An American Airlines passenger wasn’t allowed to board his flight from Austin to New York JFK because he was filming a gate agent that he thought was rude. The agent didn’t like him filming and called for a supervisor, who refused to allow him to take the flight. They deemed filming employees to violate the airline’s rules – though these are secret rules which do not appear published anywhere that customers can see them.
Police were called, the officer confirmed the passenger wasn’t breaking the law, but they still weren’t allowed to board.
Apparently the dispute began when the passenger tried to bring two bags onto the plane that the gate agent deemed carry-ons (rather than the allowable carry on bag and personal item).
- According to the passenger, the agent asked them to consolidate into one bag.
- The passenger did so, but then the bag was deemed too large to be allowed on board and they were asked to check it.
- That’s when the frustrated passenger filmed the agent, who objected.
They told the police officer they’re willing to gate check the bag, they just want to fly, and were filming so they could identify the agent they wanted to submit a complaint to the airline about. The passenger offered to delete the video if they’d be allowed to fly. However they were refused boarding, refused rebooking, and told they could request a refund.
Meanwhile, another passenger kneeling by the bag sizer at the gate says that the agent pushed her.
@liranhirschkorn @American Airlines will kick you off a flight without explanation. Ive taken 100s of flights in the last few years and never had an flying with delta. Please share. #americanairlines #kickedoffmyflight ♬ original sound – Liran Hirschkorn
Filming in public is not illegal, and there is no FAA or Department of Transportation against filming inside an airport or on board an aircraft. Filming is even permitted at TSA security checkpoints provided “the screening process is not interfered with or sensitive information is not revealed.”
However American Airlines adopted a policy in 2014 to prohibit photography of employees, they published it at the time only in their on board American Way magazine. They don’t have signage anywhere telling passengers this, and it doesn’t appear in their Contract of Carriage or on their website. The magazine that used to have this policy was eliminated two years ago.
Is a secret policy, than runs against common cultural practice where people film things with their phone at will (and even tag the airline in social media daily without being told they’ve violated any rule), even a policy at all?
Moreover, the right to film is important. David Dao would never have gotten justice after having been dragged off of a United Express flight and bloodied if there hadn’t been video of the incident. United itself initially defended Chicago Aviation Police and apologized to other passengers that they’d been inconvenienced by Dao’s behavior.
It is certainly understandable that employees don’t like to be filmed doing their jobs. They’re in public spaces, dealing with members of the public, but most people doing the filming wouldn’t like it if the roles were reversed! Still, enforcing a policy that customers aren’t on notice about seems… problematic.
(HT: Off The Beaten Points)
Filming in public broadly is legal, but filming a specific person requires that person’s permission. It is harassment if the person you are filming does not consent. I am a Harvard Law educated attorney retired from a top ranked firm in NYC.
AA is just a bunch of Cry Babies.
@Alison, this is the very argument provided by police departments the world over. You’re horribly wrong, regardless of your credentials or experience.
If you work with the public you should expect to be filmed. Don’t like it? Amazon warehouses are hiring and they don’t allow phones at work.
I’m perfectly okay with this. I was flying on KLM the other day and they actually have a rule against filming or photographing without permission. I’m honestly tired of everyone who feels the need to record every negative interaction they have in public. We only see what the person recording the video wants us to see. Put down the smartphones and just be respectful.
AA is VERY out of line for this. Filming in public is LEGAL and does not require anyone’s approval.
This is a winnable lawsuit. Idiotic behavior by AA violating peoples rights.
Kyle, what does respect mean to you?
I’m glad this happened. Frankly I hate the current state where everyone pulls out a phone to film any possible event. Grow up people. There should be more crackdowns on this type of behavior. It is intrusive and rude (even if technically legal) to film people without their consent and, as the attorney posted above, it is actually illegal in certain situations.
Beyond filming I’m impressed they actually stopped someone from boarding with more than the allowed carry ons. Now if we get that company wide and also if all flight attendants stop people from shoving their bags into First or Main Cabin Extra reserved spaces as the make their way back to the last row by the toilet we will have progress.
Alison, our resident wanna-be-lawyer….
He’s a douchebag. If you don’t believe you are being treated fairly he could’ve requested a supervisor come speak with him or he could have just looked at her name bar and made a post on Twitter to AA. There are any number of ways to voice your displeasure without trying to shame someone with a video you post online. Of course his video would have no context with his interaction with her, just his biased opinion.
Some TX based AA Gate agents are on a power trip beyond belief. They think they are part of the Biden clan and thus untouchable.
Do you job in a respectful, correct manner and no video of any kind is ever going to be an issue for you.
If you are not doing anything wrong then you should have no concerns about being filmed. Everywhere you go you are being filmed…especially in an airport.
Notably, in the recent, highly-publicized encounter where the retired Puerto Rican LEO was told he could not rent from Hertz at MSY without a passport, the Hertz agent told him more than once that because he was filming, corporate was going to ban him from renting with them for life.
My understanding is that (1) Hertz has not banned him from renting with them for life, but (2) Hertz has not confirmed or denied the existence of this policy to the media. I’ve not seen any evidence of this policy in my rental agreements with Hertz or on its website, but my search was not exhaustive.
If he had recorded the interaction and sent it to Hertz corporate but not shared it with the public, would he have been banned from Hertz? No one from Hertz PR has said anything on this. It does seem obvious that the only reason Hertz agreed that he was mistreated was because he had the video evidence.
Ultimately, firms can generally choose to serve—and not serve—whom they want, unless it would run afoul of another statutory barrier (such as anti-discrimination law). However, one does have to wonder sometimes if the reason why these firms ban filming is not because it makes their employees more comfortable but because they don’t want to be held accountable for their employees’ actions.
Alison is wrong. While my law degree isn’t from Harvard, I regularly litigate complex civil and commercial disputes in state and federal court. There is simply no legitimate or reasonable expectation of privacy in a public airport, so no laws were violated. And since the “rule” is not part of the contract of carriage, there is no contractual violation either. You have to have fair notice of a rule before it can be enforced. If it were a law, or a contractual term at issue, there would arguably be fair notice. But that’s not the case here.
Corporates are the new dictators if regular horrible behaviour stories from USA are any indication
I would get a lawyer. AA and their insurance company will settle.
@Alison: I’m sure you’re many things, including (after a very quick Google search) confidently and absolutely incorrect. You can film a specific person without their consent in public, as simply being in public affords no reasonable expectation of privacy. And to think I didn’t even go to Harvard!
Should have went to Yale.
People are idiots. People with phones are even worse idiots. Good on AA for the pushback on this jerk.
Last time I checked, American Airlines was a business, a private entity, not a government program. You have no right to demand that AA does anything for you. You have no “right” to fly on any airline. If a customer is just more trouble than they are worth, screw them, go pound sand. Act up, treat others around you like crap, fine. Enjoy your walk to New York.
Private businesses have the right to deny service to anyone (except for some specific circumstances, eg discrimination against a protected class). Being an asshole does not entitle you to protected-class status. No shoes, no shirt, no common sense, no basic behavioral standards….no service, see ya!
When people act up and act out, they should be quickly and routinely banned from any business. Our society has become a cesspool filled with entitled, bratty, morons. Cellphones, and the expectation that any encounter you may video can “go viral” and somehow benefit you, has not helped.
FAFO. Kudos, American Airlines, please ban more idiots.
@Alison: Filming a specific person is legal. Where it becomes illegal is if you use that film for commercial purposes without permission.
I’ve always been skeptical of people who brag about going to Harvard.
It is not illegal to film people who are in public spaces. What makes it illegal is using it for commercial purposes.
There are some exceptions in some states for some things. E.g. recording under someone’s skirt.
There is expectation of privacy in public. So you don’t need permission to record someone.
How many security cameras are around there?
Bad on you AA.
As a gate agent, film me and you’re not flying.
Posting these videos puts us in danger of retribution from passengers who feel the need to take their aggression out on someone. All airlines have this rule as many employees have been assaulted.
So video at your peril. I do not consent to being video taped while I do my job. Would you like me to come video you as you work?
Only I have the power to get you thrown off your flight. Like it or lump it.
Everyone films everything all the time. I cannot stand people that try to board with all sorts of extra bags. I check bags every time I fly unless it is just a day trip. I have been checking bags for over 25 years. Only once in all my millions of flight miles, years of non-rev travel, and many years of Executive Platinum on AA have I had a bag missing. This happened on Lufthansa in Munich 20 years ago. Sorry end of rant.
So my point is, I am on the side of the agent when it comes to extra bags when boarding. But what she did was absurd and as it has been stated it is not illegal to film unless it will be used for commercial purposes and at that point you would need consent. This really pisses me off and I hope the traveler does not let it go. This is a complete abuse of power from the agent. Completely ABSURD!
Half of the Harvard people never even made it to the Harvard cafeteria…. Not that I would care…
Alison doesn’t understand basic 101 constitutional law taught to high schoolers. Her statement is easily debunked – does the Hollywood paparazzi get “permission” when they chase celebrities around with cameras?
My experience: I’m a malpractice attorney (MD/JD) . I am also on the board of directors of my local ACLU chapter
@Dick Bupkiss, I couldn’t have said it any better.
@Gate Agent
“Posting these videos puts us in danger of retribution from passengers who feel the need to take their aggression out on someone. All airlines have this rule as many employees have been assaulted.”
I’m confused:
How does being filmed increase the likelihood of you being assaulted while on the job?
Is the idea that someone is going to see a video, weeks later run into you, say “hey, that’s the person from that video” and assault you? Or is it something else?
Addressing Alison’s comment, wherein she states “Filming in public broadly is legal, but filming a specific person requires that person’s permission. It is harassment if the person you are filming does not consent. I am a Harvard Law educated attorney retired from a top ranked firm in NYC.”.
I am not trying to cast any doubts on her claim of being a Harvard Law educated attorney; I am not trying to cast any doubts on her interpretation of one or more laws, but with this degree of certainty, I’m sure she could and would be happy to provide cites to the actual law(s) she is relying on.
So, by request, can you provide the cite(s)?
Even if she can produce that, it does not necessarily mean that she is right, and not producing it does not mean she is wrong; but I would think that without a cite to the actual law, her case might be difficult to support in court, if it came to that.
Things i learned this week
Aluson should get a refund on her Harvard tuition.
Gate Agent is on a power trip
Filming and berating someone making a private conversation on their phone is okay if you don’t like their topic.
Posting a picture and complaining about someone viewing porn because you looked over their shoulder is okay.
Dick is still one.
Gotta love this place
@Gate Agent: You wrote, “Only I have the power to get you thrown off your flight. Like it or lump it.”
Since you are the only person with the power to exclude a person from a flight, must the airline captain contact you for your permission before they remove a person from their flight? Were you the gate agent that authorized the removal of United Airlines Express passenger Dr. David Dao in 2017?
@Dick Bupkiss – actually in US airlines can’t just ban you. They generally must carry passengers as requirement to get certificate to operate. They can ban in certain incidents. However they can’t ban just because you didn’t comply with a policy that doesn’t appear to exist. Even if it did at point was filming they weren’t on private AA property . This is why it is more common to close a FF account instead of banning a passenger.
@Gate Agent:
> As a gate agent, film me and you’re not flying.
Posting these videos puts us in danger of retribution from passengers who feel the need to take their aggression out on someone. All airlines have this rule as many employees have been assaulted.
>So video at your peril. I do not consent to being video taped while I do my job. Would you like me to come video you as you work?
It doesn’t matter one iota if you consent to being videoed–you’re in public, you have no protection.
And you’re not going to suffer **passenger** retaliation from those videos being out there. You might suffer job-related consequences if you misbehave, though–the camera keeps people honest. You’re basically admitting you’re the problem.
@Gate_Agent if you are so fearful that someone filming you might subject you to violence you might want to consider finding a new job were you can provide uninspired, lousy, rude service without fear of being recorded doing so.
People have gone to filming things because if they don’t their complaints are often dismissed in a “he said, she said” scenario. I don’t blame people one bit for catching bad actors red-handed. Again, in public locations, like at an airport or on an airplane, you have NO expectation of privacy.
Macho bully tried to teach two demure airline employees a good lesson. He was gonna film them, whether they liked it or not. That’ll teach em.
But who actually ended up getting taught a lessons? Only the out-of-line bully! (That is, of course, if he’s even capable of learning from his mistakes, which is doubtfull)
Hurray for AA. One less rude bully on AA flights. I’m a happy camper.
Would you record and film the police? Well, the airlines have turned into the police. Interact with them and talk with them as little as possible. Take this advice: Anything you do or say (with the airlines, and the police) may be used against you.
The flight Captain has no time for this B.S. He’s too busy programming the flight. So if you are squabbling and disagreeing with a gate agent, Good Luck.
Alison is incorrect. But where you can film and can’t is a complex question. Other posters have used the term public, presumably to describe the area where the recording is taking place. They’re assuming an airport is a public space. But it ain’t necessarily so.
For example PDX takes the position, not tested in court, that recording is permissible in the areas they control but not necessarily in gate areas, which are leased to the airlines. Those areas the airlines sets their own rules.
You’d think that would be the end of it but not so. Nothing prevents AA from asking you to stop making a video recording but it would be up to a judge to decide whether AA had the right to do so. Even if they ruled you could it’s not clear that AA wouldn’t be able to ban you from flying anyway. That would be a whole separate cause of action.
The question of whether a party, such as the owner or leasee of a space can control or restrict filming or other kinds of behavior is very complex but a core feature is the nature of the space. I’m fairly certain AA would have a very difficult time preventing someone from filming their staff on the street. They’d have a pretty simple time from preventing it in their corporate headquarters. When their employees are walking down the corridor of a terminal? At the gate area? On the jetway? In the plane? Not easy to say until it’s been tested in court and probably tested a number of times in various jurisdictions (which might result in different restrictions depending where you are).
The only way to know for sure it to make a case out of it. Even then you won’t really know for sure until what you’re doing, in that place, at that time and in that way is adjudicated or until there’s a law guaranteeing your right to take pictures or make video recordings.
Alison needs to brush up on her studies.
I would most certainly film the police in those jurisdictions that have passed statutes that specifically allow it. Anywhere else I’d check the case law first.
@gate Agent
You wrote….
“As a gate agent, film me and you’re not flying.
Only I have the power to get you thrown off your flight. Like it or lump it.”
Its not up to you whether someone films you or not. It’s up to the government. They get to decide because we live in a nation of law where everyone has to abide by the rules and can’t just make up whatever ones they want.
As for having the power to throw someone off the flight for engaging in a lawful activity, you are correct that as of today you are often able to do that. But you have just become exhibit 1 for why their needs to be legislation that spells out what is, and is not permitted.
As for you recording other people at work I would ask whether you feel it should be prohibited to record policeman when they are working in public places? How about if you see them committing a crime, such as taking a bribe? Or sleeping on the job? Or murdering someone? I’d like to hope you would think that making a video would be allowed. In the public interest as it were because that’s the issue here. What is and is not permissible is always a balancing act between competing interests. I’m sure the cop doesn’t want to be photographed forbidding it would be bad for the public.
As for whether a customer has the right to photograph an airline employee, or anyone else doing their job, the same yardstick should apply however given how stridently you seem to disagree and the likelihood that many others in your profession take the same position it clearly time for the government to step in and set some rules. To that end I’ll be forwarding your post to the appropriate authorities with the recommendation that they consider doing so.
Thanks for letting us know where you stand.
Most airports have cameras perhaps this particular incident did get recorded
A clearer and published rules should be made available in todays world as almost every one carries a cell phone
@Steve – Thanks for the explanation!
Since AA either owns or lease the aircraft, am I correct to understand they would have the right to forbid filming/Recording since you’re no longer in public and on their property?
Your example of PDX is very informative. While I understand it hasn’t been tested in court, could an argument be made that the airline leases the gate podiums, chairs, and Jet Bridge, but not the entire terminal? If they argued they did lease the terminal, wouldn’t that mean all other vendors then would need to pay that airline rent directly and not the airport authority to be true?
I have no idea. There has been a ton of litigation over what makes a public space. I’m not an expert but there are experts who could at least sketch out an argument and offer an opinion.
I’m not sure the logic courts use. May start by trying to understand the balance of property rights (I don’t want you taking pictures in my living room) vs public interest, the benefit gained by restricting where people can take pictures. So for example there was street in SLC that the Church of Latter Day Saints was allowed to buy from the City. Does that give the Church as the new owner the right to forbid making videos there? What about a parking lot? Could the owner forbid someone who’s car was damaged an employee who was parking a car there from taking pictures if they damaged their car?
Airplanes are public conveyance. They are not a private office building that is restricted to employees. There is a public good that comes from requiring that the public be allowed to take pictures or videos. Perhaps something happens that might indicate the plane is unsafe. Perhaps an employee of the airlines acts in a manner that is unsafe or even appears to be illegal. There are all kinds of legitimate reasons that recording what goes on in an airplane is in the public good.
I’d imagine the airline would argue that whatever that doesn’t justify infringing on their right (if it exists) for forbid the activity. Other than interfering with the crew I’m not sure what that might be but I’m sure they’d come up with a list and prior cases to support their position.
Whatever the outcome or outcomes since it likely would take a number of test cases to converge on an outline of a solution the current situation is unhealthy in my opinion. I feel that documenting is healthy. I think using the fact that one is documenting as a weapon is not. We already have a very good model with regard to the police. We could start with that.
As far as PDX when I discussed this with counsel for the Port (who owns the airport) their position is that I had the right to photograph or video anything from anywhere that was not leased to an airline (I didn’t talk to them about other lessees). So if I wanted to stand outside the gate area and video an airline employee they had not problem with that. Nothing prevents them from banning me anyway but the police would be instructed that I was within my rights and wouldn’t prevent me from doing so.
So the really interesting thing would be if a court held I was within my right to take photographs, whether from outside or inside the leased space but an airline banned me regardless. Can they do that? One view is a business can refuse to do business with anyone (except for discrimination against a protected class). Photographers are not a protected class. But an airline is not a grocery store. They are a public conveyance and in some cases the only public conveyance providing air service to or from a given destination operating under a license from the government for a limited resource (landing slots for example). That’s were the difference lies and why a court might feel that they give up their right to fully control the behavior on their private property. This is the case with malls and such where there has been litigation over the line between private and public. Turns out there is an area in the middle where it isn’t entirely up to the owner to decide what is allowed.
I think the same applies here. But it’s not up to me and so far I don’t know of anyone who’s brought a test case but given what airlines and their employees feel I think its time.
The passenger could have easily wrote down the agents name and dealt with submitting a complaint when he got home. No one likes a camera or phone in their face so of course it’s going to escalate. He said she was “rude” so is every other person these days sadly that’s common these days. So don’t be a part of that. He wanted to teach them a lesson but it backfired. Than tried negotiating at the end let me on the flight and I’ll delete this video. Too late.
If you are belligerent and uncooperative before boarding it’s a good bet the other passengers and crew should not risk being locked in a tube with you at 30k feet.
There is no need for a specific rule against filming. The general idea is that if you can’t behave civilly on the ground then you shouldn’t be airborne.
Gary, excellent thought-provoking article. The underlying issues warrant additional main-stream media attention and future discussion.
Unfortunately, documenting an interaction is sometimes the only safeguard passengers have. After reading the comments of “Gate Agent” here, I am even stronger on this position. If AA wants to prohibit pictures/video, document it on aa.com and post it at the gates.
If any Gate Agent is conducting themselves in a professional manner, within published and available policies and guidelines, they should have no qualms about being recorded. In fact, they should welcome it.
Boonie and Catherine T are on opposite sides of the issue but both make good points.
Boonie’s statement about putting a camera in someone’s face is dead on. Someone doing that isn’t trying to make a record of what happened but rather trying to change what’s happening. That’s appropriate where life or limb is at stake, for example if someone is beating another to possibly to death, but otherwise the camera isn’t a weapon.
@Politeness Pays:
> Macho bully tried to teach two demure airline employees a good lesson. He was gonna film them, whether they liked it or not. That’ll teach em.
> But who actually ended up getting taught a lessons? Only the out-of-line bully! (That is, of course, if he’s even capable of learning from his mistakes, which is doubtfull)
We know the passenger ended up not flying. We don’t know how this will resolve in the end. Don’t assume not flying is the end of the story.
Take my picture I don’t care just give me 5$ lol
He filmed an employee without their permission, to make a complaint, but the employee was doing their job, since this passenger was obviously trying to trick the system