Flight attendants have wanted a ‘national banned passenger list’ for customers who behave badly since the start of the year. The Department of Homeland Security No Fly List would be for terrorists, for people unlucky enough to have the wrong box checked on an FBI form, and for people who drink too much on planes.
In September Delta Air Lines proposed that passengers banned from any airline over mask violations should be banned from all airlines. Of course each airline has its own standard for adding passengers to such a list.
And that’s something American Airlines CEO Doug Parker pointed out in response to an employee question this past week at an internal Crew News session with executives, a recording of which was reviewed by View From The Wing. Yet where there’s egregious behavior that becomes public, airlines will ban a passenger even when their actions took place on another airline.
After mentioning the passenger who broke a crewmember’s nose on a cross country flight in October he shared that this person wouldn’t be able to fly other airlines, and that in similar circumstances where someone did that on another airline American wouldn’t let that person fly either.
The other thing people have asked, why don’t we share these lists with other airlines? There’s some legal issue with doing that, about again some ariline might have a different standard than we have. But in this case, if we saw at Delta or United that this individual did that, they wouldn’t fly on us. So that does happen. We can’t go share our own investigations with each other and things like that and say this individual can’t fly you so they’re not going to fly us. But we can use every piece of information we have. And we have this information. So I’m certain United, Delta, and others are not going to let this individual on their airplane either. I know we wouldn’t.
On the one hand, that’s reasonable. An airline shouldn’t have to accept someone for transportation that they believe represents a threat to employees or the safety of the aircraft. On the other hand, stories are frequently misreported or only partially reported at least initially. So one would hope that this discretion is used judiciously and sparingly, only in the clearest-cut of cases where there’s physical jeopardy at issue.