Add Delta to the list of airlines being unreasonable towards passengers

I've been in this man's shoes, especially when flying pregnant. If the plane sits on the tarmac a 1/2 hour or more prior to take off, inevitably, someone will have to go to the bathroom. Silly humans and their bladders. The gentleman asked permission to use the restroom and was told "no" because Delta "could lose their place in line." He went back to his seat. Now the sitting on tarmac waiting game gets stretches and he can no longer wait. This could have been any of us, including our children or our parent. 

Now although Delta was subdued, the silliness of kicking someone off of the plane which was already delayed is ridiculous. Many will cite "rules and safety" regulations BUT, if we are seated on the plane that means we've gone through the check points and we all have to assume there's nothing on us that will cause harm. If he had an accident, they would have removed him from the plane. He couldn't win this one. 

Right or wrong?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

Its a no winner for all because of Federal regulations.

There's a regulation that mandates the seat belt sign be on during movement on the surface and during take off and landing. Its also mandated that when the sign is on the passenger is to remain fastened to the seat with the belt on. No exceptions.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cf...

Like banks and oil companies, there is no such thing as a good airline.

We have a winner.

Red_Barchetta said:

Like banks and oil companies, there is no such thing as a good airline.

Laws need to include common sense provisions. If the plane was on the tarmac and not moving, waiting for its spot in line, what good did it do the safety of the airplane to disembark the passenger? Is it so unforseable that a passenger would need to use the bathroom if the plane was delayed 30 minutes on the tarmac? What if it was a child? Could you make them wait? I'm just venting. Flying is so stressful.