Personally, I think that the airlines stopped serving peanuts in order to save money not to prevent allergic reactions from passengers. Back in 1987, one airline removed an olive from each dinner salad, and it saved $400,000 per year. I can't imagine how much money they're saving from not serving snacks on-board. However, they seem to have no problem bringing the beverage cart around multiple times. When I flew in March, they brought me coffee two times and club soda another two times.
- Status
Personally, I think that the airlines stopped serving peanuts in order to save money not to prevent allergic reactions from passengers. Back in 1987, one airline removed an olive from each dinner salad, and it saved $400,000 per year. I can't imagine how much money they're saving from not serving snacks on-board. However, they seem to have no problem bringing the beverage cart around multiple times. When I flew in March, they brought me coffee two times and club soda another two times.
Sure would like to know where you obtained that 'stat'!
My bride is hyper-hyper-allergic to peanuts (ya wouldn't believe my experiences with her reactions). In fact, she will not fly, not due to the airlines, but the passengers that bring on their own snacks.
We actually drove our SUV from FL to SDAK round trip to avoid the chance of a mishap. Woulda been cheaper flying!
As to the OPs situation, right message, wrong delivery method.
It was American Airlines, but ya got one too many zeros there. They supposedly saved 40,000 by removing 1 olive from each first class salad. Not sure if that was per year or not though, but maybe.
Excuse me, I never said that someone who is allergic to perfume is not allowed to work. However, I think that working in a doctor's office, may be the wrong job for that allergic clerk. There are hundreds of other jobs where the employee won't come into such close and personal contact with hundreds of sick people and ointments and lotions and medicine smells and ether vapors every single day - week in and week out!! Besides the obvious of cosmetic sales, I can't hink of a less suited job for that clerk. A large notice at the doctor's office door and a mention in the monthly email, whould be less invasive of the patients privacy.
But as I said earlier, I would definitely change my doctor immediatly if I was subjected to that kind of behaviour. Sorry.
Well, yes, I do feel sympathy for people who have allergies, I happen to be allergic to shellfish, some kinds of fish roe and yellow food coloring, also bee stings. But I don't burden others with my problem. It is my own resposibility to make sure that I avoid potentially harmful situations for myself. I would definitely not work in a place where my very presence, ie. my allergies would cause problems, concerns and discomfort to other people.
Having not smoked in my last two houses, I am STOKED about being able to vape all winter long without freezing my .... off!
Yes, I stated that a phonecall was inappropriate and invasive, and that it should have been done by letter and a sign on the door.
Perfumes are everywhere, not just in doctor's surgeries, so there would be an extremely limited supply of places where she can work, so if it is inappropriate for her to work there, and people take their business away, it very much does affect her right to work. Placing that against the right to not be phoned at home and asked not to wear perfume seems strange, that is all.
The peanut thing wasn't about the airline serving peanuts, it was about asking people who already had peanuts in their possession not to open them during a specific flight because they had been notified that a passenger had a severe peanut allergy. It is not the standard announcement on that airline or on other airlines I have travelled with, but I have heard it in regard to peanuts or perfume on occassion.
If the girl was indeed just being foolish and rang some patients because she doesn't like their perfume or has a mild allergy I'm sure she'll make many similar errors of judgement in due course and get fired, but if she was in any way sensible she wouldn't have rung anyone were it not sanctioned by her employer.
Obviously it is the patients' choice where they take their business, but perhaps mentioning it to the doctor as part of a complaint about being phoned at home, would be a more appropriate way to deal with it and find out the facts of the case than just assuming the girl was being rude, acting alone and on the basis of minor discomfort.
Xx
Perfumes are everywhere, not just in doctor's surgeries, so there would be an extremely limited supply of places where she can work, so if it is inappropriate for her to work there, and people take their business away, it very much does affect her right to work. Placing that against the right to not be phoned at home and asked not to wear perfume seems strange, that is all.
The peanut thing wasn't about the airline serving peanuts, it was about asking people who already had peanuts in their possession not to open them during a specific flight because they had been notified that a passenger had a severe peanut allergy. It is not the standard announcement on that airline or on other airlines I have travelled with, but I have heard it in regard to peanuts or perfume on occassion.
If the girl was indeed just being foolish and rang some patients because she doesn't like their perfume or has a mild allergy I'm sure she'll make many similar errors of judgement in due course and get fired, but if she was in any way sensible she wouldn't have rung anyone were it not sanctioned by her employer.
Obviously it is the patients' choice where they take their business, but perhaps mentioning it to the doctor as part of a complaint about being phoned at home, would be a more appropriate way to deal with it and find out the facts of the case than just assuming the girl was being rude, acting alone and on the basis of minor discomfort.
Xx
I'm with you on this one. My wife is still a smoker and she makes fun of me vaping, she call's me the Cheshire Cat
. This makes me laugh because it wasn't the Cheshire Cat that smoked it was Absolem The BLue Caterpillar LOL. My brother joins her in picking on me, but hey throughout history people have been persecuted for their actions and beliefs, I just tell them at least I don't have to stand outside in 20 below to smoke so keep laughing. This usually puts a kabosh on their little "Vapebashing".
Last edited:
Not having to go out in 110+ degrees to smoke in the Summer and getting 'blow-dryer-face' with hot winds whipping around. Yeah. I don't miss that. Happy vape-inside Winter to you
Last edited:
I love being in my local pubs and vaping away . The landlords and lady's are fine with me doing it but the faces of the smokers make me laugh. The are constantly looking at me and then the pub owner and wondering why? Hahaha
Most of the time they have 20 questions about it and I answer for so long then excuse myself.
Most of the time they have 20 questions about it and I answer for so long then excuse myself.
AMR: Making Every Gallon Count
This is the article. It was American Airlines and the approximate savings were actually $40,000 NOT $400,000.
I vape like I smoked, which was low-key and don't push any boundaries. So I still usually vape in smoking areas and I am actually starting to see more acceptance from smokers as I vape next to them, in the year since I started vaping. Actually I went to a big wedding reception over the weekend and while I could have pulled off a stealth vape, I still went outside with the smokers. The usual questions and interest...but nothing negative. It's a slow process for our little "thing" to get mainstream, but it has come a long way already.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
