Unless she had her legs hiked up over the seat in front of her for God and everyone to see, one flight attendant with a wild hair can't suddenly become the voice of SWA.

In customer service jobs, it's every employee's job to be the voice of their company.

Again, if you read the article about it, she was wearing the clothes in a different way than you see pictured. Maybe "arrested" was an over-statement; but I feel strongly that it wasn't appropriate for the circumstances.

How in the world could you wear that any differently? Skirt can't go up any farther and the top simply isn't revealing. Add in that there is no dress code policy for Southwest and it's bogus. Plain and simple...

Have you?

No, I keep getting her voice mail.

If her skirt was indeed up farther then yes I see the issue but I have a hard time believing it was any shorter. As far as the shirt,My grandma wears more revealing stuff than that. J/K but you get the point.

How in the world could you wear that any differently? Skirt can't go up any farther and the top simply isn't revealing.

Apparently they can, according to the reports.

Apparently they can, according to the reports.

So you blindly believe everything you read???

 

And why skip the fact there is no dress code???

Add in that there is no dress code policy for Southwest and it's bogus.

An airline spokesperson said Ebbert had been led out to the walkway and spoken to “away from the other customers”. Ebbert’s “adjustments” included covering her stomach, he added.

 

Southwest, whose passenger dress code bans anything “lewd, obscene or patently offensive”, had two years ago controversially ejected another American passenger.

How in the world could you wear that any differently? Skirt can't go up any farther and the top simply isn't revealing. Add in that there is no dress code policy for Southwest and it's bogus. Plain and simple...

:thumb:

We're not going there.

 

We can't go "there?"

 

You think this doesn't play into it?

On the flip side, no one complains (and abides by) "No shirt, no shoes, no service," do they?

We can't go "there?"

 

You think this doesn't play into it?

I mean, we're not going to discuss anyone's "lifestyle" (if that's what you're getting at) on BGP.

We are not going to discuss anyone's "lifestyle" (if that's what you're getting at) on BGP.

 

We don't discuss lifestyles? Don't we have a thread right now about "would you vote for " and it includes nothing but lifestyle choices?

I mean, we're not going to discuss anyone's "lifestyle" (if that's what you're getting at) on BGP.

So basically we are disregarding something that could play a factor in the whole situation? A lot worse has been said on here...

So basically we are disregarding something that could play a factor in the whole situation? A lot worse has been said on here...

 

 

:thumb: :thumb:

There are a lot of issues with this thread. If someone wants to start another thread on the same topic that is fine.