to allow them to go to the bathroom. It isn't only small children that could have difficulty with this.

I drink a lot of water when I fly to offset the dryness. Hence, I visit the lavatory 2-3 times in a 6 hour flight.

someone posted the airline passenger's bill of rights elsewhere on DU today. When the plane is delayed on the tarmac, they must provide access to toilet facilities. EDIT: I found the DU link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025102376

The Gov imposed a lot of rules about stranded pasengers on the tarmac.
Obviously the flight attendent was not up to the job.

Someone posted all the airline rules this am, sorry, I forgot where to find that post.

Never.

The flying experience has been turned into aerial cattle cars.

And some dumb motherfucker is going to pipe up "if you don't like flying, don't. You have options." No, we don't. I would happily take the bullet train but the GOP is why we can't have nice things.

If I had m my druthers I would never take another flight again. 6'1" and I can't even fit in the goddamn seats.

I don't know how long it will take but I do believe it will eventually happen. For sure, within 50 years. Hopefully, within 10 to 20.

TYY

no longer travel the roads. Until then, we won't get our trains back, bullet or otherwise.

so no bullet trains for us, this country really sucks sometimes.

my job no longer requites that and I have never flown since, that was now years ago. I just refuse to subject myself to the potentially harassing situations airlines choose to inflict on people ... and being herded around by airlines. It used to be fun, but those days are long gone IMO.

while the plane was taxiing on the tarmac.

I think people need to realize that planes operate on tight schedules, that you really do need to avail yourself of those huge restrooms in the Jet Blue concourses right next to the boarding gates, spaced at extremely convenient intervals, and if you have a little kid who pees a lot, put 'em in a pull up for a flight, just in case.

I wouldn't be willing to lose my job because a "poor little three year old" needed to pee when she needed to be in her seat, with seat belt on, because the plane is getting ready to go into the air.

The FA was put in a Lose-Lose situation. Either be perceived as an asshole, or violate very strict FAA regulations with regard to passenger safety and security.

The situation was NOT ridiculous, either--because of that incident, other aircraft didn't take off on time, and a shitload of fuel was expended wastefully. Every incident like that pushes the cost of an airline ticket up, even if it's just a few cents at a time.

The FAs were acting courteously towards the pilot, probably because he was dead heading, worked the same route, and they knew him or her, and figured that he or she would "cover" for them if the shit hit the fan.

Bottom line--the FAs, who get paid 'in the dark' for doing a tough, thankless and dangerous job, are being painted as the bad guys here, and unfairly, too. They'd be the first people to be blamed and fired if that plane crashed on takeoff and Mom and Kid were killed in the shitter while everyone else on the plane walked away.

I hate these kinds of "Ewwwww, the mean authoritarian" figures articles. Hell, why have flight attendants at all? Let people put their infants in the overhead, and bring chickens and goats on the plane....they used to do that shit (or try to) on Iran Air, back in the day!

If you're going to blame anyone, blame the a/c in front of this one that caused them to be stuck waiting to take off. Blame the airport for scheduling departures too closely for the tower to accommodate. Don't blame the poor bastards at the bottom of the food chain, who are there solely to enforce FAA regs.

pulls away from the gangway. It can sometimes take a long time between when a plane pulls away from the gangway and when it actually takes off. I am not going to automatically side with the airline on something like this. It depends upon how much longer it actually took for the plane to take off.

I do believe that parents should make sure their kids always take advantage of potty breaks whenever possible. In this case, the Flight Attendant might have considered giving the mother some plastic bags or something for the child to sit on so that the seat didn't get peed on. I don't think that I will ever look at an airline seat the same way again.

They clear the gates as quickly as possible so another plane can use it. Airlines try to keep their gates to a reasonable minimum because they pay dearly for them, especially at pricey airports like JFK, LaGuardia, or Boston.

Planes are filthy. They give them the Big Shampoo about once a month--they get a basic cleaning at the end of their workday. A pissy or pooped on seat might get a "spot clean."

Don't even speculate about what might have been on that 'tray table' before you got there. Plenty of parents just change the diaper in situ, and put the shitty one on the tray table while they do what needs doing.

It's never a bad idea to have a few wet wipes on hand, and wipe down your armrests, tray table, etc. It can get nasty in those planes.

and intervened to keep the mother and child on the plane. I think he was in a better position to judge the situation than you are.

The plane had been sitting on the tarmac, not taxiing. They shouldn't be able to keep people sitting indefinitely without letting them go to the bathroom.

The FAA should change the regulations so that whenever passengers are stuck on the tarmac for a given period of time, they must be allowed to use the restroom. There are lots of other people who could have problems waiting indefinitely, too -- even healthy adults sometimes have a sudden bathroom emergency.

This vitriol directed at the people at the bottom of the food chain, making the LEAST amount of money, makes me sick, frankly. That is what their job ENTAILS. They have very strict rules when it comes to passenger security and safety, and if they deviate from them, THEY are putting their jobs--and their liberty because if anything happened, they could be held legally responsible--on the line.

We need more capacity and more travel alternatives, if we can't persuade people to just stay home. If that mother and her three year old took a train instead of a plane, the kid could pee anytime--even when the train was in the station (they no longer encourage constipation, because the shit doesn't go through a hole in the train bottom anymore).

He was there and knew both the rules and the particular situation, and he disagreed with how the mother and daughter were treated.

But my post didn't criticize the FA -- I called for the FAA regs to be changed so that when people are stuck on non-moving planes on the tarmac, they should be allowed to go to the bathroom. Small children aren't the only people who need easy access to bathrooms.

the FAs. He--or she--gave them COVER to deviate. The blame could be placed squarely on him or her.

It is not a question of "disagreeing" here. The FAs are not permitted to deviate from FAA regulations, because if they do, and they get caught, they get FIRED.

Airports and airlines need to not overschedule takeoffs/landings. Airports are far too congested as it is. We need to put more capacity at regional airports and increase train availability as an alternative to flying.

Planes are flying buses, basically. The old "Fly the Friendly Skies" shit is history and has been for decades. Nowadays, the service in "First Class" is shittier than the service you'd get in the back row of an Eastern Flight to Puerto Rico in the seventies.

to use the facilities. That's why Jet Blue has apologized.

they would have done more than apologize--they would have been fined and that did not happen.

The apology -- and fifty bucks -- was a public relations thing. They also made a charitable contribution (that the airline can write off) to the charity of the mother's choosing.

leave the plane if they're at the gate. That is not when a delay begins. The delay begins when the pilot turns off the engine and parks on the tarmac, once he's notified that he won't be taking off on time.

§ 259.3.
Tarmac delay means the holding of an aircraft on the ground either before taking off or after landing with no opportunity for its passengers to deplane.
§ 259.4.
4) For all flights, assurance of operable lavatory facilities, as well as adequate medical attention if needed, while the aircraft remains on the tarmac;


http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/Final_Rule_on_Enhancing_Airline_Passenger_Protections.pdf

regulation orders them to write--you linked to it, so you ought to be able to pull it back up.

It says that "lengthy delays" occur when you are at the gate--with the door open, and after a half hour waiting, the FA will announce that you can get off if you want.

If you are on the tarmac, after a half hour, they will CONNECT STAIRS to the plane, and you can get off.

There were no stairs, they were getting ready to take off and they were NOT in "delay" mode.

with the idea of them removing the mother and girls. Dont know if he disagreed with keeping the girl in her seat.

On some planes the bathrooms are locked until the plane is in the air. I dont know who controls the locks and what leeway they have to unlock.

accordingly, but it is difficult. Because he has mobility issues, we get priority seating and get a bulkhead seat right next to the bathroom. Fortunately, we've never had a problem...once he tells the airline he needs handicap assistance, the flight attendants are notified and they see him coming via wheelchair onto the ramp for boarding...but he takes precautions ahead of time...

encourage him to keep trying

I meant he tries to plan flights according to his medication schedule, if that is what you are misunderstanding...

I was just good-naturedly kidding about "time travel" in general, not poking at your husband in you particular. I meant nothing mean-spirited. Diuretics are terrible.

It's terrible but what else can you do except laugh? It's better than whining about getting older...

And actually, air travel for handicapped people such as my husband has benefits for me as well. We get boarded first and so we can get preferred seating, he gets wheelchair assistance through the airport (altho he tips them generously).

Especially the elderly when their bladders get colonized with a lot of nasty bacteria and the only way to control the infections is to drink a lot of water and void a lot. Is that ok? Should we put them in the hospital, maybe kill them because the plane had to sit on the runway for three hours?

The rule is if they're on the tarmac for a half hour they have to let them go. They obviously hadn't hit the timeline yet, and they weren't sure how long the delay would be.

Had Jet Blue been out of compliance, they would have been fined. They weren't fined though, so they were within the timeline.

The plane commander could have ordered the FA to deviate from the FAA regs, but she didn't have the authority to do that.

As it is, they donated $5000 to the charity chosen by the Devereaux and apologized. They didn't do that because they were correct.


http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/Final_Rule_on_Enhancing_Airline_Passenger_Protections.pdf

§ 259.3.
Tarmac delay means the holding of an aircraft on the ground either before taking off or after landing with no opportunity for its passengers to deplane.

§ 259.4.
4) For all flights, assurance of operable lavatory facilities, as well as adequate medical attention if needed, while the aircraft remains on the tarmac;

to go. If they pause while coming out of the gate, according to you, they have the right to go.

They have the "right" after the first half hour delay is announced.

They donated the money (they will get the write off) as a PR move.

"Remains on the tarmac" starts after the first half hour "delay" is announced.

Also, if you are in "lengthy delay" mode, which you keep talking about, you are either at the gate, or on the tarmac with STAIRS connected to the plane. There's no way a person can deplane if you're on your way to the runway, because there's no stairs to get off. The purpose of those announcements is to tell the pax they CAN deplane.

They were not in this situation--they were in line, slotted for take off. You are mixing apples and oranges.

And the rule about restrooms takes effect as soon as a plane is delayed. There is no minimum time listed, though the mother and other passengers said it had been a half hour on the tarmac.

§ 259.3.
Tarmac delay means the holding of an aircraft on the ground either before taking off or after landing with no opportunity for its passengers to deplane.
§ 259.4.
4) For all flights, assurance of operable lavatory facilities, as well as adequate medical attention if needed, while the aircraft remains on the tarmac;

They were NOT in delay mode.

Otherwise, the mother could have grabbed her kid and LEFT THE PLANE.

Read the whole reg, and stop cherrypicking.

"Tarmac delay means the holding of an aircraft on the ground either before taking off or after landing with no opportunity for its passengers to deplane."

The rule about restrooms applies as soon as the pilot and traffic control agree for the pilot to park on the tarmac-- as opposed to being in the line for the runway.

There would be no need for the rule if passengers could simply deplane during a delay.

And Jet Blue's own plan simply states that IF the aircraft is at a disembarkation area with the door open, they will have the opportunity to deplane. It doesn't say that something called a "delay mode" is only in effect then. In fact, there would be little need for these passenger protections if the passengers could simply deplane when the plane was parked on the tarmac.

http://www.jetblue.com/p/Contingency_Plan_for_Lengthy_Tarmac_Delays.pdf

Passengers will receive notification regarding the status and reasons for the delay every 30 minutes while the aircraft is delayed. Beginning 30 minutes after departure time as may be revised prior to boarding, and every 30 minutes thereafter, passengers will receive notification that they have an opportunity to deplane if the aircraft is at the gate or another disembarkation area with the door open, if the opportunity to deplane actually exists.

No one is in line.

You are stuck because there is too much traffic and the tower cannot give you a slot.

You are stuck because the weather is too bad and it's too dangerous to take off.

You are stuck because there is ice on the wings and you have to be de-iced.

You are stuck because they have to plow the runway.

That's 'delay mode.' If you are in line to go, and there are a few planes in front of you, and you're inching forward on the tarmac, turning onto the taxiway, waiting and "holding" until planes take off in front of you, you are not in "delay" mode.

And these rules are for the times that they are parked on the tarmac.

It's funny that you are so intent on defending behavior that even the airline acknowledges was indefensible. They are now going to require some employees to undergo sensitivity training. Clearly this FA could benefit from some.

I am quite certain that this "mom" is a special snowflake who feels entitled.

The JB terminal at LGA is not huge and there is plenty of bathroom accommodation there, clean and nice.

She was a FIRST boarder, because she had kids with her. She could have taken her child to the toilet when she boarded. Did she? NO.

Sensitivity Training is a way of telling this Snowflake Mom to go away. She's still making a stink about it but she's getting a LOT of pushback. Most people are telling her that she needs to learn two words when travelling with a three year old: PULL UPS.

Hope JB FAs get a union--they sure don't get any support from "progressives" here.

FWIW, the plane was on an active taxiway--JB just put out a statement and they are standing by their flight attendant and are saying the MOM was wrong. Just came out on the nightly news.

much DOUBT that. The pilots can also hear what's going on in the cabin...it's an after effect of Nahn Wun Wun and JB was the first to go with it.

tell them to go, but that's it. They've checked everything BEFORE they pushed back from the gate.

Remember those Northwest guys who were playing video games and the auto pilot took them way, way off course...? They landed at the wrong airport, oooooops.

Those JB guys were probably checking out the pax in the cabin on the monitors, or playing Angry Birds or something.

by the FAA. As difficult as it was for the mother and child, the FA was following procedures set by the FAA for all airlines, not just JetBlue.

There is more to this story... It doesn't really matter all that much overall but there is fault on both sides.

as the mother claims. They were slotted for takeoff and the pilot had to turn off the runway as a consequence of the kid and mother jumping out of their seats.

They are backing the flight attendant.

I guess it's good to have those cameras in the cabins. Not easy to lie anymore.

I'm not holding my breath. Blondie from Newton who can't take her kid to two bathrooms when she has the chance, who doesn't think putting pull ups on travelling toddlers is a smart idea, gets the bennie of the doubt--the wage slave who has to execute FAA regs is always wrong!

ignored the FAA laws that required them to avail the bathroom to the passengers.

When traveling with my three and a half year old (who is FULLY potty trained), we wear a pull up diaper. It's necessary in case of an emergency. But if she wets her diaper, she would probably melt down, as well. She's proud that she doesn't have accidents.

Thank God for the pilot two rows ahead of them who talked sense into the crew.

as well as time and causes people to miss connections. Hard to justify not letting them get up during a ground delay though.

because of this, initially.

If they were still at the gate that would be a different story, but they were clear of the gate.

leave the gate and then just sit out there indefinitely. That's what was happening in this case.

The pilot isn't going to announce, "OK peeps, I'm going to go forward now--everyone back in your seat." When he or she is on the tarmac in line for takeoff, he or she is assuming the flight crew, those flight attendants, have every passenger in the seats and buckled up. That's FAA regulations.

Someone should probably figure out a new paradigm for getting planes from the gate to the runway. The way we do it now just doesn't work. It should be "Load the plane, go directly to the runway, take off." There shouldn't be any extended tarmac time or waiting lines--it leads to accidents. The genius who designs an airport to accommodate this sort of methodology will be a hero.

So you're just making this up.

With delays under 3 hours, passengers must be allowed to use the facilities. With delays over three hours, they must be deplaned.

http://www.ibtimes.com/tarmac-delays-knowing-your-rights-passenger-382706

Under the new U.S. Department of Transportation regulations on tarmac delays, passengers were given several protections. Here's a look at some of the highlights:

Airlines must return planes to the gate and let passengers off any time a flight is sitting on the tarmac for three hours (four hours for international flights).
Adequate toilet facilities must be maintained and made available to passengers during the delay.
Airlines must provide passengers with adequate food and water within the first two hours of any delay.
Airlines must designate an employee to monitor flight delays and cancellations, respond to passenger concerns, and instruct passengers on the complaint filing process.
Airlines must post and maintain updated flight delay data on their Web sites (to include information on flights that are frequently delayed) for each domestic flight they operate.
Since airlines must post flight delay information on their Web sites for every domestic flight, travelers can now research before booking to help avoid delays. By comparing delay trends flight-by-flight or even airline-by-airline, you can lessen your chance of a lengthy delay.

load.

I do not think this was the situation with this flight. They were in line, waiting to take off.

From the article:

The pilot then turned the plane around and took it back to the gate, announcing over the intercom that there was a non-compliant passenger on board, and they would be brought to security.

Please link to a source that says the plane was moving. The plane didn't move till the pilot announced he was going back to the gate.

The FAs know the rules--they wouldn't be ordering people around "just to be assholes."

I mean, really--let's not turn them into martinets. They do their jobs. They know when they can let people move around the cabin, and when they can't.

And you know who makes that decision, ultimately, for the safety and security of the aircraft, even overriding anything the FAA has to say about it?

The CAPTAIN. Not the FAs.

in a position of authority -- which FA are -- doing something inappropriate?

Jet Blue apologized for the incident. For good reason.

That is the source of this article...so I'll consider the source.

The PILOT was the one who took the plane back to the gate and said he or she was going to call security about a non-compliant passenger. The PILOT is in absolute charge of the aircraft. Not "Flight Attendant Karen" the evil lady who prevents three year olds from wee weeing...JUST BECAUSE SHE CAN!!!!

Jet Blue isn't going to try to explain. It never works. No one cares. They like stories where there's an evil witch and an innocent princess.

You just apologize and move on. Get it out of the paper ASAP.

And then he got a different point of view from the nearby off-duty pilot, which made him change his mind.

They have cameras on the passengers. http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/Security_Issues/tinycameras.html


He was convinced by the off duty guy probably as a consequence of seniority, not ignorance. Jet Blue pilots have only recently become unionized, FWIW--it's a pretty feudal society. I don't know if the FAs have the same protections.

are a matter of record.

do not say what you claim they are saying. Again, read the JB Lengthy Delay document. They were NOT in delay mode--they were enroute to the runway to take off. They were paused on the tarmac--or the taxiway--not entirely clear, and they had no stairway attached to the plane and the door was NOT open. That's the RULES when you are in "delay" mode.

They had been sitting on the tarmac for a half hour, and I didn't see it say anywhere that the plane was moving.

Where did you read these other details?

And if Jet Blue was in the right, why did they apologize, refund the tickets, and offer to give $5,000 to the charity of the mother's choice?

§ 259.3.
Tarmac delay means the holding of an aircraft on the ground either before taking off or after landing with no opportunity for its passengers to deplane.
§ 259.4.
4) For all flights, assurance of operable lavatory facilities, as well as adequate medical attention if needed, while the aircraft remains on the tarmac;


http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/Final_Rule_on_Enhancing_Airline_Passenger_Protections.pdf

there would have been a stairway attached to the plane. Alternatively the FAs or Captain would have made announcements before this happened, telling them they were in DELAY mode. You think the DAILY CALLER would have missed an opportunity to tell Jet Blue they were out of compliance with an FAA reg?

The pilot "turned the plane around and went back to the gate." What, did he drag the stairway with him? They were under a half hour from push back from the gate. They probably were in the line and had their assigned slot, they were just waiting for the planes in front of them to take off.




http://www.jetblue.com/p/Contingency_Plan_for_Lengthy_Tarmac_Delays.pdf

with its doors open -- because then, the passengers could simply leave. And these rules apply before either the 2 hour point or the 3 hour point is reached. At two hours, all the passengers have to have received food and water. At three hours, they must all be allowed to deplane.

But from the beginning, as soon as the plane is "holding" (not taxiing) on the tarmac, passengers are required to have restroom access.

I'm sure that along with the sensitivity training, this FA is getting some training in JetBlue's own passenger care plan, not to mention FAA regulations.

And they were amended in September 2012, and so was JetBlue's own passenger care plan, to give passengers NEW rights.

If they were following regulations correctly, they'd simply say that -- and show the regulation they were following. Instead, they say there are strict regulations and IMPLY that they were following them. They weren't. Not the regulations protecting passengers' rights that have been in place for the last year and a half.

Further, as a mother with kids, she got to board FIRST. If she didn't use the toilets that are right next to the gates at LGA, she could have taken the kid to the toilet while the rest of the passengers were boarding.

I'm sorry--I have no sympathy for this special snowflake. Next time, she can take the train--or put her kids in Pull Ups. Trying to get a FA fired because she can't plan properly is outrageous.

require the airline to allow passengers on a plane stuck on the tarmac to use the facilities.

With delays under 3 hours, passengers must be allowed to use the facilities. With delays over three hours, they must be deplaned.

http://www.ibtimes.com/tarmac-delays-knowing-your-rights-passenger-382706

Under the new U.S. Department of Transportation regulations on tarmac delays, passengers were given several protections. Here's a look at some of the highlights:

Airlines must return planes to the gate and let passengers off any time a flight is sitting on the tarmac for three hours (four hours for international flights).
Adequate toilet facilities must be maintained and made available to passengers during the delay.
Airlines must provide passengers with adequate food and water within the first two hours of any delay.
Airlines must designate an employee to monitor flight delays and cancellations, respond to passenger concerns, and instruct passengers on the complaint filing process.
Airlines must post and maintain updated flight delay data on their Web sites (to include information on flights that are frequently delayed) for each domestic flight they operate.
Since airlines must post flight delay information on their Web sites for every domestic flight, travelers can now research before booking to help avoid delays. By comparing delay trends flight-by-flight or even airline-by-airline, you can lessen your chance of a lengthy delay.

It was wrong.

I was flying from boston to Washington a few years ago and we got stuck at the gate while "maintenance" was going on. I usually pee before I get on the plane, but I was late, so I didn't and now I really had to go. Eventually, with no actual sign of any real maintenance occurring, about an hour in to the "flight" we rolled away from the gate and took off, but we did so with announcement that the one bathroom on the plane was out of service. I really had to go. I got up, walked back to the bathroom, ignored the squawking attendant, opened the bathroom door to a sea of feces and urine, and did my best to avoid that mess as I relieved myself. I really had to go. That plane should never have taken off with the toilet in that condition. Fucking airlines are the pits.

The ones taking the blame, though, are the people without any power--the FAs.

And the way they so tightly schedule these planes to go back and forth, there's no margin for error if anything goes wrong. That shit floating in that crapper you used was probably from the morning flight, and those FAs were probably on their fifth run back to DC for the day. If they didn't fly the plane, though, they'd be in a situation where there's no "spare" plane--they'd have to fly one in from NY or somewhere else. And then people would be delayed, miss their meetings, miss their connecting flights, etc. And the flight crew would be over their FAA limits, so they'd need to drag in new pilots and FAs and that would delay things even more.

The margins are just too tight.

If you could get fired for breaking FAA regs, you'd be a "By the book asshole" too.

people can use the restroom?

break a thigh falling over a seat.

They're in line.

How many times have you seen people getting up when the plane lands and is heading for the gate, and the plane stops and starts, and people fall back into their seats? It's not safe to have people standing when the plane will be moving at unanticipated times.

They need to find a way to reduce tarmac delays.

in that situation be allowed to use the facilities.

But I was wrong about them needing to change their regulations. They already did, in 2011.

Not on a tarmac:

The pilot then turned the plane around and took it back to the gate, announcing over the intercom that there was a non-compliant passenger on board, and they would be brought to security.

the gate from the tarmac would require turning the plane around. This quote doesn't indicate they were in line on a taxiway. And that is probably why the off-duty pilot intervened. He knew the rules.

It's absurd to suggest that FAs who do recurrent training on a regular basis, didn't know FAA rules that have been in force for years now.

It's also absurd to think that FAs on a milk run would go looking for trouble.

and took it out on a passenger.

FAs will generally take the path of least resistance, and do the minimum that needs doing while still keeping their own shit out of trouble. They're not going to go looking for a fight.

If there was a conflict between FAA regs and what the pilot was telling them to do, they're going to go with the pilot's command. He or she is like Captain Bligh--in absolute command of the ship. It's how it works. You go with the Captain, no excuses, and afterwards, if he or she was a fuckup, you file a report about it.

your assessment is off a bit imho. The capper was the part where the pilots wanted to turn back. Idiots.

Get a clue!

WE must.

JET BLUE tweeted in response to a query that the FA was following FAA regs. So, whatever.

I hit the women's room before getting on the plane, then
use the facility on the plane while boarding is going on.
Too many times I've been stuck on a plane that is delayed at the gate
or on the tarmac, or encounters turbulence on take off and the the pilot
never turns off the seat belt sign for a very long time.

Then, I make sure to watch the time and hit the lav before
the 20 minute lockdown when they switch on the seat belt
sign and make you stay seated before landing.

Once, we were sitting on a taxi way, waiting for a gate to open up,
and I couldn't stand it any longer. I unbuckled, bolted to the lav--with the flight
attendant telling me to sit down--and I told her she could clean up the
piss I was going to the lav. The whole plane applauded me!

PS: We've been back about 10 days from a 3 week trip to Europe. We were in 11 airports during
that time. I am not sure I'll ever get on another plane. If our trains were half way reliable, or fast,
I would definitely never fly again.

I better not say much else.

You should try it before you criticize them.

Sky thugs. Yep. lol.

Seeing passengers as the enemy apparently.

An off-duty pilot had to talk the crew out of the surreal action?

Furthermore they are absolute despots when that door closes. Incidentally, the low wages just makes them that much more power-crazy.

absolute authority on that flight. It is his or her call what the FAs do, or don't do. Yet everyone here is all up in the FAs face about this.

Interesting.

Pay people shit, treat them like shit, put them in what essentially is a customer service position, but then give them authority over others, and see what happens. Hint, it won't be nice.

If the pilot tells the FAs to let everyone jump on the seats, it's the pilot's call.

All the FAs can do is complain after the flight.

My understanding is that they are not overly well compensated either. But the shit runs downhill. The end result is you have over worked under paid people in positions of relative power over strangers who are often not very nice to them. To expect that none of that will come out in mild to moderate authoritarian abuse of power is to ignore human nature.

to the point of taking that vote.

The FAs do not have discretion when it comes to regs. That was an active tarmac, not delay mode. I'd bet money on it.

plane stuck on the tarmac for a long time.

If you're going to have your very young child in a situation where a bathroom might not be available for a bit, like when you board a plane and will have to wait until it's finished taking off and ascending, you have your kid use the bathroom right before hand so they can wait the half hour or whatever and won't immediately need to go. If they are not well enough potty trained to be able to go an hour or so between bathroom breaks and you're going to be on a bus or an airplane or wherever else where you might not be able to use the bathroom for a bit, put them in a pull-up just in case.

Once the plane has gotten in like to take off, you can't leave your seat, even if it's been sitting for a bit. If they had started to take off while the kid was in the bathroom the kid might very well have gotten hurt. They have those rules for a reason.

So as a mom to a young kid and to another kid who was once young and with whom I travelled quite a bit at this age, I get the mom's frustration, but really she should have taken the kid for a potty break right before boarding the plane, and if the girl wasn't secure enough with potty training to be able to go a little while before needing another potty break, she should have been in a pull-up rather than creating a potentially unsafe situation for herself and the airline.

It's all good and well to say, "Go before you get on the plane," but passengers generally have no idea there is going to be that kind of delay. To expect children (and some adults) to have to adhere to draconian demands is just cruel. Fuck those authoritarian attitudes!

If you can't wait an hour or so between bathroom breaks, you should wear a diaper just in case. It wasn't a crazy amount of time to wait. If they'd been waiting a couple of hours or something, I'd agree with everyone else, but half an hour? It's reasonable to expect people to wait that long.

When was the last time you waited 30 minutes when you had to go?

I meant if the mother had taken her to the bathroom before she went onto the airplane as she should have, 30 minutes isn't that long - no one should have a problem going 30 minutes, or an hour or more, between potty breaks.

But it isn't uncommon for me or for most people to be in situations where we have to wait a length of time as short as 30 minutes to use the bathroom, either because one isn't immediately available, because there's a line, because we're in a work sitaution that doesn't allow us to leave what we are doing immediately, etc.

you are anticipating 30 minutes on the tarmac after you board with no ability to go to the bathroom if necesary.

A three year olds bladder control is nothing like an adults.

I highly doubt it is common for most people to delay going to the bathroom when they need to for more than ten minutes. I have never seen a 30 minute bathroom line.

And lastly aparently jet blue agrees what happened here was ridiculous.

which is why pull-ups exist. If I had a 3-year-old who couldn't go a while between potty breaks and we were heading onto an airplane, she'd be in a pull-up. And I have kids. I've lived this.

If you haven't seen a 30-minute bathroom line, you're either not a woman or you are not a woman who has gone to a concert or other large event.

And peope who work on factory floors, nurses, teachers, and many other people routinely have to wait WAY longer than 10, or even 30, minutes when they need to go.