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

Honeykiss1974 · #1 10-06-2005, 06:13 PM

Southwest boots woman for shirt

Lorrie Heasley to sue for being asked to leave a flight because of her politically charged T-shirt.
October 6, 2005: 5:05 PM EDT

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Southwest Airlines kicked a woman off one of its flights over a political message on her T-shirt, the airline confirmed Thursday, and published reports say the passenger will sue.

Lorrie Heasley, of Woodland, Wash., was asked to leave her flight from Los Angeles to Portland, Ore., Tuesday for wearing a T-shirt with pictures of President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and a phrase similar to the popular film title "Meet the Fockers."

A spokesman for Southwest Airlines (up $0.20 to $15.21, Research) told CNN that the airline used the "common sense" approach when they decided to escort Heasley from the plane in Reno, Nevada, during a stopover between Los Angeles and Portland, Ore.

The airline felt that the T-shirt was offensive and that other passengers would be outraged by it, the spokeswoman said, adding that the incident is about "decency."

"I have cousins in Iraq and other relatives going to war," Heasley told the Reno Gazette-Journal. "Here we are trying to free another country and I have to get off an airplane in midflight over a T-shirt. That's not freedom."

According to the airline spokeswoman, Heasley was asked to leave after she refused to cover up her T-shirt, an account that conflicts with Heasley's version in the Gazette-Journal.

Heasley told the newspaper that she agreed to cover her shirt with a sweatshirt, but it slipped as she slept. After she was ordered to wear her T-shirt inside-out or leave, she and her husband chose to leave, the paper said.

Read the rest here

~~~~~

Even though Southest can boot you from their flight for whatever they deem fit, at least she is just suing for the cost of her airline ticket and such - not millions for her "pain and suffering".

wrigley · #2 10-06-2005, 06:26 PM

".....the airline's contract with the Federal Aviation Administration contains rules that say the airline will deny boarding to any customer whose conduct is offensive, abusive, disorderly or violent or for clothing that is "lewd, obscene, or patently offensive."

If there's a dress code for the airport, then bring out the fashion police.

#3 10-06-2005, 06:42 PM

Wow, this is ridiculous.

We had a dress code to follow when traveling Space Available. No jeans, no frayed clothing, etc. We had to follow it because, hey, we flew cheap.

However, it always has been my understanding that paying customers can wear whatever the hell they want. They should only be denied boarding if they pose a threat to the crew and the passengers.

Good for her and her suit. I hope she's victorious.

Rudey · #4 10-06-2005, 07:24 PM

She has a right to wear whatever she wants.

For example, if she were to wear a "Blacks/Hispanics/Asians/Jews and Gays/Lesbians deserve to die" shirt with a large swastika or something of that nature sewn on the back, she has every right to wear it.

-Rudey

hoosier · #5 10-06-2005, 08:45 PM

SW has some bitchy rules.

I suspect this case won't get shown on their TV show.

DeltAlum · #6 10-06-2005, 09:50 PM

I think they had every right to ask her to either cover the offending shirt or leave the aircraft.

They're running a business. They own the airplane. They could lose customers who were offended.

Businesses have been sued for sexual harassment for having pictures of scantily clad women on the walls in their buildings. It wouldn't surprize me to see the airline get sued if the right person was on that flight and chose to make a stink.

I don't have a problem with their decision in this case.

honeychile · #7 10-06-2005, 09:59 PM

I'm with DeltAlum. The woman was given the option of wearing the shirt inside out, and the rules of the airlines precludes allowing passengers wearing something " that is "lewd, obscene, or patently offensive."

She's free to fight for her right of free speech, but with a reasonable jury, she'll lose the case. Southwest would probably be better off refunding her money with a privacy clause.

kafromTN · #8 10-06-2005, 11:54 PM

Does this mean I can sue a club for not letting me in because they have a dress code& I am simply wearing my flip flops as a political statement? [don't ask me how it's a statement, i haven't figured it out yet]

Is having a dress code against the law?

-Mark

Coramoor · #9 10-07-2005, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DeltAlum
I think they had every right to ask her to either cover the offending shirt or leave the aircraft.

They're running a business. They own the airplane. They could lose customers who were offended.

Businesses have been sued for sexual harassment for having pictures of scantily clad women on the walls in their buildings. It wouldn't surprize me to see the airline get sued if the right person was on that flight and chose to make a stink.

I don't have a problem with their decision in this case.

Exactly.

If it's the companies choice and they refund her money, then they have the right to server or not serve whatever people they so choose.

AlphaFrog · #10 10-07-2005, 07:15 AM

I don't the it was the message that was offinsive but the actual F-word. I respect SW for making that decision... I don't want my daughter seeing that word on someone's shirt. Wear it to a bar or whatever, but not in a family-orientated enviroment.

AlphaSigOU · #11 10-07-2005, 07:18 AM

I guess people have forgotten the meaning of that quaint little sign posted in many businesses: "WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE". You are entitled to the right of free speech and expression, but what people fail to realize is that with certain rights also come responsibilities.

preciousjeni · #12 10-07-2005, 08:24 AM

I don't see an issue with a private business asking her to leave. But, she should DEFINITELY get a refund! They didn't fulfill the service for her.

KSig RC · #13 10-07-2005, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Honeykiss1974

"I have cousins in Iraq and other relatives going to war," Heasley told the Reno Gazette-Journal. "Here we are trying to free another country and I have to get off an airplane in midflight over a T-shirt. That's not freedom."

Past the mentally retarded non sequitur . . . I would have paid money to see the airline force her off "in midflight."

DeltAlum · #14 10-07-2005, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by KSig RC
. . . I would have paid money to see the airline force her off "in midflight."

That would be cold.

Maybe they could offer her one of those new third world parachutes...the kind that opens on impact.

Seriously, they should refund her money, though. Seems to me that if they keep it, they've accepted her business and need to complete their part of the deal.

moe.ron · #15 10-07-2005, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DeltAlum
Seriously, they should refund her money, though. Seems to me that if they keep it, they've accepted her business and need to complete their part of the deal.

Agree totally. Keeping her money means that they have to keep their end of the bargain, which is to fly her to her destination. If they refunded the money, then they do not have a debt to fulfill.