6 ms·

Retired lawyer sues Israeli airline after she was asked to move seat

32 points by azuajef 11y ago

azinman2 11y ago
Why is this on HN?
- DanBC 11y ago
  People on HN provide services to the public. The public are pretty good at testing your expectations around what a reasonable service provision is.
x5n1 11y ago
More power to her.
atonse 11y ago
What I don't get is, why wasn't the man asked to move? Again and again, this bumps up with my core belief that, you can believe whatever the hell you want, as long as you don't impose it on others. This is a clear violation of that.
- x1798DE 11y ago
  I do agree, but it may be that the only open seats were also next to women.
  - wnevets 11y ago
    Cue the world's smallest violin.
    - x1798DE 11y ago
      Well, my point was that maybe moving the guy (and no other people) was not an option that would solve the issue. In no circumstance do I think someone be forced to move like that.
    - scintill76 11y ago
      Would your reaction be the same if the passenger requesting a change had been, say, a female rape survivor being triggered by the man sitting next to her? If not, why do you get to be the one to determine which psychological distresses are legitimate to have, and which aren't? If you would say the same to that hypothetical, I suspect you would be called heartless, bigoted, whatever, when a sufficiently vocal and powerful class of people get offended by the application of this kind of opinion. AFAICT, all we really know is that it's "company policy" to try to accommodate these requests -- which due to things like the above I think is more tenable for the company in public-relations/customer-service terms -- but we don't know that it specifically says the man is to stay in his seat and the woman must move. Maybe that's what this particular flight attendant chose to suggest for this particular scenario. It's impossible to please everybody all the time with this type of situation.
- kafkaesq 11y ago
  It's a form of lip service that that society (until now) has chosen to pay to its orthodox minority. It may seem unusual if you're from the U.S... but the (at least nominally) strict equivalence of religious beliefs and communities under the law we have (and take for granted) here is, on the world stage, actually a very peculiar thing, indeed.
- woodman 11y ago
  > ...you can believe whatever the hell you want, as long as you don't impose it on others. I completely agree, but how far are you will to extend that logic? Because in this specific case the passenger that was asked to move is trying to impose her egalitarian beliefs on those that established the airline's policies for pandering to the orthodox. I think the best way to correct this sort of stupidity is to let the market handle it, instead of throwing another exception to a basic principle onto the pile: you can believe what you want... unless you operate a business in a specific industry with an employee count greater than X.
  - atonse 11y ago
    > Because in this specific case the passenger that was asked to move is trying to impose her egalitarian beliefs on those that established the airline's policies for pandering to the orthodox. No, not true. He could've moved. :)
    - woodman 11y ago
      She isn't suing the man. Did you not see the second paragraph?
brandur 11y ago
It's pretty unfortunate, but penalizing the airlines financially is the only way that they'll stop kowtowing to these sorts of unreasonable requests. Hopefully if this goes through, similar lawsuits will be brought against non-Israeli airline companies and this type of anti-social behavior will go away worldwide. The article's key quote: > Rabinowitz, a Jew who attends synagogue and keeps a kosher home, told the Guardian: “The man had no other reason to complain than my gender – and that’s unlawful discrimination. It’s no different than if a person of another religion had said: ‘I don’t want to sit next to a Jew.’ And I don’t believe El Al would move a person in those circumstance.”
- ScottBurson 11y ago
  I think this passage is also very interesting (quoting Rabinowitz): > “He started to tell me it was forbidden by the Torah. I interrupted him to say the Torah says nothing about a man sitting next to a woman. He conceded I was right, but said there was a general principle that a person should not put himself in a dangerous situation." So not only is it not explicitly forbidden by the Torah -- this whole thing is somebody's interpretation -- but the general principle being invoked says, don't put yourself in a dangerous situation; it doesn't say that you get to rearrange everyone around you! Either find an acceptable seat yourself, or get off the plane!
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

32 points by azuajef 11y ago

azinman2 11y ago

Why is this on HN?

DanBC 11y ago
People on HN provide services to the public. The public are pretty good at testing your expectations around what a reasonable service provision is.

x5n1 11y ago

More power to her.

atonse 11y ago

What I don't get is, why wasn't the man asked to move? Again and again, this bumps up with my core belief that, you can believe whatever the hell you want, as long as you don't impose it on others. This is a clear violation of that.

x1798DE 11y ago
I do agree, but it may be that the only open seats were also next to women.
- wnevets 11y ago
  Cue the world's smallest violin.
  - x1798DE 11y ago
    Well, my point was that maybe moving the guy (and no other people) was not an option that would solve the issue. In no circumstance do I think someone be forced to move like that.
  - scintill76 11y ago
    Would your reaction be the same if the passenger requesting a change had been, say, a female rape survivor being triggered by the man sitting next to her? If not, why do you get to be the one to determine which psychological distresses are legitimate to have, and which aren't? If you would say the same to that hypothetical, I suspect you would be called heartless, bigoted, whatever, when a sufficiently vocal and powerful class of people get offended by the application of this kind of opinion. AFAICT, all we really know is that it's "company policy" to try to accommodate these requests -- which due to things like the above I think is more tenable for the company in public-relations/customer-service terms -- but we don't know that it specifically says the man is to stay in his seat and the woman must move. Maybe that's what this particular flight attendant chose to suggest for this particular scenario. It's impossible to please everybody all the time with this type of situation.
kafkaesq 11y ago
It's a form of lip service that that society (until now) has chosen to pay to its orthodox minority. It may seem unusual if you're from the U.S... but the (at least nominally) strict equivalence of religious beliefs and communities under the law we have (and take for granted) here is, on the world stage, actually a very peculiar thing, indeed.
woodman 11y ago
> ...you can believe whatever the hell you want, as long as you don't impose it on others. I completely agree, but how far are you will to extend that logic? Because in this specific case the passenger that was asked to move is trying to impose her egalitarian beliefs on those that established the airline's policies for pandering to the orthodox. I think the best way to correct this sort of stupidity is to let the market handle it, instead of throwing another exception to a basic principle onto the pile: you can believe what you want... unless you operate a business in a specific industry with an employee count greater than X.
- atonse 11y ago
  > Because in this specific case the passenger that was asked to move is trying to impose her egalitarian beliefs on those that established the airline's policies for pandering to the orthodox. No, not true. He could've moved. :)
  - woodman 11y ago
    She isn't suing the man. Did you not see the second paragraph?

brandur 11y ago

It's pretty unfortunate, but penalizing the airlines financially is the only way that they'll stop kowtowing to these sorts of unreasonable requests. Hopefully if this goes through, similar lawsuits will be brought against non-Israeli airline companies and this type of anti-social behavior will go away worldwide. The article's key quote: > Rabinowitz, a Jew who attends synagogue and keeps a kosher home, told the Guardian: “The man had no other reason to complain than my gender – and that’s unlawful discrimination. It’s no different than if a person of another religion had said: ‘I don’t want to sit next to a Jew.’ And I don’t believe El Al would move a person in those circumstance.”

ScottBurson 11y ago
I think this passage is also very interesting (quoting Rabinowitz): > “He started to tell me it was forbidden by the Torah. I interrupted him to say the Torah says nothing about a man sitting next to a woman. He conceded I was right, but said there was a general principle that a person should not put himself in a dangerous situation." So not only is it not explicitly forbidden by the Torah -- this whole thing is somebody's interpretation -- but the general principle being invoked says, don't put yourself in a dangerous situation; it doesn't say that you get to rearrange everyone around you! Either find an acceptable seat yourself, or get off the plane!

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]