UPDATE: Northwest Airlines is HONORING same-sex travel pass!

[Obamarama]

It appears NWA is NOT the bad guy in this mess:

For those of you who saw last week's item re: Northwest Airlines denying an airline employee of another airline the right to choose his partner as his travel companion on a NWA free pass he won from the airline he works for (Air New Zealand), I have an update.

If you missed it, here's the link to the original thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x27442

I just got an email (rather lengthy one at that) from NWA corporate relations which explains that they ARE going to honor to pass for his partner. Email explained that NWA DOES recognize domestic partners the same as they do spouses, and they would have done so for the guy if he had been an NWA employee. He is actually an employee of Air New Zealand, which apparently does not. It sounds like because of the interline agreement between NWA and ANZ, NWA is obligated to extend the award based on ANZ's rules and regs.

As a matter of fact, NWA contacted Air New Zealand SIX YEARS ago asking them to sign a new interline agreement that would encompass domestic partners and ANZ chose not to respond to the request.

NWA is offering the employee's domestic partner travel privelages anyway, as they would one of their own employees or passengers.

Letter also outlined NWA's policies toward domestic partners and sounds like they are on our side. The text of the letter I recieved is below (WARNING: IT'S LONG!!!).

Dear Mr. XXXXXXX

Your correspondence regards allegations lodged against Northwest
Airlines, Inc. by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) about an
airline employee pass provided to an Air New Zealand employee. Those
allegations are false. The ACLU never contacted Northwest to
understand
the facts before issuing its press release or putting its version of
the
events on its website. Northwest believes the ACLU's actions in this
matter have been highly irresponsible. If they had only asked
Northwest
about the matter in question, we could have cleared it up without being
subjected to these false allegations.

You should understand that Northwest Airlines offers the same employee
benefits and travel privileges to its employees' domestic partners as
it
does to employees' spouses, including benefits and privileges that
extend to domestic partners' children. Northwest does not discriminate
against domestic partners and is fully compliant with California's
employee discrimination laws.

The issue underlying the ACLU's false accusations involves a unique
travel benefit shared by most airline employees. Many airlines provide
employees of other airlines the privilege of traveling on a
space-available basis at a significantly reduced rate. In other words,
for a nominal fee airline employees are permitted to fly on another
carrier when the carrier has vacant seats. This is referred to within
the airline industry as interline or non-revenue travel.

Interline travel privileges typically are not uniform. Some airlines
permit the employee, the employee's spouse or domestic partner, the
employee's children, and even the employee's parents to travel on this
space available, reduced rate basis. Other airlines may limit the
privilege to the employee or to the employee and spouse. Some airlines
do not offer travel privileges to domestic partners.

Northwest's policy is to only offer travel privileges to other airline
employees to the same extent that the other airline offers travel
privileges to Northwest employees. In other words, we require
reciprocity. If the other airline does not permit our employees'
domestic partners (or parents, children or any other class) to travel
on their airline, Northwest does not permit the other airlines'
employees' domestic partners to travel on Northwest. This is not a
matter of unlawful discrimination, but one of fairness. It would not
be
fair to offer other airline employees privileges that the other airline
does not offer to our own employees.

When Northwest extended travel privileges to domestic partners, it
reached out to all airlines it had interline agreements with and asked
them to sign a new interline agreement that granted mutual interline
privileges to employees' domestic partners. Many airlines signed the
new interline agreements and we currently extend interline privileges
to
those carriers' employees and their domestic partners. Other carriers
did not sign the new agreements.

In August 2000, Northwest sent Air New Zealand a letter requesting them
to sign the new interline agreement. Air New Zealand never responded
to
Northwest's letter, and since that time neither airline has permitted
the other's employees' domestic partners to travel on an interline
basis. Northwest has always been willing to offer such privileges to
Air New Zealand employees and their domestic partners, but only if Air
New Zealand were willing to offer such privileges to our employees'
domestic partners.

The airline employee involved in the ACLU's press release, a Mr. Robert
Anders, is an employee of Air New Zealand. He apparently won an
interline pass from Northwest Airlines as a prize at an Air New Zealand
holiday party. Unlike typical interline travel, the pass won by Mr.
Anders was for travel without the nominal fee normally charged. It is
not uncommon for Northwest to trade such no-fee interline passes with
other airlines to be given away for employee celebrations or
fundraising
activities. In exchange for the pass that Northwest provided it
received a similar pass to offer one of its employees for travel on Air
New Zealand. These passes are subject to the terms and conditions of
the interline agreement between Northwest and Air New Zealand.

When Mr. Anders contacted Northwest to use his newly won pass, he was
informed that Northwest's interline agreement with Air New Zealand does
not permit domestic partners to travel.

Northwest has since reviewed the pass letter Mr. Anders received and
concluded that, while intended to be subject to the interline
agreement,
it is not clearly stated on the letter. Consequently, Northwest has
decided to permit Mr. Anders and his domestic partner to use the pass.
We apologize to him and his partner and we hope they will understand
how
and why the incident arose. Northwest will also reiterate its proposal
to Air New Zealand to sign the interline agreement that permits mutual
travel privileges for our respective employees and their domestic
partners.

We want to reiterate that Northwest offers equal benefits and travel
privileges to employees' domestic partners and does not discriminate on
the basis of the employees' sexual orientation.

Sincerely,

Barb Carranza
Customer Care
Northwest/KLM Airlines

[Solly Mack]

1. Thanks for the update!

Much appreciated!

[Rick Myers]

2. Fly now, becuase Northwest may not exist in a few weeks.

They want the judge to toss out the pilots contract. Pilot union says they will strike. This would kill NW and they would be liquidated.

[insleeforprez]

3. Can we claim credit for this?

Sorta...

[TaleWgnDg]

4. I can fully understand and empathize with laypeople who are

.

I can fully understand and empathize with laypeople who are not lawyers and get suckered in by Northwest Airlines "excuse" for violating California anti-discrimination laws. This is a legal matter, not a public relations or customer service ("customer care") matter.

I say this as a lawyer. If Northwest Airlines wants to "do business in California" it must abide by and conform to California law. Therefore, Northwest's collateral agreements and negotiations with another airline cannot "bargain away" anti-discrimination laws of California as Northwest alleges in its "excuse" letter for laypeople.

Again, Northwest must conform to California law or suffer the consequences of receiving further legal demand letters informing Northwest to abide by California law, stop discriminating against gays, and honor a "winning ticket" awarded to a gay man. If not, then Northwest Airlines will suffer the consequences of litigation to force compliance w/ California non-discrimination laws.

It's as simple as that.

Hats off to the ACLU for challenging Northwest Airlines on behalf of its client Mr. Robert Anders, a gay man.

See also: DU thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=28035&mesg_id=28067
.

[Obamarama]

5. I don't think it is as simple as that, TalWagnDg...

I say this as a layperson, but not as a completely naive, never-been-around-the-block idiot as your tone above implies. Just because one doesn't have a JD behind one's name doesn't neccessarily mean we "laypeople" fell off the turnip truck yesterday.

I suspect this could likely be attributed to a screw-up by some NWA lackey, in which case it is still NWA's problem to resolve. BUT, I don't think there is any systemic culture of denying gay/lesbian employees equal treatment. I am satisified by NWA's letter, and by previous positive information I have read regading NWA's diversity policies.

Thanks for trying to save me from my own ignorance, though, Judge Judy.

[TaleWgnDg]

7. KzooDem, what are your interests w/ Northwest Airlines?

.

KzooDem, what are your interests w/ Northwest Airlines? You sound affiliated with them in some manner. Are you? Some sort of an association w/ them? I have no legal or personal interests in any of the parties. I am completely unbiased. I do, however, have a long professional career in anti-discrimination law particularly in the legal area of GLBT issues.

Again, if Northwest Airlines is "doing business in California" (legal term as defined in CA statutory and case law), Northwest's collateral agreements and negotiations with another airline (as described in Northwest's "excuse" letter) cannot "bargain away" anti-discrimination laws of California as Northwest alleges in its "excuse" letter. Northwest failed to honor Mr. Robert Anders ticket thus was in violation of anti-discrimination laws in California at the time it failed to honor his ticket. (See, e.g., California Civil Code, § 51, Unruh Civil Rights Act.)

The ACLU called them on it. Plain and simple. ACLU was legally correct u/ California gay anti-discrimination law, and as such protected the interests of their client Mr. Robert Anders, a gay man.

Again, it's as simple as that. Despite your protestations to the contrary.

And, no, I refuse to respond any further because I am merely reiterating again and again that which you refuse to understand. I pass. Have a good day.

.

[Obamarama]

8. My interest in NWA is that I am gay and am a NWA Frequent Flyer...

I wrote them a letter asking them for an explanation since I don't knowingly spend my dollars with companies that go out of their way to discriminate against me. I had suspected they were a progressive company in terms of domestic partner benefits, etc... and this news item concerned me. If I thought this was part of some sort of pattern of behavior, I'd be shopping for another airline.

They replied with what appears to be a straightforward explanation, which leads me to believe that my earlier understanding that they support GLBT diversity was correct.

What's difficult to understand here?

I don't doubt what you quote about CA law as it relates to GLBT policies, etc..., and yes it does appear that someone at NWA made an error in judgement. However, that doesn't mean the entire airline should be villified IF they can demonstrate their corporate culture is progressive and supportive of GLBT issues. PLUS, they are honoring the damned voucher. What else would you have them do? I suppose dress the CEO up in sack cloth and ashes and have them grovel at your hallowed, litigious feet?

FYI, I also support the ACLU with a healthy contribution via my yearly giving and value their role in fighting GLBT discrimination. That doesn't mean I can't say I think this case was a little blown out of proportion.

[triakis36]

6. I'm glad

We should thank Northwest for such a rapid and positive response and start directing our letters to Air New Zealand.