Woman sues Southwest airlines: asked to leave flight due to offensive T-shirt - Page 3

lifesaver · #31 10-10-2005, 03:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by wrigley
"lewd, obscene, or patently offensive."

I find SWA, lewd, obscene, and patently offensive. And it has nothing to do with the t-shirt deal. Its just a trashy-ass airline. Yeah, its making money, but its still trashy, with trashy people who fly it.

DeltAlum · #32 10-10-2005, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by lifesaver
I find SWA, lewd, obscene, and patently offensive. And it has nothing to do with the t-shirt deal. Its just a trashy-ass airline. Yeah, its making money, but its still trashy, with trashy people who fly it.

Flown on any other airline recently? None are worth writing home about.

I wish SW flew to Denver because the lower fares are attractive, and you don't really get great service on any carrier these days.

sugar and spice · #33 10-10-2005, 10:31 AM

For those of you who say you'd be pissed off if your kid read that shirt . . . what if somebody was just walking down the street wearing that shirt? Who would you complain to then?

I do understand the airline's dilemma and don't think they were out of line, but I don't think it was their responsibility to do this, either. Personally, if you take your kid out in public, they're going to be exposed to things you don't want them exposed to. Hey, chances are that they've already been exposed to naughty language on the elementary school playground. My thought on it is . . . if they don't already know what it means, they probably won't care. When you're 6, EVERYONE around you is wearing a tee shirt that you don't understand, and most 6-year-olds would rather go play than figure them all out. (I would like to reference the time that I watched "Dirty Dancing" when I was 9 -- ten years later I watched it again and said, "OMG, there's an ABORTION in that movie?" My 9-year-old self didn't have a clue -- it went right over my head.) And for those kids who do know what the f-bomb means -- well, you're really too late to protect them from it.

33girl · #34 10-10-2005, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by lifesaver
I find SWA, lewd, obscene, and patently offensive.

When I first read this (haven't caffeinated myself yet) I thought it said SWV. And I was like "why is he picking on them? They haven't had a hit in years."

At any rate, they should have told her to turn it inside out period, because as the story stated, even if you cover it the cover can slip or you can get too warm.

It sounds also like she knew she would get this kind of reaction.

kafromTN, a dress code at a club is OK as long as it's applied to everyone. You can't say "no bare midriffs" and let the skinny girls in with them while you keep the chubby girls out. There is another thread about this somewhere.

Honeykiss1974 · #35 10-10-2005, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by lifesaver
I find SWA, lewd, obscene, and patently offensive. And it has nothing to do with the t-shirt deal. Its just a trashy-ass airline. Yeah, its making money, but its still trashy, with trashy people who fly it.

oohhhh, this was TWA (remember them) to a "T".
They were so bootleg, I can't even began to comment.

SWA was like flying in a bentley compared to them.

Ok, back to the thread. Yah for SWA. Sorry, but anyone wearing a shirt with the "f-word" is purposely expecting a reaction from someone. She just probably thought it would be from a Bush supporter as opposed to the airline.

Rudey · #36 10-10-2005, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DeltAlum
Flown on any other airline recently? None are worth writing home about.

I wish SW flew to Denver because the lower fares are attractive, and you don't really get great service on any carrier these days.

I would have thought they would fly you business or first class.

My problem with Southwest is that they don't assign you seats. But other than that, they have great fares when I don't book early enough. And I would much rather fly an airline that doesn't get government subsidies by using my tax money to pay pension benefits.

-Rudey

Lindz928 · #37 10-10-2005, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rudey
I would have thought they would fly you business or first class.

My problem with Southwest is that they don't assign you seats. But other than that, they have great fares when I don't book early enough. And I would much rather fly an airline that doesn't get government subsidies by using my tax money to pay pension benefits.

-Rudey

I flew SW last March on a really short flight (Austin to Houston) and I was assigned a seat.

Is this something they only do for some flights?

Rudey · #38 10-10-2005, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lindz928
I flew SW last March on a really short flight (Austin to Houston) and I was assigned a seat.

Is this something they only do for some flights?

I've never heard of them assigning seats and I've flown it from many different cities.

Usually you're given a group number based on how early you check in and then you line up with your group and get a seats on a first come basis.

-Rudey

Lindz928 · #39 10-10-2005, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rudey
I've never heard of them assigning seats and I've flown it from many different cities.

Usually you're given a group number based on how early you check in and then you line up with your group and get a seats on a first come basis.

-Rudey

Weird. I do remember not having an assigned seat when I flew from New Orleans to Houston a few years ago. But I definately had one last March. *shrug*

lifesaver · #40 10-10-2005, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DeltAlum

I wish SW flew to Denver because the lower fares are attractive, and you don't really get great service on any carrier these days.

This is the biggest myth out there. Generally, SWA is no cheaper than any other airline.

If you have to fly (like Rudy said) with only a few days notice then its 10-15% cheaper than the other carriers. But SWA hasent been the 'low-fare' carrier (with 7+ days booking) since the 90's.

Plus, they dont fly the traditional 'hub and spoke' system, so you have to stop three times between San Antonio and NY. Yes, they are introducting more non-stop flights, but your odds are pretty good that you will have more than one stop if you are flying a longer distance (like I ususally do). So you spend more time traveling. (My friend Beth flew hoem to NYC yesterday from San Antonio via stops in Houston AND Orlando). Is the extra travel time and often destination airport which is less convienient (Islip for NYC) really worth the 15% savings? For me its not. Its a great business model tho. Give people a sense of false savings and they will come flocking. By the time you factor in extra travel time (in the air and at distant airports) you've eaten through any savings... you as the customer just dont realize it because its on 'your dime'. Its just a big scam.

I dont fly expecting great service either. I dont fly southwest because I dont want to fly with the toothless homeless guy with a live chicken on his lap, or the white trash family with 12,341 screaming babies and children in tow. While not a hard and fast rule, some of the non-discount carriers seem to have a better group of travelers onboard.

Rudy, I fly American or Continental and neither one uses tax dollars to pay for its pension.

honeychile · #41 10-10-2005, 01:00 PM

I agree about SWA not being any big savings. I happen to know the cheapest person on two feet (actually, two of them - they should do us all a favor & get married!), and he keeps saying how cheap SWA is.

Then, on the same weekend, he was flying to Pittsburgh, and I was flying to Chicago - his hometown. He bragged and bragged about the fare he was getting - until I got one $10 less. He had a layover, and I flew nonstop, during premium hours. I keep telling him, it's all a matter of timing and knowing your market, but I guess he likes the cattle call approach...

BTW, I fly USAirways whenever possible, due to the amount of people I know who work there. Not that they can get me a discount, but I use my money to support the local economy.

AlphaSigOU · #42 10-10-2005, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DeltAlum
Flown on any other airline recently? None are worth writing home about.

I wish SW flew to Denver because the lower fares are attractive, and you don't really get great service on any carrier these days.

They used to fly out of old Stapleton, but got tired of the traffic delays (caused by weather and - ahem - delays (mostly by old Continental (the Frank Lorenzo version) and United). They won't touch the new Denver airport with a 10-foot pole, either.

They did the same with service to SFO and IAH - delays, plus they had less congested airports nearby at OAK and HOU. They already told DFW to Vaffancul'! and are fighting to dump the Wright Amendment.

SWA does not assign seats... they do assign you to a boarding group, A (1-30), B (31-60), or C (61-90 or until the plane fills up).

Since they fly point-to-point, its not unusual to see thru passengers already seated (and taking the decent seats).

Rudey · #43 10-10-2005, 01:32 PM

I like American. I dislike Continental. I like United planes but all American tax payers should get a discount for supporting the pensions of their employees.

In general though, Southwest shows cheaper fares to me than the big airlines flying to NY or Cali from Chicago. I've heard if you install their Ding! program, they show even cheaper fares but I refuse to go to that trouble. I also refuse to fly anything but non-stop flights.

For its price, I think ATA and JetBlue were the best. I can't remember anything special about Ted or Song though.

I'm not sure if I can prove it but I really think my flights used to be shorter a few years ago. There definitely was food from what I remember. And I wasn't forced to pick from 2 or 3 ridiculous flight times if I needed a flight. Also, flights are way more packed now than they used to be. I'm not asking for a handjob from these airlines, I just want to get home quickly, when I want. That's all.

-Rudey

Quote:

Originally posted by lifesaver
This is the biggest myth out there. Generally, SWA is no cheaper than any other airline.

If you have to fly (like Rudy said) with only a few days notice then its 10-15% cheaper than the other carriers. But SWA hasent been the 'low-fare' carrier (with 7+ days booking) since the 90's.

Plus, they dont fly the traditional 'hub and spoke' system, so you have to stop three times between San Antonio and NY. Yes, they are introducting more non-stop flights, but your odds are pretty good that you will have more than one stop if you are flying a longer distance (like I ususally do). So you spend more time traveling. (My friend Beth flew hoem to NYC yesterday from San Antonio via stops in Houston AND Orlando). Is the extra travel time and often destination airport which is less convienient (Islip for NYC) really worth the 15% savings? For me its not. Its a great business model tho. Give people a sense of false savings and they will come flocking. By the time you factor in extra travel time (in the air and at distant airports) you've eaten through any savings... you as the customer just dont realize it because its on 'your dime'. Its just a big scam.

I dont fly expecting great service either. I dont fly southwest because I dont want to fly with the toothless homeless guy with a live chicken on his lap, or the white trash family with 12,341 screaming babies and children in tow. While not a hard and fast rule, some of the non-discount carriers seem to have a better group of travelers onboard.

Rudy, I fly American or Continental and neither one uses tax dollars to pay for its pension.

AKA_Monet · #44 10-10-2005, 03:34 PM

Aside from the fact that I have a French Connection in the UK t-shirt myself that says "The best FCUK in town"... And I also have a T-shirt that says "Relax, it's just sex" and a Playboy Bunny shirt...

What if a tiggo biddy woman with an itty bitty shirt with "Goddess" on it was walking down the aisle, would y'all be offended then?

DeltAlum · #45 10-10-2005, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by honeychile
I keep telling him, it's all a matter of timing and knowing your market, but I guess he likes the cattle call approach...

Now that is absolutely true. Timing is everything. But, if you're flying "full" fare, the "low cost" airlines are less expensive.