A disabled veteran believes Alaska Airlines broke a federal law by denying him the opportunity to check his battery-powered wheelchair on a flight from Las Vegas to Seattle last month.
Stan Smith said he was denied by airline staff prior to going through security at Harry Reid International Airport, despite the fact he was allowed to check his wheelchair on the flight out of Seattle.
He explained that the data card with information about the chair’s lithium ion batteries was lost due to minor damage caused by baggage handlers.
The manufacturer’s data card contains key specifications meant to inform airline staff that the chair can be safely checked.
At Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, Alaska Airlines staff tagged the wheelchair to confirm it had been properly vetted.
Because the data tag was lost, staff in Las Vegas wouldn’t allow him to check his wheelchair for the return flight.
“They took the tag that had been filled out in Seattle and started bad-mouthing employees in Seattle,” said Smith. “I just [needed] a solution to get home. They said it was OK on the flight down.”
Smith contacted the manufacturer; a service representative sent a text message with a copy of the data card.
“They refused to look at it. He offered to talk to them on the phone… they refused to talk to him. Then they filled out a form declining to board my wheelchair and left me in a lurch with no resources to get home,” said Smith. “My wife was crying and I was left stuck feeling like [because] I’m disabled, I’m the reason we’re stuck.”
Eventually Smith and his wife bought new tickets with Delta Air Lines.
Smith said the Delta agent allowed him to check his wheelchair without any issues; he was simply required to inform the agent what type of batteries he had on the chair and to confirm they weren’t damaged.
“All airlines should be that simple and in compliance with the law,” he said.
The new tickets cost more than $1,800.
“At least we’re fortunate to be able to put it on a credit card… If I didn’t have that, I’d [still] be in Vegas a month later,” he said.
Smith said he contacted Alaska Airlines from his home in Kitsap County and asked for a refund of the unused tickets and compensation for the cost of the Delta tickets.
“They weren’t willing to do either. When I asked to speak to a supervisor the lady said, ‘I am the supervisor. There’s nobody above me… There is nobody else. We’re not doing it,'” Smith recalled.
Through past work with the City of Tacoma and VA Hospitals, Smith considers himself an expert on the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Air Carrier Access Act, both of which are federal laws that protect the rights of people with disabilities and require accessibility accommodations.
He believes Alaska Airlines violated the ACAA by denying him the right to check his wheelchair.
“If somebody that has the knowledge and the background I do with the ADA can’t get through the system without, for lack of a better term, getting dumped on the sidewalk in front of an airport, what are they doing to people that don’t have my knowledge and background in how things are supposed to work?”
Smith reached out after seeing a previous story in which a hearing impaired individual claimed an Alaska Airlines flight attendant “humiliated” him over his use of hearing aids on a flight from JFK in New York to Seattle.
Alaska Airlines did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Smith’s incident, but in a previous statement the company said “we are committed to ensuring a safe, respectful, and inclusive experience for all guests, and we take any claims of discrimination very seriously.”
The wheelchair denial at Harry Reid International Airport despite Seattle approval demonstrates inconsistent Alaska Airlines policies where staff at different locations apply contradictory standards, creating unpredictable travel experiences for disabled passengers.
Stan Smith’s Kitsap County residence places him in the Seattle metropolitan area where Alaska Airlines maintains its largest hub, making Sea-Tac his primary departure airport and increasing the irony that the airline’s home base approved equipment that Las Vegas staff rejected.
The lost data card due to baggage handler damage illustrates the vulnerability of critical disability accommodation documentation to routine travel hazards, with airline systems apparently lacking redundancy to verify wheelchair specifications without physical cards.
The manufacturer’s data card containing lithium ion battery specifications reflects aviation safety protocols where powerful batteries in mobility devices require documentation proving compliance with regulations limiting battery capacity and chemical composition.
The Sea-Tac tagging system demonstrating proper vetting creates evidence trail that Las Vegas staff ignored, with the Seattle approval establishing that the wheelchair met safety requirements and suggesting the subsequent rejection violated the airline’s own procedures.
The Las Vegas staff “bad-mouthing employees in Seattle” indicates internal Alaska Airlines conflict where workers in different locations question colleagues’ competence rather than resolving documentation issues to accommodate passengers.
The manufacturer representative’s text message with data card copy providing alternative verification that Alaska staff “refused to look at” demonstrates the airline’s inflexibility, with employees apparently empowered only to follow narrow procedures without problem-solving authority.
The phone conversation offer rejection where the manufacturer’s representative volunteered to directly confirm specifications represents missed opportunity to resolve the situation, with Alaska staff prioritizing rigid protocol over customer accommodation.
The “form declining to board my wheelchair” bureaucratic response transforms Smith’s mobility device into cargo rather than essential medical equipment, with the airline apparently treating the wheelchair as discretionary luggage rather than legally protected assistive technology.
The wife crying and Smith feeling blamed for being disabled captures the emotional trauma beyond logistical inconvenience, with the incident creating shame and helplessness that compound the practical challenge of traveling without mobility equipment.
The $1,800 Delta ticket purchase represents substantial unexpected expense that Smith characterizes as fortunate because he had credit available, highlighting how disability accommodations failures disproportionately impact people with limited financial resources.
The Delta agent’s simple battery type and damage confirmation contrasts sharply with Alaska’s documentation demands, demonstrating that wheelchair checking can be straightforward when staff prioritize accommodation over obstacle creation.
The “all airlines should be that simple and in compliance with the law” observation implies Alaska Airlines’ procedures exceed legal requirements, with the company potentially implementing overly restrictive policies that create barriers federal disability law prohibits.
The month-long Las Vegas stranding hypothetical for passengers lacking credit illustrates how accommodation failures trap disabled travelers, with the scenario revealing systemic discrimination where mobility impairments combined with financial constraints create impossible situations.
The Kitsap County customer service contact attempting to obtain refunds and compensation demonstrates Smith’s efforts to resolve the matter directly before seeking media attention, with Alaska’s refusal prompting the public complaint.
The supervisor claim that “there’s nobody above me” and refusal to escalate represents customer service dead end, with the response suggesting either dishonesty about corporate hierarchy or Alaska’s empowerment of frontline staff to make final decisions without oversight.
The City of Tacoma and VA Hospital work background establishing Smith’s ADA and ACAA expertise transforms him from typical frustrated passenger into credible witness whose professional knowledge lends authority to his legal violation claims.
The Air Carrier Access Act violation allegation carries potential federal enforcement consequences, with the Department of Transportation empowered to investigate disability discrimination complaints and impose fines on airlines violating accommodation requirements.
The rhetorical question about “people that don’t have my knowledge and background” highlights systemic concerns beyond Smith’s individual case, suggesting Alaska routinely mistreats disabled passengers who lack expertise to recognize violations and assert rights.
The hearing impaired passenger “humiliation” story connection demonstrates pattern of Alaska Airlines disability accommodation failures, with Smith’s wheelchair case joining other incidents suggesting cultural problems rather than isolated mistakes.
