Back to Squawk list
  • 119

Delta CEO says airline will permanently ban passengers 'who refuse to display basic civility'

The CEO of Delta Air Lines has announced that the carrier will permanently ban passengers who disrespect fellow customers or crew. CEO Ed Bastian laid down the law in a memo sent to employees Friday, and shared with Fox News. The executive revealed that the airline has already added over 800 people to its no-fly list for refusing to wear mandatory face masks during travel, along with news of the company's latest policy. ( 기타...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

ExPatHere 64
I hope that means no more clipping toenails, putting feet up on seats, generally piggish behavior. Flight crews have seen it all.....A measure of decorum is in order....finally.
I've seen that for decades. They do nothing. On any airline, in any class of service. People are astonishing.
Bandrunner 18
Unfortunately, a minority of people are just pigs, and they won't be told, 'cos it's against their 'freedum' and 'rights'.
Craig Good -6
Toenail clippings won't kill you. Refusing to wear a mask might.
Yes. The same as smoking, drinking alcoholic drinks, driving, joining the mile-high-club, and just flying in general. Two of which you can still do on an airplane. Well, maybe still three.
Ken Lane 6
Let's see... a national death rate of .07%? No, quite unlikely.

You'll sooner die of cancer or even more likely in an auto accident.
Bill Brehm 8
Of the cases in the US that had an outcome, about 3% died and 97% recovered. 0.07% is not correct.
As of today, the most credible source I could find says that there have been 24.7 million covid cases in the US. That same source says that there has been 410,000 deaths. I used to teach high school algebra, so I am confident in saying that 3% isn't correct either. I researched further, and John Hopkins University of Medicine(updated today) supports the 1.7% fatality rate indicated by the preceding numbers.

So, you both can be comforted with the knowledge that the other guy was wrong, too!
Bill Brehm 7
I said "Of the cases that had an outcome". I use this site for my data. The people that are still sick could die or could recover, so we just don't know yet how they will affect the calculation. 424,177 dead and 15,222,719 recovered means 2.71% which is "about 3%".
This is how fake news gets started. You probably should stick with a more credible source:

There's so much bad math on your source that it makes my head swim. Using that logic, there are still 9,477,281 people that have COVID RIGHT NOW!. With a daily new case rate of about 200,000 per day, that would mean that EVERYONE who contracted COVID over the past 45 days still has it!

If you go searching for 'recovered' statistics, you will find that they are very incomplete. Large numbers of people get well without ever getting reported. Which is why John Hopkins doesn't use that data to determine morbidity.

I think that it is very clear the 3% number is bogus. Fake news.
Bill Brehm 2
Using 1.7% would be a more conservative estimate but in reality some people are still sick and will die so the number somewhere in between 1.7% and 3% or rather 2.71%. Certainly 2.71% is more realistic than 0.07%. It's fake news like 0.07% that gives people a false sense of safety and encourages them to be careless and not wear masks and not take other precautions, which will increase the number of cases.
It's nowhere near 2.71%, that's mathematically impossible, which is why that number is not used by credible sources. You're just irresponsibly making up numbers.

Your last statement suggests that you think it is OK to make up fake news to fight fake news. Now, that makes a little more sense. Hypocritical, perhaps, but there is some sense behind it.
Bill Brehm 2
My number is not at all fake news. I already showed you my calculation. You may not like the source of my information but in fact it agrees quite closely with your source. If you look at your source, they are getting 1.7% by dividing the number of deaths into the total number of cases. That's not an accurate way to look at it. There are people who are still sick and will die that will raise the result. You may not like my method but it is more accurate than assuming everyone that has the disease still will be just fine.

Interestingly I posted my first comment to dispute someone who said the rate is only 0.07%. That is the fake news. Your number and my number are not so far apart that we should be arguing with each other. We should both be agreeing that 0.07% is not correct and dangerous to promote as the truth.
OK, math master, let's do the math.

How many people are still sick? The number may be out there, but we can responsibly estimate it with what we know. Let's be conservative even, and assume that EVERYONE who has contracted the virus in the past 14 days is still sick and has a probability of dying. Based upon the best data available, there were about 3.15 million cases in the past 14 days. Suppose that you are right, and the death rate is 2.71 percent (we're being even more conservative). That means that there are 85,365 deaths that are 'in the pipeline', people who have been infected, but not died yet.

Adding the 'yet to be dead' number to the 'confirmed dead number' of 410,000, we get an eventual number of dead from those infected to date of 495,365. Dividing that number by the number infected to date gives us 2.0% Worst case.

Still not 2.7%, and much closer to the credible John Hopkins reported (and up to date) mortality rate of 1.7%.

We do agree that the 0.07% number is not the credible COVID mortality rate (unless you subtract out co-morbidities). But, if we are justified in calling out incorrect numbers, we can't play favorites, can we? Exaggeration doesn't serve the truth and ruins credibility. If you want to take comfort in the fact that your fake number of 3% was closer to the truth (1.7%) than Ken's 0.07% number, then by all means feel good about it. But my suggestion is that if you are going to call out falsehoods, take appropriate care to bring the truth.
Bill Brehm 3
The reason I said about 3% is because when I did the calculation a week or so ago, I got 2.89% I should have calculated with the most recent numbers before I posted and then I would have said 2.71% The calculation is simple. 424,177 deaths. 15,222,719 recoveries. Add the two numbers to get the total number of people with an outcome. 424,177 + 15,222,719 = 15,646,896. Divide 424,177 by 15,646,896 gives 2.71%. I accept the data as presented. What else should I do? Make up a number to support some belief that it's not as bad as it is or it's worse than it is. I am not exaggerating. I am simply calculating.
You keep ignoring the real fact that the 'recoveries' data is extremely inaccurate. If you dig the least bit into it, you'll find all sorts of missing recovery data for specific states. Your calculations can be fine, but garbage in - garbage out. That's why 3%, 2.89%, or 2.71% are all garbage, and no credible health organization is reporting those numbers for the U.S.

If you want to be accurate, use accurate information. If you want to be wrong, use inaccurate data. And if you purposefully use known bad data for your calculations, people are going to think you have an agenda and are willing to do anything to support it.
Bill Brehm 4
I searched for coronavirus recovery data as you suggested and the first result was the webpage I use as my reference. I suggest you read this page about the data. In it you will see how the sources for their data and also see the John Hopkins uses this webpage as a source for their data.

Sure, the recovery data may not be perfect. Also the deaths and cases data are probably not perfect. But I have no reason to believe that any of them are "extremely inaccurate". What you are proposing is to completely ignore the recovery data and assume that EVERYONE has already recovered to get your number of 1.7% Surely you can see that that is more of an exaggeration than using data that might be off slightly.

This will be my last post on this topic. You seem to want to argue for the sake of arguing. My point in making my first post was to say that 0.07% is way off. It's off by a factor of ~40x. That point has been made. 1.7% and 2.71% are in the same ballpark and 2.71% is more realistic.
Tommy Boy 2
Actually, Dan, while you find fault with the recovery data that Bill gleaned from a reputable source, you turn around and ASSUME that everyone who contracted the virus in the past 14 days is still infected. The actual recovery time is 21 to 28 days and even longer for those over 60.

For reasons of public safety, I would rather have an estimate on the high end of the scale, simply to effect positive public cooperation in mitigating the spread of the virus. Those who tend to underestimate the deadliness of the virus do, in fact, have a completely different, and more dangerous agenda, and don't care who it may hurt.
Tommy, I was allowing Bill to have the last word, I had said everything that needed to be said about his data, and did not want to just rehash what I had already said. However, you made 2 points that I believe need a response.

1. Worldometer's data not reliable. Hopefully this will be sufficient to convince you. On the page of U.S. mortality data that Bill referenced, you can obtain this history of their mortality reporting:

March 13, 2020 - US mortality rate of 83.93%
March 15, 2020 - US mortality rate of 54.14%
March 25, 2020 - US mortality rate of 75.21%
April 4, 2020 - US mortality rate of 41.32%
May 1, 2020 - US mortality rate of 27.52%
June 1, 2020 - US mortality rate of 14.13%
July 1, 2020 - US mortality rate of 9.34%
August 1, 2020 - US mortality rate of 6.21%

Do you believe these numbers? If so, I'd like to sell you some land in Florida! ;-) Mortality rates were never this high, and they aren't 2.71 either, or 2.68 which they are reporting today.

What you will notice about the data is that it is continually going down. It started at TOTALLY unbelievable numbers and keeps going down. Why? Because worldometer's analysis is flawed for determining mortality. In reality, deaths are VERY ACCURATELY reported, but recoveries are VERY INNACURATE. Looking at county by county recover data for my own state, there are many counties with completely missing data! To back into mortality by ignoring the death data, and relying on inaccurate recovery data will produce garbage. Worldometer is MISSING data on 10,000,000 cases! That is over 50 days worth of positive diagnosis. If you assume that none of these people recovered, then your conclusions will be B.S.

I appreciated your last statement. My allegiance is to the truth. Yours is towards coercing others to do what you think is best, even if it means 'bending' the truth. I call it exaggeration. If you don't think accurate facts will support your position, rather than questioning (or exaggerating the facts), you should question your position.
Tommy Boy 3
All of the statistics available are suspect at best and disparaging some statistics in favor of others in order to stubbornly prove your point is useless.
Do I believe the numbers you quoted? Yes, I do. Obviously they are not correct, but they were calculated with what precious little information was available at the time.

My point was, Dan, as one who studied statistical analysis in college decades ago, None of your numbers are accurate and when performing a statistical analysis of the data, is only as good as the data itself.

But you know what is absolutely forbidden, Dan? You kn ow what is simply not allowed? Saying "Let's...assume that EVERYONE who has contracted the virus in the past 14 days is still sick and has a probability of dying."

Let's ASSUME???

I don't think WorldoMeter accurately compiled it's data SO LET ME ASSUME a number instead???

Bill's methodology for determining his answer was more logical than yours and your attempt to discredit him by injecting fake numbers into his method was disingenuous at best.

The problem that both of you have to deal with is, other than the number of deaths, are pretty sketchy. The number of cases is literally, garbage. What it comes down to is what number do you believe is an accurate accounting of cases?

In all honesty, Dan, I think the number of cases has been vastly under-reported, and you know what that does to the mortality rate. I think your estimate is way off and the reality is closer to .7% than 1.7%

However, it's the number of cases that shuts down the country, not the deaths.
Your response did a fair job of letting everyone know where you stand. So well in fact, that I have nothing to add. Have a good day.
I like how you round up, do you do that with your penis length, too?
So inappropriate and unrelated to the discussion forum. Very poor form.
There's a lot of poor form going around these days...
More deaths in a year from Covid-19 than in WWII. You think that is insignificant?

You are one cold hearted person.
Philip, Some context is obviously in order. The vast majority of COVID deaths involve co-morbidities. World War II deaths did not. It is deceptive to compare the two. When a co-morbidity is involved (that is, the patient already has a disease that has them on the road to death), what do you blame for the death, COVID, or the pre-existing co-morbidity, when the person would have lived through COVID just fine without the co-morbidity.

If you are consistent with your reasoning, you should be even more riled up about those that don't get enough regular exercise, maintain poor diets, and smoke cigarettes. These are the major contributors to causes of death that far exceeded COVID deaths in 2020. Are those people cold hearted for not caring about those behaviors?
srobak 2
For decades the #1 and #2 killers in the US have been cancer and heart disease. Each at over 600k per year. for 2020 - the count is between 50k and 65k each - depending on the source. Let's call it 120k total.

So at the end of the year Covid had claimed a bit over 300k. Subtract that and the aforementioned 2 highest killers and you have a net of 800k lives saved.

Who knew the cure to cancer and heart disease was covid?
Hence why it is easy to misinterpret COVID mortality numbers. In the large majority of COVID cases that resulted in death, the individual would have survived if they did not have a pre-existing life threatening condition. The mortality rate when COVID is the only cause is 0.28%. Interestingly, the most common co-morbidity for persons under 70 years old? Lung cancer!

So, in those cases, what really killed the individual? Their lung cancer, or COVID? The real answer is both. But it makes no sense to blame all the COVID deaths being reported on COVID.
aurodoc 2
A more accurate way of determining the total deaths from Covid is to look at the total deaths in USA in 2018,2019 and in 2020 and see if there is a significant increase in 2020 that is unexpected. There will be some number of increased deaths due to Covid (TBD) and some number that may have died that year from existing disease. What is known for sure is that hospitalization with ICU use is definitely higher this year (2020) and the costs for Covid treatment in money and opportunity losses is going to be significant not to mention the toll on health care workers involved in Covid care.
Since COVID hastens the death of those with other morbidities, it is reasonable to assume that once the pandemic passes, there will be a slight decrease in total deaths. Those that would have died in the near future, died earlier with COVID. So, a graph would show an increase in annual deaths due to COVID, followed by a drop below 'normal' numbers for a few years due to the accelerated deaths of those with morbidities.

The net increase may very well be very low. Mortalities are very low for those under the age of 65 and without co-morbidities.
The mask doesn’t protect the wearer I’m told.
Tommy Boy 2
I'm told it does. It protects both. Otherwise, when a patient presents with pneumonia, why would an ER physician wear a mask and the patient does not? Maybe so the physician doesn't breathe in the shedding bacteria or virus.
How do you think the Coronavirus travel to America from China? By boats, cars or aviation?
Then why wear it?
Wearing a mask lowers the risk of the wearer of spreading the virus.

This is the same reason that doctors wear masks in the operating room and other emergency situations. The mask stops spittle while talking and breathing therefore keeping the spit off/out of the patient.

If everyone wore a mask, the rate of spread would be significantly reduced. This is global pandemic ya know - just say'n.
Dr. Fauci told us that there was "miniscule risk" to the American public from the CCP virus. I'll wear an N-95 to protect myself, but I can't prevent others from catching the virus.
I find it fascinating that you and others talk about comments from Dr. Fauci and others that were presented BEFORE it was demonstrated that SARS-Cov-2 was airborne.

Yes, last year in January, February nearly everyone said masks were not necessary - not that they did not work. Perhaps you should look at the news conference with Dr. Fauci ah - yesterday?

Wear a mask, wash your hands and stay six feet away from people. It does work.
I stated nothing about masks. Woodward was all concerned that President Trump knew how deadly the virus was in December 2019 or January 20 -- yet the President's chief epidemiologist was going public with an interview on February 17 telling us that the risk was "miniscule". So do you believe Woodward? Do you believe President Trump? Dr. Fauci now wants us to do the troika of virus prevention even after we get the vaccine -- so why get the vaccine? I banned myself from Delta and United so I didn't have to fly their horrible airlines; saved them the postage, too.
So, you are all hung up on what was said a year ago as if that was the last word.

I don't care about Woodward and Trump is not there anymore.

It appears that you are a anti-vaccer now. Smart, real smart. Be sure to not get in line and have your do not treat paperwork in order.

The latest mask order (Executive Order) covers all airlines. Good luck flying, getting on a train or bus anywhere in the US.
I'm hung up on what the leading epidemiologist told the public more than three months into the pandemic. How could someone that uninformed now be leading the charge for President Biden ... oh, birds of a feather, right?
Did you notice, however, that the mask EO doesn't cover (1) the President and his family while they are "celebrating", and (2) doesn't cover the President press secretary even while they are on federal grounds? Elitists.
Only an idiot would believe a word that comes out of trumps "miniscule" brain. He would lie when the truth would save him. He belongs in Guantanamo.
AuggieD 1
Funny only an idiot would insult people on this site because they have a different opinion then you.
Troll Alert! The trolls are still at work!
Tim Dyck 1
At least your wearing a rated mask. Most people are wearing cheap paper or cloth masks that do little or nothing to protect the wearer or others.
John D 1
It's foul behavior in public. Do it in private.
Actually, what the mask will do is not stop the virus but will start incubating bacteria if you wear the mask for more than 20 minutes, and you'll be breathing that all into your lungs, and then you'll be more apt to catch the virus if you're exposed to it...any wonder why it hits the lungs so hard? They found out during WWI that masks don't work, and in all my years of doing acute care medical transcription, I never so much as once heard the word "mask" dictated as being a viable solution to any disease. The most important thing that should be discussed during this dem-panic should be DIET AND LIFESTYLE, which is your BEST defense against ANY disease, but THAT is never mentioned cuz, heaven forbid if we should all have to take a little responsibility for our own health...and make some difficult choices. Oh,'s much easier to virtue signal about masks over and over which does absolutely nothing except make us all sick of hearing it...and we should force little kids to wear them on planes, scaring them half to death, and then kick them off the flight if they can't be forced to keep the mask on! Yeah...THAT'S the ticket. Bunch of damn sheep!
The mask will stop YOU from spitting on people close to you.
Tim Dyck 4
Most people don't spit on people around them. Perhaps you need to just learn a few manners?
If this keeps loons like you off the flights, I'm thinking it can't be bad. :-)
How exactly does a virus incubate? It requires living, functioning, relocating cells in order to multiply. Last time I checked any human cells caught in the mask won’t be living or replicating anymore as they don’t have access to proteins and enzymes required. Bacteria could incubate but viruses would not.
You should re-read what Linda wrote. She never said the virus would incubate. She said that bacteria would incubate. Same as you. It sounds you you agree with her post.
Replicating not relocating.
Plus...anyone noticed how not one single person has died from the flu this season? Just like with the past election's all about who's doing the counting!!
srobak 7
let's not forget the 95% drop in the biggest annual killers: heart disease and cancer
And you're getting that "fact" where?
1. Putting 'fact' into quotations indicate you don't have an open mind.
2. If you did, you would have done a quick 30 second Google search and easily found the following nugget of knowledge from Rochester Regional Health, sourced from the CDC:

"According to the CDC, among the 3,337 PIC deaths reported for the week, 2,486 had COVID-19 listed as an underlying or contributing cause of death on the death certificate and 2 listed influenza, indicating that the current increase in PIC mortality is due primarily to COVID-19 and not influenza."

So, although NOT zero, pretty damn close. For the first week of 2021, 2,486 people died with COVID as a primary or contributing cause, and 2 PEOPLE died from the flu, quite possibly with co-morbidities.

Are flu deaths down to almost zero during these COVID times? I would say yes, and health organizations back me up.

Does this answer your possibly rhetorical question?
This was a response to the accuracy of the statement "not one single person" as well as just what proportion of the world's populace this statement may include. Isn't this an aviation interests community? Medical information/disinformation/political spouting/personal hygiene or lack thereof would be more appropriate in another venue, please.
Oh, so you didn't want an answer. OK. Best not to post a question then.
Did notice how "not one single person" was defined by admitting its inaccuracy. That fact was not one. The relatives of those 2 (out of how many, where & when, are always controlling factors not to be ignored) who died do not consider them zeros. Underlying or contributing cause is often a narrowing down of a multitude of contributing factors. You can only fit X number of factors and consider that a pull down menu facilitating input speed may also contribute to a bias in the reporting. That many other maladies and misfortunes are now taking place outside healthcare facilities for fear of Covid exposure/transmission must also be recognized in this equation. Will try not to pose any even rhetorical questions you might find insulting.
Thank you.
Another trumpet! Only her rights don’t like civility and rules. Try walking oh forgot it’s your right to do nothing and pass the virus to others. By the way check the flu deaths.
Whoop, whoop, whoop! Troll alert! Whoop, whoop, whoop!
Facts are such difficult things to deal with, aren't they?
Greg Zelna 25
Its about time. Of course any rule can be abused, in this day of everybody filming everything- I highly doubt it will be. I/we have never once had an issue with any of the flight crew- yes as in any profession some are better than others, to be expected. Have appropriate expectations and if you have special needs, make sure YOU make accommodation for them. The FA's cannot wait on you hand and foot back in the cattle car- its just not possible and for a $200 plane ticket- it simply ain't gonna happen ! Don't bring a carryon on board you personally cannot place in an overhead bin- this is also not the FA's job and some physically cannot (or should not) do it, either. For gosh sakes if you do see the frail or elderly passenger flailing with an overweight bag- get off your butt and help them and be thankful you are physically able to do so ! Civility will go a long way, the agonizing process of boarding will go faster, people will be happier, we all win.
Tim Dyck 3
I've had issues with flight crews a couple of time, each one was with Air Canada were customer service is not one of their strong points.
As for carry on, I help people who need help if their carry on is the size carry on is supposed to be. Those people who somehow think they can bring oversized bags and multiple laptops, giant purses and other extras on board should not be allowed to use up the overhead space the rest of us who follow the quidelines need.
Totally agree with this move. Good job Delta. I hope the other airlines follow suit.
sparkie624 -2
The problem with term "Basic Civility" is that it is open to interpretation and I have seen how they operate... I will never fly DELTA!
John D 23
It really comes down, behave yourself and act like an adult.
I agree 100% with you. Another way of looking at it is treat others as you would like to be treated. And I hope the general public is not masochistically inclined.
Self inclined. Generally, totally self inclined. Many times self reclined.
Tim Dyck 2
That concept is lost on some people. They think everyone is treating them poorly but they fail to realize that those people are just reacting to the treatment they are getting.
An experment...if your brave enough to try it. Go through a busy airport and smile lots, wish people a good day, say thank you to security, ticket agents and othe staff, act polite to everyone and pay attention to how you are treated. A week later go through the same airport but be a self centred, rude, obnoxious jerk and pay attention to how you are treated. Compare the results.
A freind and I tried this experment year's ago taking turns being the gentleman and the a-hole over a year of flying to and from work on a monthly basis. The results were evident, the gentleman got treated well and everyone was polite back, the a-hole got slow service and almost always extra time spent going through is a mirror that reflects your own attitude back at you. I perfer you just take my results then actually go and play the part f the a-hole, no one deserves to have to deal with that kind of person.
Can we petition FlightAware to kick people off this forum who don't display basic civility?
If there are people that are blatantly lacking in civility you can report them. In the past there was this « esquire » guy who got kicked off for that reason.
srobak 3
We've had 9 months of shining examples of what is considered adult behavior these days.
Tim Dyck 1
I've never had a bad experience with Delta staff. Maybe the problem is with how you treat them. I find that if you treat people kindly they will in turn treat you the same. But I have seen a stewardess that was polite with all the other passengers treat one woman very coldly because she was being a total bitch to the person seated next to her. I think everyone in that aria wanted to toss that passenger off the plane and the stewardess treated her better then I would have.
By far the best domestic airline, hands down. I don’t know what you’re flying!
Agreed. Our experiences with Delta have always been positive.
i thought this was already being done.."basic civility" is a rather broad term, but it can and does include rude and offensive language,loud and brash behavior,abusing a flight attendant or cockpit crew member,and just basic "family feud" or bar room brawl" behavior..that is apart from issues that encroach upon faa safety regulations like wearing the seatbelt,or trying to open an exit door!wearing a mask onboard is now included in individual airline safety regulations,and an airline does and should have a right of refusal to people not in compliance...
geroldn 14
Considering how many people are flying (even though there are fewer now)the number of banned passengers is pretty low. I don't expect Delta will be banning passengers on a willy-nilly and think a person will have to try hard to be considered 'uncivil' enough to be banned. I doubt Delta will be taking a big financial hit.
There is a very clear process that Delta and UAL go through before banning a passenger. It is a choice the passenger makes because they have so many opportunities to comply with the basic rules that THEY agreed to multiple times before buying their ticket.
John D 5
Right. In the end, Delta has seats to sell and wants to sell them. Think like a shopping mall operator might think. If you allow thugs to roam your mall, all it will attract is more thugs and paying customers will go elsewhere.
geroldn 3
'banning passengers willy-nilly' - sorry about the editing
I'm pretty sure that's correct. The people who have gotten banned have gone out of their way to act like spoiled children. It won't be hard to identify who qualifies.
Delta is just basically taking over the role of parents for people who didn't learn manners when they were growing up. "If you can't behave properly, you can't be here." I think I learned that as a toddler, certainly by kindergarten.
srobak 3
Something completely skipped by gen z and millennials
Tim Dyck 3
You can find a-holes in every age group and at the same time you can find polite well mannered people in every group too.
Al P 1
Actually I find Gen z and millenials to have much better manners than X'ers, boomers and earlier. But I'm sure anecdotal evidence, personal experience, and bias is probably a pretty big factor in this observation.
I see no evidence that this is generational.
srobak 3
You're blind then. Boomers and Xers don't do this
doublet 1
As a “boomer” I’ve observed several of my fellow boomers exhibit rude behavior. I’ve also seen under 30’s who were polite and gracious.
Selfishness knows no age limits.
srobak 1
about 100 hours a month on commercial aircraft and in airports across half a dozen airlines - plus everything observed of them outside of the aviation world.
I assume that includes Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (who every airline hates to fly) because she is so unreasonable and demanding to get her own way and be the exception to every airline rule. Flight crews hate it when she gets on their flights. Of course, they won't tell you that....but I will.
There is never any good excuse for bad behavior, on any airplane or in any business or situation. Civility and good manners matter.
And you think this matters because...?

That was a rhetorical question. I think I can recognize deflection when I see it.
Quote from Chuck Lavazzi: "The previous administration refused to help."

And you think that matters because...?

Oh, wait, I know what you mean: "Do as I say, not as I do."

Sweet! I need the license that you have in order to do that, too. It really seems to work well!
Well, it's relevant because the reason Biden issued the EO is that it wasn't issued by the previous administration, even though the airline industry had been asking for one for months.

Hope that helps.
Hmmm. Check this out, from May 1st of 2020.

"All Major U.S. Airlines Are Now Requiring Passengers to Wear Face Masks"

How does what you just said make any sense at all?
No sir, it is how I view life. Manners matter. No deflection meant. I fly so I do understand the aviation end of this issue.
OK, I'll take your word for it. I just didn't see why you had to bring up a specific person. Obviously it would apply across the board
In general Society in this era is disturbing. It all starts at home...did caring parents raise you or did TV and the internet? People have to held accountable for their actions, Delta is implementing accountability. Good for them, I hope it spreads!
Well put John!!
Lanny Word 6
Am I wrong or don’t airlines already have this on the books? This sounds more like so many things passengers are just now figuring out that they agreed to when buying a ticket. Unlike what Americans seem to think, the customer is not always right. As a small business owner, if someone showed their ass in my business, I would boot them out. It’s that simple. Wouldn’t you do the same? I’m sure Spirit Airlines will be glad to take all the banned troublemakers. Lol
Yes, it's about time people start being civil, and responsible for their actions/choices. Good on Delta.
srobak 3
This includes airline personnel. Often they are not.
Not true of Delta, in our experience. United, on the other hand....
They do, but they have been asking for Federal backup for months now. The previous administration refused to help.
I find it interesting that he calls flying Delta a “privilege.” I thought we were paying for a service from a business. I suppose like any business Delta has a right to do as it wishes and as consumers we have the right not to give them business. Yes, civility is very important. But which employee at Delta will decide what is civil? All it takes is one nasty flight attendant to report you and you can be banned. I wish airlines would focus on providing a good product on the ground and in the air instead of trying to be the arbiters of civility.
If they did not have problems with people they would not have this ban. If they ban you from one airline, try another, if they ban you from that airline I would say it were the individuals who are the problem.
You're 100% right!!
Ken Lane 1
Like many liberals who creeped into such positions, they fail to comprehend the concept of "free enterprise".
Insuring that a flight is as safe and pleasant as possible for all passengers actually is part of "providing a good product." Our experience with Delta have always been positive in any case but, of course, we haven't been flying since last March. We have a European trip lined up for this November; I just hope it will be safe to do so by then. And we will be definitely be flying Delta.
D Rotten 12
Funny! Does this include their EMPLOYEES???
srobak 2
Well to be fair... I guess it would mostly apply to American airlines.
srobak 3
It damn well should
I would assume so. But we've never had any problems with Delta employees anyway.
nckitkat 4
those of you arguing about the virus and masks are completely missing the point. Delta has the right to set their own rules about who they will fly and who they will not, barring racism, sexism, etc... I'm sure their employees will appreciate this, and many passengers, also. I have no problem with it.
Delta is back to being "ready when you are". Good for them. I hope all the other carriers get the same case of "balls" and follow suite.
What about eating? I thought you could remove your mask to eat
respect of the rules and principally people, is a must. Thanks Ed Bastian, go ahead
Agree with Delta CEO.
Mike Monk 11
How does Delta define 'civility' in this context? This notice shows concern for Delta employees, which is a good thing, but borders on contempt for its custoers.
On occassions I have witnessed cabin crew arrogance and disrespect to customers particularly when they have been called to account; under Delta's 'civility' ruling crew can, and likely will, take advantage of this.
This is not good for any passengers whether they are offending or otherwise.
If I was living within Delta's sphere of operations I would feel very reluctant to travel on its aircraft with this.
The free market will decide whether Delta's action is justifiable and not subject to abuse, not complaints of individuals who have a bone to pick with Delta. If Delta's policy becomes too odious for the air travel public, it will become self-evident.
Is the market 'free' if airlines share these lists, as others on this forum have suggested is going to happen?
srobak 1
In the end money talks.
Ed Angel 0
100% correct!
Excellent idea. I have been flying for 65 years and never saw such bad manners.
"Thousands of Americans are currently listed on the collective "no-fly" lists of the nation’s major airlines amid news of the TSA reviewing "hundreds of names" that may be prohibited from flying with any commercial carrier following riots at the U.S. Capitol earlier this month." Seems funny CEO Delta is banning passengers for disrespect and TSA is banning for being in Washington DC, source Michael Bartiromo, Fox News. Just a thought, maybe the list, of reasons to ban is growing longer? Maybe more bans added that with effect other people? I hope somebody understands what I'm trying to say.
srobak 5
It's basically giving big airline excessive power just like big tech. Slippery slope indeed.
TSA puts you on the list for just strolling through the Capitol, but if you loot and burn a Target store the Vice President will collect money for your bail.
Jim Prevo 9
Love Delta. Even more reason to fly Delta exclusively when possible.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Jim Prevo 16
Take solace in the fact that I won’t be competing with you for a seat on your favorite airline,
srobak 0
Much better than American
Randy Brown 14
So far this ruling has included a family that had a crying two year old who refused to allow her parents to put a mask on her.
The actions of a two year old child got a family kicked off an airplane.
Talk about Nazi flight crew!
Power corrupts
As defined by the airline.
zennermd 15
Is there protection for the customer being falsely accused or the employee failing to display basic civility?
There might be legal recourse for them, but protection? I'm thinking probably not so much.
Mike Mohle 7
Or for wearing the "wrong" hat?
The innocent always get punished.
TWA55 4
Why all the sudden is this CEO laying down the law now. Like everything else, they have had decades to curve bad behavior but did not. For those of us who have been in the industry we now what has been going on for many, many years. Ground agents, flt attendents, etc have been subject to civil abuse in all forms for too long. It would be nice if a code of conduct be placed at every airport door like all those other signs we are suppose to follow. That would include onboard code as well.
Flight service personnel aren't any different than other service personnel in this regard. I have watched bad behavior directed towards fast-food workers, amusement park service personnel, restaurant table servers, bar-tenders, law enforcement officers, etc. Working directly with customers has always brought with it the risk of interactions with bad behavior.
Does that include Delta personnel?
che mex 4
as they say....whats good for the goose is good for the gander
This is nothing new. Section 44902(b) of the FAA, known as “permissive refusal,” provides pilots with broad authority to remove passengers. The pilot in command stands in the role of the air carrier and can decide whether to remove a passenger from a flight for safety reasons.
John D 6
Right, long before all this recent cutting up, I've seen quite a few times where one or more folks were tossed off the plane prior to pushing away.
Wrong. This is very new. Removing a person from a flight is significantly different than never allowing them to fly again in their lifetime. You may want to correct your incorrect statement.
Sounds like an avenue for abuse by bitter flight attendants.
Everybody better start turning their cellphone camera to permanent record.
Greg Zelna 5
Perhaps if you (we) showed that 'bitter FA' a bit of kindness it might improve his/her day, eh ? Frankly our expectations back in the cattle car are way too high- I simply want to arrive in one piece and if possible, be left alone, period. I bring my own food, drink, and electronic entertainment on board and am thus never disappointed by the 'service'.....
Greg, years ago I may have agreed with you. However, my broader experiences preclude that now.

I used to travel internationally to Asia and sometimes to Europe. When I experienced service on the Asian airlines, I was embarrassed to be an American. The service difference between the Asian and American airlines was substantial. I couldn't help thinking about what Asian travelers thought about American service when they flew on one of our Airlines, and that was embarrassing. The best way to sum it up is, Asian airlines treated you as their customer and U.S. airlines treated you as their subjects. The service attitude on U.S. domestic airlines quite frequently was/is "This is OUR airline, you must do as we say", versus "What can we do to make your flight even more pleasant." I understand that in the end, the flight personnel are responsible for the safety and operational aspects of the flight (e.g. on-time performance), but just as there are many ways to say 'no' without being abusive, there are many different ways to treat a customer to get the required result, especially upon first contact.
Lanny Word 0
Maybe it’s Americans in general that are the problem? lol. I’m not going to disagree with you on the difference in Asian airlines and US airlines but they are only mirrors of their culture. But if you think they aren’t harsh on people, you should see what they do to people who chew gum or spit on the street.
Oh yes, I have been to Singapore! And aside of the fear of what may happen to me if someone slipped illegal drugs into my luggage in order to get them into the country, my experience was awesome. (For those unaware, smuggling illegal drugs into Singapore is a capital offense, and bringing gum into the country is met with very high fines.) It was one of the safest large cities to visit in the world. The government is very paternalistic, and this tendency even lead the government to segregate its three major ethnic populations into different parts of the city. Some may consider that a tyranny, and that is generally what happens when a government becomes paternalistic.
gprescott1 2
Who sets civility standard; the same airlines that lie about late or cancelled flights, take govt bailout for their own incompetence to manage; horrible service from flight crews(united & aa); inconsistent C19 rules of not downright draconian. Just like Dems and all the other crap, airlines are hypocrites and uncivil! I love airplanes, but flying commercial is a terrible experience and driving has become a pleasure when I think of buying a ticket on one of these winged sardine cans of uncivil aviation!
When leaking blubber from huge pax overwhelms my seat, what action should I take, Mr. Bastion?
Bilro 2
I promised myself that all my future flying would be done by private jet. I've since set up a special savings account so that I can amass enough money to fly again someday. At least I'm sparing Delta the bother of banning me.
From the article it sounds like wearing a mask is the only criteria of “basic civility”
Airlines in the US are common carriers. I suspect that at some point the ban of passengers who refuse to display basic civility will result in a complaint of discrimination contrary to common carrier regulations.

Moreover, Delta themselves are not totally free of refusing to display basic civility. Despite the clear statement of Delta's Contract of Carriage regarding canceled flights, Delta engaged in deceptive, bullying behavior to convince passengers to give up their rights to be refunded all money paid for flights that Delta wasn't providing. (I know of this personally because I had tickets on a cancelled flight and personally experienced deceptive and bullying behavior where I was repeatedly told in multiple occasions that I didn't understand the contract and that Delta did not have to refund my money - until it was finally admitted that I was right and my money was refunded.)

Permanently banning passengers will probably be found to be illegal except in cases where the passengers have violated laws as opposed to being uncivil, especially when the lack of civility is a judgement call. Even then the violation of law will probably have to be egregious. Our society generally recognizes the concept of repentance, remorse, and second chances. Corporate policies that don't are ultimately against foundational precepts of our civil society, and could therefore be viewed as "uncivil" themselves.
Every state has laws on its books that allow any business to BAN any single person from their establishment. The law very clearly states though that you MAY NOT BAN a group of individuals, say red heads. That is discrimination. These rules must be applied individually to a single person. Any restaurant owner can tell you that they can and infact do BAN individual customers from their business. Aggressive harassing vulgar behavior is one of those reasons that you may be banned for. As Delta is stating that they are concerned for all their passengers and flight crew, some people may never fly Delta again. You do not have a constitutional right to fly on a plane.
Never flown on Delta. Come to think of it, it’s been over five years since I flown. Besides, driving is cheaper, more comfortable, and no mask required.
sparkie624 -7
Flown on them a lot when I worked for Pinnacle/Endeavor... crap company! they are all about big money and minimal service. They force small airlines out of business.. Forced Pinnacle into a Hostile Take OVer, Pushed Go-Jet and other regionals to brink of Bankruptcy...> Sorry No good company!
...I wonder how many are going to Google that phrase...
Yeah, turns out Gander is an airport in Canada, so it's aviation related.
A great idea. Does it also apply to cabin crew also? No matter, I banned myself from Delta 20 years ago.
Whose the judge? Same folks types who get to shut down free speech? We have law enforcement and courts to deal those problems. Far from a belligerent, I wear the mask, but these kinds of pre-emptive threats stink of something else.
mariofer 1
It is called free market. Delta is a private entity, not public transportation. As long as they don't base their decisions on any of the protected categories, they can do whatever they want. If someone does not agree, they can take their business somewhere else.
srobak 4
If they are truly a private entity then they should be getting any common/public carrier recognition it protection through federal agencies, and customers should be better protected from predatory business practices. Oops.
Lanny Word -3
Exactly, you don’t have a right to free speech inside a private business.
I guess you're right. Just like in Twitter and Facebook.
Yes, actually. You don't have a Constitutional right to an airline ticket, a social media account, or any number of other private goods and services.
Classic slippery slope that enables tyrants to be tyrannical.
che mex 5
Tyrants? ...are you referring to the passengers who act without respect for others and without civility?
Look up slippery slope.
sparkie624 -5
The Company.. Not the Passengers... Bad Airline... They are very unethical.
sparkie624 1
That is all Delta is, is Tyrants.... Look at what they did to Pinnacle... Totally Illegal. Hostile takeover to create Endeavor. They bankrupted the company and then took them over and created Endeavor... They are truly a Criminal Company... No respect for them.
O.K. I get it. I understand. BUT, I grew-up just down the Street from the Woolman's in Atlanta. I have seen the company go from very humble beginnings to a world-wide giant. I have flown all over the world on DL. In all of those flights I have lost count of how many rude DL employees I have seen in action. Not just to me, mostly towards others. So, pardon me Mr. Bastion, but, I think arrogance and narcissism must have taken you over!
AND, I'll bet Mr. Bastion will never return a penny of the Billion Dollars hand-out he got from us taxpayers----- some of whom, will be banned. Where is the justice for a one-sided argument?
Has air travel become a totalitarian transportation experience?
Just another glaring example of how the Big Corporations that rule us no longer care about the "marketplace".
I can't stand a bully.
Greg Zelna 1
If DL or any airline abuses this policy, which is already basically Federal law - I think 'the market' will respond appropriately, don't you ?
No. IMO the "market" no longer matters. And going forward it is going to become more and more obvious.
It is already down to "our way or the highway". As Big Corporations complete their merger with the Government it won't matter one bit. The New World Order has arrived.
Gary Snyder -6
Exactly! This is the big picture that most people don’t understand. When I fly, I just sit down, I don’t bother anyone and wait to get to point B. However, we know that as of late, when there have been passenger issues it has revolved around the mask issue. Don’t have the mask perfectly over your nose, “we’ll ban you for life take that!” It’s just an extension of cancel culture gone too far. I’m a captain for a major airline but this has gone too far.
a hazy aspiration, not specifically defined, with remedies not explained, ; feel good foolishness. Directness may violate Delta's idea of civility, with Delta being both judge and jury and court of appeals also. Corporate silly-speak ....
John D 3
of course not - that would make too much sense. there will be no opportunity to defend yourself if falsely accused. it's cancel culture - nothing else. there have been unruly employees AND pax for years not displaying "basic civility" however that will be arbitrarily defined by some yahoo at HQ. Don't know how this is going to solve anything.
Good for Delta Airlines and I believe American Airlines has followed their lead. Its about time for someone to put these rude and immature individuals in their place. I only wish that other services, serving the public would, follow their example.
Right...for years passengers could behave poorly and airlines wouldn’t do much at alll and the. The mask issue and customers are getting thrown off and now banned from travel? Why are the airlines working in unison on this? Are they following orders from someone above? All of these reactions over mask issues when the science doesn’t even support that masks prevent the transmission of viruses. This is over the top and has now given flight attendants new found power to lord over customers and threaten banning the customer for life. And by-the-way, im a Captain at a major US Airline.
Seth Riklin -3
Actually, the facts and science are clear that masks protect your fellow passengers from you, and you from them. Wearing a mask is a simple act of kindness and consideration, as you do not know what health issues the person next to you might have. Thankfully, President Biden made masks mandatory, taking flight crew off of the hot seat. The airlines asked President Biden for this help. I hope we are able to get back to a time when people will respect each other, and be courteous to each other.
Tim Dyck 3
I don't know we're you are getting your science from but the ability of a cheap paper or cloth mask to stop a virus is pretty much zero. That is why anyone who wears a mask of respirator for respiratory protection only uses a rated and fitted product. If your trusting anything else then you better be thankful SARS-CoV-2 has a low mortality rate.
JJ Johnson -2
Good job Comrade. We are getting more and more like China everyday. Comply! Sign your papers! Wear your mask for the flu. Speak when only spoken too. Paranoia is real.

Remember blowback is also real.
wiregold 0
"Paranoia is real." You've got that bit correct ...
Andy Grove thanks you!
eat some more cheese.
But were they wearing masks when they heckled Romney and Graham ? This is key.
Are 51.1% of American Citizens stupid?? Or only 50% of the few that fly??
Research has proven over and over again that fully 50% of American citizens are dumber than average.
Civility rules!
Thank you, Delta. We have lost common decency. We ueed to "dress up" to fly! Now flip flops seem to be ok
AuggieD 1
Great Now all we need is for the Democrats to get their act together.
Oh, heaven forbid!
Jim Ward 1
I suppose flying in the nude is out of the question ?
srobak 1
not on the right airline
The answer is not just wearing an N-95 Mask, trust me!
Tim Dyck 1
An N95 is actually not even good enough for viruses. The medical grade ones are coated with a substance to make them more efficient but doctors and other medical professionals working with airborn viruses wear a higher rated mask.
Sounds like a plan for insolvency, oh wait us travel trash are bailing them out with federal tax dollars. Slow Joe needs to cut off their welfare and let them compete or go bankrupt.
Ryan Medd 1
CEO finger wagging is a sure fire way to lose my business.

I'm all for civility, and generally expect it, especially onboard aircraft, but wagging your finger at your customers isn't useful. Nor is blindly following the dictates of bureaucrats and politicians, spread by a compliant media. I've yet to hear a single airline CEO question whether masks on planes will solve anything, and have any data to back up their use. In fact, I haven't heard any CEO question whether there has been any viral transmission ON BOARD their aircraft, and if there has been, how many cases, and what their results were. (Don't kid yourself...this data is readily available, if the CEO's want to get it from govt)

We're entirely sucked in by the idea that every case is bad. Yet, when one goes looking at the actual data (rather than that being fed to us on the evening news), that idea is entirely blown out of the water. There is a very well defined group of "most at risk", and outside of that, risk falls spectacularly for the rest of the population. Interestingly, while the most at risk are well defined, I've yet to find a jurisdiction doing anything in particular to protect THEM....better to ruing everyone's life, instead of protecting those which are easily protected with next to no impact on everybody else's lives, I guess.

This is all moot now, anyway, since WHO has advised that PCR testing thresholds have been too high (something most of us paying attention knew the better part of a year ago). "Positive cases" will quickly start to diminish as jurisdictions follow WHO's recommendations, bringing an equally quick end to this supposed pandemic.
Tim Dyck 1
Because our company flies to and from work we can pretty much be certain that the virus is sometimes traced back to the plane. We are all very mask compliant because if we lose our flight privileges we also cannot get to work so we lose our jobs. We had several cases were one person shows up and within a few days starts showing symptoms and when tested positive and when others within a few seats are tested they to are positive and soon start showing symptoms. There are people from differant communities and have no contact off the job but are suddenly infected after the plane trip. Because of this we have put our mine into shutdown so we can reduce staff and space people out on the plane which had solved the problem. Masks obviously don't work but social distancing does.
Of course some are more at risk than others. Some live through the virus with little symptoms, some die from it. Everyone reacts to the virus differently. However the means of transmission are the same for everyone. You may have the virus and be a-symptomatic but You can pass it on to someone who will get very sick and possibly die. I will gladly wear a mask, maintain proper distance etc. if it means not spreading a virus that has already killed over 400,000 people in this country and many hundreds of thousands around the world.
What you say is true now, and has always been. This is the same real science that has existed since human beings have been around (and before!). Communicable diseases that carry risk of death, particularly for specific groups, have always plagued us. Those reasons to wear masks have always been around, and will always be around. Have you been constantly compliant with the results of your reasoning.
Ryan Medd 3
Your mask isn't saving those people from dying. That's a fundamental fact, proven by the data. As I noted, we ARE NOT doing anything to prevent those people from dying. We ARE impacting EVERYONE little, if any, effect. The sooner we ALL realize that, the sooner we start protecting those likely to die from this virus, from this virus.

That last paragraph sums everything up. A simple change in how we run the test, and this whole thing goes away. When that happens, will you THEN question all your obedience? Or will you still blindly follow whatever CNN tells you?
Lanny Word 3
You keep talking about “facts” and “data” yet you have yet to list any actually supporting data. Are you sure you don’t work for
Actually it's the medical community who are telling us that masks save lives. Don't know where you get your "proven data". Fox?
Tim Dyck 3
Medical journals like The Lancet have had a lot of articles about how cheap paper and cloth masks are not working but actually spreading the virus faster. Once people put on the mask they think they are protected and forget the basics of social distancing, sanitizing and staying away from crowds. The media is telling you that masks save lives, the majority of medical community is not.
Ryan Medd 3
.....and, yet... EVERYWHERE masks have been mandated, cases have continued to rise. It's almost like our "case" counts are flawed in some way? Hmmmm... I wonder what could be causing that? Hmmmm...could it be the recently admitted to, by the WHO, incorrect testing procedures? I wonder.
Thank you, a smart individual
Airbnb and a few others have what's essentially a political questionnaire. I imagine this is where this will end up in 5 years or so.
As of 01/20/2021 12:01pm EST. You got that right.
Good for Delta I applaud them for standing up for common decency. I will fly Delta every chance I have!!!
bbabis 1
So glad I don't fly airlines! Passengers are always civil in the back of the CJ.
Yup. On our Lear also.
FlightAware forum used to be about aviation topics. This and many other stories posted lately are not about aviation. Another instance of the tragedy of the commons.
cyberjet 3
Delta is an airline. Those offensive passengers are buying tickets on an airline. Their behaviour is affecting other passengers travelling on an airline. It is an aviation story.
Tim Dyck 1
It is about the industry so it is relevant. Some of the politically biased comments could be left out. Flightaware is soon going to be as bad as Facebook.
The Dude 1
Completely ridiculous.
What about the airlines lack of basic civility in their abusive fees and rules?
More tolerance, not less.
cyberjet -1
Says a guy who's being intolerant towards a business' right to run their business the way they see fit. You can always take your money elsewhere ...
Oh, but one step at a time. Once airlines begin sharing their no-fly lists, as has been suggested, there is no alternative. If one airline determines a person is a nuisance to them and/or others, then why would any other airline disagree?
leo bramel 1
Wonderful news, Go Delta !!! Now if others will get a back bone.
Overdue, -If you just can't play nice find someone else to lug you around-, thought it was implied in the ticket contract, with a venue to petition for reversal of the decision through legal means. Justifying the documented incident becomes the obstacle.
Great work Delta, these low life's have no place on aircraft. Let's see American, United and the others follow suit.
Bravo your travelling majority thanks you.
Miles Dee 1
Ok........fair enough. How's going to be the arbiter of what is and isn't "basic civility?" What are disqualifying actions that you consider basic civility. Do we see a "social scoring" process coming. And while we're at it, when will you provide us, US Taxpayers with a plan to never need our hard earned money to bail you out?
Jean Kevil 1
That would depend on who is making that determination. Being thrown off a plane for wearing a MAGA cap—WHICH I READ THAT YOU DID—is ridiculous regardless of one’s political ideology.
I admire Mr. Bastian for saying this will be done, but as a former flight attendant for 40 years, alcohol is the main source of any inflight disturbance problem. Unless you require everyone to take a breathalizer or abolish liquor sales, these "eruptions" will continue. True, that there is strength in numbers and that gets people riled up but they simply cannot be allowed to "take over" a flight. Sorry but if that occurs, a diversion will be made and those causing the ruckus removed. Pilots always backed us up, 99 percent of the time, if we asked them to remove someone disruptive. Since the era of checking in at home or at a kiosk, there is minimal interaction with anyone until stepping onto the airplane.Once on, they can begin harrassment of the cabin crew.
This incredible raid on a revered building brought out the worst in people and they have to be held accountable for actions on and off the aircraft.
Linda Tyler -1
What about people with medical exceptions/conditions like disautonomia? Are they to be discriminated against? Doesn't Delta's discrimination violate the 1964 civil rights Act? Who says civility goes only one way, as in "you are only civil if you wear a mask, but you are not civil if you don't"? Why is a person suddenly and solely not civil if they make the medical decion for themselves and their family to not wear a mask? Why is Delta allowed to make our medical decisions for us? (Wearing a mask is a medical treatment) Why is Delta allowed to violate the Nuremberg code like this even though studies have been done and show wearing a mask can cause lung cancer??
cyberjet 1
If my 87 year old mother-in-law who suffers from asthma and COPD and whose lungs function at about 40% of normal can wear a mask with on problems, so can everyone else.
Not sure where you got your ’facts’ but there is more to wearing a mask than it is all about you. In any civilized society you should think of the big picture and how your actions affect others. I totally believe in the freedoms we have here in the USA but along with those freedoms comes the need to act RESPONSIBLY!!!
Now with Federal support. Bans will be on ALL the airlines not just one at a time. Mask deniers and asswipes beware.
srobak 4
This is for you...
You did a good job just shutting down all the commenters who suggest you can just go to another airline to escape.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Here we go. Does anyone else see how we are being made to judge one another as good or bad over things that should be personal choice/medical privacy issues? Should I even have to tell a stranger of my medical condition in order to survive in society? These laws and policies are pitting Americans against one another, where before we used to care about one another simply because we are countrymen.
They are next.
dj horton -6
Could start with fat pilots. The ones that can’t tuck in their shirts, pouring out of their uniforms, in heart rate zone 5 as they waddle up the jet bridge from the plane to terminal... only to go stand in line at McDonald’s. What an embarrassment.

First class medical my ass
I would like to see a civility deposit. Half the amount of your ticket. If you behave, deposit returned as leave the airport. I have been on flights, like NWK to LAX where they would make more for bad behavior than baggage fees.
srobak 2
This is equal to celebrities and politicians getting out of crimes that would incarcerate most others.


You cannot put a price on such things. Makes it ripe for corruption and exploitation.
Good. And, of course, they now have the backing of the Federal government when it comes to common-sense health measures like masks during a pandemic.
For any liberals out there. My body my choice should apply to mask wearing. Don’t be a hypocrite!
Good for them. The nonsense we have seen on the airlines for years needs to stop. Now if they would enforce the carry on baggage size the world would be great.
Gee, It only took fifty years of ignorant behavior for them to get it.
If you do not want to play fair with the airlines, you may feel free to start driving!
leo bramel 0
Right! I hope that all companies take Delta's example and make it their moral imperative to refuse to do business with or accommodate in any other way any and all people who have displayed bad manners at any time in the past! It obviously is the only realistic way of making this world a better place to live.
So nice to have a LEADER in the industry. He protects his employees and you!!! Do wish that some of our leaders in WAS D C would stand up and be truthful. Don't quibble.. Just the TRUTH..
Ken Lane -6
Bastian can go perform a physical impossibility upon himself.


계정을 가지고 계십니까? 사용자 정의된 기능, 비행 경보 및 더 많은 정보를 위해 지금(무료) 등록하세요!
이 웹 사이트는 쿠키를 사용합니다. 이 웹 사이트를 사용하고 탐색함으로써 귀하는 이러한 쿠기 사용을 수락하는 것입니다.
FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?
FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..