United Airlines is receiving criticism, after it was reported that two young girls were prohibited from boarding a flight because they were wearing leggings. The girls were reportedly traveling from Denver to Minneapolis when three of them were stopped for their outfits. One changed out of the leggings and was let on the flight, and the other two were prohibited from boarding. Shannon Watts, a woman who was boarding a separate flight, tweeted about the incident:

1) A @united gate agent isn’t letting girls in leggings get on flight from Denver to Minneapolis because spandex is not allowed?

— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) March 26, 2017

2) She’s forcing them to change or put dresses on over leggings or they can’t board. Since when does @united police women’s clothing?

— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) March 26, 2017

3) Gate agent for flt 215 at 7:55. Said she doesn’t make the rules, just follows them. I guess @united not letting women wear athletic wear?

— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) March 26, 2017

United responded to the tweets Watts sent, indicating that the girls were in violation of its “Contract of Carriage” which includes a provision that passengers be “properly clothed.” But the concept that adolescent girls wearing leggings is improper sparked outrage on social media.

A 10-year-old girl in gray leggings. She looked normal and appropriate. Apparently @united is policing the clothing of women and girls. https://t.co/RKsIFoE8pq

— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) March 26, 2017

@shannonrwatts Hey, @united, you know how this ends, right? Images of women in leggings tagging you on social as they fly your competition.

— Jenn (@jennvzande) March 26, 2017

@washingtonpost leggings? Like the ones in your advertisement @united hmmmmm… pic.twitter.com/EfIlBRMlEY

— OLIVIA FOX RADIO (@Oliviafoxradio) March 26, 2017

For the record, the girl wearing the leggings was TEN YEARS OLD. Good luck to @united explaining why she looked too sexual.

— Dana Schwartz (@DanaSchwartzzz) March 26, 2017

@united Leggings are business attire for 10 year olds. Their business is being children.

— Patricia Arquette (@PattyArquette) March 26, 2017

United has since stated that the girls were flying as “pass riders,” which are usually family members of United employees. Apparently, those designated as pass riders are held to a stricter dress code that specifically includes a ban on spandex. A local outlet, 9News, spoke to Jonathan Geurin, a spokesperson for United, about this special pass rider dress code:

Pass riders have a stricter dress code to board. The three people involved in the incident did not meet the criteria for pass riders.

Pass riders are considered representatives of United and that extends to the dress code requirements. Casual attire for pass riders is allowed as long as it is in good taste for the environment.

As an example, Guerin says flip flops are not allowed for pass riders.

9NEWS asked to see the dress code policy for pass riders. Guerin says the information is part of an internal policy and will not be released at this time.

But that concept seems odd–it’s hard to believe that anyone would have mistaken pre-teen girls for employees, or assumed that they represented United just because they may have been related to an employee. United has announced that it’s looking into the policy and the complaint, but many were left with a bad taste by the incident. After all, leggings are normal travel attire for many women–and that’s certainly not the airline’s business.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post United Prevents Girls Wearing Leggings from Boarding Flight appeared first on Law Street.

About a year after resuming the diplomatic relationship with Cuba, the U.S. government has just approved direct commercial flights from 10 American cities to Havana. This is yet another step toward thawing a relationship that has been icy since 1961.

A statement by the U.S. Department of Transportation reads:

Today we take another important step toward delivering on President Obama’s promise to reengage Cuba […] Restoring regular air service holds tremendous potential to reunite Cuban American families and foster education and opportunities for American businesses of all sizes.

Officials first signed an agreement to open up American flights to Cuba in February—for the first time in more than half a century. Last month, the Transportation Department approved flights to other cities in Cuba, but now the time has come to allow air travel to the the capital city, Havana. American Airlines will receive the biggest share of flights, at 35 per week, closely followed by JetBlue with 27.

Thinking about traveling to #Cuba? Watch this video from @USEmbCuba on 5 things to know before you go! https://t.co/mHQ429chlC

— Travel – State Dept (@TravelGov) July 7, 2016

The American cities that the flights will depart from are: Atlanta, Charlotte, North Carolina, Houston, Los Angeles, Newark, New Jersey, New York, Orlando, Tampa, Miami, and Fort Lauderdale.

Florida has the highest Cuban-American population in the U.S., and so four cities will launch the most flights, at 85 per week. Demand will be high from Cuban-Americans, according to the Miami Herald.

Since Fidel Castro seized power and started collaborating with the Soviet Union in the early 1960’s, there has been mutual mistrust and economic sanctions on Cuba. The trade embargo also meant a travel ban, so that Americans could not visit the island legally.

When Obama came into office, he started working towards easing the bans and sanctions, in an effort to normalize the relationship. In 2009 he lifted the travel ban for Cuban-Americans, making it easier for people to visit relatives and travel freely.

La Habana, Cuba – Raw & Beauty, Old Glory | GLOB▲L – M▲G▲ZINE https://t.co/rW8jNvTa6z pic.twitter.com/8ABATUhrIa

— Be ▲rtist Be ▲rt (@BeArtist_BeArt) July 7, 2016

However, the ban on American tourism in Cuba is still in place, so airlines will be required to record the reason why passengers are traveling there. But if you don’t have relatives on the island and want to visit, don’t fret. There are 12 scenarios where you could still be allowed to visit. For example, you’re ok to go if it’s for religious activities, to make a public performance, or compete in an athletic competition.

The decision about the flights won’t be final until after a 30-day trial period during which potential complaints or objections will be handled. The first U.S. to Cuba flight is scheduled to fly from Fort Lauderdale to Santa Clara in September.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post U.S. Approves Direct Flights From 10 Cities to Havana appeared first on Law Street.

Four female Frontier Airlines pilots from Denver–Shannon Kiedrowski, Brandy Beck, Erin Zielinski and Randi Freyer–just filed a complaint against the airline company, alleging that they were discriminated against while they were pregnant and breastfeeding.

The women filed the suit with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. They claim that when they reached the point in their pregnancies where they were no longer able to work as pilots, their only option was to take unpaid leave, as the airline didn’t offer them paid leave or the chance to perform other ground-based work. For the four women, this amounted to eight to ten weeks of unpaid leave each.

Additionally, the women allege that after they had their children, accommodations were not made by the company so that they could breastfeed or pump milk. They were not given adequate breaks, nor were they given appropriately designated areas where they would have been able to pump. Not being able to pump breastmilk while nursing can lead to discomfort and pain as well as medical issues, and three of the four women ended up with infections as a result.

While this may seem like an extreme example, maternity leave (and parental leave) and accommodations in the United States are still seemingly stuck in the past. According to an advocacy group called MomsRising that pushes for paid family leave around the United States, only 13 percent of working people have access to paid family leave. In fact, only one other nation doesn’t guarantee paid maternity leave–Papua New Guinea. And while it wasn’t maternity leave specifically that was at issue for the Frontier Airline pilots, problems with paid family leave and accommodations during and after pregnancy are something that a large majority of American women and families have to contend with. After all, Zelinski explained her motivation for filing the complaint, stating:

I love my job as a pilot so much, except for this issue. We don’t want future moms to have to go through this. We want a better policy for everyone going forward. There are more and more female pilots being hired, including at Frontier. We don’t want anyone to have to choose between flying and breastfeeding.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Female Frontier Airlines Pilots File Complaint Over Treatment While Pregnant and Nursing appeared first on Law Street.

The Transportation Security Administration agents recently failed 67 out of 70 total tests, missing 95 percent of the of mock explosives and weapons that were smuggled into airports by undercover Homeland Security Red Teams, ABC News Reported.

Since the administration’s last review in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security spent $540 million on checked baggage screening and $11 million to train Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agents. Despite these expenditures, ABC news notes that the TSA has “failed to make any noticeable improvements in that time.” Professors John Mueller and Mark Stewart further reviewed homeland security expenditures using a cost-benefit analysis. They conclude, based on the costs of security and the financial damages of potential attacks, American spending has not produced the necessary results.

The failed airport security tests come at the worst possible time for the TSA. In the past couple months, we have witnessed multiple breaches in airport security. In April, a teenager snuck into a wheel well on an airplane leaving from the West Coast and flew all the way to Hawaii. In late May, a man was able to bypass airport security at LAX, only to be subdued by a TSA officer with a taser as he reached gate 66.

Last August, a woman was able to board a plane in San Jose without a ticket. The woman made it all the way to her destination before being arrested by police, who later determined that the she suffered from a mental illness.

After news of the recent Red Team tests emerged, Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson said,

Changes will be made in response to the identification of the vulnerable aspects by these tests.

According to the ABC News report, one undercover agent was actually stopped after setting off the alarm at the magnetometer, but after a pat down, TSA agents failed to find fake explosives taped to the undercover agent’s back.

The question now becomes, what new security measures will be enacted by the TSA, and will these new measures be any more effective?  The TSA recently started testing electronic devices traveling to and from overseas cities at many U.S. airports with direct international flights. The new rule will require passengers to power on their devices when arriving at security checkpoints for overseas flights. If the device will not power on, it will not be allowed past airport security checkpoints.

Many passengers feel this does not adequately address all the security concerns as it is only being implemented in select airports and does not address the problem of passengers smuggling bombs and weapons on their bodies, which TSA agents failed to detect in the mock testing. In 2014, the TSA  confiscated 2,212 firearms at 24 airports after screening nearly 653 million passengers, a 22 percent increase from 2013 where only 1,813 firearms were confiscated.

With external security threats remaining high according to terrorism experts, it is imperative to keep internal security at its best. Homeland Security has used Red Teams for the last 13 years to detect security flaws; however, the changes never seem to address the problems accurately. NBC News notes that since 2002, TSA agents failed similar Red Team tests on several occasions, indicating that there are many existing security flaws yet to be addressed.

NBC recently learned that 270 TSA security badges went missing at the San Diego International Airport over the last two years. These missing badges would allow non-Homeland Security personnel to gain access to restricted locations within the airport. As of March 2015, the Hartsfield-Jackson Airport in Atlanta saw more than 1,400 badges go missing over a similar time period.

How are we supposed to trust TSA agents with our lives when they can not be trusted with their own badges? Unless the TSA is able to completely restructure the airport security system, it is unlikely that new changes will make a large enough difference to deal with existing security threats.

Jennie Burger

Jennie Burger is a member of the University of Oklahoma Class of 2016 and a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Jennie at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Does the TSA Really Keep You Safe? appeared first on Law Street.

Hey everyone, it’s Friday, which means that most of us are probably just biding our time until 5 o’clock. Luckily, I’m here to help you bide that time, by presenting you the top weird arrests of the week!

[SlideDeck2 id=25767 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week: Where Exactly Is Waldo? appeared first on Law Street.

It’s happened to everyone. You arrive at the airport, ready to jet off to a choice destination. You go up to the counter and suddenly you get hit with some BS fee. Your luggage weighs too much or maybe you have too many bags. You want to change your seat to sit with your family, but you have to pay for that too. It’s all quite infuriating, inconvenient, and most of all, expensive.

These fees have, quite frankly, gotten ridiculous. A recent USA Today study found that there are fees as high as $400 to check an overweight bag (71-100) pounds on international flights for some airlines. American Airlines charges up to $450 for such a bag on some of their international flights. There are  ridiculous charges for changing international flights, up to $400 in some cases. And there are some weird fees that are pretty cheap, but still incredibly annoying. For example, most airlines now charge around $10-$25 to book a round trip ticket from a mobile device. Frequent flier mile users can get charged just to use those miles. For example, Jet Blue and Delta both charge $25 to book a free ticket online or on a mobile device. Keep in mind that these are all just fees that apply to coach customers; first class customers have the potential for even more fees to be levied against them.

According to a few recent polls, baggage fees are hated the most by travelers, but flight change and cancellation fees were a notable second.

Why do airlines charge such exorbitant fees? Well, quite frankly, because they can. They know that people will pay to fly because they have no choice. It’s completely legal for them to institute these fees. It’s not a monopoly, but there are a finite number of places that customers can turn to to get flights. And these fees have been incredibly lucrative  for the companies — as the USA Today piece put it, “according to the Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 15 U.S. airlines reported revenues of $2.6 billion from baggage fees and $2.1 billion from reservation-change fees during the first three quarters last year.”

A separate survey by Fly.com didn’t focus on the fees that travelers have to pay, but rather the fees they would want to pay. That’s right, airline passengers said they would pay more fees for certain perks, such as a fast pass to get through airline security, a guaranteed overhead bin in their area, or for their checked luggage to come out first.

After all, it would kind of make sense for airlines to offer more extensive kinds of service. In most aspects of life, we are able to choose different features based on affordability and convenience. Currently most airlines only distinguish between coach and first class, leaving travelers with only two options. (Although some airlines do offer things like extra space seats for a little more.)

It’s probably wishful thinking, but charging people only for the things they want — like overhead bin space — may lower the prices for the rest of us?

I know this is an overused gif, but it was too applicable to pass up.

Nah, these prices are never going down, we should all just get used to paying an arm and a leg for some of our flights.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Jason via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Airline Fees Are Getting Even More Annoying appeared first on Law Street.