Nuts on airplanes

Law for disabled was overdue
Jan 07, 2010 03:00 am
The law that became effective on January 1 requiring Ontario's public institutions to provide services that take into account the needs and requirements of people with disabilities was long overdue, says this editorial.

I don't think flying on a plane is a right. It is a service. You buy a spot, you don't buy the seat or rent the plane. Your ticket price covers gas, food, service, airport fees, cleaning the plane at the other end, in a foreign country without our laws!

Then, there are these stories...

• Air Canada ordered to accommodate people with nut allergies
• Canadian Transportation Agency decision 
• Air Canada to allow pets in cabin starting in July
• Should airlines provide a buffer zone for people with nut allergies?
  

How do you balance one's rights over another? My right to take a snack on board a plane that meets my needs vs. someone's rights to being protected from same snack?

When does an allergy become a human rights issue? And don't you see a bit of a conundrum in this?
We'll have those with nut allergies at one end, the people with perfume allergies back with the nut allergens, the people with pets at the other, those allergic to pets...on top of the wings?

The issue re: nut allergies; Read the decision, here are some humorous excerpts...

[4] The applications also raise the broader issue of whether the lack of a formal policy to accommodate persons who have an allergy to peanuts or nuts constitutes an obstacle to the mobility of Dr. Huyer and Melanie Nugent and to persons whose allergy to peanuts or nuts results in a disability for the purposes of Part V of the CTA.

So, she doesn't inform Air Canada, prior to booking the flight, that she has an allergy to peanuts.
She refuses to move to the back of the plane, since the snacks have already been loaded, and no replacement snack is available. She refuses to deplane at one point. Sometimes you just have to risk your health to make a point, methinks.



[12] Air Canada states that it does not serve peanuts or peanut snacks on any flights, however, it serves other nuts and "nut type" snacks. Air Canada further states that it serves smokehouse almonds in business class and, on its long-haul international flights, it serves a mix of nuts in business class. In economy class, almonds and cashews can be purchased from its On Board Café. Air Canada has replaced its other packaged snacks with non-peanut alternatives wherever possible. (According to their expert: Almonds cross-react with plums, nectarines and peaches and are not classified as a tree nut.)

[16] Air Canada personnel did offer to move Dr. Huyer to a seat in the last row of the aircraft, but Dr. Huyer declined that offer and decided to enclose herself in a washroom on the aircraft for approximately 40 minutes during the time that nuts were being served.

She had a choice. She made it. She could have taken another transportation route!

[18] On the last leg of the Nugents' trip, from Montréal to St. John's, Ms. Nugent was informed by onboard carrier personnel that an announcement would not be made and that cashews would be served on the flight. Carrier personnel offered to accommodate the Nugents by moving them to the back of the aircraft where they would have been separated from all passengers by 6 rows and separated from the business class cabin, where cashews were being served, by 12 rows. However, this offer of accommodation was refused.

[29] Air Canada submits that the reports from Dr. Huyer's physician and her doctor of naturopathic medicine do not confirm that she is allergic to products other than peanuts.
Allergy tests show that she has a strong allergic reaction to peanuts and may have an anaphylactic reaction. 

For this reason the rest of the world has to move around her, rather than the other way around. One commentor on a CBC news item said, "Putting me near crying babies can be hazardous to the health of all on board. I guess we need buffer zones for that too."

Wouldn't that be good? Cause crying babies make me crazy, too!
This is the real world. People do bring food onto planes. Kids go into schools and need snacks. Forcing those with peanuts to sit and eat in one place punishes them for something not their fault.

I taught 25 years and over time we went from no-peanut classrooms, to no peanut elementary schools. I had one class in which two students had anaphyalctic allergies. We managed with no incidents. We taught the kids to be proactive. They were prepared with epipens, and emergency plans. One of my students was anaphylactic and diabetic. We managed just fine.
From there, in a sheltered atmosphere, kids go to high school with a cafeteria.  There was a death in a high school where a student chose to eat something in a cafeteria. She had a false sense of security. She let her guard down and she lost.


Catering agencies who bring food onto airplanes cannot guarantee that their food is nut-free.

The people that clean the plane may have had peanut butter for lunch.
Baggage handlers may have had peanuts for lunch.
Flight staff, ticket clerks, the same.
Mechanics, ditto.

Westjet has far fewer flights, and do not travel the distance of Air Canada flights (cross-continental). They have a peanut-free zone, which is fine for shorter flights.

This private industry, people pay big bucks to travel.
They don't want to impose these restrictions on business passenger who pay most of the cost of a flight. Why should those up front be refused nuts? They are a great food.

This is a slippery slope. Milk, eggs, perfume...if you have an allergy you have to manage it, not the rest of the world. You must be prepared. You never know where you will be and what you will face. It is predictable, however.

I had to quit a job for health issues. This woman needs to get real. She needs to be proactive. Back in 2002 this was a new issue for the business world, when she first had a bad experience, and for an airline close to bankruptcy, more restrictions seem to me unfair. This is a private business. You have an agreement: transport me from A to B. I have to protect myself, not the other way around, as there can be no promises it be peanut-free, as the law suit could bankrupt a business...

I had to quit a job for health issues. People make compromises. This woman needs to get real. She needs to cooperate with this company with whom she has a business arrangement, or go elsewhere. She needs to be proactive.