[Jane]

After notifying several Delta employees that I have a fatal nut allergy ... the attendant handed me a bag of peanuts! It's their policy to serve them ... Apparently they would rather kill someone than not serve the peanuts...

Lets see .. Delta and nuts ... a coincidence? I don't think so.

And this is after they changed my 4 hour trip to 10.5 hours ... All we can do is HOPE this company goes under ... before they can do any more damage to innocent people.

I will never fly Delta again...

[pattis]

no airline will insure a allergen free environment. Sucks for anyone with this situation however you said you told some Delta agents. Did you tell a flight attendant when you boarded the plane? Even if they did not serve it to you, what would stop the person next to you or behind you from having brought peanuts with them. Flight crew has no right to tell other passengers they cannot eat that. I have worked a few flights that when the crew was notified, have had pilot come out and talk to passenger about this and told them if it was that severe, refused boarding.

[The_Judge]

Hi Jane.....nice title. Have you heard of the word defamation? Here is a quick snip of what it means.........In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image.

You might want to think twice about flippantly saying someone is trying to kill you.

The Judge

[Jane]

Thank you Patti and "judge" for your response. Yes, I notified Delta 9 months, 6 months, 1 month and 1 day prior to boarding the plane. In addition, I notified two people at the check-in, two people at the boarding desk, and two people on the plane. When purchasing my ticket I was told that Delta would do whatever is possible for a safe flight. And their policy is to have a "buffer zone" of 3 rows in front and 3 rows behind. They did not follow their policy, in fact handed the rows in front and behind me and simply say "don't open the peanuts because of a person with an allergy on board!!!
I have flown many times - and have never had a problem. The attendants at other companies CHOOSE to serve something different. I totally understand that the airline can not stop someone from bringing nuts on board. But speaking as a person with a severe life threathening condition, it's better to have 1, 5, 10 people eating peanuts than the whole freakin plane. True there are other allergens in the air and many people suffer from it. But there is nothing more severe or life theathening than a bee sting or a nut allergy.

And as for "The Judge"... good for you, you have a dictionary!!! Bad for you, there wasn't a single false claim in my statement. Any negative image from Delta is at their own doing. I am simply reporting the FACTS, not as you put it "implied to be factual". Delta did INDEED endanger my life .. and quite frankly that pisses me off!

By the way Judge, the name you chose to hide behind is very telling.
Jane

[jimworcs]

There is a difference between negligence and intent... if you had died it is possible (or even probable given the lamentable state of the ridiculously litigous society you live in), that Delta may have been found to have been negligent in contributing to your death. It is a stretch, even for neurotics, to turn this into a specific intent to kill you. How do you imagine this took place. After you had notified about 40 Delta employees of your life-threatening condition, what happened next? Did they form a conspiratorial group and decide to kill you? How do you think they cooked up their evil plan? Perhaps they ordered extra large peanuts for their dastardly plan and ordered their evil flight attendants to co-operate in their "Kill Jane" conspiracy. I hope they gave the FA's the suitable attire of black capes and the opportunity to snicker as they outlined their dastardly deed and plans. I notice however, despite their best efforts you didn't die... perhaps it was because the famous socialite, Bruce Wayne, was onboard and he was able to foil their evil ways with a secret anti-dote whilst Robin wrestled with the wicked FA's in the galley. I am so happy it worked out for you. Keep us up to date with your adventures.. I will keep checking for postings at the same bat time, same bat place...


(Incidently, as they didn't observe the exclusion zone and you survived enough to tell your tale... did it occur to you that in fact your allergy may not be so severe as to require an entire airline to shut down its food service in order to serve you?)

[The_Judge]

Originally Posted by Jane

And as for "The Judge"... good for you, you have a dictionary!!! Bad for you, there wasn't a single false claim in my statement. Any negative image from Delta is at their own doing. I am simply reporting the FACTS, not as you put it "implied to be factual". Delta did INDEED endanger my life .. and quite frankly that pisses me off!

By the way Judge, the name you chose to hide behind is very telling.
Jane

Hey.....thanks for the response, as well. I enjoy hearing from disgruntled passengers as I might be able to offer some advice on how to possibly make their next travel experience a pleasant one.

Now, you mention I have a dictionary. Yup, I sure do. Pretty useful in lots of cases, like in this one where you just have no clue what you're saying. You said there was no false claim in your statement. Let's take a look at it.
Delta tried to kill me.
Hmmmm, I think we're all clear on the first word. You mean Delta Airlines. The second word though is quite interesting. tried..........I'll go back to my dictionary for that one.......

v. tried (trd), try·ing, tries (trz)
v.tr. 1. To make an effort to do or accomplish (something); attempt


To make an effort requires intent.

Now the rest of your statement is pretty easy to understand also. ....to kill me. I believe that requires no interpretation.

So Delta Airlines had intent to kill you. That is a pretty strong statement. Did you go to the DA? Did they file charges for attempted murder? If you didn't feel strongly enough to do these things, why on earth do you feel you can slander them? I didn't work for Delta but if I did, I would be forwarding this communication to their legal department to see if they thought like me.

As far as my name, you're damn right it's telling. 25 years of dealing with people like you though affords me the right to be able to judge your situation. And yes I'm hiding behind it because you never know who the crazies are out there, do we Jane??

The Judge

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

Originally Posted by The_Judge

Hi Jane.....nice title. Have you heard of the word defamation? Here is a quick snip of what it means.........In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image.

You might want to think twice about flippantly saying someone is trying to kill you.

The Judge

I apologize, to the powers that be, for going off-topic. However this kind of arrogance simply can't go unanswered.

"Judge," since you seem to be such a legal expert, perhaps you might want to consider that CREW can (although, almost never, are) be held accountable for THEIR less than stellar behavior.

First, there are a few categories of customers who deserve whatever they get. Those are people who are assaultive (with, or without, weapons), drunks, people who think they can smoke in-flight, and those who are unnecessarily loud (unless you're 6 months old.) After all those groups are considered, there should be no LEGITIMATE reason for a crew member calling the cops on someone. Unfortunately, that's not the reality. "Interfering with crew" has to some flight attendents, who are bored or have weak egos, come to include customers who complainin about the quality of a meal; any customer who says they will write a complaint letter; any inter-continental business-class customer who requests a special meal for their child; traveling with a child who will not stop saying "bye-bye plane," and other "pearls!" Obviously, alleging, in these instances that any crew member was "interfered" with is a lie. In many states there are laws penalizing the act of "unsworn falisifaction," or "filing a false report." It's time these laws start being enforced when it comes to flight crew! Airport police should stop kissing the a** of the crew, and treating the customer like a major world terrorist! Indeed, the first crew member to spend a few nights in the lock-up, over this kind of behavior, will likely spark a change of attitude in some of these border-line sociopathic crew.

Finally, NO, I have NEVER had to talk to cops, or have been threatened by crew. HOWEVER, there continues to be coverage, by the media, of incidents of this sort. The outrageous part of this mess is that almost all of the garbage responsible for this behavior work in planes where the American flag is painted on the outside. As yet, this country is NOT a police state. However, this scum is, obviously, working hard to change that!

[The_Judge]

No arrogance here, Butch. I am simply asking Jane to think a little bit before she says someone tried to kill her. A very serious accusation that shouldn't just be thrown out there with no consequence.

As for your tripe filled diatribe about false report writing crew members......you said it yourself. There are laws about filing a false police report. I hope they are enforced, like you. On the other hand, I have been on the ground numerous times meeting an aircraft that has requested LEO and have NEVER ONCE seen them arrest or even issue a ticket for the behavior reported by the crews, i.e., smoking, fighting, not following crew instructions, etc. So it goes both ways, I hope and wish they would enforce the existing laws.

[Jane]

See my caption stirred up some thoughts! Thank God for freedom of speech.
I believe if the airline has full knowledge of a life threathening situation and chooses to ignore it ... Then in fact, acts to create a life threatening situation for their passengers, then they are endangering life and should be held liable. No not murder, endangering. There's no implying or falsifyling about it... it all factual.
Note to Judge, I have worked for the DA's office and I do know my rights.
To use your words Judge "that shouldn't just be thrown out there with no consequences". Delta should be held accountable for the actions of their employees. The idiot attendant should be called in a taught about the consequences of her actions. Can you imagine if a school district or a private company ran their business the way the airlines do??
How can you flippantly say the airline is not liable?

And to answer Bat boy ... I stood up and announced that I had the allergy, and the passengers were kind enough to understand. I started with a reaction, took my meds, and got off the plane before I had to use the epi pens...
Note to batman -- get your head out of the comic books and educate yourself. Nut allergies are life theathening. And you're right, I do have issues -- and they're with stupid people. No I don't expect the airlines to provide a special diet. But do comic books lovers have to eat peanuts at 6:10 am? Get a life Bat boy.

[jimworcs]

Now, do I detect a not so subtle shift in your argument?... it appears that Delta is no longer trying to kill you..... instead they are "endangering" you... funnily enough you seem to have adopted the position I suggested in my post.. that at best it is negligence! Were you fired from your job working at the DA's office?

Just so you know, airlines are in fact private companies!

Now, try to re-read my post and find out anywhere where I suggest that "nut allergies" are not real or that you can't die of anaphylactic shock as a result. I made no such suggestion. Instead I used the device of sarcasm to illustrate my contention that there was no intent to kill you.. and your post was titled "Delta tried to kill me". I am all for freedom of speech, and you were free to make your allegation. Equally, we are free to refute it. Co-incidently, I am also developing a nut allergy, but I am not sure what the antidote is, when the nut is called Jane.

[stephen]

Not being a doctor or other medical person, I had no idea that there were people who are so allergic to nuts that their lives could be endangered by merely touching an unopened packet of peanuts. or by people sitting three rows in front or behind them in an airplane eating nuts. This sounds like a very dangerous condition to me and one that really should prevent you from travelling on public transport at all. You cannot expect all the staff and crew and fellow travelers on a flight with you to be responsible for your health. How do you know somebody in the second row behind you hasn't brought some nuts with him or her, whether the flight crew hands them out or not? It is even possible that someone might not care whether a fellow passenger is mega-allergic to nuts and continue chomping away even if told their snack is endangering a life.
Sorry but I think you have to look after yourself and not expect others to do it for you and if you are really that allergic to nuts you should only travel in a private car or other conveyance that you can insure is nut-free yourself.

[jimworcs]

Quite right Stephen. Although, as a non doctor, you don't understand just how critical her situation is. Jane used to work at the doctors office, so she knows her medical conditions. Perhaps alternatively Delta, as a responsible airline, could have cancelled the reservations of all the other passengers and rebooked them onto other flights and then flown Jane in an empty jet (after thoroughly cleaning the plane) to her destination.

Afterall, Jane had given them 9 months, 6 months, 1 month and 1 days notice and had informed the parking attendant, the airport authorities, the check-in, air traffic control, the woman in the toilet, the people at the gate, the flight attendants and the President. I cannot understand why the Air Force was not scrambled as a precaution.

[Jane]

Never worked for a doctor .... never said I did. Stephen- airlines usually are very precaucous and understand that there are times when flying is necessary for people with allergies. They usually try to make a safe environment for all their passengers.
I try not to fly whenever possible. But why is it so important for the airline to serve peanuts? Pretzels, cookies, etc. are cheaper to serve and less likely to kill anyone.

And to the kooks who write, ah Jim - that would be you and Judge .. I find the fact that people respond to my emails quite odd! I posted my email to alert others with the same medical condition. The fact that you weirdo's would respond is a simple display of discontent in ones life... if you have no direct interest in Delta or allergies - why would you even care to respond? Are you lives so shallow and empty that this is fun for you? I feel sorry for you... you definately have serious problems, and I'm guessing your not being treated for it ... judging people and comparing people to comic books?? Good Lord you're nuts ... get a freakin life. Go out with people - stop making the computer your friend. It's a machine, that's all it is... Go get a job, find something constructive to do... especially you Jim.

[Jane]

For those who can read more than comic books... article from USA Today

US Airways dropping peanuts
By Dawn Gilbertson, The Arizona Republic PHOENIX — US Airways is pulling peanuts from its flights by the end of June, but this is no penny-pinching move so prevalent in the industry today.
The Arizona-based airline, the nation's fifth-largest, is bowing to concerns of travelers with severe peanut allergies. It will serve pretzels, crackers and other in-flight snacks, instead. Several other major airlines had already stopped serving peanuts after peanut allergy groups expressed their members' fears of a dangerous in-flight reaction.
The decision is an about-face for the new US Airways. The airline, formed by last fall's merger of America West and bankrupt US Airways, went with America West's policy of serving peanuts after the merger last fall. US Airways did not serve peanuts.
"It's a growing concern," said Jennifer Tongé, US Airways' director of customer relations. "It's still an absolute minority (of passengers) out there, but peanut allergies can be extremely severe."
"They had grown so used to not needing to worry about peanuts being on US Airways flights," Tongé said. "Many of them wouldn't even call to check to make sure there weren't peanuts."
The Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network and other groups also weighed in.
"At that point, it became very clear that it (removing peanuts) was the right decision," said Tongé, whose daughter had mild peanut allergies as a preschooler.
Terry Furlong, chief operating officer of the allergy network, praised US Airways' decision.
"It shows real sensitivity for the needs of people with peanut allergy," he said.
King Nut Cos., a leading peanut and snack supplier to the airline industry, did not respond to a request for an interview Friday.
Making accommodations
Some airlines that do serve peanuts do their best to accommodate passengers with severe peanut allergies. Southwest, the other dominant airline in Phoenix, does not serve peanuts on a flight if it has been alerted to a passenger's allergy, spokeswoman Whitney Eichinger said. It also suggests such travelers book an early-morning flight when the plane is clear of peanut dust.
America West, and the merged airline until now, never offered peanut-free flights even if notice was given because it was a logistical nightmare, Tongé said.
There are different caterers in every city, last-minute plane changes to worry about and more. And if you promise it, the liability is huge if something bad happens.
"It's really hard for us to manage that process," Tongé said.
Doug Bell, a Phoenix website developer and graphic designer, said he couldn't believe it when US Airways told his wife "it's not our policy to not serve peanuts." The couple have a 14-month-old son, Bishop, who has been diagnosed with severe peanut allergies. They had booked a flight to Las Vegas to see her parents and called several times with concerns about the infant's allergy.
The airline employees' attitude made him angry, he said. They simply told the family to book with another airline. US Airways also would refund tickets to those who said they couldn't fly because of their peanut allergy.

[Jane]

Continued:

"They weren't really concerned about our 1-year-old," he said.
His wife and son took the flight on Monday, and everything was fine. She just made sure to pack the shot peanut allergy sufferers take in case of an allergic reaction.
Bell was thrilled about the new no-peanut policy.
"I think it's great," he said. "We don't have to fly. But it's so common today, if you don't do it it'll take forever to get anywhere."
Peanut precautions
Even though US Airways will no longer serve peanuts, it is not forbidding passengers to bring peanut products aboard and is not guaranteeing that other snacks it serves weren't made in facilities that also make peanuts.
"They're fine with that," Tongé said of the allergy groups. "They just don't want 120 people all opening a bag of peanuts at the same time."
US Airways' pending change leaves Southwest, Delta, Continental and Alaska as the largest airlines serving peanuts.
Furlong said airlines that still serve peanuts and don't offer peanut-free zones or peanut-free flights for allergy sufferers are losing business from them and their families and friends. Many of those allergic to peanuts are children.
"We think it's foolish because there are a million and a half people in the country with peanut allergy, and in this time of tight airline margins, to make no accommodation for that many people is leaving money on the table," he said.
The Arizona Republic is owned by Gannett, parent company of USA TODAY.

[jimworcs]

As you clearly don't get sarcasm or irony, perhaps I can make it totally clear. Neither I, nor Judge, nor Stephen doubted that you had a nut allergy, nor did any of us say that nut allergies were not serious. We reacted to your outrageous hyperbole. DELTA DID NOT TRY TO KILL YOU. You were stupid to suggest it and you have been subjected to this level of villification because of your stupidity, not because of your nut allergy. Hope it helps!

(By the way, I have never read comics... I just watched a ludicrously camp American TV show in the 60's, and it's hyperbole and exaggeration seems to fit your posts perfectly).

[Corbel]

even when they stop serving peanuts, do you think that is going to stop other customers from bringing them on board? nope. sure not all 130 people will have a bag of peanuts, but im pretty sure some will, and that person maybe seated next to you.

[Leatherboy2006]

So now that they are serving pretzels, I have a friend with a wheat allergy(its really fun to cook for him when he visits from London ). Will they clear they rows around him so he is not exposed? Why did people survive for so many years with peanuts on planes without any issues? They have been served on planes since most of us were in diapers or before without issue. Seems like its more of the way we are all changing to the me-me attitude then anything else

[Leatherboy2006]

Also to add another 2 cents (or is it 25 cents with inflation) Perfumes mess up my sinus's and my asthma so I should the airline be responsible for making sure no on boards with heavy perfume(especially how some people feel the need to bath in it). I carry an inhaler and take responisblitily for myself

[abutterfinger25]

Getting back on topic..

Jane, to toot the company line...

At this time, the creation of buffer zones or other accommodations requested by passengers with severe allergies to peanuts are not required by the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), based on past guidance provided to the Department of Transportation by Congress.

So, until Congress changes its mind, my advise to you would be to fly a carrier that does not serve peanuts. And keep in mind, as someone said above, even if a carrier does not serve them, a passenger may bring them on board.