Community Chat

[sunshine45]

---

@SaRina wrote:

The Rules say no:  "form-fitting lycra/spandex tops, pants or dresses".

I guess that would bar cotton leggings? jeggings? skinny pants? leather pants? (which are usually form-fitting)

Who knows? shrug.

---

exactly......why mention the fabric content?

if they dont want any form fitting clothing then say just that......and who is to judge what "form fitting" means exactly?

anyway, i say they should change the rules.....they may be bordering on being archaic.

[3suwm5]

It sure does.  If you are priviledged to fly for free as an employee benefit, you best follow the rules as if you were the employee.  United has every right to make rules for those receiving a benefit allowed employee and/or family.

If you don't want to follow the rules, PAY for your ticket.

Can't be any simpler.

[Nancy Drew]

Maybe they should take away the perk if it too much bother for the person getting dressed. They can just buy a ticket. I flew on Disney Shamrock private jet. And yes there was a dress code and we honored that.

[Isobel Archer]

---

@Jackaranda wrote:

Maybe they should take away the perk if it too much bother for the person getting dressed. They can just buy a ticket. I flew on Disney Shamrock private jet. And yes there was a dress code and we honored that.

---

After all this "outrage" I wouldn't blame them if they did.

[Nomorebirthdays]

NO. A word that many act like they never heard before and refuse to accept that NO, you can't do everything, can't have your way every time. NO rules apply to you too. NO a word more need to hear and hear it often. And not just the young.

[SUHsE]

1. I understand rules are rules and they were flying on, United's  dime, so, suck it up.

However, some rules deserve to be looked at, challenged, even eliminated or altered, updated. A lot of positive change has come about that way. 

This situation, I suspect, could have been prevented, with a little common sense flexibility.  United could have been spared,a, lot of, guessing here, unwanted publicity.

Of course, we didn't see pictures of the girl's, they're kids, I thought, they said one was only 10? I find it almost impossible to believe, that these kids, traveling with their parents, on passes, would have looked so inappropriate, or offensive, in their leggings, that, they would have been denied boarding without changing clothes.

How tough would it have been, for the gate agent, to quietly tell a parent, "I'm going to let it go, but, you need to be aware, leggings aren't allowed per our dress code, for employee travel, another agent might deny you boarding"

How many of us know every detail, of every rule, in our employee handbooks, especially if we're long time employees? Probably should, but do we?

Speculating, but, I can imagine the parent's not giving a thought to the dress code.  It's so common for kids to wear leggings, so comfy to fly in, they probably thought their girl's were dressed just fine.

Some rules need to be inflexible, for instance for safety's sake. Others are open to some common sense interpretation. I'm pretty darn  sure, no one on the flight, would have had a less pleasant trip, if a couple of kids, had been allowed to wear their leggings!

[chickenbutt]

I honestly don't think that the gate agents would have the latitude to skirt the rules.  That could end up in that person losing their job.

I get the thing about looking at the rules, but that's for the company to contemplate and they can also say 'no, we want the rules the way they are'.  

But for now they are what they are and I can see how a gate agent would have to abide by them.  They don't have a choice.

[SUHsE]

Actually, gate agents have a considerable amount of discretion.  

I see now, that two of the girls, teens, I believe, were not allowed to board the flight, had to stay over, in Denver, to change clothes and catch the nex t flight.  I thought they all got on the plane, just had to change. 

I think this is interpreting the rule, to the point of absurdity.  They weren't misbehaving, being disruptive, etc.  Was enforcing a rather outdated rule on leggings really worth all the uproar? 

[ALRATIBA]

My father worked for PanAm (remember them?) for many years.  Whenever the family traveled, my father wore a suit and tie and the rest of us were dressed appropriately.

I don't have any problems if a company wants a dress code.  Don't like it?  Don't work there.

[CrazyDaisy]

---

@Suhse wrote:

Actually, gate agents have a considerable amount of discretion.  

I see now, that two of the girls, teens, I believe, were not allowed to board the flight, had to stay over, in Denver, to change clothes and catch the nex t flight.  I thought they all got on the plane, just had to change. 

I think this is interpreting the rule, to the point of absurdity.  They weren't misbehaving, being disruptive, etc.  Was enforcing a rather outdated rule on leggings really worth all the uproar? 

---

Interpreting company policy is not in the relm of the gate agents authority.

The people involved in the incident have remained silent, so one is led to believe that they realized they were wrong and have moved on.  Wish the rest of the world would too.