Date: 201709
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: I was the C Flight Attendant and I observed a passenger using an assistive device to walk (cane). She was limping as she walked and it was clear to me that in the event of an emergency that she would not be able to assist me with an evacuation. After observing this I approached her and said; 'ma'am; I'm concerned that you may not be able to assist in an emergency and I'm going to have to re-seat you'. She asked why; I told her 'I noticed you limping and in order to sit in the emergency exit row you need to have full use of your legs and arms.' She refused to be reseated and said that she had been allowed to sit in an emergency row while having her assistive device with her before. I then let the A know what was going on. We found exit seat criteria on our tablets before talking with a [customer service agent]. After speaking with several [customer service agents] and advising the crew service center along with Flight Attendant supervisors we were advised that it was ok for this passenger who was limping and did not have full use of her legs (using an assistive device) was allowed to sit in the emergency exit row. The Captain explained that he did not have any authority to overrule the customer service agent. The customer service supervisor said that they were concerned about being sued for discrimination [under the] disabilities act and refused to move her based on that and not wanting to be filmed and out on social media. While inflight the passenger sitting beside her advised that the customer service agent asked her if she was able to operate the exit and she informed her that she had a knee injury and that's the reason she had to use the cane in order to walk. This passenger went on to say that the customer service agent apologized to her for her inconvenience and gave her a voucher to be used her next flight. At no time did the customer service agent disclose to the crew that the passenger informed her that she was injured and had to use her cane to assist her with walking. Upon landing it was clear that this passenger needed the cane as she was limping even more than before when leaving the plane. FARs were not followed. The first manager that I spoke with did inform me that the tablet was my guidance and to follow procedure and that the Captain would have the final say. However another supervisor asked if I'd spoken with the lady and if she said she was able to operate the exit then there was nothing further that we could do. I just need clarification on the exit seat criteria. I take this very seriously as I've been in an emergency evacuation before. I'm not sure what needs to happen to not have this occur again. As a Flight Attendant I am trained to make assessments regarding the emergency exit rows and follow FARs as they are laid out in our tablets. I don't understand why we have the tablets if someone can override them. I followed procedure and the passenger refused to follow crew member instructions and was rewarded with a travel voucher without any regard given to safety.




Synopsis: A321 Flight Attendant reported she wanted to reseat a passenger who was using a cane from the emergency exit row; but was overruled by customer service.