A police body cam video of a woman being removed from a United Airlines flight offers insight into United’s new “huddle process” and shows why flight crews tend to err on the side of caution by removing passengers, even if there is disagreement over intoxication levels.
United Removes Stumbling Passenger From Flight, But Gate Agent And Flight Attendant See The Matter Differently
Body-cam footage from Fort Myers’ Southwest Florida International Airport (RSW) shows a United Airlines passenger being asked to leave a departing flight after a crew member determined she appeared intoxicated. What makes this incident, flagged by One Mile At Time, unusual is not that she was intoxicated or removed, but that a gate agent actually questioned the crew’s assessment in front of arriving law enforcement.
United has implemented a new internal protocol called the “huddle process,” designed to bring multiple employees into a deliberate decision when a passenger boards exhibiting signs of intoxication…a process I first shared in April. Under this system:
“After boarding, if two flight attendants independently observe a customer exhibiting red light behavior(s) the Inflight team will call a mandatory huddle between Inflight, Flight Ops and Airport Operations to facilitate customer removal from the aircraft. This new huddle process is designed to handle situations where red light behaviors may not have been visible during boarding and a customer that appears to be intoxicated makes their way onto an aircraft.”
The airline defines “red light behaviors” with observable cues, including stumbling or falling, moving in slow motion, needing extra time to respond, slurred speech, inability to sit upright, and other signs of severe intoxication.
> Read More: United Airlines Rolls Out “Huddle Process” To Quietly Remove Intoxicated Passengers
In the RSW incident, that crew member said the woman was “stumbling down the aisle” and “couldn’t walk straight,” which fits squarely within United’s published criteria for removal. Police footage shows the gate agent returning to the cabin to ask the flight attendant whether she was “sure” the passenger was under the influence, saying she had not seen the woman stagger onboard and that she seemed “perfectly fine” from her vantage point.
Was Gate Agent Just Protecting Herself?
That reaction makes sense when you consider what is at stake. Above all else, gate agents are often judged on on-time performance. In confronting the flight attendant, the gate agent may have been trying to protect herself from being blamed for allowing someone aboard who would then be removed, a situation that could reflect poorly on her when it became clear how intoxicated the passenger appeared.
Indeed, a review of the video and witnesses suggests the passenger was very likely intoxicated. Stumbling is only one red light behavior; reports also described slurred speech and a lack of coordinated movement. None of this should be taken lightly. Federal regulation specifically prohibits an airline from allowing a person who appears intoxicated to be carried on a civil aircraft, and crew members appear to have concluded better safe than sorry.
In this case, once law enforcement arrived and the crew had voiced their concerns, the captain ultimately agreed with the removal. The passenger’s refusal to comply initially, followed by a visibly unsteady gait even on the jet bridge and urination accident, only underscored why staff were reluctant to let her sit in a confined cabin at altitude.
CONCLUSION
Removing passengers for intoxication is never pleasant, and disputes among employees on the ground only make the optics messier. But looking at the totality of observable behavior, it did appear the woman showed classic signs of intoxication that United’s own “huddle process” is designed to catch and address. The system worked.
Whether the gate agent was trying to cover her own butt or genuinely didn’t notice the cues in the crowd, the outcome seems consistent with safety priorities. United’s approach demands multiple observers before removal, and in this case, the criteria appear to have been met.
Great job by the crew ‘huddling’ and coming up with the right decision which is never easy in these situations!
It’s possible the agent didn’t notice this customer. However, after the flight attendant noticed and brought it to everyone’s attention it’s pretty clear there’s an issue if they wet themselves….HELLO!!
When the agents questioned the flight attendant and asks if they, “ were sure” it sounds as if the agent just didn’t want be bothered. After it it’s the agent who will have to deal with the problem.
It sounds as if the agent was perfectly fine with pawning off a drunk. A)get the flight off on time and B) said drink gets boarded and it’s not my problem anymore.
Now, many times the drunk gets on the plane, passes out and the flight goes off without a hitch. But it’s also possible the drunk causes an issue, gets belligerent then there’s a chance of an inconvenient and costly diversion.