I’m going to call out United Airlines on a technicality, here. United’s website is simply unclear concerning its mask policy for two-year-olds, United overreacted concerning a two-year-old girl who could not keep her mask on, and removing two-year-olds in general remains an unnecessary overreaction to this pandemic.
Mask Debate Aside, United Airlines’ Policy On Masks Is Simply Not Clear For Two-Year-Olds
My position should not come as a surprise…when Southwest Airlines kicked off a two-year-old under similar circumstances, I wrote a story titled, Southwest Airlines Boots Another Two-Year-Old Off Over Mask. Enough. And I get there are two sides to this: those who believe uniform compliance is necessary and those who believe that flying with young children is hard enough already and masks on toddlers do little to protect the health of those around them.
But Southwest’s policy is clear: only “young children under the age of 2” are exempt. That key word is under.
On the other hand, United’s policy states:
All travelers over the age of 2 are required to wear a face covering.
Does “over” not imply greater than? As in, if not over two, you are not required to wear a face covering? We tend to round in years, not months and days. And it’s not like the policy is spelled out more clearly on other parts of the website…the language is always “over the age of 2”. Indeed, that can encompass those over two and those who are still two, but it is undeniably ambiguous language that United should immediately clarify.
So on that basis, the family should have been spared. The whole charade of making the family do the “walk of shame” off the fully-boarded aircraft exposed a lot more people to potential virus than the little girl laying down between her parents for the three-hour flight.
Was she wearing her mask during boarding? That is when enforcement should happen.
I have yet to see cogent, science-based argument that two-year-olds should not be exempted. The family noted that the World Health Organization does not recommend masks for two-year-olds. As I said in the Southwest story:
Look at other airlines around the world: young children don’t have to wear a mask. On Lufthansa, children under six are exempt. On British Airways, children under 11 are exempt. In fact, UK Department of Health strongly discourages face coverings for children under the age of three for health and safety reasons. On Cathay Pacific, children under six are exempt. On Emirates, children under six are exempt.
So again, I think masks are ridiculous on young children, but (and this is a key but), United certainly has the prerogative as a business to require them. However, United should make its policy clear and I simply see its current rule as vague and misleading for two-year-olds.
All that said, I have several observations:
- From the conversation (watch the video above), the crocodile tears and selective editing make me suspicious
- The family was apparently heading to New York City to visit family and friends and go sightseeing…that’s not allowed right now without quarantine and it appears the family had no intention of quarantining
- I suspect the little girl had no advance practice in wearing a mask…the father seems like an anti-masker because of the way his mask falls below his nose and because of his indignation over masks while stating that 99% recover from COVID-19 (though he is correct on that…).
- The gate agent who escorted them off was professional and just doing his job
- I don’t doubt the family has flown United or others before without enforcement…the flight attendants I talk to tell me they are not going to kick a two-year-old off.
- United cannot be faulted for failing to remove their checked baggage, which would have risked delaying all the other passengers onboard.
The family claimed United banned them, but that is not the case. United is reviewing the incident and issued the following statement:
“The health and safety of our employees and customers is our highest priority, which is why we have a multi-layered set of policies, including mandating that everyone onboard two and older wears a mask.
“We are investigating this specific incident and have made contact with the family. We also refunded their tickets and returned their car seat and bags.”
The family has gone quiet and removed the video from Instagram.
CONCLUSION
I still deeply question the wisdom in forcing two-year-olds to wear masks. That said, United is welcome to do that. But if it does, its rules need clarification. Now. Until then, two-year-olds are in a gray area. And for parents who need to travel within the USA with young children, consider flying Delta, which has a much looser policy for masks on toddlers.
Was United right, were the parents right, or were both wrong?
United banning them for life is a blessing. They should celebrate.
Although it has been reported that they were banned, I’m told they were not banned (at least not yet) and if they are banned, it will just be for the duration of the pandemic-related mask mandate.
Your technicality focus is wrong. When you turn two, then you become older than two so they were justified in kicking out this entities family.
The bigger question is how fricking irresponsible the parents are for willfully violating the required NYC quarantine for their kid to see a tree in Rockefeller Center. A totally unnecessary trip, violating the law, and done so they can boost their instagram followers. They bear responsibility for taking an unnecessary and illegal trip. United may be going for overkill but their policy is clearly stated like it or not.
Two thoughts. First, your bigger question is a good one and a question the family must answer. But my entire article was about how the United policy for two-year-olds is not clear. Beyond overkill (which United is entitled to do), United must first make its policy clear.
You are confusing “laws” (passed by legislative branch, signed into law by executive branch, not struck down by judicial branch) with whatever these covid regulations are…edicts, policies, demands, but they are not laws, because they are clearly unconstitutional.
If stopping travel to NYC, or anywhere would make a dent in the pandemic then why are their flights at all? You hypocritical covid shamers like your buddies Newsome and Cuomo are the worst. You can control your own level of risk, stop with your power trip.
A technical point, the NY (and any other states’ quarantine requirements) are a State law/order/mandate. States or local jurisdictions do not have the ability to restricts flights or close airports, only the FAA is permitted to do that as it would have to be a Federal order…so perhaps wait until January 20th to see if Sleepy Joe sees his shadow or not.
You are not the covid police! If they were to arrive in NY and face sanctions for not quarantining, then that would be a consequence they would have to deal with based on their decision to travel. I certainly hope that you are equally appalled by the actions of Saturday Night Live circumventing covid restrictions by paying audience members for attending and deeming them essential employees?!?
It is very clear that this family has rarely if ever attempted to put a mask on this child before. Why didn’t they try having the child get used to a mask in their own home? A plane is a pretty stressful place for an experience like that.
Agreed. I guess it isn’t clear to me if they had a reasonable expectation their two year old would have to wear a mask.
“United cannot be faulted for failing to remove their checked baggage, which would have risked delaying all the other passengers onboard.”
Well first off, if someone is removed from a flight for security reasons, their luggage is always removed. Why is this different? Second, oh to save 10 minutes of the other passengers time, but by taking their luggage across country without them you are wasting days of their time and lots of money in tracking it down and doing without or replacing essentials.
It’s one thing to refuse to fly someone because of some unclear policy, but to steal their luggage? I’d think this family has some significant compensation coming.
Attention seekers. If you dig deeper you will find this been edited and there are videos before the flights. They knew there will be a problem. Check the passengershaming.
Uh, If a flight is leaving at 2pm, then the mark to make is 2pm, not 2:15pm. Same goes for age. over 2 years means any person over he age of 2. As in 2 years and 3 months must wear mask. Not so hard to understand.
Sorry, I addressed that in the post. Over two means three to a lot of people. People think in years, not months/days when it comes to age. I am glad it was clear for you. It wasn’t for me…
Is “means to a lot of people” the standard we are going by?
Not trying to be sarcastic…
Pretty much. Because that’s what the flying public is…
I’m not sure why you say the policy isn’t clear…
on EVERY flight, it’s said loud and clear… They say EVERYONE must wear a mask… EXECPT for children UNDER the age of 2.. That means as soon as the little girl turned 2, she wears a mask…
They do no say 2 and under… they say UNDER the age of 2.
On their website “Requiring all customers over the age of 2 and employees to wear a face covering on board”.
When you check it, you get the same language…
Again… I’m not sure why you say the policy isn’t clear…
Yep! Whether “a lot of people” or “the flying public” understand or don’t understand United’s policy, the policy still applies and should be uniformly enforced. When police cite a person for violating a law that the offender claims not to know about, the person has still committed a violation and is still subject to the penalty. Why doesn’t the same principle apply here? Besides, these reckless parents don’t care about the rules, anyway. I’m glad to see United staff enforcing the airline’s policy and doing so professionally.
Yeah…this is pretty simple to me. United’s policy is a total nightmare. It is very stupid. It’s not based in actual science. When you have stupid policies, stupid things happen afterwards. I don’t think we need to get two in the weeds about what constitutes “over 2”. This particular airline just needs an injection of common sense.
So if a child flies on his second birthday, is he over 2? Asking for a friend.
If the flight takes off and lands after the hour:minute:second during which they escaped their mother’s ovarian Bastille, then yes…they are over two years of age. If it takes off before said moment in time, they are exempt. Super simple stuff. Doesn’t everyone know the hour, minute, and second at which they were born? /s
Your second birthday is the first day of your third year. If you were born, say, March 14th, the March 14th of your second birthday is actually the third March 14th you have been alive. You are over two on your second birthday (2 years and a day)
“Does “over” not imply greater than? As in, if not over two, you are not required to wear a face covering?”
I think this is getting into the weeds. We’ve all flown with lap infants who are under 2. On their 2nd birthday, bam, you have to buy them a seat. Nobody is quibbling that “my child isn’t OVER 2”. At best I would give you that United could be more clear and just straight up state “if your child is not eligible to fly as a lap infant they must wear a mask”.
Tangential to this…but we can’t ignore the fact that being filmed is going to put an FA on edge, for better or worse. So maybe if the Mom hadn’t tried to capture this moment on camera in order to throw a social media pity party, it may have played out differently. Yeah that’s kind of ‘victim blaming’ but there’s a grain of truth in there somewhere. Where are all the people getting kicked off who didn’t film the incident?!
Interestingly, United’s infant policy says, “Children under the age of two” which seems much clearer to me.
I think they are erring in trying to make a positive statement about who is required to wear masks, rather than specifically identifying the group that is excluded from wearing masks. In this case you are right that it would leave little to no doubt.
Came here to say exactly this.
The lap child policy’s wording is “under two,” i.e. <2, not ≤2. Why did United choose to use the words "over two years old" in this instance to mean ≥2?
I agree with you, Matt, that in common parlance "over two" means an age above two, which is not typically "two and one day old" but "three or older."
I flew on Delta last night with my 4 year old daughter. She wasn’t wearing a mask. Nobody said anything checking in, at the SkyClub, or on the flight itself. I had one in my pocket in case there was an issue.
On American last month, our 4 year old wore a mask the whole time because we knew the rules. However, even then two FAs were badgering us about my younger daughter not wearing a mask. They did not relent until they were satisfied she was only 1 year old (they checked to confirm she was a “lap infant”). Once she turns 2 we will only fly Delta because of the flexibility in their rules.
Non-essential vacation. Bad idea. Parents should be ashamed of themselves. They are not the poster children for an anti-United campaign.
I will say the same to you as I did in a previous reply: You are not the covid police! If they were to arrive in NY and face sanctions for not quarantining, then that would be a consequence they would have to deal with based on their decision to travel. I certainly hope that you are equally appalled by the actions of Saturday Night Live circumventing covid restrictions by paying audience members for attending and deeming them essential employees?!?
Not dying from an illness doesn’t equal recovering from it
Agreed.
Testing postive for COVID does not = Ill or sick
“99% recover from COVID-19 (though he is correct on that…)”.
<1% mortality rate does not rise to the level of panademic, even moreso when mortality its age,& pre-existing comorbidities skewed.
I know you like science – The month long quarntined Diamond Princess was a really great controlled petri dish.
14 deaths out of 3,700 pax/crew – 0.0038
USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71)
1 death, 1,156 tested postive out of crew of 3,200 crew =0.0003125
Both ships No HEPA filtration, recirculating HVAC, little PPE.
A little more science – from John Hopkins based on real CDC deaths.
“She explained that the significance of COVID-19 on U.S. deaths can be fully understood only through comparison to the number of total deaths in the United States.
After retrieving data on the CDC website, Briand compiled a graph representing percentages of total deaths per age category from early February to early September, which includes the period from before COVID-19 was detected in the U.S. to after infection rates soared.
Surprisingly, the deaths of older people stayed the same before and after COVID-19. Since COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly, experts expected an increase in the percentage of deaths in older age groups. However, this increase is not seen from the CDC data. In fact, the percentages of deaths among all age groups remain relatively the same.
“The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals,” Briand said.
Sadly it didn’t fit the “Narrative” so it was retracted – pure COVID deaths with no pre-existing or commorbidites is extremely small. The CDC listed 6,000 pure COVID deaths out 200K with commorbidites.
2017 2.81M Americans died of all causes.
Preliminary numbers are that we will be below 2.81M despite having more residents.
I digress.
John Hopkins study and retraction “…Briand’s study should not be used exclusively in understanding the impact of COVID-19, but should be taken in context with the countless other data published by Hopkins, the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
I took COVID serious for the first three months – till the numbers just weren’t adding up.
I think we will look back on 2020 with a WTF we’re we thinking.
https://web.archive.org/web/20201126163323/https://www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19
CORRECTION: CVN-71 crew numbers.
Crew compliment was actually 5,000 out of max of 6,000 with airwing. Not 3,200 from prior post.
So 1 death out 5,000, 1,156 tested positive but only 471 presented with symptoms.
That said everybody panic as the the sky and solar system are falling – and we’re all going to die–one day.
While I agree UA should change the language to 2yrs and older to be absolutely clear, technically anyone 2 yrs and 1 day is older than 2. Just because some like to round up doesn’t really affect United’s interpretation of said policy. I also think the fact that United clearly defines the distinction between infants and children in the CoC will go a long way when these idiots sue United.
And in the end, I’d wager the parents would have done things exactly the same if the policy did read “2yrs and older”.
I concur with Shaun’s sensible post. I don’t think United needs to change the phrase “over the age of two.” Why not supplement it with parenthetical wording like “24 months and older”? These irresponsible parents would certainly have pulled this selfish stunt regardless of the wording of United’s policy, which the airline has every right to enforce on every one of its flights. It seems unfair to criticize United for nitpicking or kicking noncompliant passengers on a “technicality.” UA’s “over the age of two” policy is not a technicality.
You’d be surprised by how much litigation has been caused by e.g. insurance policies using wording of the kind of “over 75 years old.” So not as clear-cut as some commenters are making this out to be.
There were probably 100 or more people on that plane. At a 99% survival rate, one of them would theoretically die if they were all infected…..
One of them would have died even without the kid being on board, since many of the passengers will take their masks off to eat and drink.
Matthew, I agree, United’s policy could be written much clear than it is. If they want 2 year olds to wear a mask, then it needs to read “customers two years of age and older…” but if 2 year olds are ok, then it should simply be “customers 3 years of age and older…” I don’t know what United’s intent was, nor do I care, but the way I read it, a two year old should not have to wear a mask…the language to me implies 3 years and older. I have no problem with United enforcing their rule, so long as its done uniformly, but the language needs to be amended.
I also wonder why parents don’t just say they’re kid is 18 or 20 months…its not like they’re being asked to produce a birth certificate to fly maskless.
This is completely stupid. Those of you spitting hairs over this are stupid too. Also, United sucks. Sorry Matthew.
Oh, come on Chris, they were threatening castration! Are we gonna split hairs here? Am I wrong?
You’re right in that United should be clearer in their description. That does nothing to excuse these absolutely detestable people. Influencers are about as universally beloved as cable companies and these people make influencers look bad.
When I opened this article, I expected to hate it. But Matt did a good job of presenting both sides and also the difference in how SWA and UAL wrote their policies.
I don’t expect airlines to enforce state quarantine polices, especially since they change all the time. But it would be nice for airlines to add a one-click certification that they are aware of the policy in their destination.
You are having a good faith argument about the technicalities of United’s policies in regards to a family that was clearly not approaching them in good faith.
Kyle, your point is fair.
These people are a-holes. Screw them and their precious little super-spreader.
Right. United is not at fault for enforcing a reasonable policy, and attacking the airline is unfair. Leisure travel with an unmasked toddler during a pandemic? Breathtaking selfishness. Unbelievably cavalier and wholly disrespectful of the airline, its staff, and the passengers on the flight. These people deserve to be banned (Thank you, United). Reasonable people might also question their judgment as parents.
This was staged by anti-maskers.
This is a big problem for me as the parent of a 2 year old and a 1K with United. I need to fly the family ultra-longhaul (necessity not a vacation) in January. My daughter simply won’t wear a mask despite my spouse and me practicing everyday. I doubt she will wear the mask for the 24 hours it will take to reach our destination. So, we will forgo United Polaris and fly coach on other airlines like Lufthansa, Turkish, Virgin etc. which don’t require a 2 year old to wear a mask. Wish United would make it more flexible – perhaps increase the age.
A couple points. Americans don’t need to justify their God given right to travel whenever and wherever for whatever reason. Social media was quick to censor the videos, that should be alarming to all Americans. I applaud the parents for not mentally conditioning their child to wear a mask that us useless and has zero basis in science. The Covid has been used by the oligarchs to cause chaos in the global economy. Where is the critical thinking here? So many accredited health care professionals have revealed this fraud but the sheep herd cannot comprehend the con being pulled here. All you mindless followers need to wake up because the herd is taking you all off the cliff.
They have a right to travel, they don’t have a right to travel on a private enterprise and enforce their desires on that private enterprise or the other passengers who chose to comply with the Contract of Carriage. If they don’t like wearing the mask, they can drive. There are of course other more extreme positions like charter their own flight or hike.
Maybe they genuinely didn’t think about preparing their nearly-3-year-old daughter for the trip, maybe they staged the incident in order to create an uproar and increase their “influence” (or maybe try to score a settlement from UA), maybe they *did* prepare their daughter but she was just being recalcitrant that day. I’m not a mind-reader so can’t know but their histrionics in the video and selective editing don’t help their case and whatever the reasons are, I would prefer passengers like them not be on a flight I’m on.
Matthew,
Unrelated here, but I always admire how you go through all replies and comment where needed/warranted. Thanks for not just posting and dumping. You always state and clarify your opinions. Thank you.
Thanks Gus! I appreciate you reading.
Ridiculous…it is a two year old…some leeway should be given. I think the parents were,,, especially the father… were very controlled. BTW, their luggage should have been unloaded there and then.
I applaud UA here, I mean the dad wasn’t wearing his mask correctly (if at all at the beginning of the video), once they were off the mom was instagramming with her mask down in the terminal and the kid seemed to have discovered a mask for the first time on that flight.
Kids can be trained to wear a mask and whoever says the contrary is just an anti-mask. It’s pretty much the sam as teaching your kid to wear underwear or pants.
I really think these parents were out fishing and trying to get kicked off a flight just for a great story. Their claims of being banned by United just proves the point.
There is a problem here….it is has to do with being OBEDIENT. Parents be warned, there are many decisions you will make for your child between now and adulthood. They are not in a position at 2 years old to decide some life and death matters. Perhaps explaining to your daughter the need for the mask (like the ones Mommy and Daddy are wearing) prior to the trip may have gone a long way to prevent a scene. And it would have been good practice (should the plane experience mechanical problems) for using the life-saving drop down devises that assist in breathing.
First time I watched this — only read about up until now.
My biggest question: why was the mother filming the kid struggling with putting the mask on???
In my experience, holding a camera/phone in front of a kid doesn’t increase the likelihood of them doing something you want them to do, and will likely have the OPPOSITE effect.
Wait I thought it was all the vogue now to let our children tell us they were transgender and woe unto the Philistine who dare argue against that child’s “decision “. But for mask enforcement the parents MUST TRAIN the child and FORCE the child to wear the mask.
I am sorry, the societal rules seem to change hourly. Much like the flip flopper of the government edicts (they are definitely not laws, and our overlords know their demands are unlawful, how else to explain that 10 months in, and not a single edict has been legally codified through any legislature )
It’s your plane/airline kick off whomever you please for what ever spurious reason you can dream up. But when you do…. take their belongs out of your hold..otherwise you are a thief.
It’s unfortunate this happened. But I’m sorry, she was traumatized? Put on your big girl pants and get over it. Your daughter won’t remember it. And we ALL have embarrassing moments in our lives. People now days are so ridiculously sensitive.
I’m truly disgusted that someone actually come under this article and said they should teach their kid how to wear a mask. She is two, she has been on this Earth for 2 years. siding with this airline company for any reason whatsoever is unbelievably ridiculous. what this family was doing and where they were going it’s no one’s business and should not be discussed on this article or commented on. The simple fact is people are so ridiculous behind a disease that has a 99% survival rate and if this entire family was not wearing their mask then yes I could understand some issues but one individual which was two years old. it’s absolutely absurd to try to blame this family in any kind of way for doing anything wrong. How dare anyone try to complain about the child not wearing a mask, there are children out there who have autism like my own child or other problems or are just 2 years old and won’t keep a mask on. People on here being ugly about this family are complete ignorant people. They handle themselves so amazingly because I know a lot of families that would have blown up and acted a fool over being treated this way behind a mask and a two-year-old. People need to get woke on the simple fact of what this really is, this is not about a disease it’s about complete power trips and control and wanting to turn our society into a communist country. The airline completely handled this wrong. even when he hailed The mask over his own child’s face to make them happy they said that they weren’t complying with policy for the flight. It’s sad that this is what the world we’re living in has come to that we can’t just let a 2-year-old be a 2-year-old.
While I believe masks are inappropriate for two-year-olds and side with the family here, I think the larger issue of training is important. I also had to train my four year old. He’s very good at wearing a mask now, but it took a lot of practice.