1395
So you don't have a doctor's note?
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2025
1395 points (100.0% liked)
Microblog Memes
8080 readers
3004 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
"I'm at 26 weeks" (actually at 30 weeks)
"Ok you're good to go."
something bad happens
"THEY LET ME THROUGH IT'S THEIR FAULT I'M GONNA SUE YOU" and the person loses their job even if they can somehow remember and prove this woman lied.
So your answer is, like always, shitty asshole liars ruin things for decent people.
That's not how this works. She could also have been fat and not pregnant. She would obviously not be required to prove that in that circumstance.
The rules are clear, she was compliant, the airline agent wasn't.
Yes, its the shitty asshole liar, not the fact our entire system of recompense and accountability is fucking unhinged. I'm so glad we agree.
And keeping that system instead of any better social fprm, well, sometimes you gotta deprive innocent usually marginalized people of their autonomy; it's just a 'cost'. Cant beat a puppy to death without havin a few orgasms, amirite?
That's not liability on the gate agent, its liability on the airline (which needs processes for adjudicating when to ask and to document the answer).
This is something that's supposed to happen during the ticket sale process, not the moment-before-you-get-on-the-plane.
It is literally not this agent's job to probe. And if she's worried about liability, harassing a woman who doesn't qualify for her investigation is a bigger liability concern, particularly if she delays the flight or tries to boot the passenger.
You can't sue someone because you made a dumb choice and lied.
Technically you can try, but any judge would laugh you right out of the courtroom for attempting to waste their time.
This.
People keep confusing "can sue" with "be successful in court".
You can sue anyone for anything at any time. I can sue you because I don't like your default avatar. But that doesn't mean that I would have any chance in a courtroom.
And this is exactly how it should be. The decision whether a lawsuit has merit or not should be taken in court, not somewhere before court. Because that would mean that some police man or someone else with only cursory knowledge of the law would have to decide whether a lawsuit has merit and that would be catastrophic.
No, anyone should be able to sue for anything. And garbage lawsuits should be thrown out of court by a judge and/or jury.
Yes you can try but the company would never even hear about it because it wouldn't get any further than trying to file the case.
Yes that's what I said.
I think that's the point. It doesn't stop the occasional chancer from trying, but no this side of the pond at least you'll get short shrift if you do.
The whole thing is about limiting liability to the company. (In the pregnancy case I think there's an increased risk of thrombosis at late-stage.) Their policy says no paperwork is required, you say that applies to you; if something goes wrong after you lie then the onus is on you.
which is why the policy is dumb. it should be a document proving you're under 28w OR a doctor's note that says you're fine to fly.
Liars are everywhere. And we all have to do our own duty (to ourselves) to spot it/set passwords/monitor bank receipts/ keep up to date/ etc.. No, it Doesn't make it right that there are so many con artists out there(and they should absolutely be held accountable) but in this case it’s their literal job to observe and hold to rules and maintain their sector: they can’t take that failure to hold to a rule in a reasonable way out on everyone else.
I try the ‘if this were a date’ metaphor to see who really is the irrational person in the situation.
This situation in dating would be like if a person went around to people saying ‘prove to me you’re not going to be a manipulative asshole’ and post ‘no manipulative assholes allowed’ on their profile as their strategy to weed out assholes. But really it’s just weaseling out of duty to set healthy boundaries or taking on any observational work when shit comes up. It’s lazy. That person would be seen as the one with the problem and shirking every personal responsibility to monitor their own life, looking for ways to pass their responsibility to their own happiness and security onto everyone else.
If it sounds like it would be insane if it were a dating strategy: they are in the wrong.
In this case the person is literally being paid to monitor and take responsibility over security and they still shirked their basic responsibility pushing it entirely on the target to prove to them that they are secure despite the paperwork (set by their own standard of rules) was not required.
if anything : anyone using that excuse of someone bucking the system should be talking to management to let them know the rules are not secure as they are. Perhaps they require passengers to hold the paper to say they are allowed to travel. eg: like they do with passports. A doctor’s note acknowledging they are pregnant and what week they are in so they can compare to the rules might do better here rather than the other way around.