that person from traveling on any commercial air carrier."" In other words, just a disagreement between a passenger and a crew member wouldn't be enough; the person's behavior would have to be bad enough for them to have been prosecuted and convicted for a crime arising from their behavior.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

12. Ah, okay!

Sounds good to me, then.

Sorry for missing that.

EDIT:
There doesn't seem to be many people actually convicted, though. Meanwhile, Delta's Bastian previously wanted to ban people who were on one airlines' no-fly list (a much larger number) from flying on other airlines too.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/delta-ceo-wants-us-place-convicted-unruly-passengers-no-fly-list-2022-02-04/
----------

The Federal Aviation Administration said last year it had taken a "zero tolerance" approach and referred more than three dozen unruly passengers to the FBI for potential criminal prosecution.

Bastian said Delta has placed nearly 1,900 people on Delta’s “no-fly” list for refusing to comply with masking requirements and submitted more than 900 banned names to the Transportation Security Administration to pursue civil penalties.

Delta previously called on other airlines to share their unruly passenger “no fly” list to ensure individuals "who have endangered the safety and security of our people do not go on to do so on another carrier," Bastian wrote.
----------

By the way, I personally almost never fly and I've never been in trouble with any airline.

If Bastian is sticking with criminal conviction as the standard, then fine. I'm actually surprised it's not that way already! But his previous desire to make some airlines' no-fly list (based on nothing but their own accusations) a universal no-fly list isn't cool with me.

[Captain Zero]

23. Definitely. At least for a time period.

12 months minimum.
18 months ?
24 months ?

[Martin68]

15. When on board a ship or a plane the captain is the ultimate authority. Would you prefer they walk

the plank? Or perhaps we could belly-haul them in flight.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

17. Why would I prefer they walk the plank?

My concern was that one airlines' accusation could be blindly accepted as fact universally.

I've flown commercially four times in my entire life (in my mid-50's), but there's no way that I'd trust a single airlines' no-fly list as warranted for all of them without clear evidence.

[ancianita]

20. Read what Delta's CEO SAID: "any person convicted of an on-board disruption..." OK? Not "accused."

ANY time a pilot has to stop to get a passenger off a plane, that passenger's a danger to everyone else and can be charged as such. So no, it's not "one airlines' (sic) accusation."

[Buckeye_Democrat]

21. And I'm fine with that.

If Bastian is sticking with criminal CONVICTION now, then I support the idea. And I'm surprised it's not that way already.

It's not what Bastian previously suggested, though. And there's barely any convictions happening compared to Delta's no-fly list.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/delta-ceo-wants-us-place-convicted-unruly-passengers-no-fly-list-2022-02-04/
----------
The Federal Aviation Administration said last year it had taken a "zero tolerance" approach and referred more than three dozen unruly passengers to the FBI for potential criminal prosecution.

Bastian said Delta has placed nearly 1,900 people on Delta’s “no-fly” list for refusing to comply with masking requirements and submitted more than 900 banned names to the Transportation Security Administration to pursue civil penalties.

Delta previously called on other airlines to share their unruly passenger “no fly” list to ensure individuals "who have endangered the safety and security of our people do not go on to do so on another carrier," Bastian wrote.
----------

[azureblue]

28. who decides?

I thought everyone knew it is the pilot. The pilot has the final say and yes it can be a subjective decision, if a person is thought to be disruptive by the crew. So rule one - don't irritate the crew. For some reason, people think the same rules apply in the air as on the ground. No. You are in a confined space and there is no room for acting up.It's not a democracy, and passengers do not get much of a say. The pilot is responsible for everyone's safety during the flight. In essence, a flight is a monarchy and the monarch is the pilot. If you don't like it, don't fly. Or don't act up.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

33. Fine by me, but...

... my concern is that one "monarch" could deny such services universally.

As long as a jury of peers has the final say, as numerous people have asserted in this thread that's what Bastian means by conviction, then it's okay by me.

It's just not what Bastian previously suggested. He wanted any particular airlines' no-fly list to be applied to all of them. But if he's seen the error of his ways, and now wants a criminal conviction to be the decider in a national no-fly list, then that sounds good to me.

I've personally never been a problem on a commercial flight, by the way. And I've only flown four times in my life anyway. I just respect the concepts of innocent until proven guilty and a jury by peers.

[ancianita]

37. Wait. You're not, because you don't see "conviction" as applicable to all airlines, but it is.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

40. If it's a conviction by a third party -- i.e., the courts --

then I'm fine with a universal ban.

I'm NOT okay with one airline putting a person on their no-fly list (without a criminal conviction) and then having their list shared and applied to ALL of the airlines. That's what Delta's Bastian has previously suggested!

I'm honestly surprised that nobody else seems to see a potential injustice if such a national policy was adopted. No corporation in this country deserves that much power and trust.

People could be misidentified as disruptive passengers when they weren't even involved in some kind of group fight, for example, and then they'd get on an airlines' no-fly list that would then be applied to all of them (as Bastian previously suggested as national policy).

However, if a criminal conviction with "innocent until proven guilty" is the standard as Bastian SEEMS to be implying NOW, then I'm fine with it.

I'm not bothering to clarify my argument on this thread any longer.

[ancianita]

41. You're wrong about what Bastian has done. He has SAID. Not "suggested."

Seriously. You need to just chill on interpreting and just go by what Bastian said.

The pilot has the final legal call no matter how you muddy up your clarification with passengers' complaints. No airline bases their legal stand on passengers' hearsay. They stand behind their pilots and so do courts.

Glad we all got the thread to clear up your OP argument. Have a good day.

[cinematicdiversions]

36. Is asking someone to act like an adult in a public space such a big ask?

I would have no problem banning anyone who has a toddler tantrum in a confined public space.

[Martin68]

13. Damn straight! They endanger everyone's lives with their tantrums.

[Joinfortmill]

14. Do it.

[RainCaster]

16. Another way to solve this...

The airlines could fund and maintain their own list, sharing with each other. They don't have to wait for courts to maybe do something. Or not. It doesn't have to be that complex, it's really quite a simple project.

[SouthernDem4ever]

19. They probably want the person to be rejected at the TSA checkpoints

do the airlines have any input in the TSA?

[azureblue]

30. yes

DNF lists are there even as early as buying a ticket. If you happen to buy a ticket and your name is on the list, when your name is entered as checking in at the ticket counter or kiosk, a flag will pop up and security is alerted. You won't even make it to the TSA checkpoint.
And it is really easy to share a DNF list - airlines already do for the worst offenders.

[SouthernDem4ever]

42. That's good. Keeps innocent travellers further away from the riff-raff

I think I'll not fly for a while until they work this out.

[keithbvadu2]

18. And pay for extra expenses for rerouting and delays.

[monkeyman1]

22. personally , 33,000 ft is a long first step ???

[DBoon]

24. makes more sense than the other critiera for being n the no-fly list

like having a name similar to a suspected terrorist

[ShazzieB]

25. YES.

Yes yes, yes, yes, yes. High damed time!

[BigmanPigman]

26. When flights are delayed or forced to turn around it costs everyone $$$$$.

I am pissed off that the other normal passengers have had to put up with a lot due to these assholes. They are not only inconvenienced but it costs them money too.

[KPN]

27. Do it! Fuck their "freedum". I want freedom from worrying about all the nuts with unfettered

access to guns who are killing dozens of people daily across our land; freedom from real threats to my and other people's live's as opposed to their bullshit about "freedum to do whatever the fuck they want".

[BlueIdaho]

29. Let them walk.

Enough is enough.

[Cha]

31. We were talking about that

should be Done months ago!

Just Do IT, Delta.. Please! It only makes Sense.

[turbinetree]

32. Just throw the (*&@$&!* book at them....there is law....

49 U.S. Code § 46504 - Interference with flight crew members and attendants

An individual on an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States who, by assaulting or intimidating a flight crew member or flight attendant of the aircraft, interferes with the performance of the duties of the member or attendant or lessens the ability of the member or attendant to perform those duties, or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both. However, if a dangerous weapon is used in assaulting or intimidating the member or attendant, the individual shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

And just for good measure throw the $250,000 dollar fine on them as well....

[Hekate]

34. About damn time. We are STILL taking off our shoes & walking thru X-ray machines 21 years...

… after 9/11. How dare these home-grown thugs and entitled Karens and Kens get away with what they’ve been doing?

[LetMyPeopleVote]

35. Put these assholes on the no fly list

Link to tweet

[NurseJackie]

38. ABSOLUTELY!!

Yes... a million times YES!!

[Vinca]

39. In other news, Greyhound is now looking for security personnel for their buses.

Not really (as far as I know), but that's where the crazies will end up. Scientists need to develop a sanity vaccine.