Too Sexy for Southwest Airlines?

[stuck_in_chuk]

I think maybe the airline was over-zealous, but this is all a bit ridiculous. I always find it funny when people complain about being humiliated and having unwanted attention - ON NATIONAL TELEVISION! Really, when I'm embarrassed by a situation, I really don't want anyone else to know about it.

Will she complain when she gets her cheque from Maxim after she does a spread for them? Or Playboy? Will she feel like a spectacle then?

I remember a few years ago reading my WestJet ticket, and it was very specific about acceptable attire (I remember thinking I was in violation since my jeans were ripped, and was thankful that the plane was in the air and would not likely be chucked off the flight).

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by stuck_in_chuk

I think maybe the airline was over-zealous, but this is all a bit ridiculous. I always find it funny when people complain about being humiliated and having unwanted attention - ON NATIONAL TELEVISION! Really, when I'm embarrassed by a situation, I really don't want anyone else to know about it.

Will she complain when she gets her cheque from Maxim after she does a spread for them? Or Playboy? Will she feel like a spectacle then?

I remember a few years ago reading my WestJet ticket, and it was very specific about acceptable attire (I remember thinking I was in violation since my jeans were ripped, and was thankful that the plane was in the air and would not likely be chucked off the flight).

Exactly, it would not be surprising to me at all if someone got in her ear and told her how good it would be for a future career if she made a big deal out of this.

[HOZ]

I don't see the problem there. She wasn't trying to join the mile-high club. IF it was so bad, throw her a blanket. I find the airconditioning on planes to be cold!

[mykalberta]

Southwest Airlines is a private buisness who can disallow service to anyone within the context of the current laws.

MYK

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Southwest Airlines is a private buisness who can disallow service to anyone within the context of the current laws.

MYK

But I think the problem here is that this was completely arbitrary. If a business has a set of rules I don't believe they can discriminate against some people and not others. They can't kick her off and let another hundred girls dress the same on future flights.

I'm all for businesses have their own set of rules, but they have to be consistent with enforcing them. If a bar has a 25 or older rule, that's fine. But don't let the people who are under 25 in front of me in, and then deny me entry because I'm under 25.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Southwest Airlines is a private buisness who can disallow service to anyone within the context of the current laws.

By starting a business which caters to the public, you take upon certain obligations. While technically you can deny service arbitrarily (in most cases, although for example medical services do not adhere to this rule), in practice you must have some reason for doing so, else you will be open to charges of discrimination.

If she had refused to change and sued them, I would think she would have had a decent chance of getting her ticket cost and damages awarded. If the policy cites "inappropriate clothing", and the clothing was not particularly unusual (which it isn't in California AT ALL from what I've seen from being there) then citing that as a reason for denying service would be unreasonable.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

Keith, the customer service agent must be gay. there is no way a straight guy would ever try and throw her off a plane.

###!!

If they don't have a posted dresscode and the girl was not breaking the law (going topless or something) then I don't see the problem. The line on what girls can wear was crossed a long time ago...

The thing that concerns me is the 16 year old who dress and/or look like they are 21...that is just trouble!

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by kootenayguy9

I still think it is important to remember that she was on a PUBLIC flight and her clothes were inappropriate for a flight with children on it.

I am so sorry your kids would be exposed to a pair of legs. How traumatic. Perhaps you should keep them at home, so adults have the freedom to dress how they please when they travel.

Good old USA. You can't show a breast unless there is a bullet going through it.

[Winsor_Pilates]

What's wrong with how she's dressed anyway? I was expecting a lot more skin when I clicked the link.

I'm a little dissapointed actually

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

What's wrong with how she's dressed anyway? I was expecting a lot more skin when I clicked the link.

I'm a little dissapointed actually

Thank god I'm not the only one!

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by jammies

By starting a business which caters to the public, you take upon certain obligations. While technically you can deny service arbitrarily (in most cases, although for example medical services do not adhere to this rule), in practice you must have some reason for doing so, else you will be open to charges of discrimination.

If she had refused to change and sued them, I would think she would have had a decent chance of getting her ticket cost and damages awarded. If the policy cites "inappropriate clothing", and the clothing was not particularly unusual (which it isn't in California AT ALL from what I've seen from being there) then citing that as a reason for denying service would be unreasonable.

In the contract of carriage for Southwest there is an adendum for refusing passengers based on appearance/smell etc.

No refund is therefore required. Southwest is only obligated to quote the contract of carriage and allow her to board if she then complies after changing. She should have been told that when she recieved her ticket, although if since she didnt go to the desk to check in its up to her to make sure she knows the rules.

MYK

[jammies]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

In the contract of carriage for Southwest there is an adendum for refusing passengers based on appearance/smell etc.

No refund is therefore required. Southwest is only obligated to quote the contract of carriage and allow her to board if she then complies after changing. She should have been told that when she recieved her ticket, although if since she didnt go to the desk to check in its up to her to make sure she knows the rules.

That is not the same as arbitrarily refusing service, which is what you implied was allowed. Further, the whole point is that the contract (which does not supersede laws that specify consumer rights, which I would suspect in California lean far more towards the consumer than the company) says unacceptable appearance is not allowed, and how will that standard be defined in a court of law, given that she sued the airline?

I submit that it would be community standards that would be a reasonable test of acceptability, and by that test, she should not have been denied boarding. So, she would probably win her case, regardless of what fine print the airline puts on the ticket disclaiming all need to compensate their passengers despite whatever arbitrary foolishness they get up to.

[FurnaceFace]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

What's wrong with how she's dressed anyway? I was expecting a lot more skin when I clicked the link.

I'm a little dissapointed actually

Originally Posted by Slava

Thank god I'm not the only one!

Thirded.

Of course this is the same country who totally lost their mind at the Janet Jackson thing. I was on conference calls with the US the day after the "malfunction" and you'd have thought there was another terrorist attack the way they were freaking out. It's a boob and only in North America is it news.

Originally Posted by fotze

I wonder if it is possible to blindfold a baby just prior to childbirth so they don't get to see the traumatic and deeply pornographic ordeal. Its full blown body sex with your own mother and we force them into it. Soon after that, we continue the degradation by forcing them to suck on boobs in exchange for food.

Perspective is everything.

You sir are the wing beneath our wings.

[Teh_Bandwagoner]

Originally Posted by fotze

I wonder if it is possible to blindfold a baby just prior to childbirth so they don't get to see the traumatic and deeply pornographic ordeal. Its full blown body sex with your own mother and we force them into it. Soon after that, we continue the degradation by forcing them to suck on boobs in exchange for food.

Perspective is everything.

Wow. This may very well be the worst description of childbirth I have ever heard in my life :P

[JoesGonnaKillYou]

I was in Kelowna last week and saw a 15 year old girl in nice little booty shorts when you could see the bottom of her ass cheeks.

Good sight to see, but I would be pissed if I had any relation to her.

Girls just love the attention.

[Teh_Bandwagoner]

Originally Posted by fotze

That is nothing compared to the real thing. Remember that video game R-Type with all those crazy biological beastmachines, its like that but in real life.

I'm not sure, but I think my life has now been made better after hearing childbirth being compared to R-Type.

[Superflyer]

You would think that Southwest would learn but they did it again. This time she was able to fly but had to adjust her clothing, pull her skirt down so it covered more and then she had to cover up with a blanket for the flight.

http://www.nbc10.com/news/14090043/detail.html

[I-Hate-Hulse]

That doesn't look as short as the 1st girl's. I'm not quite sure why you board a plane looking like you're off to an awards show but that really doesn't seem to be that "inappropriate".

(Although I have to say wow, I'm clearly flying the wrong airlines)

[Devils'Advocate]

Update:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20780771?GT1=10357

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Update:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20780771?GT1=10357

Boy, she is really milking this.

The airline apologized and now they've ponied up some tickets but I bet she still sues.