Disabled And On Crutches
 

This happened on a flight from LAX to Seattle. I had had major surgery three days prior to the flight & was on crutches. 1. Upon boarding, the female cabin attendant took my crutches and put them in the overhead about half way down the plane. 2. She & the male attendant refused to get my crutches when I needed to use the restroom in flight. 3. I made it to the restroom & upon leaving the male cabin attendant handed me a cup of coffee and expected me to carry it back to my seat. When I refused, he was visually upset. The next day, when I could think clearly, I called Southwest and asked what were the procedures to be applied when a passenger is on crutches. The regulations read to me state that the crutches were supposed to be kept close to the passenger, for the passengers needs. Further, the cabin attendants were to accommodate the disabled person (not expect them to carry hot coffee when there is an obvious disability). Would I use S.W. again, only after hell freezes over.

Wow. That just, well, sucks! I don't fly Southwest very often because in my opinion the casual "fun" attitude of the employees sometimes comes across as being unprofessional. (And for the sake of all aboard I prefer that the safety demonstration be taken seriously and not made into some dinner-theater musical production!) Perhaps they were just playing a friendly game of keep away with your crutches?

All joking aside I would definitely write a letter to Southwest AND the DOT as there are guidelines and rules about accommodating passengers with special needs. Unfortunately the most you can hope for is a voucher for future travel on Southwest. I'm not sure that voucher will be good until hell freezes over.

On the point of putting the crutches halfway down the plane, the question then becomes, how full were the bins?

Regardless, though, sounds like the violated Part 382, which is the regulations for passengers with disabilities, and being you were on crutches, you qualify. Write Southwest and the DOT.

A. The OP should have been allowed to pre-board (perhaps behind BusinessSelect and A-Listers) so bin space shouldn't have been an issue. If it was, then...

B. Contents of the bin closest to the OP should have been moved to accommodate the crutches.

This is definitely a valid DOT complaint. To the OP: Draft the DOT complaint letter first then include a copy with your correspondence to Southwest.

Not necessarily. If the travel dates was before May 19, then Southwest is only required to pre-board the OP if he needs a seat to accomodate his disability. After May 19th, Southwest must allow him to pre-board if he self-identifies that he needs "additional time or aissitance to board, stow accessibility equipment, or be seated." [14 CFR 382.93]

That being said, even if the OP did not make a request to pre-board, any carrier should take a proactive approach and ask the passenger if he wishes to pre-board the aircraft.

In regard to the assistance to the lavatory, the carrier needs to provide it. I would suggest you file a written complaint with Southwest and/or my office (http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/problems.htm)

Unconcerned and inconsistent
 

I'm awaiting ankle surgery and use a cane. On a Southwest flight recently that originated in San Antonio and required a Nashville connection, there was no problem pre-boarding where the flight originated. I didn't need to explain the discomfort experienced by prolonged standing, but when I approached the agent in Nashville the rules had changed: the only pre-boarding involving disabilities was for wheelchairs. The woman's attitude was cold and less than interested, and I was not about to plead. I'm a senior citizen and a 100% disabled veteran, but there are limits and I chose to not stoop to her level. So, I did as instructed (a solution that made absolutely no sense) and waited until the first group to board at which time I was allowed to board before the second group. There was absolutely no advantage, because I stood behind at least 20 people as the first ones sought seats and placed their belongs in the overheads. I realize now that Southwest's flights are cost effective and very efficient, so much so that they can virtually ignore complaints. But all that glitters isn't gold...

At that point you should have demanded wheelchair service!

A painful ankle and a pain in the butt...
 

To tell the truth, I'd rather experience discomfort I can deal with than be relegated to a wheelchair. It's sort of like seeing those kind of people who abuse disabled parking places: I guess I'm too proud to surrender to wheels unless there's no sensible alternative. It seemed like a legitimate and reasonable request, and I expected a reasonable response. Maybe there's too many people out there who would claim a need just to save time or secure a better seat; maybe the agent was having a bad day. Whatever it was, it wasn't worth making a big deal about - but next time I'll be prepared.

Let me explain Southwest's boarding procedures as it applies to the Air Carrier Access Act.

1 - Southwest will board all passenger's with disabilities who are entitled to or need a a specific seat to accomodate their disability. The also board any passenger who needs to stow an assistive device or needs to board via the onboard wheelchair.
2 - Southwest will then board all passenger's in Group A.
3 - Southwest will then board any passengers who need additonal time to board. This includes any passengers with disabilites not in #1 as well as families with small children.
4 - Southwest will then board Group B followed by C

Southwest claims that this procedure complies with the provisions of the ACAA as implemeted by 14 CFR Part 382. DOT has apporved of these procedures on a trial basis.

Thank you, abutterfinger25. That system WOULD work much better were the A group completely boarded before they called for passengers who need additional time. Maybe I'm a little slow, but I don't see the logic in sandwiching those "extra time" people between the people in A group who are still in the process of boarding and the people in B group who will be on their heels. Sure, turnaround time is critical, but at what expense? I guess if it's one way or the other I'll swallow my pride and go with the Everest-Jennings...

Is there some purpose for the rudeness?