jumbojet
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 3:01 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 2:09 am

I just read that Dr. Dao and his wife's luggage was not removed from the plane. Correct me if I am wrong, but if a passenger leaves a plane, in this case, dragged off a plane by force, isn't it policy to have the corresponding luggage removed?
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 5665
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 2:11 am

OSUk1d wrote:
GlenP wrote:
OSUk1d wrote:


You can read it yourself. It says nothing about being on board already or not. They "admitted" to appease social justice warriors who think that someone who says you'll have to drag me off shouldn't be dragged off.


Go on. Do tell us you're actually in the running for daftest comment of the thread award, or at you so caught up in trying to shift the blame to the victim that you genuinely believe the tripe you're posting.

Can you really be unable to see that, given the fact that litigation would have been guaranteed, United's lawyers would have permitted the company's CEO to go on television, state that the passenger did nothing wrong and admit that they screwed up without having gone through the COC with a fine toothed comb, looking for anything which would have permitted OM to state that the airline acted within the terms of the contract between them and the passenger?

In effect, even if they don't settle out of court, by saying this OM has handed Dr Dao's lawyers their case on a plate. It is inconceivable that any CEO would do such a thing if there was even enough of a chance that they could claim they acted lawfully, even if it the arguments were reduced to the level of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

If he'd done such a thing OM would currently be on the unemployed list, after the board and shareholders had hung him out to dry by his privates, yet, he is still in the role of CEO and has stated that he's going nowhere.


It doesn't say anything about being onboard or off. He admitted it was handled poorly, not that anyone from United assaulted him. It was well within their rights to deny him boarding in an oversold situation. I guess they should just sit there all night next time so you won't need to use so many tissues.


If you ask some thugs to beat up a person, you have the same responsibility for what happened, as the thugs.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12875
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 2:15 am

I am not sure this has been noted, but apparently UA is changing it's policy for crew travel as pax - they must be booked not less than 60 minutes before takeoff.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/united-airli ... 39109.html

This would make it easier to get volunteers or limit risks of last minute bookings of paying pax.
 
ubeema
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 3:48 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 3:15 am

Flighty wrote:
Yeah, there is an automatic assumption that everything airlines are doing is inexcusable and evil, and dumb.

Rightfully so because the flying public knows well they are treated like cattle. After one agreed to pay published fare, well if you are not frequent flyer, no Status, not flying business, how much extra can you pay for an aisle or window seat in the last 5 rows where you will be the last to board after you have been told to step aside to make way for VIP. Then to find out there is no overhead bin space for your carry-on, and on arrival if you are lucky you will wait a half hour at the carrousel for your one piece.
Airlines created this environment to reinforce in the brain of the low fare paying passenger they better pay more next time. It does not improve efficiencies it just maximizes profits because they can do so. But they need to own up to it, instead of making misleading branding that they care. They DO NOT FREAKIN' CARE. I really do not see any difference between US3 v. Spirit except for the larger network. At least Spirit is upfront about the extra fees/nickel and dimming to get one from point A to B. Another one I like "Oh you made it to the gate 3 hours early and want to fly home early in the 3/4 loaded next flight. Pay me $$ for asking the question and I will let you know if you can Standby."

Flighty wrote:
Actually, there was a good, customer service reason why that crew needed to travel. But otherwise, UAL's operation is well considered, and many new ideas have been tried since the 1950s, and if successful, they were implemented.

You still defend the indefensible. OM took responsibility for this. It was a terrible chain of event that started with an unmitigated operational failure allowed to disrupt the operation of one flight, and followed by the poor decision making and judgment of a gate agent who PUNTED to LEO with the terrible results we have witnessed.

UA website shows they have 4527 daily flights, I have not checked but I can bet that the day following this debacle many flights were cancelled/disrupted for various reasons and those did not break the bank as someone in the chain of event believed not flying the 4DH crew would have.

Flighty wrote:
I understand the emotions about a guy bleeding, and it's terrible. But I don't understand how we are going to change the airline industry without making it more inefficient and overall worse for customers.

Can you clarify what would make airlines inefficient?
Unless you live in a different world, overall situation has been worst and untenable for a long time. UA3411 was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Airline got away with similar events before, thus the amazing public outrage. No news there.

Flighty wrote:
The only changes likely to occur, or that ought to occur, are a couple of small details in DB procedure. That will fix this issue.

Delta seems to have been ahead of that curve, and in light of UA3411/DAO DL continue to lead with backing up their actions with higher payout for DB. SO should not be too hard to replicate. Bet the counter argument from the pack will be the usual DON'T DO IT FARE WILL GO UP.
 
ubeema
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 3:48 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 3:28 am

mjoelnir wrote:
OSUk1d wrote:
GlenP wrote:

Go on. Do tell us you're actually in the running for daftest comment of the thread award, or at you so caught up in trying to shift the blame to the victim that you genuinely believe the tripe you're posting.

Can you really be unable to see that, given the fact that litigation would have been guaranteed, United's lawyers would have permitted the company's CEO to go on television, state that the passenger did nothing wrong and admit that they screwed up without having gone through the COC with a fine toothed comb, looking for anything which would have permitted OM to state that the airline acted within the terms of the contract between them and the passenger?

In effect, even if they don't settle out of court, by saying this OM has handed Dr Dao's lawyers their case on a plate. It is inconceivable that any CEO would do such a thing if there was even enough of a chance that they could claim they acted lawfully, even if it the arguments were reduced to the level of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

If he'd done such a thing OM would currently be on the unemployed list, after the board and shareholders had hung him out to dry by his privates, yet, he is still in the role of CEO and has stated that he's going nowhere.


It doesn't say anything about being onboard or off. He admitted it was handled poorly, not that anyone from United assaulted him. It was well within their rights to deny him boarding in an oversold situation. I guess they should just sit there all night next time so you won't need to use so many tissues.


If you ask some thugs to beat up a person, you have the same responsibility for what happened, as the thugs.


Same thing if one hires a Hitman to eliminate another individual. Once you are linked to the hitman you will do the time. Heck the driver of a getaway vehicle in a bank heist would be criminally charge for the actions of the comrade(s) inside the bank including murder if any.
 
User avatar
GlenP
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 3:30 am

OSUk1d wrote:
GlenP wrote:
OSUk1d wrote:

They would have told them to get off the plane.


Oh, you mean the security goons, prior to arresting them for assault?

The police would most likely have told the airline staff that this was a commercial dispute, and, as such nothing to do with the police.


Yet you're suggesting his wife should have called the police. You can't seem to make up your mind.


No, and you know that is not what I'm suggesting.

Your own response to the original question was perfectly worded in such away that you clearly lead to the conclusion that the real police would have told the security staff / airport police to get off the plane; in light of the fact it has emerged that they shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Their response to any attempts by airline staff to get the passenger removed, who had committed no criminal offence, should, and most likely would, then have been that it was nothing to do with the real police.
Ubique Quo Fas et Gloria Ducunt
 
ubeema
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 3:48 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 3:35 am

ltbewr wrote:
I am not sure this has been noted, but apparently UA is changing it's policy for crew travel as pax - they must be booked not less than 60 minutes before takeoff.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/united-airli ... 39109.html

This would make it easier to get volunteers or limit risks of last minute bookings of paying pax.


This has been noted. But Delta upstaged them because at least they addressed the crux of the issue: MONEY MONEY MONEY...
http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/14/news/co ... ed-flight/
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 4:31 am

Aptivaboy wrote:
The only reason I can fathom to overbook as zealously as the industry does is to maximize profit, which I'm not opposed to as long as the regular paying passenger receives his seat, as promised, as bought, as expected.


I'm not sure how zealously they do it, but if someone buys a refundable ticket and changes their schedule last minute, don't you think that that empty seat has cost them money? Furthermore, if they eliminate refundable tickets, as some have suggested, fares will need to equalize somehow because those people are now buying the cheap nonrefundable fare, reducing airline revenues and profits. I don't care one way or the other, but it's not a zero sum game no matter how we slice it.

jumbojet wrote:
I just read that Dr. Dao and his wife's luggage was not removed from the plane. Correct me if I am wrong, but if a passenger leaves a plane, in this case, dragged off a plane by force, isn't it policy to have the corresponding luggage removed?


I doubt it was a concern since he basically was insisting to fly, meaning that his luggage was likely not set to explode after takeoff. I know I've missed flights and my luggage just goes ahead without me, and I've also sat in an airport for hours waiting for my luggage to catch up. I don't really think it's a big deal at all.
-Dave
 
User avatar
DIRECTFLT
Posts: 688
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:00 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 4:32 am

OSUk1d wrote:
DIRECTFLT wrote:
CanadaFair wrote:

In all fairness he was not beaten as that article claims.


For safety, they should have at least asked the passengers in the rows in front and in back of Mr. Dao to temporarily vacate their seats. IF, a security officer had been on either side of Mr. Dao, in his row, then standing him upright could have easily been done, and could have avoided Mr. Dao's injuries that occurred from being "popped" out of the middle seat, and that force of action leading Mr. Dao right into the armrest across the aisle.

I do not think the security officers intended on crashing Mr. Dao's face against the armrest, like a "bad" cop might intentionally bang some perps head against the door frame of his cruiser, as he puts the perp in the vehicle.

Whether it was right or wrong to extract Mr. Dao, the security officers handled it very poorly. I blame the entire commercial aviation industry for this. There should have been adequate required training for officers of how to safely extract someone from a middle seat, with what looked like physical barriers between each of the seats.


You know how his injuries could have been avoided? By him getting his ass up when told to. He wasn't being asked, he was being told. Repeatedly.


All that aside, it was a very poorly executed extraction. A skilled extraction would not have caused the injuries to Mr. Dao that the one done that day did.
Smoothest Ride so far ~ AA A300B4-600R ~~ Favorite Aviation Author ~ Robert J. Serling
 
blrsea
Posts: 1612
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 2:22 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 5:28 am

Why didn't UA book the doctor on the AA flight which left couple of hours later in the day? The doctor only resisted because the next flight wasn't till 24 hours later. Is UA so cheap that it won't go extra mile to just have AA take the ejected passengers? Or just have the crew take the AA flight? Why is UA penny-pinching?
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 5:31 am

blrsea wrote:
Why didn't UA book the doctor on the AA flight which left couple of hours later in the day? The doctor only resisted because the next flight wasn't till 24 hours later. Is UA so cheap that it won't go extra mile to just have AA take the ejected passengers? Or just have the crew take the AA flight? Why is UA penny-pinching?


Did the AA flight have seats?
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 5:54 am

CriticalPoint wrote:
blrsea wrote:
Why didn't UA book the doctor on the AA flight which left couple of hours later in the day? The doctor only resisted because the next flight wasn't till 24 hours later. Is UA so cheap that it won't go extra mile to just have AA take the ejected passengers? Or just have the crew take the AA flight? Why is UA penny-pinching?


Did the AA flight have seats?


Someone earlier said it had some seats, though I don't know how many. The thing is, they thought this would work. Had they realized it'd end up the way it did, they'd have done plenty differently.
-Dave
 
blrsea
Posts: 1612
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 2:22 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 5:58 am

PlanesNTrains wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
blrsea wrote:
Why didn't UA book the doctor on the AA flight which left couple of hours later in the day? The doctor only resisted because the next flight wasn't till 24 hours later. Is UA so cheap that it won't go extra mile to just have AA take the ejected passengers? Or just have the crew take the AA flight? Why is UA penny-pinching?


Did the AA flight have seats?


Someone earlier said it had some seats, though I don't know how many. The thing is, they thought this would work. Had they realized it'd end up the way it did, they'd have done plenty differently.


There were reports earlier that AA flight had some open seats. Hind sight is 20/20, but curious why UA didn't do it initially, as I assumed it would be the first thing airlines would do to help out the passengers who they ejected for their own requirements. Either it was contempt for the passengers, or the gate agent didn't do their job properly
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 6:03 am

blrsea wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:

Did the AA flight have seats?


Someone earlier said it had some seats, though I don't know how many. The thing is, they thought this would work. Had they realized it'd end up the way it did, they'd have done plenty differently.


There were reports earlier that AA flight had some open seats. Hind sight is 20/20, but curious why UA didn't do it initially, as I assumed it would be the first thing airlines would do to help out the passengers who they ejected for their own requirements. Either it was contempt for the passengers, or the gate agent didn't do their job properly


Interline agreements are complicated I don't pretend to know how they work. AA has to agree to carry the passenger. Was it offered? I have no idea.

I can however assure you UA has an interline agreement with AA.
 
User avatar
GlenP
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 7:16 am

OSUk1d wrote:
GlenP wrote:
OSUk1d wrote:


You can read it yourself. It says nothing about being on board already or not. They "admitted" to appease social justice warriors who think that someone who says you'll have to drag me off shouldn't be dragged off.


Go on. Do tell us you're actually in the running for daftest comment of the thread award, or at you so caught up in trying to shift the blame to the victim that you genuinely believe the tripe you're posting.

Can you really be unable to see that, given the fact that litigation would have been guaranteed, United's lawyers would have permitted the company's CEO to go on television, state that the passenger did nothing wrong and admit that they screwed up without having gone through the COC with a fine toothed comb, looking for anything which would have permitted OM to state that the airline acted within the terms of the contract between them and the passenger?

In effect, even if they don't settle out of court, by saying this OM has handed Dr Dao's lawyers their case on a plate. It is inconceivable that any CEO would do such a thing if there was even enough of a chance that they could claim they acted lawfully, even if it the arguments were reduced to the level of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

If he'd done such a thing OM would currently be on the unemployed list, after the board and shareholders had hung him out to dry by his privates, yet, he is still in the role of CEO and has stated that he's going nowhere.


It doesn't say anything about being onboard or off. He admitted it was handled poorly, not that anyone from United assaulted him. It was well within their rights to deny him boarding in an oversold situation. I guess they should just sit there all night next time so you won't need to use so many tissues.


You are willfully choosing to ignore statements from the airline that do not support your positon on this issue.

It has been publicly stated by the airline that the flight was not overbooked, or as you choose to phrase it, oversold. It was, however, fully booked, which created a situation in which they decided to, after enticements failed to get any volunteers, select 4 passengers for removal from the flight. Again, United have stated this should never have happened.

Are you really claiming that your opinions should carry more weight than public statements by the airline, who's senior management and legal teams will have been fully briefed as to what happened on the aircraft that night, regardless of any social or news media coverage?
Ubique Quo Fas et Gloria Ducunt
 
airliner371
Posts: 2274
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:53 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 7:26 am

At the end of the day, last night's SNL Weekend Update has it absolutely right...

"I'll say after all this, I will never fly United ever again... Unless they have a cheap flight to wherever I'm going, in which case I'll definitely fly United."

4:37 in the video if you'd like to see the full version of what SNL had to say about United this week.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MFIRoHHg3g
Take a little time and enjoy the view.
 
FlyingAY
Posts: 409
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:26 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 7:54 am

ytz wrote:
You know how his injuries could have really been avoided? By the cheapskate airline offering more compensation, real money (instead of United vouchers) and offering to book passengers on the AA flight leaving an hour later which had seats on it.

They valued those 4 seats pretty highly. And decided that Dr. Dao valuing the seat higher than they were willing to pay should result in violence.


Can someone tell me, why did the the 4 crew members had to travel on this UA flight if there were seats available on other airlines' flights on the same day? Wouldn't it be much cheaper to buy 4 tickets on the AA flight than to pay $1350 for 4 passengers?
 
User avatar
GlenP
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:19 am

ytz wrote:
OSUk1d wrote:

You know how his injuries could have been avoided? By him getting his ass up when told to. He wasn't being asked, he was being told. Repeatedly.


You know how his injuries could have really been avoided? By the cheapskate airline offering more compensation, real money (instead of United vouchers) and offering to book passengers on the AA flight leaving an hour later which had seats on it.

They valued those 4 seats pretty highly. And decided that Dr. Dao valuing the seat higher than they were willing to pay should result in violence.

Scenario. I sell you a souvenir at my store. Just before you walk out, I decide that I want it back. I offer you three times the price. You refuse to sell it back. Should I be allowed to call the police and insist that they force you to give the souvenir back?

I find it funny that Americans say they are rebels and love freedom and then prostrate before authority figures without questioning anything. If a police officer showed up at your house and demanded to search it, I would bet money, you're the kind of guy who would never ask for a warrant.

There's a reason those three security officers are on leave. They airport PD now says they weren't even supposed to be on the plane. That should make the coming court case, if it happens, even more interesting. I hope Dr. Dao's lawyer is looking at charging those three for assault and battery, so people like you can learn the meaning of "reasonable force".


Thanks to OM's statements, earlier this week, where he basically admitted the airline was in the wrong, Dr Dao's lawyers wouldn't be worth their salt if they didn't decide to take this to court.

For our US based contributors, isn't there a court in either Illinois or Michigan which is the absolute favourite venue for cases such as this, i.e. a member or members of the public suing a corporation, due to the locals, who'd make up a jury, being inclined to find against the corporation, regardless of the fact that evidence exonerates them? If so, they'd have a field day with this case.
Ubique Quo Fas et Gloria Ducunt
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 5290
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:32 am

Tugger wrote:
seahawk wrote:
More rules that will make tickets more expensive and help terrorists and other criminals. The simple solution is to make it optional to have an overbooking protection with your ticket or not. If you buy a cheap basic fare it won´t be included.

So you are saying rules will make tickets more expensive, and as a solution you are suggesting adding a charge that will make tickets more expensive? As someone previously noted even if you assumed the maximum cost (I believe the poster used (Delta's new max amount of $9950) used for all passengers that have been bumped, it would only add 5% to the ticket cost. Not that I think that is what should be done.
Tugg


It is your personal choice, if you take the overbooking protection or not. If you are in a "must travel" situation, it might be a good idea to book it, if you are not, why should you pay for this? And I think 5% higher ticket costs are not helping the industry nor the customer. People need to have a choice for "must travel" situations, it should not be standard though.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:38 am

FlyingAY wrote:
ytz wrote:
You know how his injuries could have really been avoided? By the cheapskate airline offering more compensation, real money (instead of United vouchers) and offering to book passengers on the AA flight leaving an hour later which had seats on it.

They valued those 4 seats pretty highly. And decided that Dr. Dao valuing the seat higher than they were willing to pay should result in violence.


Can someone tell me, why did the the 4 crew members had to travel on this UA flight if there were seats available on other airlines' flights on the same day? Wouldn't it be much cheaper to buy 4 tickets on the AA flight than to pay $1350 for 4 passengers?


1. The tickets weren't necessarily $1350 each - that was the maximum required, but I believe it was 4x what they paid, which could have been hundreds of dollars less.
2. There are probably several reason why they may have chosen to stick with putting the crew on this flight:
A. The crew was told to go to this flight - standard operating procedure.
B. Trying to stop and make arrangements on another airline takes time and they were running on the assumption that they'd make this flight.
C. United (and every airline) would much rather keep all the revenue rather than split it with another carrier.
D. It's just easier.
-Dave
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:50 am

A few thoughts.

1. I think we can all agree things should have been differently in so many ways. We can second guess why they weren't all day long but it doesn't matter anymore. Changes will be made because of this so the past is irrelevant.
2. It's still not totally clear if UA was originally expecting this crew to arrive before boarding or if they only found out they were flying after the fact. Early in the thread (or somewhere anyhow) someone stated that they were expected but when they didn't show up prior to boarding the gate agent moved forward with the boarding process. That same person I believe also noted that sometimes UA gate agents weren't overly supportive of getting contract flying crews onto UA planes (I'm guessing due to the inconvenience of having to VDB or IDB passengers).
3. It's still not clear if Dr. Dao left his seat or the aircraft after initially agreeing to be bumped. We have heard that he changed his mind after hearing how long the delay was going to be.
4. If Dr. Dao agreed to be bumped, was that initial "OK" enough for him to have legally forfeited his seat on that flight? If not, was leaving his seat and perhaps even the airplane enough for him to have legally forfeited his seat? I'm talking about the initial request and not the point at which the LEO were involved.
5. Have we heard word one in any way about the gate agent? I feel like that person is a huge missing piece in all of this, though I admit it's mostly just the desire to know everything about what went on and not really anything that matters ultimately. What happened, happened.
6. I don't think anything Oscar said publicly starting around Tuesday should be meant to indicate company policy or what they internally believed to be legal. I'm not saying that he lied or that references to the situation were out of hand incorrect - I'm just saying that by Tuesday the court of public opinion took over and I don't think there was a way for him to blame the victim in any way even if legally there were a case to be made (such as him forfeiting his seat, then changing his mind, etc).
7. I had something else but am drawing a blank....lol
-Dave
 
OSUk1d
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:43 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:46 am

mjoelnir wrote:
OSUk1d wrote:
GlenP wrote:

Go on. Do tell us you're actually in the running for daftest comment of the thread award, or at you so caught up in trying to shift the blame to the victim that you genuinely believe the tripe you're posting.

Can you really be unable to see that, given the fact that litigation would have been guaranteed, United's lawyers would have permitted the company's CEO to go on television, state that the passenger did nothing wrong and admit that they screwed up without having gone through the COC with a fine toothed comb, looking for anything which would have permitted OM to state that the airline acted within the terms of the contract between them and the passenger?

In effect, even if they don't settle out of court, by saying this OM has handed Dr Dao's lawyers their case on a plate. It is inconceivable that any CEO would do such a thing if there was even enough of a chance that they could claim they acted lawfully, even if it the arguments were reduced to the level of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

If he'd done such a thing OM would currently be on the unemployed list, after the board and shareholders had hung him out to dry by his privates, yet, he is still in the role of CEO and has stated that he's going nowhere.


It doesn't say anything about being onboard or off. He admitted it was handled poorly, not that anyone from United assaulted him. It was well within their rights to deny him boarding in an oversold situation. I guess they should just sit there all night next time so you won't need to use so many tissues.


If you ask some thugs to beat up a person, you have the same responsibility for what happened, as the thugs.



Go on. Do tell us you're actually in the running for the biggest drama queen of the thread award. Nobody beat anyone up. He injured himself by resisting when they did what they told him they were going to, and what he told them they were going to have to do.
 
User avatar
GlenP
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:53 am

OSUk1d wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
OSUk1d wrote:

It doesn't say anything about being onboard or off. He admitted it was handled poorly, not that anyone from United assaulted him. It was well within their rights to deny him boarding in an oversold situation. I guess they should just sit there all night next time so you won't need to use so many tissues.


If you ask some thugs to beat up a person, you have the same responsibility for what happened, as the thugs.



Go on. Do tell us you're actually in the running for the biggest drama queen of the thread award. Nobody beat anyone up. He injured himself by resisting when they did what they told him they were going to, and what he told them they were going to have to do.


Those removing him from his seat had no authority to either do so or even be on the aircraft, unless you missed the fact that the authorities in Chicago have made a statement to that effect.

The fact that they attempted, without due authority, to remove him from his seat constitutes assault.
Ubique Quo Fas et Gloria Ducunt
 
Andy33
Posts: 1777
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:30 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:30 am

OSUk1d wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
OSUk1d wrote:

It doesn't say anything about being onboard or off. He admitted it was handled poorly, not that anyone from United assaulted him. It was well within their rights to deny him boarding in an oversold situation. I guess they should just sit there all night next time so you won't need to use so many tissues.


If you ask some thugs to beat up a person, you have the same responsibility for what happened, as the thugs.



Go on. Do tell us you're actually in the running for the biggest drama queen of the thread award. Nobody beat anyone up. He injured himself by resisting when they did what they told him they were going to, and what he told them they were going to have to do.


The Chicago Department of Aviation has issued a statement saying that their own police/security officers have no authority to remove passengers from planes for any reason whatever.

The regular Chicago PD officers do have authority to remove passengers under certain circumstances, but whether or not you agree that this incident fell under those circumstances, the Chicago PD wasn't even there. Why didn't United/Republic (depending on whether the call was made by the gate agents or the flight deck crew) call the Chicago PD? Might be because real cops are trained to assess the situation before acting, and by the time they'd turned up and made that assessment the flight would take a delay.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12875
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:14 pm

I would note that the Port Authority of NY & NJ who operates and polices EWR, JFK and LGA, put out a news release on Friday and issued orders to be delivered to all PAPD officers that they are not to assist in the removal of involuntary removal of passengers already on the plane. Likely that is due to liability and certain legal issues, but also to note that it isn't their job, but the airlines' to handle. I suspect they still could go on a plant at the gate if a passenger had committed a criminal act like assault of a crew member and called in by the PIC.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 4625
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:28 pm

OSUk1d wrote:
Go on. Do tell us you're actually in the running for the biggest drama queen of the thread award. Nobody beat anyone up. He injured himself by resisting when they did what they told him they were going to, and what he told them they were going to have to do.


Resisting what? If their own employer CAD saying these three are not allowed to enter the aircraft, let alone make any arrest, there is no resisting.

Impersonating law enforcement (or) claiming to have authority is a major crime than resisting street thugs. Add few more $$Millions to the claim.

UA behaved like a middle school student who brings his/her friends to rough-up someone they don't like.
 
Cerecl
Posts: 477
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:22 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:50 pm

WNbob wrote:
Cerecl wrote:
Finally-one shouldn't need to pay extra to guarantee a place on a flight-this is what the ticket is for! Airlines should not be enabled/empowered by any means to charge extra for delivering what they are meant to.

You are arguing against a practice that's been in place for decades, perhaps it needs changing but our society would label that anti-capitalistic. This happened before, it just that with everyone owning a smartphone camera, it feels like new and extra-outrageous but it's for the better. United just announced they won't book working employees last minute and giving them 1 hour cut-off, will see. The pilots/flight attendant unions should have this spelled out in their contracts, they don't want to be yo-yo around the last minute either.

I am not arguing against overbooking per se . I understand airline have to mitigate risk of no-shows. I am arguing against seahawk's suggestion about creating two extra fares classes.
 
User avatar
neutrino
Posts: 1212
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:33 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 1:16 pm

More stories are being dug out, this one from 2013:
http://nypost.com/2017/04/15/former-bea ... ight-suit/
“It’s about the culture of United,” Carmen Maria Montiel said. “They treat the customer as the enemy.”
Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
 
VC10er
Posts: 2787
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 1:35 pm

I have taken a couple days off reading this thread because it had become so repetitive. I come back at it's still repetitive. The way I see this, there is a silver lining to this horrific episode: as of a couple of days ago this one incident has changed the flying experience for passengers forever.

The genie is out of the bottle for United and cannot be put back...although moving forward perhaps the genie can be tethered a bit and maybe have some of its powers diminished...but this incident will be remembered and evoked for at least a decade, but probably not past down over generations as the Richard Gere rumor!

For the past 30 odd years passenger's rights and privileges have been eroding, legal fine print and policies has become more and more anti-consumer, and this incident will be the tipping point to rebalance the airline and passenger relationship. It also had to happen to a major airline and not some small LCC. Unfortunately for United it happened to them. I AM NOT absolving UA for what they did wrong- but this incident "could" have happened to American, Alaska, Delta or Southwest. HQ cannot micro manage 80,000+ employees and subcontractors across the USA or the world and bad shit happens. We humans are deeply flawed and make mistakes, make bad decisions, say and do STUPID things (especially under pressure)

Who here watched Weekend Update on SNL last night? Even after United was being raked over the coals (funny IMHO) in the end Colin Jost said "I am never flying United again...until the next time they have the lowest fare to wherever I'm going"

I'm sure United will settle with Mr Dao for a lot of money. I'm certain that polices will change for the better at United and that their primary competitors will either follow or even try to surpass those policies. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if there was some coordination between them to establish new passenger friendly policies because they all know "it could have been them".
I prefer flying over the vacation itself! I go on business trips just so I can fly!
 
User avatar
neutrino
Posts: 1212
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:33 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 1:55 pm

Meanwhile:;
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/united-airl ... passenger/
"They say they are “infuriated” by what happened and blamed the debacle on the “grossly inappropriate” actions of the security officers.
“This violent incident should never have happened and was a result of gross excessive force by Chicago Department of Aviation personnel,” the United Airlines pilots union said. "
Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
 
User avatar
neutrino
Posts: 1212
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:33 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 2:08 pm

VC10er wrote:
For the past 30 odd years passenger's rights and privileges have been eroding, legal fine print and policies has become more and more anti-consumer, and this incident will be the tipping point to rebalance the airline and passenger relationship.

Dr David Dao is the Chosen One. He is bringing balance to airline and passenger relationship.
Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
 
User avatar
GlenP
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 2:24 pm

neutrino wrote:
VC10er wrote:
For the past 30 odd years passenger's rights and privileges have been eroding, legal fine print and policies has become more and more anti-consumer, and this incident will be the tipping point to rebalance the airline and passenger relationship.

Dr David Dao is the Chosen One. He is bringing balance to airline and passenger relationship.


He's not the Messiah, just a very naughty boy! :lol:

(Sorry, had to follow a bit of tradition amongst Brits and Python fans, when a statement like that is made.)
Ubique Quo Fas et Gloria Ducunt
 
User avatar
neutrino
Posts: 1212
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:33 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 2:37 pm

What Messiah! I'm parodying Anakin.
Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
 
User avatar
GlenP
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 2:50 pm

It's a line from, "Life of Brian", along with, "You're all individuals. ... I'm not! and many others which have become almost always added to any conversation or forum thread in which someone is described as being, in some way, very special.
Ubique Quo Fas et Gloria Ducunt
 
Andy33
Posts: 1777
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:30 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 3:34 pm

neutrino wrote:
Dr David Dao is the Chosen One. He is bringing balance to airline and passenger relationship.


Does that make him Harry Potter? If so, who is Voldemort? Munoz doesn't seem nearly evil enough. Smisek?
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 3:52 pm

I'm not sure how zealously they do it, but if someone buys a refundable ticket and changes their schedule last minute, don't you think that that empty seat has cost them money?


Assuming it's a refundable ticket, perhaps. But, they can always sell standby tickets or schedule a late arriving or itinerary passenger aboard another flight, subject to whatever rebooking fees will be charged to recoup any loss.

If the ticket is not refundable, then the airline gets to have it's cake and eat it, too. They get the original fare, the chance to sell a standby ticket, and essentially still sell the same seat twice without actually inconveniencing anyone. And, if no one sits in the seat for whatever reason, then the plane is ever so slightly lighter and burns ever so much less fuel, not to mention the onboard consumables that aren't being, well, consumed like drinks and soda; over the life of an airplane, that could add up to a few quatloons.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 160
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 4:33 pm

OSUK1D,
In view of the fact that the UA's Legal team advising the CEO and the ORD Airport Authority Police don't agree with your statements here, would you reconsider your position?

If you persist with the ridiculous "oversold" argument which Munoz has abandoned, would then agree that the 4 DH crew are passengers and should have been denied boarding due to late arrival at the gate. Mind you I was an airline pilot and know the usual nonsense.

GF
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 5:24 pm

Question: If a flight is fully booked but not oversold, but then after boarding a FAM shows up and is required to be given a seat, is that considered "overbooked" or "oversold"? I'm just trying to figure out the lingo for these situations.
-Dave
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 5:29 pm

Aptivaboy wrote:
I'm not sure how zealously they do it, but if someone buys a refundable ticket and changes their schedule last minute, don't you think that that empty seat has cost them money?


Assuming it's a refundable ticket, perhaps. But, they can always sell standby tickets or schedule a late arriving or itinerary passenger aboard another flight, subject to whatever rebooking fees will be charged to recoup any loss.

If the ticket is not refundable, then the airline gets to have it's cake and eat it, too. They get the original fare, the chance to sell a standby ticket, and essentially still sell the same seat twice without actually inconveniencing anyone. And, if no one sits in the seat for whatever reason, then the plane is ever so slightly lighter and burns ever so much less fuel, not to mention the onboard consumables that aren't being, well, consumed like drinks and soda; over the life of an airplane, that could add up to a few quatloons.


Well I guess a good question would be what percentage of no-shows are refundable vs nonrefundable tickets.
-Dave
 
LJ
Posts: 4313
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 5:30 pm

blrsea wrote:
Why didn't UA book the doctor on the AA flight which left couple of hours later in the day? The doctor only resisted because the next flight wasn't till 24 hours later. Is UA so cheap that it won't go extra mile to just have AA take the ejected passengers? Or just have the crew take the AA flight? Why is UA penny-pinching?


Or propose to provide gound transport which would at least get them to Louisville much earlier than on an afternoon flight.

PlanesNTrains wrote:
1. The tickets weren't necessarily $1350 each - that was the maximum required, but I believe it was 4x what they paid, which could have been hundreds of dollars less.


They already offered $800 in vouchers + hotel, much more than an one way full fare to Louisville on AA (or any other airline).

PlanesNTrains wrote:
A. The crew was told to go to this flight - standard operating procedure.


Which tells more about the standard operating procedure than about how the airline views customer care (BTW I don't thinbk anyone blames the crew that they were ordered to take the flight, in fact I feel sorry as I doubt they other passengers enjoyed them boarding after what happened).

PlanesNTrains wrote:
B. Trying to stop and make arrangements on another airline takes time and they were running on the assumption that they'd make this flight.


The AA flight leaves much later than the UA flight. As such if they could make the UA flight, they should be able to make the AA flight.

PlanesNTrains wrote:
C. United (and every airline) would much rather keep all the revenue rather than split it with another carrier.


Which says a lot about UA. Moreover, if one has USD 800 in vouchers it will eat up the seat which you could have sold otherwise by the person using the vouchers.

PlanesNTrains wrote:
D. It's just easier.


But a lot less customer friendlier. Moreover, this would avoid soliciting for volunteers, thus in the end probably easier for operations. Then again, that would require thinking "out of the box", which apprantly UA eployees cannot or not allowed to do.

I'm glad I live in Europe where we at least have the right to be put on the next available flight (regardless of the airline) or transported by another mode of transport if that's quicker than the first available flight and accepted by the passenger.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 5:56 pm

LJ wrote:
blrsea wrote:
Why didn't UA book the doctor on the AA flight which left couple of hours later in the day? The doctor only resisted because the next flight wasn't till 24 hours later. Is UA so cheap that it won't go extra mile to just have AA take the ejected passengers? Or just have the crew take the AA flight? Why is UA penny-pinching?


Or propose to provide gound transport which would at least get them to Louisville much earlier than on an afternoon flight.

PlanesNTrains wrote:
1. The tickets weren't necessarily $1350 each - that was the maximum required, but I believe it was 4x what they paid, which could have been hundreds of dollars less.


They already offered $800 in vouchers + hotel, much more than an one way full fare to Louisville on AA (or any other airline).

PlanesNTrains wrote:
A. The crew was told to go to this flight - standard operating procedure.


Which tells more about the standard operating procedure than about how the airline views customer care (BTW I don't thinbk anyone blames the crew that they were ordered to take the flight, in fact I feel sorry as I doubt they other passengers enjoyed them boarding after what happened).

PlanesNTrains wrote:
B. Trying to stop and make arrangements on another airline takes time and they were running on the assumption that they'd make this flight.


The AA flight leaves much later than the UA flight. As such if they could make the UA flight, they should be able to make the AA flight.

PlanesNTrains wrote:
C. United (and every airline) would much rather keep all the revenue rather than split it with another carrier.


Which says a lot about UA. Moreover, if one has USD 800 in vouchers it will eat up the seat which you could have sold otherwise by the person using the vouchers.

PlanesNTrains wrote:
D. It's just easier.


But a lot less customer friendlier. Moreover, this would avoid soliciting for volunteers, thus in the end probably easier for operations. Then again, that would require thinking "out of the box", which apprantly UA eployees cannot or not allowed to do.

I'm glad I live in Europe where we at least have the right to be put on the next available flight (regardless of the airline) or transported by another mode of transport if that's quicker than the first available flight and accepted by the passenger.


1. The $1350 comment was simply clarifying the legal rule for an IDB situation.
2. What US airlines do not Positive Space ferrying crews on their flights, sometimes displacing otherwise paying customers? I just would like to know from someone.
3. Of course they could have made the later flight on AA. Clearly there were many things that could have been done differently. However, they weren't probably because they all figured this would work out, just like every other time. Perhaps you think I'm advocating that this is ok? I was just trying to give reasons WHY it might have been done the way it was.
4. RE: Keeping all the revenue. If you think UA is unique in preferring to minimize their costs and maximize their revenues versus helping out a competitor, I would probably say you are wrong. Who knows.
-Dave
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 5665
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 7:16 pm

OSUk1d wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
OSUk1d wrote:

It doesn't say anything about being onboard or off. He admitted it was handled poorly, not that anyone from United assaulted him. It was well within their rights to deny him boarding in an oversold situation. I guess they should just sit there all night next time so you won't need to use so many tissues.


If you ask some thugs to beat up a person, you have the same responsibility for what happened, as the thugs.



Go on. Do tell us you're actually in the running for the biggest drama queen of the thread award. Nobody beat anyone up. He injured himself by resisting when they did what they told him they were going to, and what he told them they were going to have to do.


You would tell a guy newly mugged and beaten up, that he was not fast enough to hand his wallet to the mugger. What do you not understand with that it is against the law to use violence to sort a civil disagreement? How thick is your brain? Is violence your usual mode of operation?
 
spacecadet
Posts: 2938
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:20 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
Well I guess a good question would be what percentage of no-shows are refundable vs nonrefundable tickets.


It's a valid question but I'd be surprised if the answer was much different than the overall makeup of the plane, ie. that neither refundable nor non-refundable passengers are more likely to be no-shows. Usually when people just don't show up for a flight, it's not a choice that they've made, it's because something happened outside of their control. I'm sure it occasionally happens that someone wakes up that day and says "eh, I don't feel like flying today, I'll call and get my refund later", but usually when people fly, it's because they have to be somewhere. Even on vacation, people have hotel reservations, etc. that they can't easily change on a whim.

So given all that, I'd have to say that the vast majority of no-shows are non-refundable, as most tickets in general are. Which does mean the airline gets to double dip. And I've always thought this was flat-out wrong - no other industry that I can think of does this. If a bakery makes 500 loaves of bread, they sell 500 loaves of bread, not 520 and then hope that 20 people never show up to pick up what they've paid for so they can keep those 20 extra sales for something they never made. If you have a product, you don't get to sell it twice and keep the money from the person who didn't get it, regardless of why they didn't get it.

So if an airline's going to be allowed to overbook, then *every* ticket should really be refundable. If you're a no-show, your ticket gets refunded; that's it. Either that, or airlines aren't allowed to overbook, and they keep the money of everybody who doesn't show up. Those seats go empty, but they're paid for so why should the airline care? That bakery doesn't care if somebody pays for their loaf of bread and then throws it in the garbage. Once you pay for something, it's up to you how you use it. Those seats are no longer the airline's to sell.

Anyway, it's probably been pointed out many times (I haven't gone through the whole thread), but this flight wasn't really overbooked. They weren't making room for other passengers, but for employees. And that's arguably worse.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
jetmatt777
Crew
Posts: 3228
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:29 pm

spacecadet wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
Well I guess a good question would be what percentage of no-shows are refundable vs nonrefundable tickets.


It's a valid question but I'd be surprised if the answer was much different than the overall makeup of the plane, ie. that neither refundable nor non-refundable passengers are more likely to be no-shows. Usually when people just don't show up for a flight, it's not a choice that they've made, it's because something happened outside of their control. I'm sure it occasionally happens that someone wakes up that day and says "eh, I don't feel like flying today, I'll call and get my refund later", but usually when people fly, it's because they have to be somewhere. Even on vacation, people have hotel reservations, etc. that they can't easily change on a whim.

So given all that, I'd have to say that the vast majority of no-shows are non-refundable, as most tickets in general are. Which does mean the airline gets to double dip. And I've always thought this was flat-out wrong - no other industry that I can think of does this. If a bakery makes 500 loaves of bread, they sell 500 loaves of bread, not 520 and then hope that 20 people never show up to pick up what they've paid for so they can keep those 20 extra sales for something they never made. If you have a product, you don't get to sell it twice and keep the money from the person who didn't get it, regardless of why they didn't get it.

So if an airline's going to be allowed to overbook, then *every* ticket should really be refundable. If you're a no-show, your ticket gets refunded; that's it. Either that, or airlines aren't allowed to overbook, and they keep the money of everybody who doesn't show up. Those seats go empty, but they're paid for so why should the airline care? That bakery doesn't care if somebody pays for their loaf of bread and then throws it in the garbage. Once you pay for something, it's up to you how you use it. Those seats are no longer the airline's to sell.

Anyway, it's probably been pointed out many times (I haven't gone through the whole thread), but this flight wasn't really overbooked. They weren't making room for other passengers, but for employees. And that's arguably worse.


Usually even non-refundable tickets are able to use the value of the paid fare towards future travel in consideration of a change-fee. So they aren't exactly keeping the money, as someone does have the right to use the ticket within 365-calendar days should they choose to pay the change fee.

And really, most no-shows are misconnects, which the airline automatically rebooks on the next flight at no additional charge to the passenger and no change fees. In some cases, the airline may rebook misconnects on other airlines also at no charge to the customer, at a significant loss to the airline.

It's not fair to compare the airline industry to the baked goods industry. Airlines really are in a world of their own when it comes to the logistics.
Lighten up while you still can, don't even try to understand, just find a place to make your stand and take it easy
 
OSUk1d
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:43 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:03 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
OSUk1d wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:

If you ask some thugs to beat up a person, you have the same responsibility for what happened, as the thugs.



Go on. Do tell us you're actually in the running for the biggest drama queen of the thread award. Nobody beat anyone up. He injured himself by resisting when they did what they told him they were going to, and what he told them they were going to have to do.


You would tell a guy newly mugged and beaten up, that he was not fast enough to hand his wallet to the mugger. What do you not understand with that it is against the law to use violence to sort a civil disagreement? How thick is your brain? Is violence your usual mode of operation?


Don't tell me what I would tell anyone, you don't know me. But I would tell anybody that if the airline insists you must leave the plane, then you leave the plane. When authorities ask you to leave and you leave, you are much less likely to get injured. I have no sympathy for him. You apparently prefer to have a Mexican standoff and delay everybody indefinitely and cancel flights.
 
OSUk1d
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:43 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:05 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
LJ wrote:
blrsea wrote:
Why didn't UA book the doctor on the AA flight which left couple of hours later in the day? The doctor only resisted because the next flight wasn't till 24 hours later. Is UA so cheap that it won't go extra mile to just have AA take the ejected passengers? Or just have the crew take the AA flight? Why is UA penny-pinching?


Or propose to provide gound transport which would at least get them to Louisville much earlier than on an afternoon flight.

PlanesNTrains wrote:
1. The tickets weren't necessarily $1350 each - that was the maximum required, but I believe it was 4x what they paid, which could have been hundreds of dollars less.


They already offered $800 in vouchers + hotel, much more than an one way full fare to Louisville on AA (or any other airline).

PlanesNTrains wrote:
A. The crew was told to go to this flight - standard operating procedure.


Which tells more about the standard operating procedure than about how the airline views customer care (BTW I don't thinbk anyone blames the crew that they were ordered to take the flight, in fact I feel sorry as I doubt they other passengers enjoyed them boarding after what happened).

PlanesNTrains wrote:
B. Trying to stop and make arrangements on another airline takes time and they were running on the assumption that they'd make this flight.


The AA flight leaves much later than the UA flight. As such if they could make the UA flight, they should be able to make the AA flight.

PlanesNTrains wrote:
C. United (and every airline) would much rather keep all the revenue rather than split it with another carrier.


Which says a lot about UA. Moreover, if one has USD 800 in vouchers it will eat up the seat which you could have sold otherwise by the person using the vouchers.

PlanesNTrains wrote:
D. It's just easier.


But a lot less customer friendlier. Moreover, this would avoid soliciting for volunteers, thus in the end probably easier for operations. Then again, that would require thinking "out of the box", which apprantly UA eployees cannot or not allowed to do.

I'm glad I live in Europe where we at least have the right to be put on the next available flight (regardless of the airline) or transported by another mode of transport if that's quicker than the first available flight and accepted by the passenger.


1. The $1350 comment was simply clarifying the legal rule for an IDB situation.
2. What US airlines do not Positive Space ferrying crews on their flights, sometimes displacing otherwise paying customers? I just would like to know from someone.

NONE

3. Of course they could have made the later flight on AA. Clearly there were many things that could have been done differently. However, they weren't probably because they all figured this would work out, just like every other time. Perhaps you think I'm advocating that this is ok? I was just trying to give reasons WHY it might have been done the way it was.

Can't make any flight when he refuses to leave and escalates it to the point he did.


4. RE: Keeping all the revenue. If you think UA is unique in preferring to minimize their costs and maximize their revenues versus helping out a competitor, I would probably say you are wrong. Who knows.
 
OSUk1d
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:43 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:06 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
Question: If a flight is fully booked but not oversold, but then after boarding a FAM shows up and is required to be given a seat, is that considered "overbooked" or "oversold"? I'm just trying to figure out the lingo for these situations.


Overbooked means more tickets sold than there are seats... Oversold means more people actually showed up than there are seats.

Plenty of overbooked flights go out with open seats and standbys boarded. I get on them all the time in hubs. Oversold flights require volunteers or misconnects.
 
OSUk1d
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:43 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:09 pm

For everyone suggesting they should have booked him on AA or given ground transportation... how do you suggest they do this when he refuses to disembark and acts like a child? You can't look up options or discuss anything on the plane. I bet if he would have just cooperated they would have had several options. But they didn't have all night to have an auction on the plane or run back and forth to the gate to look up flights.
 
OSUk1d
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:43 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:11 pm

ytz wrote:
BravoOne wrote:
UA should pray and pay to stop this from going to court, lest the whole industry gets upended when a judge decides that whole parts of that CoC are invalid.



How can a judge decide their CoC is invalid? Is a company not entitled to set their policies that are agreed to upon purchase of a ticket?
 
ytz
Posts: 3093
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:36 pm

OSUk1d wrote:
For everyone suggesting they should have booked him on AA or given ground transportation... how do you suggest they do this when he refuses to disembark and acts like a child? You can't look up options or discuss anything on the plane. I bet if he would have just cooperated they would have had several options. But they didn't have all night to have an auction on the plane or run back and forth to the gate to look up flights.


Doesn't even have to be him. Offer $300 and free booking on AA. They would have had way more than 4 volunteers. I would bet my next paycheque on it.

In fact, a lot of the rumours say he was willing to get off until he found out the replacement flight was 22 hrs later.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos