United Airlines backlash over barring girls wearing leggings

[Whispering 18,865]

Just now, Creativek said:

Because you are commenting about a situation without fully understanding the details, which could lead to more uninformed negative opinions.

I understand that there is a dress code. My opinion is that it is silly. If you are going to allow people to wear shorts, t shirts, sweat pants, sandals and crocs...then that's not dressing up, or business casual. That's all I was saying. 

[YeehawKylie 7,817]

3 minutes ago, Whispering said:

I understand that there is a dress code. My opinion is that it is silly. If you are going to allow people to wear shorts, t shirts, sweat pants, sandals and crocs...then that's not dressing up, or business casual. That's all I was saying. 

Can you post the article you read that describes the fathers attire and that he was also using an employee pass? I only have found articles that describe his attire as wearing 'shorts' which is vague. You seem to have information suggesting he wore athletic shorts. All the articles I read keep saying the same thing. Thanks. 

Edit: Asking cause I'd agree, athletic shorts on a male are no different than leggings. The amount of peen I've seen slipping out of those or flopping around in those is...alarming.  

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

11 minutes ago, IndieKylie said:

It's a thing for individuals flying under an employee perks program for close to free, in which there is a defined dress code and other specifications in regard to the trip. If you don't want to follow it, you're free to pay for a full price ticket and fly as an average citizen, in which you can wear leggings and flip flops. 

Who are you dressing for though? These people aren't passing out peanuts. It's a dumb rule, especially for kids...

Also, what does the dress code entail? Just it just mean no leggings?

The rules seem to only include articles of clothing connected to being a woman. It's petty and ridiculous. 

[YeehawKylie 7,817]

2 minutes ago, ZacharyMark said:

Who are you dressing for though? These people aren't passing out peanuts. It's a dumb rule, especially for kids...

Also, what does the dress code entail? Just it just mean no leggings?

The rules seem to only include articles of clothing connected to being a woman. It's petty and ridiculous. 

People flying under this perk can be seated in first class. As someone who, for the flight at least, is considered an employee...they want you looking nice and presentable. It does not mean suit and tie. Generically, it would probably be easiest to throw on (clean and in-tact) jeans, closed-toe shoes, and a shirt.

Some airlines have vague rules in regard to dress code (ie. look presentable), United does not and specifically states certain articles of clothing are a no go (mini-skirts, leggings, flip flops, tank-tops [male and female]). It is the responsibility of those redeeming these close-to-free employee passes to read what comes with it (dress code is just one thing they warn you about). 

You can think the rules are stupid, but there are articles of clothing they ask both men and women not to wear while using the pass. It is the responsibility of the person(s) redeeming the perk to comply. For me, I would follow the dress code and get my essentially-free flight. If someone wants to wear flip flops, torn-up jeans, and an undershirt (or a variety of other equivalents) onto the flight, they're gonna have to pay up. 

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

3 minutes ago, IndieKylie said:

People flying under this perk can be seated in first class. As someone who, for the flight at least, is considered an employee...they want you looking nice and presentable. It does not mean suit and tie. Generically, it would probably be easiest to throw on (clean and in-tact) jeans, closed-toe shoes, and a shirt.

Some airlines have vague rules in regard to dress code (ie. look presentable), United does not and specifically states certain articles of clothing are a no go (mini-skirts, leggings, flip flops, tank-tops [male and female]). It is the responsibility of those redeeming these close-to-free employee passes to read what comes with it (dress code is just one thing they warn you about). 

You can think the rules are stupid, but there are articles of clothing they ask both men and women not to wear while using the pass. It is the responsibility of the person(s) redeeming the perk to comply. For me, I would follow the dress code and get my essentially-free flight. If someone wants to wear flip flops, torn-up jeans, and an undershirt (or a variety of other equivalents) onto the flight, they're gonna have to pay up. 

Yea, that's ridiculous. 

[YeehawKylie 7,817]

5 minutes ago, ZacharyMark said:

Yea, that's ridiculous. 

If you're ever offered an employee pass gift it to me instead. 

[Cuchulainn 3,040]

47 minutes ago, IndieKylie said:

If you're ever offered an employee pass gift it to me instead. 

<img alt=":hor:" data-emoticon="" height="18" src="//gagadaily.com/uploads/emoticons/hor.png" srcset="//gagadaily.com/uploads/emoticons/[email protected] 2x" title=":hor:" width="18" />

Against the rules!  

[Seeka 12,372]

7 hours ago, 666 others said:

What is this outrage over leggings? Dress code is fine, but why are some of you guys saying people should not wear leggings at all? (Genuine question. In my country women, and nowadays men too, frequently wear leggings and its acceptable everywhere, for women at least.)

Edit: We are talking about these things right?

Yeah but wearing it as the only thing on your bottom half?

Leggings are meant to be worn UNDER things. Tunics. Dresses. Short (though I haven't seen much of that). There are not meant to be worn by themselves.

It's the equivalent of wearing pajamas in public. To me at least.

Leggings were honestly invented to be layered, but we all know how and why leggings = pants got started.

[OBEY 57,109]

Leggins can only be weared with long shirts/t-shirts/hoodies/sweaters/cardigans.

[666 others 1,856]

14 hours ago, Seeka said:

Yeah but wearing it as the only thing on your bottom half?

Leggings are meant to be worn UNDER things. Tunics. Dresses. Short (though I haven't seen much of that). There are not meant to be worn by themselves.

It's the equivalent of wearing pajamas in public. To me at least.

Leggings were honestly invented to be layered, but we all know how and why leggings = pants got started.

Not meant - by whom?

I don't find anything wrong with wearing pajamas in public either, if we are talking about these things.

I don't bother about other people's clothes in general. But I totally understand and accept that the airlines (or any business for that matter) reserves the right to maintain a dress code for it's employees.

Edit: Found this blog post on leggings that I completely agree with.

https://www.bustle.com/articles/70012-9-things-women-who-wear-leggings-as-pants-are-tired-of-hearing

[Rosalina 612]

Why don't you people read what actually happened instead of reading the headline and becoming automatically triggered?

[RadioIsOurs 13,876]

Getting another of that attention-grabbing trigger-happy headline I see...typical of someone who calls themselves a news correspondent... 

[Morphine Prince 109,671]

5 hours ago, RainbowBlonde said:

Getting another of that attention-grabbing trigger-happy headline I see...typical of someone who calls themselves a news correspondent... 

 

This is literally what happened. You can't always fit in all the details in a headline obviously. 

Read the article and inform yourself. 

[Economy 52,857]

On 2017-03-27 at 11:45 AM, IndieKylie said:

This. United, or any other airline, would not do this to a customer on flying on their own dime, under a general boarding pass. Really disrespectful to turn this into a general dress-code issue when these girls were flying under a specific pass that dictates dress-code and, in doing so, they've jeopardized the privileges of the person who gave them the pass.

Well typical of Justice Warriors...

 

See an oppurtunity to argue about discrimination and they wont even consider important details about that particular circumstance..

 

Its like they thrive and love the drama and will look for any reason to start an argument  

[Economy 52,857]

8 hours ago, Cedric said:

Why don't you people read what actually happened instead of reading the headline and becoming automatically triggered?

Our modern society thrives on jumping to conclusions

 

How many times do u see protests over a major court case where the details havent even been released to the public and people have no idea what they are protesting on

 

People just get on my nerves these days. They are also at fault for electing idiots because they dont look into stuff enough to really educate themselves  

 

When i whatch an election im always aware of numbers that are being exagerated and what accusations from opponents are misleading.

 

People will find that staying up to date or see a situation in detail first will go a long way to prevent comments or decisions you later feel stupid for