- United Airlines Says Women May Be Denied Boarding for Wearing Leggings by View From The Wing. Particularly loving people asking United if certain outfits are acceptable.
- Lots of Sears Shop Your Way deals today by Frequent Miler. Hopefully some of these are still available.
- Credit bureau Experian fined $3 million over misleading credit scores by LA Times. Not such an issue now with how commonplace free FICO scores are.
- Barclaycard Sells $1.6 Billion in Risky Credit-Card Balances to Credit Shop by WSJ. They didn’t sell any co-branded balances and in total sold 6% of the balances they had (30% of the non co-branded portfolio). Would be interested to know how much this debt sold for.
United Airlines is well known for discrimination. Many years ago, they would not hire dark skinned black people as Flight Attendants. Then, they did not want to hire latinos. Then they did not want to hire gays.
Finally I was hired, I am gay and Moslem. I was harassed and bullied by my supervisor for many years. He even wrote me up for allegedly wearing “Make up”, which I only covered some scars on my face. He kept writing me up for Bogus stuff that he eventually got me fired after 25 years of employment and I was a great employee. So, they love drama at United and they are bunch of hateful people!
I had to deal with the terrible discriminatory management at United for years, being bullied, harassed and I was called names!
Even if these were non-rev passengers, it’s an absolutely ridiculous rule, and I hope all the viral media attention afforded to it sends it to a justly deserved death.
Since when did an airplane, where they feed you cheap over-salted snacks, cramp your legs into a row narrower than a mini-fridge, and even provide you flimsy pillows and blankets for sleeping become a country club? Then add to the fact that this particular leggings rule is clearly targeting women only…it’s completely outrageous.
And whoever says leggings aren’t appropriate attire, please take a look around you. Athleisure is totally in fashion now, and there’s nothing vulgar or obscene about it.
haha… yup, dont mind the naked girls all around me actually. love how western culture is super liberal about what counts as clothes. piece of string called a bikini? naaaice. see thru ultra skin tight leggings with thong showing called pants? naaaice… feminists dont wanna wear a shirt since men can walk around shirtless. naaaaaaaaaice… loving it baby.
Also, allow see-thru tops?
LOL
really wouldnt call it Leggingsgate at this point, but watever. no big deal. funny pun i guess.
The title is misleading and unclear: “United Airlines Says Women May Be Denied Boarding for Wearing Leggings.” Like most airlines, United has special dress codes for employees and guests traveling on United passes (unpaid flights). The general dress code for other passengers is more lenient.
View from the Wing, please do not fall in the yellow journalism trap!!!
Another good discussion topic: Should airline passengers be permitted to wear bikinis or shorts without shirts? Should a dress code exist?
It’s always hilarious to see a big company completely bungle what should be an easy PR move.
I also had no idea that airlines had dress codes. While it makes a modicum of sense (you don’t want someone showing up shirtless or shoeless), I couldn’t help but be amazed by United’s blog post (https://hub.united.com/our-customers-leggings-are-welcome-2331263786.html), where they state that “all employees and pass riders are considered representatives of United” when using a pass rider. Is it actually possible for anyone to tell that a passenger is there on a pass rider? (serious question!) It seems to me that passengers wouldn’t know and couldn’t give a fig in any case. (Clearly, not many people had any idea since this got covered extensively without mention of that fact.)
That’s a really great point. How would anybody even know they weren’t regular passengers?
(Is the new GET OFF MY LAWN now, GET OFF MY AIRPLANE WITH YOUR LULULEMONS!)
> Is it actually possible for anyone to tell that a passenger is there on a pass rider?
Probably not for everyone, but I often spotted ‘Passengers’ who were obviously related to the cabin crew. Maybe somebody’s family, but I did assume they were employed with the airline — and I think the impression is what matters to the airline.
I friend of mine is a commercial pilot and he just (almost) always flies in his uniform. Just to avoid any issues.
Who the heck lets their 10 year old leave the house dressed inappropriately and then complains when they get called out for being dressed inappropriately?
Yes, leggings are common but still very inappropriate attire by themselves without a long shirt, skirt, or dress.
Part of the problem is the term “leggings” is very broad. There are some that are skin tight like nylons and some that are basically pants. I have girls around that age and they wear leggings as pants to school all the time and they’re completely appropriate.
We used to fly non-rev a lot and were well aware of the dress code so never had a problem, but saw plenty of people coming who did – especially coming back from somewhere warm wearing shorts or t-shirts when they weren’t supposed to.
Who the heck cares what a ten year old (or, really, anyone) is wearing.
Welcome to the modern age. This doesn’t matter.
The woman who posted it to twitter originally and United’s twitter team did not realize they were flying non-rev. United’s response should have been along the lines of “we’ll look into this” but they fanned the flames by quoting a clause of their contract of carriage that allows them to deny boarding for inappropriate attire. There has always been a dress code for non-rev passengers.
And non-rev means employees and their friends using buddy passes, not award tickets.
Folks, if you travel on a non-revenue pass, the rules are clear. Information is provided or available for the actual types of clothing that are restricted.
We, as a family, were almost restricted from a flight because I didn’t realize my son’s (nice, like chinos, longer length) shorts were restricted because he had reached his 12th birthday. At that time, he wasn’t a tall kid. I thought he looked fine, but where he was 11, he could wear the shorts, but not at 12, and the age was on the record.
Thankfully, the gate agent gave me grace and allowed me to board with my other children and I was very grateful. Pass riders should not challenge the agents. Not only are they enforcing the pass rules but they are also still working with paid passengers and they don’t need the added stress.
Whether or not the rules are *clear*, they are still sexist and gross.
We should stop telling women and girls what to wear.
My personal issue with leggingsgate isn’t so much that the rules were being enforced, but that rule exists in the first place. I personally don’t see a difference between some leggings and pants for example.
I think the rule in general is sexist and will be revised.
> I think the rule in general is sexist and will be revised.
Is it? Is every rule that applies to women automatically sexist, even if a similar rule for men exists? I’d guess that a man showing up in a muscle shirt, or hotpants would have been denied access too.
I wasn’t there and I don’t know what they were actually wearing (neither does anybody who now accuses United of sexism).
As many here, I have flown a lot and I often saw people boarding flights in the most ridiculous and sometimes disgusting appearance.
I’d consider myself fairly liberal and I generally think you should wear what makes them happy. And if you decide that you don’t can’t wash your hair for religious reasons, that is fine with me too.
However, as soon as you board a plane, those decisions directly affect others. At that point, I expect you to respect your fellow passengers and that doesn’t end at being showered; it also includes appropriate clothes.
Nobody wants to have a guy with a big hat or hairy dude in muscle shirt next to you. It’s just common decency to leave the big hat at home and to put on a shirt.
That being said, I wouldn’t put leggings in the inappropriate department, but I wasn’t there and it’s a loose term. I doubt the gate agent just randomly thought to be suddenly sexist against those girls.
I actually think airlines should be pickier how paying passengers are boarding their planes. My unscientific gut tells me that I’ve seen more men that shouldn’t have been allowed on the plane than women, though.
So, in my opinion, I would find it hard to argue that the rule itself sans cultural context is sexist. Because it gives so much latitude to human beings (instead of being a more objective rule), though, it is inherently sexist because – with specific regards to women’s clothing – there is a deeply ingrained sexism in American culture. (and otherwise, of course, but sexism wrt women’s clothing is a super softie target).
I can see an intent where the rule is supposed to be fair, but it just doesn’t wind up that way. And then leggings wind up inappropriate, somehow.
@Rene ^^ This.
It’s like it always was in middle and high school. The dress code rules might not be explicitly gender-targeting, but it’s awfully interesting how it’s always the women who are called to the office and scrutinized.
It would be nice to think we could have some equality in the clouds 20,000 feet above ground, but it seems that’s too much to ask.
> So, in my opinion, I would find it hard to argue that the rule itself sans cultural context is sexist.
Agreed.
> Because it gives so much latitude to human beings (instead of being a more objective rule), though, it is inherently sexist because – with specific regards to women’s clothing – there is a deeply ingrained sexism in American culture.
Yes, as pretty much any decision that can’t be expressed in numbers it’s subject to personal standards. How would you measure appropriate attire objectively?
I totally understand the intention behind a dress code and many companies have dress codes, which consider short skirts and leggings as inappropriate for women. They also consider shorts and sandals as inappropriate for men. Are those rules often applied in a ridiculous context? Yep. Are they outdated and will get revised? Yes. Does it make sense to apply those rules to a child? Absolutely not. Is reasonable to accuse those companies of sexism? I don’t think so.
You remember the dark times when meteorologists had the practice of using male names for high-pressure areas (usually clear/sunny weather) and female names for low-pressure areas (usually cloudy/rainy weather). Luckily some brave people fought against this sexism … and won. That’s how we ended up alternating the naming scheme every year.
I bet it’s really comforting for many women to know that the sunny weather is called ‘Heidi’ when they are out in the park with the kids while the man is sitting in those all-male board meetings.
Why do I bring this up? I think we all should be a bit more relaxed and not scream ‘sexism’ at every incident where a woman or girl is treated unfairly.
My comment above doesn’t seem like it, but I actually agree that the rules will probably be revised — under the pressure.
However, that is unrelated to my opinion that United as an employer has the same rights to establish a dress code for their employees as any other company has — for men and women.
I actually believe they’ll also crack down on the employee-ticket front: Too much abuse and now bad press — not only at United.