Does anyone know if the “apology” is available publicly?
Well, she wasn’t drunk and she used her kid(s) as human shields. But yeah, people have gotten tossed for less.
http://www.capitalbay.com/news/653957-united-airlines-apologizes-to-mother-for-trying-to-force-her-disabled-daughter-into-her-own-seat.html According to this article the apology that the “FA behaved poorly” was via phone.
The mother also tweeted that she got a nice apology and thanked United. To their credit, they don’t appear to be gunning for free tickets.
It would make sense the apology is via phone - they aren’t going to send someone to pop up on her doorstep, I wouldn’t think!
I wondered if the apology was via email or something. Not in person. And they probably, hopefully realize they are partially responsible for the bru-ha-ha and have received much negative feedback. Trying to get free tix would pour salt in the wound.
My guess is that they have the head of PR on the phone, who is very skilled in making nice-nice, and that they aren’t going to do it in email because an email could then be picked apart, circulated and keep this story alive.
I read here that the family was scamming the airline by buying a ticket for Ivy in coach while the family was going to sit in upgraded seats.
Niw I read that there were 4 seats bought in coach. The empty seat was in business class. Is that right pizzagirl?
In regard to the article Calmom posted, we never had trouble using this on United. http://kidsflysafe.com/2014/10/08/first-american-delta-now-united-cant-airlines-comply-faa-kid-seat-safety-rule/ As a matter of fact, the FAs were happy to see it. It was so much easier to use than a car seat.
But since the apology was via phone, we are limited by mom’s account of what was said.
No, that’s not quite it. From a blog (which I will take to be accurate but is of course unverifiable), there were 16 family members. The grandfather redeemed miles (which is really irrelevant whether he redeemed or bought) and they wound up with 12 premium and 4 coach. It so happened that the 4 children were assigned the coach, but that’s completely irrelevant since as anyone knows the family members can divvy up the seats as they see fit; as everyone knows, there’s not some special rule that says you can’t switch your seat with your cousin or whatever. In any case, apparently other family members took the 4 coach seats so the 6 members of this family could fly together in premium. So that suggests there WAS an open seat in premium and they just didn’t put her in it and balked / refused when requested to do so.
And as several people have pointed out, once the FA made it clear the child needed her own seat, coach becomes a better option because the armrests raise and the seats are “tighter” so it would have made sense for the FA to suggest moving to coach AND it would be easier since presumably the coach family members would quickly and willingly trade. The fact that it took so long makes me wonder if they weren’t forthcoming about how easy it would be to switch with their coach relatives.
So I retract my post 146 because (assuming this blog I found is true) there was an empty seat in premium for her. They just had no intention of using it.
I thought we “knew” the family scammed the airline by buying a seat for Ivy in coach. 
Pizzagirl, I appreciate your retracting your earlier post.
Really, it doesn’t matter where the seat was. The family didn’t have a car seat for her…and they didn’t plan to put her in the premium seat. They planned to have her on a parent lap. And they held up a whole flight of passengers because of this.
Thumper1, you don’t know what happened on that flight.
It also looks like some people who actually work for airlines don’t know the rules.
From the Mom’s tumblr post:
That is a big part of the problem. They were enabled by United until they ran into one rules oriented (or mean, or mean and rules oriented) flight attendant. They were putting their daughter and others at risk all those times and were oblivious to that fact and happy to continue to do so.
I can understand why she would privately complaint to United about the manner or particular words of a flight attendant. It’s in the airline’s best interests to have better customer service. But that fact that she took to all the airways to advocate for her position just shows how clueless she is about safety.
I have a slightly more charitable read on this situation–but perhaps a harsher view of what should have happened. What I think happened is that this family violated the rule about every passenger sitting in their own seat multiple times, and nobody at the airline said or did anything about it. Perhaps the empty seat was previously always beside the mother, perhaps not. Perhaps the child really can’t sit in her own seat. But this time, the FA insisted that the rule be enforced. Ultimately, the FA was overruled, and a solution (probably an illegal one) was found. Whether putting the child in her own seat and propping her up would have been better (or even possible) is unclear. This is just one of those uncomfortable situations in which a rule that wasn’t enforced before is enforced this time.
Only, UA didn’t enforce the rule. Really, the child shouldn’t have been allowed to fly if it’s not safe.
I agree, and it would have been an even BIGGER PR disaster if the headline had been “UA kicks family with disabled child off plane.” I mean, if I’m UA, I’d rather be thought of as rude for enforcing safety rules for a special-needs child, than so cold-hearted I kicked a family with a special-needs child off to find their own way home.
“What I think happened is that this family violated the rule about every passenger sitting in their own seat multiple times, and nobody at the airline said or did anything about it.”
YK, honestly, you can picture a flight attendant thinking “it’s clear that child has special needs. I can’t really tell her age, maybe she is indeed under 2. That family has enough of a rough go in life - don’t ask, don’t tell.”