@maseratijim - Thank you for the heads up on Delta. Out of principal, I know where I'll be taking my business for now on. Less than 2.5% of the population is allergic to tree nuts - and SWA decides to punish the other 97.5%. Clearly, their stated reasons are either a LIE or a case study in textbook incompetent decision making with a side of smoke and mirrors. @Wjwr1223 - While I can empathize with your situation, as an alleged licenced physician I am a bit shocked you're applauding this move, which appears to have given you a false sense of security. As a physician, you should know this does not nothing to solve the other 40 or so carrier product items which can cause reactions in those that are allergic to peanuts or tree nuts.... https://www.foodallergy.org/common-allergens/peanut Again, I'm awaiting SWA's response on how this is truly a "passenger safety" decision given JUST NOW 40+ years either A) this has dawned on them or B) in reality, something else is driving this decision - SWA just hasn't come clean. What does add up is.... either.... 1) SWA is too lazy to hold their crews accountable for proper cabin cleanliness or 2) Simply, this is for financial reasons - such as paying the $15M they now owe to the DOJ in fines for setting allegations of collusion with other airlines to keep prices inflated. So....Hey SWA.....Why not just say.....It's costing us $.10 per pack of peanuts, times ~150M+ passengers annually (plausible figures which basic basic math says... SWA now saves annually... wait for it....wait for it.... $15M annually in product cost (excluding weight, fuel, etc.... OH... and coincidentally the estimated $15M savings is exactly the same tab SWA now owes the US DOJ for settling allegations of pricing fixing with the other airlines.... To be clear, I do empathize with those that truly have allegies - It sucks to have to worry about individual conditions, whatever and whenever risks may arise - but I implore you look beyond what may seem superficially good is nothing more than a test of your intelligence. Either way, SWA PR and Marketing department - Please... Pretty please....Could you please come up with something a little better rather than assuming we're all idiots and will buy the current line being fed to us. Is it too much to ask that you make your message at little more plausible? SWA you can earn my respect back (and associated business) if you simply just tell us the truth... Why not employ some of your own rhetoric of "Transfarency" and simply tell us peasants this saves you $15M+ per year? None of which we'll see in lower faces with your touted "Transfarency" commitment.
... View more
