As I predicted, easyJet has settled with a woman who sued after being “forced” by flight attendants to move seats in order to accommodate two Haredi Jewish passengers on a flight to Tel Aviv, then was “intimidated” to move again on the return flight.
Woman Settles Gender Discrimination Lawsuit With EasyJet After She Was Asked Twice To Move Her Seat In Order To Accommodate Haredi Jewish Passengers
First, some background.
The first incident occurred in October 2019. Melanie Wolfson was traveling from Tel Aviv to London on easyJet and had paid extra for an aisle seat. Upon boarding, she found a Haredi Jewish father and son in the window and middle seat of the row.
The son stood up and began looking for a male passenger to switch places with Wolfson. He found a wiling participant a few rows up. But Wolfson initially refused to move. Only after being coaxed by flight attendants did Wolfson begrudgingly agree to move.
She later told Haaretz she was “insulted” and “humiliated” by the move:
“It was the first time in my adult life that I was discriminated against for being a woman. I would not have had any problem whatsoever switching seats if it were to allow members of a family or friends to sit together, but the fact that I was being asked to do this because I was a woman was why I refused.”
The lawsuit claimed flight attendants later told Wolfson that these gender-related seat assignment incidents routinely occur on Tel Aviv flights. They encouraged her to write easyJet and complain.
Just two months later, a similar incident occurred onboard the same route, Tel Aviv to London.
This time, Wolfson held her ground and refused to move. Eventually, two female passengers agreed to switch with the two Haredi passengers. Wolfon’s lawsuit alleged that flight attendants refused to intervene in the matter and never defended her right to remain her seat.
The lawsuit was filed in Israel, where Israeli’s anti-discrimination law means Wolfson can earn up 50,000NIS (~$15,000) for unlawful discrimination without even needing to prove damages.
The EasyJet Settlement
Wolfson and easyJet have settled for an undisclosed amount.
In a joint statement with the Israel Religious Action Center (IRAC), easyJet noted:
EasyJet is aware of the issue where some male passengers say they are uncomfortable sitting next to women, who are not in their immediate family, due to their religious beliefs and as a result request that a crew member ask female passengers to move seats.
EasyJet does not believe that female passengers should be asked to move seats simply based on their gender. The airline has a policy to politely inform any customer who raises this request that this will not be accommodated. Unfortunately, according to Melanie Wolfson this policy was not followed in her case.
EasyJet is committed to tackling any discrimination on flights. Therefore, we listened when Ms Wolfson told us about incidents of gender discrimination on our flights when she was asked to move simply because she is female. We take this very seriously and in addition to compensating Ms Wolfson for her experience, easyJet intends to implement additional crew training and renew our crew guidelines in order to prevent these incidents from happening in the future.
At easyJet we believe that flying should be a safe and enjoyable experience for everyone, regardless of their gender and we are committed to making sure this is the case going forward.
Is This Valid Discrimination?
Looking back at my thoughts last August and the great discussion that ensued, I cannot say my viewpoint has shifted.
Obviously, this is discrimination. This is also an issue that seems to run afoul of both British and Israeli law. But that’s an incomplete analysis.
I have shared about my own experience surrounding a Haredi passenger on a flight to New York many years ago. I was asked to move to a middle seat so the man could avoid sitting next to a woman.
In that case, I moved, even though it was from an aisle seat to a middle seat (there was a bit more to the story). I’d probably do it again today depending upon flight length and seat assignment.
It’s not because I want to perpetuate treating woman as second class. Goodness no. Rather, it’s because my understanding of Shomer negiah is that such behavior is actually done out of respect for woman (i.e., you only touch your own spouse or family members, no one else of the opposite sex).
Perhaps intentions should not matter. Wolfson should not have been made to feel second class because these observant passengers were too cheap to buy a third seat.
But as a religious person myself, I try to make reasonable faith-based accommodations to others, including those outside of my faith group. I struggle to view such actions as hostile to women.
Here, Wolfson was asked to move to an aisle seat two rows up the first flight and refused to move the second flight. I don’t see the harm. It’s one thing if the state treats you as second class due to your gender. But is it really so horrible if a seatmate simply wants to follow his faith in a way that does not impact you as long as you are offered an equivalent or better seat?
Rabbi Noa Sattath of the Israel Religious Action Center (IRAC) disagrees. He told Haaretz:
“The attempt to move a woman from a seat she reserved because of chauvinistic ideas, which have absolutely no connection to Judaism, is immoral, illegal and illegitimate. A direct line connects the attempt to erase women by refusing to sit next to them and the tacit consent that is given to hurt them and their bodies. We, in the Reform movement, through IRAC, will do whatever needs to be done to promote gender equality in Israel.”
I still do not fully understand how not sitting next to a woman somehow erases them.
> Read More: Would You Have Switched Seats?
CONCLUSION
As I predicted, Wolfson settled with easyJet. The flight attendants should not have pressured her to move the first time nor left her to fend for herself the second time. Israeli law is clear on this. So is UK law. Even so, who wants to sit next to someone who does not want to sit next to you? Wolfson could have moved for her own comfort, not theirs. Yet I get the stigma of even being asked to move…
What do you make of this issue? Feel free to opine below or continue the lively discussion here.
image: easyJet
It’s completely unacceptable that airlines and society continue to pander to the whims of ancient religious bigotry. It’s understood that if you fly you may sit next to a stranger who – gasp – may be a different religion or gender. Don’t like it? Buy out the entire row. A woman who paid for an aisle seat shouldn’t be asked nor forced to move. If people are so worried about contact with others, stay home in your little Stone Age neighborhood/village and let the rest of us live.
Exactly. 100%
Why didn’t the male passengers try to move?
“Erase” is probably a bit of hyperbole.
Intent matters to a certain degree, but because the action results in consistent verifiable harm to a specific class of person, the morality of the situation is clear to me here. I use “harm” in the sense that the woman has suffered damage to her dignity.
@ChiFlyer979: right on!
Matthew –
Would you find it acceptable if the story were that someone was unwilling to sit next to a person of color because of their religious faith?
This is no different.
It is totally different, IMO. It is about sincere motive – my understanding of the Haredi faith is that this is done to protect woman, not to marginalize them.
That said, the more acceptable action would be for the men to find people to swap with them, not ask the lady to move.
This is an example of why businesses should be able to offer a particular service to a particular group of people. If Orthodox Jews want to create an airline exclusively for Orthodox Jews, I have no problem with it. If there is demand, they stay in business. If not they go out of business. Unfortunately, government thinks people and businesses shouldn’t be free to offer services to an exclusive group. If gays want to create a gay airline or have a gay only cruise, I don’t care. Let them.
This is a frequent problem with Orthodox Jews who fly to Israel. It’s not going to end because it’s their religious belief (in addition to of course Jews being a specific ethnic group/race, Jews also have a religion). It would be easily solved by allowing a business to serve the market. It’s the same with doctors. A lot of people feel most comfortable with their own race or own sex. Doctors can cater to this. It’s hard for an airline when everyone is forced together and a segment does not want to be and would rather pay for something else.
I’m obviously not Jewish ethnically. I don’t have those religious beliefs. But it’s not my place to support the government banning a simple solution to all our problems: stop forcing people together who don’t want to be together. I’m sure this woman would be ok with an airline that allows orthodox to practice their beliefs and not cause her problems.
I do recognize the danger of flight attendants abusing their authority over flight safety to compel people to act. They do it all the time when a passenger makes a legitimate complaint about poor service. The public needs to hold flight attendants accountable as well as pilots who automatically defer to flight attendants.
Oh please. No one is asking those people to boink the lady.
Are these Haredi Jews so horny that they can’t keep their hands to themselves on a flight?
Israel has a problem with far right extremism. And this is a symptom of the whole thing
Where does this nonsense stop? What if I say I’m a Hindu and hence you shouldn’t eat beef if you’re sitting next to me. Will you accept that?
I don’t understand how this “protects” the woman. She isn’t complaining. The men were. Move them. Or suggest they take a later flight and buy a third seat for “safety” from the random girl cooties they might get from a non-family female. The person/people with the issue should do the seat shuffle, not passengers who selected and paid for a specific seat. Guys, charter a flight if you can’t handle it and realize she doesn’t want to touch you as much as you don’t want to touch her. Let her use the arm rest. Be a gentleman. Problem solved.
As a Christian who is also sympathetic to faith-based accommodations, I believe the airline should have done absolutely nothing beyond offering to move the men to an equivalent or inferior seat (even if that splits them up), unless they could upgrade the woman to a higher cabin class. The point is that *she* should not have to accommodate *his* beliefs. Whether the accommodation significantly inconveniences her is subjective and immaterial. The basic principle of faith-based accommodations should be that you not infringe on others’ rights. She has a right to the seat that was assigned to her at the time of boarding.
You choose to be Jewish… or Catholic… or Buddhist. You are not born biologically a religion. But you are born biologically a gender that you cannot choose. It’s time to stop pandering to one persons choice over another person’s reality.
If your travel restrictions are THAT acute, then reserve, and pay extra for your special seating IN ADVANCE, as the woman did, to specify an aisle seat. No one else should be inconvenienced by your inability to plan ahead.
Gender identity is a choice and literally violent transphobia such as yours will not be tolerated in the brave new world, comrade.
Matthew Klint seeks to justify a modern-day revival of Jim Crow “separate but equal.” Of course, motive matters, and the reason we provided separate carriages or sections of a bus, not to mention colleges, was to protect our minority citizens!
It is customary for passengers to be asked to move to accommodate a married couple or a family that reasonably wants to sit together, often to supervise minor children. That is also objectionable, and for the same reasons.