MrAOK

from consumerist.com
Southwest nearly lets liver transplant die
because he wouldn't buy 2nd ticket.

Richard Brown nearly died on Sunday, January 21st, thanks to reckless indifference by a Southwest Airlines ticket agent.

A dying hep-C patient, Richard, secured an appointment at the Mayo Clinic. After getting turned down, he was ....

http://consumerist.com/consumer/comp...ket-231104.php

Mr. Vker

Their comment that "every airport has its own rules" is false. I am a big guy so I made sure I knew SWA policy. It seemed to be applied aribitrarily on "Airline". Anyway, you have to buy a 2nd ticket if you cannot sit in 1 seat without putting down the armrest-which I can. It doesn't matter if you need a belt extension (I don't-but if you do, you cannot sit in emergency exit).

If the flight goes out with empty seats, you can get a refund.

That is the policy for us "healthy" fat people. This was a horrible stance for SWA, I probably would have bought him the ticket if I was near him in line.

COME ON SWA, SHOW THE LUV!!!

nsx

Appeals to emotion aside, the central question is whether purchase of a single ticket entitles anyone of any size to travel for the price of a single coach ticket. That's exactly the same debate that has appeared here and on other boards many times. We know the arguments by heart.

Given that this customer was probably unaware of Southwest's policy and was clearly not a serial violator of same, and given that the flight was not full (meaning that he would have been eligible for a full refund), there was really no need to be so strict.

I applaud the actions of the Southwest agent in Dallas who bought him a ticket. When a customer is in a fix, the airline should help out, especially if health is in jeopardy. The moral hazard concern (encouraging violation of the rules) applies only to serial violators of the policy.

All the above said, I still object to the tone of the article that Southwest was at fault for even attempting to enforce its longstanding policy on Customers of Size. The customer was not entitled to this favor, but under these circumstances Southwest should have offered the favor quickly and without resort to Customer Service people in Dallas.

The article does not say whether the customer was delayed so much that he missed his intended flight, but I'm pretty sure that the author would have mentioned that. If the customer caught his intended flight, I don't see how the part about freezing in the gate area relates to Southwest's decisions.

rajman

I read these boards occassionally, but since I have nothing much to add about air travel, I never registered. But I had to respond to this ridiculous "article" with some facts. In full disclosure, I am a gastroenterologist so I am very familiar with cirrhotic patients.

The concept of the patient "dying in the gate" is just sensationalistic. If he is truly dying at the gate, he should be back in the hospital, NOT on a plane to go to UCSF. The article makes it sounds like the gentleman is going to get off the plane, get in a taxi to UCSF, and get a liver transplant that night. Which is ludicrous. It's at LEAST a few weeks to get listed, then it is weeks to years to get a transplant depending on how ill you are. And if this guy can get on a plane, he is by far not the sickest Hep C patient. Which makes reading things like "Again, a race against his death's clock" so irritating.
I say all of this because the website is talking about attorneys and suing the airline, etc. They did not put him at any risk. I think they should have given him a free extra seat, but they were not criminally negligent. There are a lot of other strange medical details that I will leave out...

I realize that this is 'off-topic' but I wanted to say that I don't think Southwest did anything terribly egregious. Just perhaps not particularly nice...

SAPMAN

Welcome to your first posting. Good to have your on board.

Yes, I think the article was written for sensationalism. Anyone on their
death bed is unlikely to be going thru the hassle of flying - but rather should
be in a hospital.

And maybe I did not read the article in detail, but he went to PHX to Mayo for
a transplant and had a return flight scheduled. Does the time stamp on the email
from SWA show 6pm on 22nd, and the flight was to be at 5:10pm Even with
time zone diff., seems very odd.

However, I do think if flights are not too full (over 5 or so seats open at boarding time), there
is no reason to bother to sell and then refund a POS for an extra seat. Does SWA really
sell an extra ticket so a POS shortly before flight time when the plane is less than 95% sold?

curbcrusher

Welcome to FlyerTalk, rajman!

I think this issue boils down to the inconsistent enforcement of WN's COS policy. Then again, had it been consistent, we'd be treated to two inflammatory accounts accusing WN of attempting to kill someone.

justageek

The OP's article came from a blog. That doesn't mean it's factually incorrect, but it's a fary cry from a news article. Take a look at the amount of misinformation that gets posted on some of the FlyerTalk boards....that's the level of accuracy of an average blog entry.

QuantumMeruit

I saw this issued covered on some blogs/news aggregators and was curious as to what the FT reaction would be.

I'm sure the Southwest gate agent's take on things is a lot different than the (highly slanted) blog coverage on consumerist. That said, my rampant speculation is that this was a problem of poverty and not policy. I think it's safe to say that most mileage running FT'ers are NOT scraping together change to get by. People at or below the poverty line simply can't travel frequently (and likely wouldn't have jobs that required them to do so).

The passenger in question was "living on" disability pay. Buying a single ticket was probably a stretch for him. Likely, he did not have the funds to pay for the second seat EVEN THOUGH he was going to get a full refund pursuant to Southwest policy.

For FT'ers, being "forced" to buy the extra ticket with a near 100% chance of a refund is an illusory "cost". It probably is for most travelers, even those who fly SWA. But for the poor -- this is simply not an expense that they can "float".

Again, just rampant speculation on my part.

justageek

But the rule is in the Contract of Carriage. Nobody was making him fly Southwest. No question that the gate agent should have bended the rules if fully aware of the medical and financial situation of the passenger. But they were in no way obligated to do so.

expert7700

I agree 100%. I think part of the issue is that many gate agents have become immune to hearing person x/y/z's reason for needing a ticket. At any time a % is in need of medical assistance, etc. Sure maybe only .0001% bloated due to a disease and need to occupy two seats, but they are still consuming products/services. Souhwest was 100% in the right to charge them, businesswise but maybe not morally. This wasn't a new discriminatory fee, and I'm sure that gate agent either always charges it or always doesn't charge.

Morally, if this was appealed to the right people in Dallas, with the right amount of advance notice, I'm sure this could have been circumvented. Not saying he had a lot of advanced notice before his flight, but Southwest would have likley agreed to a free ticket or gotten the man in contact with an agency that folks have donated expiring Rapid Rewards to.

Remember the Gate Agent could have even denied the passenger boarding--if they felt their medical condition put them or any other passengers at risk. If he was really "freezing and dying in the terminal", the Gate Agent had the right to deny travel.

I were a Southwest gate agent and the flight wasn't 100% full, I'd use my own personal credit card any time a COS complained and then call or mail in for a refund each time, just to go out of my way to help the customers. If every Southwest employee did this, I'm sure WN corporate would get the message that some change needs done. Or at least Passengers would see how easy the process of buying & getting a refund was.

As i've said before, I think COS who are forced to buy an extra seat should pay full price then a refund should be issued to EVERYONE, based on a % of the time the flights went out full/oversold versus going out with 1+ seat remaining. That way Joe Schmoe who flies once every 5 years and buys a $600 round trip can't have a negative Southwest Experience--by getting "unlucky" due to passenger loads and have to spend $1200.00. He instead buys his original $300 each way ticket, plus a $300 each way second ticket, and THEN gets two refunds check for say $285.00 each--95% of his second seat fares. Why would Southwest have to charge this at all? if they didn't make people front the $$, people would abuse the policy, bulk up even more, hide pillows, etc in order to get the coveted second seat for $15 a person.

justageek

A drawback I see with your scheme is that under the current scheme, a COS can intentionally avoid flights that are likely to be full (and it's really easy to know which those are, by looking at fare bucket availability on the Southwest web site). They can thus guarantee themselves with 99.999999% certainty that they will get 100% of their money back. Under your scheme, the shrewd COS has to pay for the non-shrewd COSes.

gregorygrady

Man, somebody always loses out, huh? Those poor shrewd COSs would be getting screwed.

gregorygrady

I agree with others. This thing is just completely sensationalized. I mean, this guy very well wasn't dying by the gate from freezing. It's an airport for crying out loud, they have heat in most airports last time I checked. And if he's prone to coldness, he probably should have brought a few extra layers of clothing or blankets with him. And frankly, he would have been cold and dying regardless of whether or not he paid for his ticket in advance. Pleading to get a free didn't didn't make him any colder.

Next, if he truly was dying, shame on his daughter for sitting there in Japan while her father was freezing to death in an airport waiting to get a liver. And please don't tell me that nobody could have gotten this guy a ticket. His daughter seemed to use her AMEX just fine to book his original ticket. Why couldn't she pony up for her "dying father" for an extra ticket that would have been refunded anyways? And if she couldn't, please don't tell me that nobody else could. Who is this guy he went with (his caretaker)? Don't tell me the who of them went all the way from Sacremento to Phoenix and neither of them had a credit card. PLEASE!!!

This jerkoff and his daughter are just out to make SWA look bad, it's as plain and simple as that.

That said, I thought SWA's COS/POS policy doesn't apply if the flight wasn't full? Why would they even try to charge him if they knew the flight wasn't full? I do think the gate agent could have been slightly more sympathetic, but from the tone of the article (which BTW the daughter wrote the whole thing so the view is obviously COMPLETELY SLANTED), this guy is probably a real jerk and if I were the gate agent and this guy really was a jerk like I assume, I would have treated him exactly like she did, by the rules down to the T.

BTW, this event just made the official SWA Blog:
http://www.blogsouthwest.com/2007/01...ortunate-event

And for further amusing reading about this, check out this blog:
http://digg.com/business_finance/Sou...nt_Patient_Die

nsx

This could indeed be a case of Customer With Attitude. It's obvious that the blogger has an attitude. And as I've said before, attitude and altitude don't mix. Regardless, even customers with attitude sometimes deserve a break.

SWABrian

As a Southwest Airlines Employee, I understand how emotional this is, but before you draw any conclusions, please read the post at our corporate blog, Nuts About Southwest: http://www.blogsouthwest.com/2007/01...vent/#comments

Brian