Delta Airlines is proposing that passengers who are accused of wearing a mask in order to evade detection by security should be banned from all air travel.
Delta Airlines has proposed banning all passengers who are accused of wearing a mask that does not comply with the airline’s policies. Read more in detail here: delta airlines.
Accused Mask Non-Compliant Passengers Should Be Banned From All Air Travel, Delta Proposes.
on September 23, 2021 by Gary Leff
Before it became a legal mandate, U.S. airlines forced passengers to wear masks, and the typical punishment for disobeying the regulation has been a suspension from flying with the airline – generally until the mask requirement is removed.
Each airline maintains its own list and has its own set of criteria for adding people to it. Passengers who are barred from travelling on one airline due to mask-wearing are allowed to fly on another.
Any customers who act improperly in other ways are placed on the normal permanent prohibited list, as American Airlines revealed to staff at an internal meeting last week.
A customer on American Airlines’ mask compliance ban list is otherwise calm. A passenger is put on the misbehavior ban list if they make a physical threat, touch someone, or call them names.
Delta Air Lines wants any customers who have worn masks on one airline to be barred from flying on any other carrier.
We currently have over 1,600 individuals on our “no fly” list at Delta, and we’ve sent over 600 names to the FAA as part of their Special Emphasis Enforcement Program in 2021.
We’ve also requested other airlines to share their “no fly” lists with us so that all airline workers are protected. A list of prohibited customers, as we all know, is useless if the client can travel with another airline.
This would essentially put non-compliant passengers on a list, similar to the terrorist no-fly list that was recently published online and whose legality is now being challenged by the ACLU. Despite this, the Biden administration has explored adding “domestic radicals” on terrorist watch lists. Delta would also want to provide the ability to disguise non-compliant passengers.
Naturally, each airline has its own procedure for adding people to a list like this. While being included on such a list may result in a lawsuit, there is no actual due process for doing so. It is acceptable for a company to decide not to conduct business with a certain client. It’s much more dubious for a company to claim that no one else should do business with that client.
Adding an appeals procedure has no effect on the following:
- inconsistency, inconsistency, inconsistency, inconsistency, in
- the low standard of evidence that an individual airline must meet in order to refuse a customer.
According to American Airlines Vice President of Inflight Brady Byrnes, if a passenger participates in name calling with an employee, the customer will be added to the airline’s permanent ban list (not the mask list). Two workers are all it takes to prohibit a traveler for life, with no chance of appeal. Should it be enough to bar a passenger from flying for the rest of his or her life? What if rail and bus travel, which are also subject to masking rules, are also included? We’re more concerned about passengers on this list than about those who refused to wear a mask but did not participate in any rude conduct.
There have been many instances of families being booted off flights because their two or three-year-old has struggled to wear a mask. There are misconceptions in some of these instances (such as kicking off an 18-month-old who isn’t obliged to wear a mask!) because the toddler has been eating a snack. A family is taken off the plane and may have to go home on another carrier. Adding a family like this on an industrial no-fly list might leave them stranded on the opposite side of the country.
NEW – A family is being ejected off a @SpiritAirlines aircraft from Orlando to New York because their two-year-old kid is not wearing a mask while eating. pic.twitter.com/dOIZrbbJt6
April 5, 2021 — Disclose.tv (@disclosetv)
More on the situation with @SpiritAirlines.
FYI, after the @FlyFrontier incident a few weeks ago, @FAANews issued warning letters to passengers who were not even suspected of not wearing masks at the time of the event. It is even possible to appeal the letter! pic.twitter.com/e7ZgQzA4NV
April 5, 2021 — Yossi Gestetner (@YossiGestetner)
You might argue that airlines, as private companies, should be free to refuse to carry anybody they choose. This, however, should not be considered private activity; it is governmental action. The idea comes in response to the FAA’s ultimatum that airlines come up with a solution to disruptive customers within one week.
Masking is governed by a federal regulation. As a maximum punishment, a fine is imposed. It is very difficult to persuade airlines to apply a harsher penalty than is allowed by rule or law.
By the way, I often fly with mask-wearing crews, and they would face no comparable penalty under this plan.
To be clear, I think wearing a mask is a good idea – a high-quality mask that is correctly worn, not a tiny piece of paper with two strings that complies with federal regulations. In the future, I intend to use a mask throughout flu season. However, this strategy seems to be a poor one.