Holy water! Did Southwest mistreat passenger on a pilgrimage?

October 18, 2012

There isn’t much Val Maswadi and Southwest Airlines can agree on.

Here are a few facts that aren’t in dispute: Maswadi and her family were scheduled to fly from Chicago to Orlando this summer. They were coming from a religious pilgrimage in Saudi. In Chicago, they had a disagreement with a Southwest agent over jugs of holy water they wanted to check with their luggage. After an argument, Maswadi’s flight was involuntarily refunded.

(Note: And earlier version of this post suggested the family was on its way to Saudi.)

Maswadi says Southwest was “abusive” and insensitive to her religious beliefs.

“I was never able to get checked in, and had to delay my travel with a different airline the next day,” she says. “It cost me money, time, and a lot of heartache. It is a shame for Southwest to hire such individuals that can’t treat customers well — employees that are ignorant of other cultures and religions.”

Maswadi contacted me because she believed the Southwest agent with which she argued acted inappropriately. She says the agent wouldn’t let her check the holy water in her luggage and then, after arguing, removed her bags from the conveyer belt, refunded her ticket, and told her to fly on another airline.

What set the ticket agent off?

“I agreed not to check in the water but also told her, that her behavior will be reported as I wrote her name down,” she says. “At that time she got more angry. She decided I should find another airline.”

I asked her if she’d contacted Southwest in writing about this incident. It turns out she hadn’t. Here’s what Southwest had to say after she asked:

We received your e-mail and are sorry to hear that we have left you doubting our commitment to Customer Service. Thank you for giving us the chance to follow up on your concerns and to apologize for letting you down.

In researching you situation, we contacted the Chicago Midway Station (MDW). According to our records, we show that you never boarded Flight #1446. Rather, our MDW Lobby Manager advised that this incident occurred at the baggage check-in area. He went on to explain that you and your family were attempting to check in two 3-gallon unmarked plastic containers full of liquid. Our employees explained to you that the jugs of liquid could not be checked-in as baggage or taken on the plane as carry-on items because they were improperly packed. However, our Agents offered to hold the items for you to be picked up a later time, but they advised us that you declined our offer.

It is important to point out that Southwest Airline’s Contract of Carriage states that we may, at our sole discretion, chose to refuse to transport as checked baggage, items that are improperly packed. The reasoning behind this is that some items are not always able to withstand the shifting cargo loads associated with turbulence and weight distribution inside an aircraft luggage compartment during takeoff and landing. In these cases, if the containers were to get damaged, there is a high chance that their contents would spill out, potentially damaging other Passenger’s checked luggage. With this in mind, our MDW Employees refused to accept your plastic containers as checked luggage because they were not properly packed.

Additionally, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) maintains that all liquids must be in a 3.4 ounce bottle to be acceptable as a carry-on; Therefore, the liquids you attempted to check in would be unfit as carry-on items as well.

It is our understanding that the items in question held a strong religious value to you, and we are so sorry that we were unable to accommodate your request to transport them. That said, our MDW Manager also advised that your family was refused transportation due to their threatening and confrontational behavior. Our Contract of Carriage specifically cites our responsibility to deny access and/or transportation to any “person or persons whose conduct may compromise his/her own comfort and/or Safety or the comfort and Safety of others.” These provisions apply to any person or persons whose conduct is, appears, or has been known to be disorderly, abusive, uncooperative, offensive, threatening, intimidating, or violent. Our MDW Manager went on to advise that the local law enforcement was called in order to help mediate the situation. Since we did not provide you and your family with transportation, please know that your unused tickets have been refunded to the original form of payment.

We are saddened to hear of this unpleasant experience. Furthermore, I assure you that Southwest Airlines does not condone discrimination or prejudice in any form. In fact, a cursory view of our workforce, as well as our expansive, multi-cultural Customer base, is a reliable indicator that we exalt and appreciate diversity. Regardless of the circumstances, we care about the impression we leave on our Customers, and we want them to know that their complaints are taken seriously. I want you to know that the appropriate Leaders have been made aware of your concerns.

Again, we appreciate your taking time out of your day to let us know about your recent experience. We understand that you must do what you feel is necessary to achieve peace-of-mind about these events, but it is our hope that you will consider all perspectives before drawing your final conclusions about Southwest Airlines. Thank you for your patience and your patronage.

I asked Maswadi what she thought of Southwest’s rebuttal. She wasn’t impressed.

“I’m disappointed,” she told me. “I did follow the rules. The person at the counter just refused to hear me and roughly handled my luggage. She kept saying this is not because of your religion. And that statement in itself made me uncomfortable.”

I wasn’t present, so I don’t know what really happened. But the truth probably lies somewhere in between. Did Maswadi and her family get a little extra scrutiny because of their attire, which suggested they were devout Muslims? I can’t imagine that not being the case.

At the same time, having large jugs of liquid would be problematic, no matter what your appearance.

The takeaway for the rest of us: Don’t get into an argument with the ticket agent, if possible. And if law enforcement has to be called to mediate a dispute, don’t expect to fly that day.

Southwest refunded the ticket in the end, but refused to compensate Maswadi for additional expenses incurred because of the altercation.

Frank Atheist

Back home, there’s a brand of chocolate milk that I really, really like. Now I know how to get it home with me. I’ll just declare it Holy Chocolate Milk, and accuse the airline of religious discrimination if they won’t let me check it in with my luggage!!

As an atheist, I think all of this is hooey, and it also shows how willing we are to forgo safety and security in the name of “religious respect.” United’s rules for “Zamzam” water look like a great loophole to get carefully-packaged liquid explosives, or perhaps a chemical warfare agent, into the country with no scrutiny. Attention, TSA: You’re doing it wrong.
Joe_D_Messina

Seems to me you’re leaping to just as many conclusions by assuming they were packed properly. The OP themselves calls them “jugs.” The sort of packaging I’ve seen my marine biologist sister-in-law use for transporting her stuff could get hit by a truck and not leak. And I wouldn’t exactly use the term “jugs” for them because they’re these square, super-heavy-duty containers.

And, of course, if the airline had accepted them and they’d been ruined, the OP would be claiming it was the airline’s fault for not telling them they weren’t packed properly and now owed them compensation. Truly a lose-lose position for the airline.
Joe_D_Messina

Now that’s just not fair. Don’t ban it but then make us want to read it all the more!
Michael__K

I find it interesting that when Chris posted a case about a passenger’s checked luggage getting left out in the rain and soaked — leaving some of her garments ruined — several commenters insisted that wet conditions should be anticipated and that it’s each passengers’ responsibility to waterproof their luggage/belongings if the contents can’t withstand water.

http://www.elliott.org/blog/airline-left-my-luggage-in-the-rain-but-wont-cover-damage/

Yet here, water is an “aircraft safety” issue.
http://www.facebook.com/asiansm Dang Ph

From Chicago ORD, Etihad and Turkish Airlines have good connections to Middle-East, and all the European Airlines have too. That’s the first ODD thing and the second ODD thing is people collect Holy water on the way back not the way out.
adele

Before the current liquids carry-on ban, I was on a SW flight with a woman who was carrying a gallon jug of what I gathered was vodka mixed with fruit punch. She put it in the overhead bin above her seat. During the course of the flight, the jug tipped over, and leaked. A steady stream of red, vodka scented liquid seeped down on her head from the overhead bin. She started screaming to the flight attendant that she was going to sue Southwest for destroying her booze. The flight attendant firmly pointed out that Southwest hadn’t touched her luggage at all. I secretly chuckled a bit, as the lady was a really behaving poorly and I thought what happened to her what poetic justice. However, it was unfortunate that the outgoing flight was delayed because they no doubt had to clean the plane.
LeeAnneClark

I wanna see it too! I think Raven should get special dispensation for his comments, even if they cross the line. He makes snark sexy. ;)
technomage1

Southwest’s response was outstanding and their compensation was fair. I don’t claim to be an expert, but isn’t holy water only holy if it comes from the well in Saudi? Why would she be packing water to take to Saudi? While it’s not uncommon for those on Haji to bring home holy water, taking it to the pilgrimage is a new one to me. It’s like a Catholic taking water to Rome to get it blessed by the Pope. You wouldn’t do it, you’d just pick up the water there to bring back with you.

Let’s be honest here: the fact that she was flying to Saudi probably didn’t help matters any. 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were from there. People flying to and from there probably get a little more attention that those flying to Canada, for example. I spent time in Saudi in 2000 and it’s probably my least favorite Arab country. Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain are OK.
TonyA_says

I am confused with your reply. It is certainly within WN COCs to reject those jugs of water (holy or not holy). But even if she connects in Orlando with an international flight that allows 10 liters of Zamzam water she will probably be rejected because:
a) it is hard for her to prove she is transporting Zamzam water from a flight not originating from Saudi Arabia,
b) 3 gallons is more than 10 liters, so the container size and contents are more for any airline allowing Zamzam, and
c) she most probably did not properly wrap the jugs to ensure avoidance of water leakage or the water jugs themselves were not the jerry cans referred to that were built to withstand air travel.

Please note that airlines that allow this much water as an EXCEPTION spefically state the exemption for Zamzam water in properly packed containers. Southwest does not have a Zamzam exception. It has a WINE exception.

In reality, Southwest did them a favor by stopping them from further embarrassment and hassles with their latter flights.
technomage1

I’d probably pack a 10L jerry can.
Michael__K

I have no idea whether they were packed “properly” or not and neither do you.

You missed my point: “properly” is a SUBJECTIVE STANDARD. Reasonable people and different baggage agents could potentially reach opposite conclusions under that standard. Maybe this was actually a clear cut case . Again, I don’t know and neither do you.

Just because someone referred to it as a “jug” tells you practically nothing. Is the “jug” pictured in the link below packed properly or not? How can you tell? –

http://www.alhannah.com/products/ii786.html
flutiefan

i’ve been in a similar situation. they do not care and actually do not believe us when we say that exact sentence.
GrantRitchie

Beautifully written, LeeAnne. Thank you.
bodega3

Is seems that you are missing the point. The airline employee is the one who gets to make the judgement call on what is proper, what is allowed. Obviously the employee saw the container and declared it unacceptable, be it a jug, a plastic bottle, a thermos, a boda bag, a rum runner or anything else that could hold liquid that you wish to call it.
Michael__K

Tony, it would not surprise me if these *were* 10 liter containers. The only “3 gallons” reference comes from Southwest’s letter. 10 liters is 2.6 gallons which SW could have easily eyeballed or rounded to “3 gallons.”

I’d really like to know if they eventually transported this Zamzam and, if so, if they made any changes to how it was packaged.

Re: (b), I misread and thought you objected to the second container; we can disregard that.
Ed Boston

Don’t read things into my statements that aren’t there. First off, where did I say I was referring to the United States? The statement was a general one that can be used in any country. It probably would have been better worded as “of the area”, but the basic idea is they want me to respect their culture and religion but they don’t want to respect mine.
Sadie_Cee

It seems to me
that trying to check two, freestanding/unsecured 3-gallon containers of a
liquid as baggage on an airline and refusing to accept that this act is
impermissible is unreasonable.
http://twitter.com/DutchessPDX Dutchess

Actually, I think you have this all wrong. This is someone who decided their religion was more important than the safety of other passengers belongings and thought they could bully a flit attendant into breaking the rules on the grounds of religion. I don’t care what religion affiliation he was, the rules were clear and the decision to remove him was because of his attitude and not which god he chooses to worship.
backprop

I didn’t delete the comment, but I saw it, and it wasn’t anything but a rant. There was nothing related to the topic.
ClareClare

Back in a previous life, when I was a federal officer (years before Sept 11), this sort of scenario would’ve already raised security’s eyebrows instantly. The first question, of course, would’ve been, “Is that really water? And why do you want to transport it?” And the answers as the OP gives them would’ve raised the eyebrows even further, not only because the OP said they were taking the water TO S. Arabia, but more importantly, because the routing of the flight doesn’t seem to mesh with a trip to S. Arabia.
I remember an actual scenario where a couple of Poles were stopped in Hawaii, because they claimed they were en route to Chicago from Poland. They had flown east, changing in India, going many hours/miles out of their way, and this fact IN ITSELF caused the officials manning the US border in Honolulu to stop them. To make a long story short, it turned out that they were legit–presumably they’d booked the cheapest flight, which obviously wasn’t the most convenient. But it simply wasn’t normal, and it caused our border-people at the time to take a closer look.
My point is this: the OP and her family undoubtedly raised a number of different red-flags, simultaneously, when they attempted to check in. Their overall story, at least on the surface, doesn’t sound like it checks out. Add this uncertainty about them to their apparent belligerence, and wham, you’ve got yourself a refund! This has nothing necessarily to do with being Muslim, and everything to do with a total picture that looks suspicious from a security standpoint.
Michael__K

See my reply to TonyA.

http://www.elliott.org/blog/holy-water-did-southwest-mistreat-passenger-on-a-pilgrimage/#comment-686365171

‘You’re right: the airline is the sole judge of “packed improperly.”
I object to the aspersions being cast against the OP’s that are not grounded in any established facts.‘
http://elliott.org Christopher Elliott

I’m at a little bit of a disadvantage because I didn’t make the decision to hold the first comment made by Raven (and just to be clear, we usually hold them for a while, but don’t delete them unless they contain profanity or other objectionable content). I think the moderators felt — and I support their decision — that there was a chance the discussion could go off the rails, devolving into an anti-Muslim diatribe. This is a moderated discussion, and is clearly disclosed as such since last month, which means that you can’t say whatever you want.
LeeAnneClark

As someone who arrived at my destination with my luggage soaked by someone else’s booze, I can assure you that you are correct – nobody wants someone else’s improperly packed liquids befouling their luggage.
TonyA_says

Wait a minute now. No one interfered with their right to whatever religion they want to believe. They were not being persecuted for their beliefs. Two points:
(1) The airline rejected their water jugs because it did not pass the transport worthiness test of the airline. The airline was offering to hold the jugs for them until they came back.
(2) They were not allowed to board because of their unacceptable BEHAVIOR.

Religion has nothing to do with SWA’s actions.
jmtabb

I had a similar experience with wine on an inter island flight in Hawaii once – a young couple had opened a bottle waiting for their transfer and pushed the cork back in partway to carry it on to the next flight.

The bottle started leaking at takeoff. At first the flight attendants were super apologetic to the couple about the “rain in the plane” moisture that was dripping all over them, then we all realized that the “rain in the plane” was more like “champagne in the plane”. Fortunately for all, the couple was mortified, the flight attendants had a good laugh and they managed to put a stop to the leakage before too much damage was done.
http://www.facebook.com/sommer.gentry Sommer Gentry

I think it would be important to see exactly what containers the Maswadis brought the water in. If they truly think that their containers would have protected other passengers’ luggage from leaks and spills, let’s see what those impervious containers looked like. From the description, they sound like the thin plastic jugs that milk comes in, which would obviously not be crushproof in checked luggage. If the containers were solid, then I doubt Southwest would have had a problem.
RetiredNavyphotog

Southwest did the right thing by refusing to check unknown liquids in unmarked containers.
Thank goodness we still have some common sense in the US.
EvilEmpryss

Technically, the aircraft is waterproof only on the exterior. Spills inside the cargo area risk soaking more than luggage; there are mechanical and electrical systems that could be damaged by three or more gallons of water (holy or not). The damage might not affect that flight, but could cause problems down the line with corrosion in places that aren’t inspected as often because they’re assumed to be in a dry environment. Liquids can be shipped safely by air in appropriate containers, but shouldn’t be allowed in unsafe ones.

And I missed that article. I would have a fit if my luggage were left out in pouring rain. Luggage should be water resistant, able to ward off a good spritzing, like would be expected if bags are loaded or moved in the rain, but that’s excessive. And as much the airline’s fault as if they allowed someone else’s stuff to soak mine.
y_p_w

Might be suspected of being a flammable liquid. That’s why I’d suggest something translucent.
Michael__K

You’re assuming that SWA’s version is 100% accurate and that the OP’s perceptions and discomfort were completely unwarranted.

Possibly so but I don’t see how you would know that.
Michael__K

“they want me to respect their culture and religion but they don’t want to respect mine.”

What is that assertion grounded in? How do you know all this about the OP’s? For all you know, they could be experts in your religion (whatever it is) and they could be prominent champions for tolerance towards your religious brethren in other countries where your religion is in the minority.
TonyA_says

Nowadays, there is no need to argue with an airline rep. Based on my experience and idea of how an airline works, what happened to her is understandable. It’s simple Michael, you argue, you don’t board. End of story. The complaint box went away after 9/11.
TonyA_says

Yeah, didn’t AA blame the seats becoming loose on spilled drinks and coffee. 6 gallons might cause the whole floor to come apart :-)
Ed Boston

If you read my comment more closely, you will see I pointed out that this was a *CULTURAL* difference, not religious. They obviously did not respect the rule to pack the water properly. Southwest refused based on that, not religious reasons.

How do I know this about the OP? By their actions as represented in their statements. They wanted the airline to break the rule so they could take the water, thus not respecting our culture of rules and laws.
Raven_Altosk

So…by hold you mean not posted ever? Cuz what I said is about as anti-Muslim as some of the no-breastfeeding comments were anti-female. Your board, your rules bro…but…yeah.
TonyA_says

Ed Boston has a good point. Please read http://wikitravel.org/en/Medina

WARNING: Non-Muslims are strictly prohibited from entering Central Medina. The penalty is deportation from the country. Documentation will be checked upon entry and anyone not showing proof of being Muslim will be denied entry. However, many parts of the city, notably the outskirts and the Medina Airport, are open to all.

Now tell me who is INTOLERANT of who?
Raven_Altosk

Religious entitlement. My new fave term! Brofist
http://elliott.org Christopher Elliott

It’s posted. The mods just hold them for a little while.
technomage1

I think either way they’re going to want to open it.
Michael__K

I quoted your exact words, which referenced “culture and religion”

Can you please point us to the rule which explains how water should be properly packed? The one you claim the OP did not respect? And explain what that has to do with “culture?”

FYI, here is the actual rule which SWA cited:

h. Conditional Acceptance

Carrier may, at its sole discretion, but is not obligated to, conditionally accept the following categories of items for Carriage as Checked Baggage subject to the Passenger‟s assumption of risk for damage to or destruction of such items. Checking items in the condition described below is considered by Carrier as Passenger‟s agreement to this assumption of risk.

(1) Fragile or perishable items

(2) Previously damaged items

(3) Improperly or over-packed Baggage

(4) Soft-sided cases or unprotected/unpacked items

Notice this doesn’t say that any of these items are not allowed. It says SWA is not *obligated* to accept them. Also notice that SWA didn’t claim it was a soft-sided case.

Without even seeing the containers in question, I defy you to explain how you know with such certainty that the OP’s “did not respect the rule?” How are you so certain that they weren’t using jugs that were designed for safe shipment, in spite of the baggage agent’s apprehensions?
jpp42

I wonder if Chris got the direction of travel wrong? Could the OP have been carrying the jugs of water home, after having arrived on an international flight and making a domestic connection to Florida? There is no mention of change penalties for missing an international flight which you’d think would be another consequence of missing the first leg of a journey.

However it should be noted that there are several flights on various airlines from Orlando to Europe, from which onward connections are clearly available to the middle east – maybe these were cheaper as it’s off-season in the theme parks.
Michael__K

That’s a whole separate topic. It doesn’t mean that either side’s version is completely true or completely untrue.
Ed Boston

How can you even ask how to explain they didn’t respect the rule? The agent said the water was not pack properly and according to the very rule you quotes, did not have to accept it. The fact they kept trying to get it checked in shows they were wanting the airline to ignore the rule.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Jason-Hanna/100000038010477 Jason Hanna

I’m planning on buying some tannerite for target practice later this year.. Tannerite is a binary explosive which, when properly mixed, requires a projectile traveling at around 2000 fps to detonate. When it is unmixed, it’s stable and no more dangerous than baking soda, and perhaps even less so. So, I popped over to the tannerite site to do some research on it a few weeks ago. Google it and check the site out.. Over on the right hand side of the page, it shows this..

“Although we shouldn’t have to tell the customers this, it’s a really bad
idea to take ANY item that has the word “Explode” onto a plane.”

This goes into the “shouldn’t have to tell” pile. Someone shouldn’t have to be told that you can’t bring 6 gallons of unmarked liquids onto a plane. Either as checked or carry on. While ‘holy water’ might have some exceptions.. Gee.. It MIGHT be a good idea to talk with the airline well ahead of time to see what would need to be done to be allowed to transport it. Not just show up at the airport with it and get snotty when you’re refused.
http://elliott.org Christopher Elliott

I’ve reviewed her original email. It looks like she was vague about the timing of her flight, and whether she was on her way back or not. But here’s what must have happened: The family was returning from Saudia to Orlando via Chicago. The airline had allowed the liquid in their luggage on the international flight, but Southwest wouldn’t allow it on her domestic flight. I’ll see if I can get her to clarify the routing.
Michael__K

Did the OP’s make those rules? Are you assuming they endorse them? Would you assume that anyone who traveled to the U.S. during slavery or segregation was intolerant?
LeeAnneClark

Brofist back atcha! ;-)
LeeAnneClark

Okay so I take it this is the comment that was previously “held” because it was a “rant” that was supposedly completely off-topic.

Here’s my take (if anyone cares): the majority of this comment is most decidedly on-topic. Including the comment about the “emotional support snake”, which is classic Raven-style snark. ;-)

The only part of this comment that I can see might lead to questions as to its suitability for this forum is this one: “I also am willing to bet good money the “religious and cultural differences” are from a certain “religion of peace” that expects everyone to bend over backwards for them. Perhaps they should worry less about holy water and more about the murder of young women trying to educate themselves?”

Yeah, I gotta agree that’s pushing the envelope. Not all Muslims believe in murder or denying young women the right to education. Just like not all Christians believe in denying gays the right to marry, picketing soldier funerals, or that women are Biblically forbidden from being in leadership positions over men. The fact is that there are whacko extremists in all religions, and I don’t think there’s a single major religion in this world that doesn’t have some horrific stuff in its history to be ashamed of. And none of that has anything to do with this topic.

So, Raven: behave yourself! We need your snark in here, not just for comic relief, but sometimes to just put some perspective on all of whiners who get all up in a lather when they are not treated like special snowflakes.
Ed Boston

“Which rule? You still haven’t explained what properly packed water looks like (and how that differs from the OP’s containers).”

I don’t have to explain what properly packed water looks like. SWA said the way the OP presented the water to them was not acceptable and under the rule you posted, they did not have to accept it. If you want to argue about the rule for properly packed water, look up the rule and find out how the containers used by the OP did or didn’t match the rule. The facts of the discussion is SWA claimed the containers presented did not meet requirements. We did not get the information on how they didn’t meet it, just that they didn’t.

Now given the follow up that Chris posted that it may in fact have been on their return trip this happened, I can understand the OPs frustration. However, the international airline that brought them in may have different rules as to what properly packed water looks like. Again, information we have not been given. Since it appears there is no international standard for how to properly pack water, it is up to each airline to define that and the passenger’s responsibility to find out what those rules are.
Michael__K

If it was an aircraft safety issue I would expect an FAA rule, not a Southwest baggage liability rule to be cited.

Share: