Flier Claims Southwest Attendant Played Fashion Police - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-09-2007, 05:35 PM   #81
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar


Maybe not a legal right, but more an expectation - otherwise people will complain.
Well I have an expectation that people will bathe before they travel, but I can't really enforce that one, can I?

Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar

I really don't see her winning a lawsuit or getting an apology over this. Companies can do business with whomever they wish, as long as it doesn't violate discrimination laws. Those signs we see at stores and restaurants saying “We Reserve the Right to Refuse Service to Anyone” is pretty much correct - as long as they don't violate civil rights. It's up to the discretion of the business.
But arbitrarily choosing what is offensive clothing or not, is violating discrimination laws. She could easily win a case if they can't find evidence that she violated any DEFINED dress code.
__________________

BVS is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 06:05 PM   #82
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,739
Local Time: 11:28 AM
Probably they have printed it in their terms of trade on the backside of her contract, or ticket. Since it's in the fine print, she probably didn't read. But she wouldn't have a case then.
__________________

Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 06:08 PM   #83
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 4,591
Local Time: 09:28 AM
Quote:
Now whether those policies, or any notification that passengers will be held accountable for following them accompanied by instructions on how to obtain a copy, appear on any documention given or showed to all passengers, that I don't know. Would that necessarily be legally required?
Don't plane tickets, or computer printouts contain a page full of legalese fine print?
U2FanPeter is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 06:08 PM   #84
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Vincent Vega
Since it's in the fine print, she probably didn't read. But she wouldn't have a case then.
Not necessarily.
anitram is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 06:19 PM   #85
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,739
Local Time: 11:28 AM
Ah, ok, it's still a question of interpretation?

Is your law different there? I mean, in German law what is in the terms of trade is, whether you read it or not, legal, despite it being something so unusual, or adversarial, that you couldn't have expected it being included.
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 06:21 PM   #86
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 4,903
Local Time: 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar

But arbitrarily choosing what is offensive clothing or not, is violating discrimination laws. She could easily win a case if they can't find evidence that she violated any DEFINED dress code.
I don't see what discrimation law was violated from the Civil Rights Act of 1964 -race, color, religion, or natural origin?
ntalwar is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 06:26 PM   #87
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,739
Local Time: 11:28 AM
Maybe I've missed that, but did she even announce to take legal measures or is it just a hypothetical discussion?
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 06:30 PM   #88
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar


I don't see what discrimation law was violated from the Civil Rights Act of 1964 -race, color, religion, or natural origin?
I believe he's referring to sexism.
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 06:35 PM   #89
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 4,903
Local Time: 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Vincent Vega
Maybe I've missed that, but did she even announce to take legal measures or is it just a hypothetical discussion?
She hired a lawyer, and appeared on TV with him.
ntalwar is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 06:38 PM   #90
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,739
Local Time: 11:28 AM
Ah, I thought she was on TV on her own.

So, next question: Would a lawyer even chose to represent her if there was no chance of winning the case? (In case he isn't just behind some money he could charge her)
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 06:49 PM   #91
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 4,903
Local Time: 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Vincent Vega
Ah, I thought she was on TV on her own.

So, next question: Would a lawyer even chose to represent her if there was no chance of winning the case? (In case he isn't just behind some money he could charge her)
It was on the Today show. Who knows what's happened behind the scenes. The incident happened two months ago, and she just went public with it now. Maybe they already tried to get money, and threaten to go public with it. Good for Southwest for not going along.
ntalwar is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 07:25 PM   #92
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar


I don't see what discrimation law was violated from the Civil Rights Act of 1964 -race, color, religion, or natural origin?
Who said anything about the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Ever heard of sexism?
BVS is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 07:27 PM   #93
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar


Good for Southwest for not going along.
Yes, let's allow everyone to kick people off for no reason!!!

Woohoo!!!

BVS is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 07:54 PM   #94
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 10:28 AM
I wouldn't say "no" reason--I've never heard of a 'dress code' that doesn't allow the service provider or employer some leeway in interpreting its application on a case-by-case basis; that would be completely unrealistic. That's not to say, certainly, that the attendant who challenged her couldn't have been egregiously unreasonable or inconsistent in how he applied that policy...I just don't know that it's all that cut-and-dried, especially since none of us know what exactly her outfit looked like before she "adjusted" her skirt and top at the flight attendant's request.
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
Not necessarily.
Is there some rule of thumb about how the relevant policies are to be communicated? That was a very long list of rules.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 08:03 PM   #95
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 4,903
Local Time: 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Who said anything about the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Ever heard of sexism?
Gender was not an issue here - lack of clothing was.
Can you name a specific statute that protects one's right to dress as one chooses in a public accomodation?
ntalwar is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 08:09 PM   #96
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland


Is there some rule of thumb about how the relevant policies are to be communicated? That was a very long list of rules.
Generally it depends on how onerous the clause is, the more onerous the more the airline would have to do to bring it to the attention of the customer.

If the policy is to send people home to change and have them take a later flight, I'm thinking that the courts would probably see it as onerous, because of the level of inconvenience we are talking about. If so, then the airline can't just print this in font 5 on the back of the ticket and call it a day.

The thing is, most airlines have this exact policy, or something similar, I'd assume. But my guess is they let people onboard and hand them a blanket and try to ignore it rather than requiring a change of clothing.
anitram is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 08:12 PM   #97
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 04:28 AM
The result of this case will be something more specific in the dress code rules. Sort of like with schools.
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 08:13 PM   #98
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26
The result of this case will be something more specific in the dress code rules. Sort of like with schools.
Or they'll start selling those paper pants that the Vatican makes you buy for a Euro to go into St. Peter's if you're in shorts.
anitram is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 08:29 PM   #99
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar


Gender was not an issue here - lack of clothing was.
Gender not an issue? I doubt the'y send the fat man home that bends over and shows plumber crack.


Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar

Can you name a specific statute that protects one's right to dress as one chooses in a public accomodation?
Would she get arrested walking down the street?

So basically your argument comes back to the fact that you or this attendent has the right to determine how much skin can or can't be seen. What if the attendant was Muslim or Southern Baptist, their standards would be different. Should they have the right to make these determinations as well.

Look, if there are not requirements specifically stated, like skirts must be this many inches off the knee, what gives you the right to determine it's not enough if there is no exposure?
BVS is offline  
Old 09-09-2007, 08:30 PM   #100
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


Or they'll start selling those paper pants that the Vatican makes you buy for a Euro to go into St. Peter's if you're in shorts.
Really? Interesting, although it's ok to show Christ in a loin cloth?

Paper pants
__________________

BVS is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×