Narrative:

Removed passenger at gate in lax due to level 1 threat. 20 mins prior to departure, 'a' flight attendant informed us of a problem with passenger. Passenger moaning, rocking, chin and cheek seriously bruised, appeared ill, and said he was 'sick in the head.' 'a' flight attendant uncomfortable and said she would keep us informed. Called operations to get a security check on passenger. Operations refused and said customer service representative supervisor would meet aircraft. Called dispatch manager to get security check and to get dispatch in loop. Customer service representative supervisor arrived. Passenger had been removed from a previous flight. Security check had been done at that time. Lax police were previously contacted and passenger appeared sober. This is the first time we were given this information. Other passenger in same row emphatically refused to situation next to this passenger. Suspect passenger appeared developmentally disabled and repeatedly said 'I'm not contagious.' passenger exhibited suspicious behavior. Other passenger started to become aggressive because customer service representatives would not accommodate seat change. Elected to remove ill passenger as situation was approaching level 1 security alert. Concerns: 1) operations refused to do security check. Later spoke to shift manager. Shift manager said they will not do a security check close to departure because it is redundant to our booking system and that we need to trust the process. (Flight operations duty manager heard this on call.) operations said if they said it is ok, it is ok. (Operations needs to understand responsibility of PIC.) 2) customer service knew the passenger was a problem. They observed behavior in boarding area and knew about previous denied boarding. None of this was passed to pilots or flight attendants. 3) captain asked customer service to reseat passenger at onset of situation. Customer service felt it was too close to departure time. This created a volatile passenger situation which could have been avoided. 4) customer service needs to understand that flight crew needs to know status of aircraft prior to departure. 5) customer service needs to understand security takes precedence over on-time. We were 5 mins late and would have been on-time with customer service cooperation at start. Customer service needs to understand it is not enough for them to be satisfied with safety and security of the flight -- the captain must be satisfied with the safety and security of the flight. 6) all customer service agents were pleasant -- no personality conflicts. Poor communication caused a delay, a denied boarding, and raised serious concerns about security precautions. 7) spoke with flight operations duty manager and operations shift manager. Operations manager said they do not run passenger security checks and that if other stations say they do, they are just waiting a respectable interval, and then report it done. This makes me lose confidence in the system. Flight operations duty manager told operations to refer all future requests for security checks to FOD manager or dispatch manager.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A319 PURSER FLT ATTENDANT DETECTED A 'STRANGE' PAX THAT WAS REMOVED FROM ANOTHER FLT. THE CAPT ASKED OPS TO CHK THE PAX. THEY REFUSED THE CAPT'S REQUEST.

Narrative: REMOVED PAX AT GATE IN LAX DUE TO LEVEL 1 THREAT. 20 MINS PRIOR TO DEP, 'A' FLT ATTENDANT INFORMED US OF A PROB WITH PAX. PAX MOANING, ROCKING, CHIN AND CHEEK SERIOUSLY BRUISED, APPEARED ILL, AND SAID HE WAS 'SICK IN THE HEAD.' 'A' FLT ATTENDANT UNCOMFORTABLE AND SAID SHE WOULD KEEP US INFORMED. CALLED OPS TO GET A SECURITY CHK ON PAX. OPS REFUSED AND SAID CUSTOMER SVC REPRESENTATIVE SUPVR WOULD MEET ACFT. CALLED DISPATCH MGR TO GET SECURITY CHK AND TO GET DISPATCH IN LOOP. CUSTOMER SVC REPRESENTATIVE SUPVR ARRIVED. PAX HAD BEEN REMOVED FROM A PREVIOUS FLT. SECURITY CHK HAD BEEN DONE AT THAT TIME. LAX POLICE WERE PREVIOUSLY CONTACTED AND PAX APPEARED SOBER. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE WERE GIVEN THIS INFO. OTHER PAX IN SAME ROW EMPHATICALLY REFUSED TO SIT NEXT TO THIS PAX. SUSPECT PAX APPEARED DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED AND REPEATEDLY SAID 'I'M NOT CONTAGIOUS.' PAX EXHIBITED SUSPICIOUS BEHAVIOR. OTHER PAX STARTED TO BECOME AGGRESSIVE BECAUSE CUSTOMER SVC REPRESENTATIVES WOULD NOT ACCOMMODATE SEAT CHANGE. ELECTED TO REMOVE ILL PAX AS SIT WAS APCHING LEVEL 1 SECURITY ALERT. CONCERNS: 1) OPS REFUSED TO DO SECURITY CHK. LATER SPOKE TO SHIFT MGR. SHIFT MGR SAID THEY WILL NOT DO A SECURITY CHK CLOSE TO DEP BECAUSE IT IS REDUNDANT TO OUR BOOKING SYS AND THAT WE NEED TO TRUST THE PROCESS. (FLT OPS DUTY MGR HEARD THIS ON CALL.) OPS SAID IF THEY SAID IT IS OK, IT IS OK. (OPS NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND RESPONSIBILITY OF PIC.) 2) CUSTOMER SVC KNEW THE PAX WAS A PROB. THEY OBSERVED BEHAVIOR IN BOARDING AREA AND KNEW ABOUT PREVIOUS DENIED BOARDING. NONE OF THIS WAS PASSED TO PLTS OR FLT ATTENDANTS. 3) CAPT ASKED CUSTOMER SVC TO RESEAT PAX AT ONSET OF SIT. CUSTOMER SVC FELT IT WAS TOO CLOSE TO DEP TIME. THIS CREATED A VOLATILE PAX SIT WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. 4) CUSTOMER SVC NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THAT FLT CREW NEEDS TO KNOW STATUS OF ACFT PRIOR TO DEP. 5) CUSTOMER SVC NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND SECURITY TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER ON-TIME. WE WERE 5 MINS LATE AND WOULD HAVE BEEN ON-TIME WITH CUSTOMER SVC COOPERATION AT START. CUSTOMER SVC NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND IT IS NOT ENOUGH FOR THEM TO BE SATISFIED WITH SAFETY AND SECURITY OF THE FLT -- THE CAPT MUST BE SATISFIED WITH THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF THE FLT. 6) ALL CUSTOMER SVC AGENTS WERE PLEASANT -- NO PERSONALITY CONFLICTS. POOR COM CAUSED A DELAY, A DENIED BOARDING, AND RAISED SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT SECURITY PRECAUTIONS. 7) SPOKE WITH FLT OPS DUTY MGR AND OPS SHIFT MGR. OPS MGR SAID THEY DO NOT RUN PAX SECURITY CHKS AND THAT IF OTHER STATIONS SAY THEY DO, THEY ARE JUST WAITING A RESPECTABLE INTERVAL, AND THEN RPT IT DONE. THIS MAKES ME LOSE CONFIDENCE IN THE SYS. FLT OPS DUTY MGR TOLD OPS TO REFER ALL FUTURE REQUESTS FOR SECURITY CHKS TO FOD MGR OR DISPATCH MGR.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.