The story is still breaking but you can catch most of the details here: http://www.courier-journal.com/story/ne ... 100274374/

Here's the gist:

Apparently, United overbooked a flight to Louisville and offered $400 + hotel stay to volunteers, but didn't find any takers. Then they allowed boarding. Once people were on board they came in an said that 4 employees had to get on the plane because they were rostered in the morning from Louisville. They upped the offer to $800 but again no takers. Then a manager came and said that four random people would be chosen. A doctor (the man in question) was chosen but refused to volunteer, because he had patients to see in the morning.

Next thing you know security comes on board, tries to convince him and then slams him against the armrest. He was knocked out and dragged out of the plane. He then ran back bleeding saying he needed to get home. But they dragged him back out.


I honestly can't believe this. I'd wait to hear from both United and the doctor to get the complete story, but their response so far has been shocking. The video is absolutely damming and I can't believe anyone would be this stupid when it came to customer service.

What do you think? I'm sure this will be a lively and civil discussion

EDIT: Here's a Twitter account with another video angle: https://twitter.com/Tyler_Bridges/statu ... 0042106880. Jesus Christ that's just... wow.

Yeah, someone's getting fired and/or sued for that.

As is typically the case, there's probably more to this story

smokeybandit wrote:

As is typically the case, there's probably more to this story

What is the point of making that comment? Any issue with the reporting contact the news media.

These guys love being in the media... for all the wrong reasons.

Did he wear leggings?

JFK31R wrote:

Yeah, someone's getting fired and/or sued for that.

Indeed. The video is damning. This is barbaric and shameful on all accounts. Even if a passenger refuses to leave an aircraft, there is NO EXCUSE for physical ABUSE.

That video makes my stomach turn. Disgusting.

smokeybandit wrote:

As is typically the case, there's probably more to this story

Given UA have been quoted in the OPs linked article, it looks like its fairly reflective of what happened.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a single solution to this (if the report is complete and accurate); jail time.

Jail time for anyone involved in the decision, from the "security" staff right up the tree to the manager that made the decision.

The correct solution was very simple - keep offering more money to the passengers until UA got enough volunteers. If they make a loss on the entire flight due to this - so be it - their fault for overbooking. I hope they get utterly reaming in court and those idiots see the inside of a cell. People have a personal responsibility to do the morally right thing long before they have any responsibilities toward their employers.

The flight was by Republic Airlines, not United mainline but then nobody would take the click bait if the headlines said Republic now would they?

Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe.

Airlines cannot and should not be in the business of picking IDBs based on whose time is most valuable. If this man's arrival in Louisville were truly as important as it evidently is in his head he should have (1) checked in sooner, (2) bought a more expensive ticket, (3) booked a flight that returned him to Louisville with more time to spare or (4) not traveled in the first place.

Like most people who travel a lot for business, I play the "take the last flight out" game from time to time. It is not without risk.

exunited wrote:

The flight was by Republic Airlines, not United mainline but then nobody would take the click bait if the headlines said Republic now would they?

That's an important point that it actually wasn't United, but with a video showing that, I'm pretty sure it would've gone viral regardless of the carrier.

jetbluefan1 wrote:

Indeed. The video is damning. This is barbaric and shameful on all accounts. Even if a passenger refuses to leave an aircraft, there is NO EXCUSE for physical ABUSE.

That video makes my stomach turn. Disgusting.

Well that's how police/security acts when you don't cooperate, you're just getting a chance to see it for the first time. Some people live with this and have for decades.

I also don't see how this is an UA issue. He was asked to leave, he didn't. Security was called. At that point it's between the passenger and security

Good ole "not the mainline" and CoC excuses.

If it is not United why the plane is painted in United livery?

exunited wrote:

The flight was by Republic Airlines, not United mainline but then nobody would take the click bait if the headlines said Republic now would they?

Really doesn't matter, the plane's outside and interior is all UA branding. They are representing United and anything that happens goes straight at UA.

Cubsrule wrote:

Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe.

Airlines cannot and should not be in the business of picking IDBs based on whose time is most valuable. If this man's arrival in Louisville were truly as important as it evidently is in his head he should have (1) checked in sooner, (2) bought a more expensive ticket, (3) booked a flight that returned him to Louisville with more time to spare or (4) not traveled in the first place.

Like most people who travel a lot for business, I play the "take the last flight out" game from time to time. It is not without risk.

I think the "gaffe" in question is not the gate agent's IDB'ing of passengers, but how security chose to handle the situation. Unless the passenger got violent or unruly beforehand, there's no excuse in my mind for that kind of treatment. The passenger has a massive lawsuit on his hands, and he'll more than likely win, especially with that video. The airline obviously had to IDB people, it's just a fact of life, but if the gentleman in question refused to get off, then they should have increased the compensation and selected new passengers to IDB.

atcsundevil wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe.

Airlines cannot and should not be in the business of picking IDBs based on whose time is most valuable. If this man's arrival in Louisville were truly as important as it evidently is in his head he should have (1) checked in sooner, (2) bought a more expensive ticket, (3) booked a flight that returned him to Louisville with more time to spare or (4) not traveled in the first place.

Like most people who travel a lot for business, I play the "take the last flight out" game from time to time. It is not without risk.

I think the "gaffe" in question is not the gate agent's IDB'ing of passengers, but how security chose to handle the situation. Unless the passenger got violent or unruly beforehand, there's no excuse in my mind for that kind of treatment. The passenger has a massive lawsuit on his hands, and he'll more than likely win, especially with that video. The airline obviously had to IDB people, it's just a fact of life, but if the gentleman in question refused to get off, then they should have increased the compensation and selected new passengers to IDB.

The way security handled the situation was a gaffe, but that's really not UA's gaffe.

Do I understand correctly that you believe that you and I ought to be able to decline an IDB because we don't feel like dealing with the inconvenience? I'd point out also that ORD-SDF is a doable drive.

Airline/Union attorneys and Insurance companies are doing impeccable job settling these cases out of court, hence the continued saga.

The process for law enforcement is 1. ASK, 2. TELL, 3. MAKE - it's your choice at point 1 or 2 but should you get to step 3, you will be leaving with plenty of assistance. If you are a Doctor or a brick layer, it makes no difference. As some have said, it's the airplane operator's decision as to who gets on and who gets off, they owe you a refund if they don't get you to point B and that's all.

Cubsrule wrote:

Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe.

Airlines cannot and should not be in the business of picking IDBs based on whose time is most valuable. If this man's arrival in Louisville were truly as important as it evidently is in his head he should have (1) checked in sooner, (2) bought a more expensive ticket, (3) booked a flight that returned him to Louisville with more time to spare or (4) not traveled in the first place.

Like most people who travel a lot for business, I play the "take the last flight out" game from time to time. It is not without risk.

My read from the articles and from the present but limited response from UA on Twitter about law enforcement is that this must have been an IDB situation and the guy who was IDB'd somehow boarded the plane, took his seat, and refused to leave. Unfortunate it turned out this way, but rules are rules I suppose. Nobody wants and IDB situation, and they suck, and they happen. It seems too that there's some confusion here about the difference between VDB and IDB.

It is amazing though how UA somehow manages to end up in situations like this so frequency. I wonder what controversy will happen next week and to what extent the UA Twitter/PR response will exacerbate the damage next time.

You follow the instructions of the crew and security promptly and without discussion or face consequences.

They really should have upped the offers above $800 before doing this. The fallout and bad press is going to cost a lot more

The video looks really bad

Yes technically an Airline can do a lot of things, and make anyone de-plane at anytime, but SHOULD they, in this case it could have been handled better to say the least
As for the security POOR training

UAL stock down 2.5% in pre-trading, and top news on CNBC. Somehow I don't think history is going to be on the side of UA and airport security...

Again, the circumstances of the situation provide ZERO excuse to knock out a passenger and drag him down the aisle. NONE. This is totally inhumane and appalling on all levels. Just listen to the man shriek at the top of his lungs. Send shivers down my spine.

exunited wrote:

The process for law enforcement is 1. ASK, 2. TELL, 3. MAKE - it's your choice at point 1 or 2 but should you get to step 3, you will be leaving with plenty of assistance. If you are a Doctor or a brick layer, it makes no difference. As some have said, it's the airplane operator's decision as to who gets on and who gets off, they owe you a refund if they don't get you to point B and that's all.

I guarantee you that if the Dr was pregnant, she wouldn't have been removed like that. This is not a person who is belligerent, harming other passengers or creating a hazard. The other day Delta paid out close to $11000 for an overbooked flight to a family of 3.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurabegle ... s-weekend/

Airlines are not short of cash. If you're making over 3 billion dollars a year off of baggage fees when fuel is this low, I have no pity for UA. Pay up and live with the fact that you overbooked the flight.

I feel really bad for United here, their branding is splashed all over an - admittedly unfortunate - incident that they had nothing to do with. The security personnel really should have called Police if they felt that level of force was required, but at least the clown won't think of arguing with airline staff or security again. Not saying he deserved been knocked unconscious, but he definitely deserved some form of punishment.

Cubsrule wrote:

Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe..

It's called Involuntary DENIED BOARDING. He was not denied boarding. He was allowed to board, by all accounts. No one has claimed he rushed the gate agent. When your butt is in a seat, it's yours. With him is his seat, we have left Rule 25 of the CoC and are now in Rule 21: Refusal of Transport. That is the only clause that covers removing a passenger from the aircraft. And not a single enumerated reason in Rule 21 applies to this customer.

$400 was a pitiful offer for this situation. The compensation by law for a delay of this length is 400% of the fare up to $1,350 IN CASH. They could have offered way more. And that's what they should have done when they screwed up and let the bumped passengers board.

You airline employees defend even the most egregious actions, and it is frankly ludicrous. Call a spade a spade. They screwed up. Stop trying to blame the CoC, or pass the buck to the regional carrier or airport security. United is the one that chose to outsource. This passenger booked with United, not on rjet.com. And United's screw up is the one that put them in the situation. Security has their own blame, but that does not alleviate United of responsibility.

This is a mistake that will lead to a 6, or even 7 or 8 figure settlement, plus a ton of bad press. Offering $2,000 in vouchers (or even cash) times 4 passengers probably would have saved them all this trouble.

RyanairGuru wrote:

I feel really bad for United here, their branding is splashed all over an - admittedly unfortunate - incident that they had nothing to do with. The security personnel really should have called Police if they felt that level of force was required, but at least the clown won't think of arguing with airline staff or security again. Not saying he deserved been knocked unconscious, but he definitely deserved some form of punishment.

Really? He deserved PUNISHMENT for being boarded, and then removed from the aircraft just because he wanted to get home and go to work in the morning? And you have to call the guy names?

I have little sympathy for United. They are the ones that boarded a IDB. That throws their Contract of Carriage out the window. Now you want to remove him from the aircraft, that becomes a completely different matter.

Not really going to blame UA/Republic for this one, but those security staff need their entire company/personnel fired along with those two on the plane to be charged with assault and battery. Seriously do these security companies hire these people right out of jail?

I will however blame UA/Republic for not calling law enforcement over who always handle the situation the best they can but instead called elementary school educated criminals with badges.

Disgusting.
I hope Star have the guts to kick them out of the alliance and look for a more civilized partner in their business.

rotating14 wrote:

exunited wrote:

The process for law enforcement is 1. ASK, 2. TELL, 3. MAKE - it's your choice at point 1 or 2 but should you get to step 3, you will be leaving with plenty of assistance. If you are a Doctor or a brick layer, it makes no difference. As some have said, it's the airplane operator's decision as to who gets on and who gets off, they owe you a refund if they don't get you to point B and that's all.

I guarantee you that if the Dr was pregnant, she wouldn't have been removed like that. This is not a person who is belligerent, harming other passengers or creating a hazard. The other day Delta paid out close to $11000 for an overbooked flight to a family of 3.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurabegle ... s-weekend/

Airlines are not short of cash. If you're making over 3 billion dollars a year off of baggage fees when fuel is this low, I have no pity for UA. Pay up and live with the fact that you overbooked the flight.

What's funny about is UA profits about a billion more than DL, having the one of the most, if not the most profit margin of any airline. I would have expected a minimum of a $1,000.00, next possible flight, and a hotel room. This clearly shows UA cares more about their profits than passengers. *sigh*

Once again, United is compounding a horrible error by completely screwing up the PR. They apologized for the overbooking, and only the overbooking.

It's like they're trying to screw up. What on Earth are they doing?!

RyanairGuru wrote:

I feel really bad for United here, their branding is splashed all over an - admittedly unfortunate - incident that they had nothing to do with. The security personnel really should have called Police if they felt that level of force was required, but at least the clown won't think of arguing with airline staff or security again. Not saying he deserved been knocked unconscious, but he definitely deserved some form of punishment.

Really?

They boarded knowing they did not have enough seats
If they kept asking for volunteers and got none, they should have continued to try for volunteers, or tell 4 people they cannot travel BEFORE boarding
Yes the man getting treated the way he did was primarily security's fault, and his not following instructions was a bad idea, but to say United had nothing to do with this is absurd

Will this cost the brand more than $800 x 4 or if they had upped it to $1,200 x 4? YES and if the man sues Legal fees and settlement will cost a lot more than that.

Just like the leggings BS (and this is worst) even though Airline could Technically to the letter of the Law be in the right, better judgment of the situation could have been used to result in a much better outcome for all involved

Cubsrule wrote:

Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe.

Exactly. Regardless of the merits of this particular individual, let's see...

- Failure to follow flight crew instructions - federal felony
- Failure to follow law enforcement instructions - state misdemeanor
- Resisting arrest - state felony

And there's probably an assault charge or two in there as well. I hope this guy has a large bank account, a good lawyer and enjoys his new friends at the Cook County hotel.

Cubsrule wrote:

Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe.

Airlines cannot and should not be in the business of picking IDBs based on whose time is most valuable. If this man's arrival in Louisville were truly as important as it evidently is in his head he should have (1) checked in sooner, (2) bought a more expensive ticket, (3) booked a flight that returned him to Louisville with more time to spare or (4) not traveled in the first place.

Like most people who travel a lot for business, I play the "take the last flight out" game from time to time. It is not without risk.

"gaffe.
----an unintentional act or remark causing embarrassment to its originator; a blunder:"

Is UA legally in the wrong, probably not, is this a gaffe....absolutely
If UA knew the outcome they would have acted differently...so yes an unintentional act or blunder, repercussions are just beginning to unfold.

exunited wrote:

The flight was by Republic Airlines, not United mainline but then nobody would take the click bait if the headlines said Republic now would they?

I was wondering who would be the first person to post this. Here's the thing...I subcontract some of my work out to other people. If one of them screws up, it's still my company's name on it. You take that risk when you subcontract work out. There are pros and cons to it...if you're willing to take on the pros, you MUST take on the cons. This is one of those cons, so United better deal with it better than they have so far.

Instead of brawling with your passengers why not just up the compensation offer - $1200, $1600, $2000? Hard cash? There is a price for everyone and they would have had volunteers.. After the HA gaffe and this - I am convinced airline employees are absolute knuckleheads when it comes to dealing with other people.

A.net really amazes me way often than it should, and not in a good way. The number of people here who rush to the defense of an airline that wouldn't give a damn about them is awe-inspiring.

Adipocere wrote:

Instead of brawling with your passengers why not just up the compensation offer - $1200, $1600, $2000? Hard cash? There is a price for everyone and they would have had volunteers.. After the HA gaffe and this - I am convinced airline employees are absolute knuckleheads when it comes to dealing with other people.

That's what I was thinking as well. Up the offer and you'll probably get some people to volunteer. Them being cheap isn't anyone else's fault but their own, if they need employees to take that flight, they should be prepared to offer everything but the kitchen sink.

Just a company being cheap.

smokeybandit wrote:

The Twitter link is already the top post on Reddit, so it's going to explode in the morning.

It appears that the Reddit post has been taken off the front page

goCOgo wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe..

It's called Involuntary DENIED BOARDING. He was not denied boarding. He was allowed to board, by all accounts. No one has claimed he rushed the gate agent. When your butt is in a seat, it's yours. With him is his seat, we have left Rule 25 of the CoC and are now in Rule 21: Refusal of Transport. That is the only clause that covers removing a passenger from the aircraft. And not a single enumerated reason in Rule 21 applies to this customer.

$400 was a pitiful offer for this situation. The compensation by law for a delay of this length is 400% of the fare up to $1,350 IN CASH. They could have offered way more. And that's what they should have done when they screwed up and let the bumped passengers board. .

It's not refusal to transport if they were going to rebook him later. Also, pretty sure the IDB compensation is $1600 max.

This is certainly embarrassing for the company, but ultimate responsibility for the violent outcome is on the security personnel.

glbltrvlr wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe.

Exactly. Regardless of the merits of this particular individual, let's see...

- Failure to follow flight crew instructions - federal felony
- Failure to follow law enforcement instructions - state misdemeanor
- Resisting arrest - state felony

And there's probably an assault charge or two in there as well. I hope this guy has a large bank account, a good lawyer and enjoys his new friends at the Cook County hotel.

His bank account is about to be a lot bigger, as it should be

glbltrvlr wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe.

Exactly. Regardless of the merits of this particular individual, let's see...

- Failure to follow flight crew instructions - federal felony
- Failure to follow law enforcement instructions - state misdemeanor
- Resisting arrest - state felony

And there's probably an assault charge or two in there as well. I hope this guy has a large bank account, a good lawyer and enjoys his new friends at the Cook County hotel.

I hope you are being sarcastic. If not you are a truly sickening person.

"Failure to follow flight crew instructions" - you mean the instructions to leave in violation of the Contract of Carriage? Rule 21 spells out the only reasons United can remove someone from an aircraft, none of which applied to this customer. By boarding him, they threw Rule 25 out the window.

You sound like one of those cops that thinks they can arrest someone on the sole charge of resisting arrest.

This guy isn't going to Cook County Jail. He is instead going to split a few fat checks with his lawyer from United, Republic, and the O'Hare PD.

Adipocere wrote:

Instead of brawling with your passengers why not just up the compensation offer - $1200, $1600, $2000? Hard cash? There is a price for everyone and they would have had volunteers.. After the HA gaffe and this - I am convinced airline employees are absolute knuckleheads when it comes to dealing with other people.

This is a good point, although I wonder how much leeway is given to front line employees and how far they can go.

If United does not give it's employees any discretion, and Denied Boarding Compensation is set in stone ... then this is the result. I have often read, that the airlines with the best customer handling reputations are the airlines that empower their employees the most.

In this case, as things were snowballing quickly, it may well have been a lengthy process to call in a supervisor, or higher, to get the authority to up the compensation. Time that they clearly did not have.

Cubsrule wrote:

The way security handled the situation was a gaffe, but that's really not UA's gaffe.

Do I understand correctly that you believe that you and I ought to be able to decline an IDB because we don't feel like dealing with the inconvenience? I'd point out also that ORD-SDF is a doable drive.

No, I don't think it should be an option, but if the passenger is putting them in a position where they have to forcibly remove him (as in this situation), then some sort of alternative would need to be devised. Physically dragging a non-violent individual off the aircraft isn't a proper solution.

He sure doesn't look like a doctor.

If security asks you to leave the plane and you don't, don't expect them to sit around and plead with you like a child.

Nobody is entitled to a 'fair fight' with police or security. That's what the courts are for.

Keith2004 wrote:

They really should have upped the offers above $800 before doing this. The fallout and bad press is going to cost a lot more

The video looks really bad

Yes technically an Airline can do a lot of things, and make anyone de-plane at anytime, but SHOULD they, in this case it could have been handled better to say the least
As for the security POOR training

Airlines don't want to IDB revenue passenger to put on crew members, however when a flight is completely full and a situation occurs that requires an airline to deadhead crew members to protect another flight then you are left with no choice but to IDB revenue passenger. As far as the compensation the agents followed protocol staring at $400 dollars plus overnight accommodation and meal vouchers, then upped it to $800 dollars.

When an agent is facing with an IDB situation because there are no or not enough volunteers they don't pick passenger randomly they look at who paid the least amount for their ticket or for revenue standby so while it may seem like agents came onboard the aircraft and just picked four people they didn't. While agents should have kept these passengers from boarding it takes time to go through the manifest to find the right passengers. So while one agent works on identifying the customers in the computer the other agent is boarding the aircraft. However most UAX flights only have one agent working the flight now they have to multi-task by boarding the aircraft to minimize the delay while trying to identify IDB passengers. And believe it or not this happens a lot and most time passenger will get off the aircraft when they are approached in this case one passenger refused and the situation spiraled out of control from there. I'm not sure what more the agent could have done to coax this passenger off the flight but I do agree after watching that video that the ORD airport security overreacted, but it is by no means a United gaffe or a PR nightmare.

Wasn't it a few months ago that a woman during the holidays that a woman was dragged off a Delta flight? That situation wasn't called a gaffe or a PR nightmare I'm mentioning DL to show that these types of situations happen however most times passenger when asked to get off a plane comply but when they don't comply airport security has to get involved. So while I do think airport security overreacted the passenger is also partly responsible because he failed to comply not only with the agents request to disembark but also when asked by airport security.

goCOgo wrote:

You sound like one of those cops that thinks they can arrest someone on the sole charge of resisting arrest.

Hear hear.

I too am getting a little tired of airlines using this "out" to treat their passengers shabbily, and this poor Gentleman was treated very shabbily indeed.

This poor passenger did everything he was supposed to do. Bought a ticket, arrived on time, passed security guidelines and restrictions, waited at the gate, boarded and sat down. Just because things were falling off the rails for this airline and their operation, does not give them an excuse to "bully" him off the aircraft.

It reminded me of school yard tactics where you are only powerful when you have your buddies to back you. And if you have the audacity to resist being bullied, you get beat up!

atcsundevil wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

The way security handled the situation was a gaffe, but that's really not UA's gaffe.

Do I understand correctly that you believe that you and I ought to be able to decline an IDB because we don't feel like dealing with the inconvenience? I'd point out also that ORD-SDF is a doable drive.

No, I don't think it should be an option, but if the passenger is putting them in a position where they have to forcibly remove him (as in this situation), then some sort of alternative would need to be devised. Physically dragging a non-violent individual off the aircraft isn't a proper solution.

He was non compliant with their orders. They did what they had to for removal.

Special snowflakes.

Rdh3e wrote:

goCOgo wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe..

It's called Involuntary DENIED BOARDING. He was not denied boarding. He was allowed to board, by all accounts. No one has claimed he rushed the gate agent. When your butt is in a seat, it's yours. With him is his seat, we have left Rule 25 of the CoC and are now in Rule 21: Refusal of Transport. That is the only clause that covers removing a passenger from the aircraft. And not a single enumerated reason in Rule 21 applies to this customer.

$400 was a pitiful offer for this situation. The compensation by law for a delay of this length is 400% of the fare up to $1,350 IN CASH. They could have offered way more. And that's what they should have done when they screwed up and let the bumped passengers board. .

It's not refusal to transport if they were going to rebook him later. Also, pretty sure the IDB compensation is $1600 max.

This is certainly embarrassing for the company, but ultimate responsibility for the violent outcome is on the security personnel.

It's refusal of transport because that is the only reason in the contact of carriage that allows them to remove someone from the aircraft (with the exception of a cause that applies to service animals.)

Read it for yourself. Nowhere else does it call for removing people. Only denied boarding, which does not apply once the passenger boarded.

https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx

Also, same document, Rule 25, Part A Section 4a - $1350 for delays over 2 hours.

United is the one that screwed up and forced security to be called. They don't get to wash their hands of this screw up.

Varsity1 wrote:

He sure doesn't look like a doctor.

If security asks you to leave the plane and you don't, don't expect them to sit around and plead with you like a child.

Nobody is entitled to a 'fair fight' with police or security. That's what the courts are for.

What the hell does a doctor "look like"? I'd love to hear your definition.

Keith2004 wrote:

Is UA legally in the wrong, probably not

That you think so, and many other supposedly operators of this industry are with you is absolutely shocking.
The passenger probably received a blow in his face looking at his bleeding.
OK, this is the hard and violent US, (Just been there) but so much violence on a Customer seems to me totally unacceptable. Even during an arrest for a more serious crime. In other Countries that won't happen so easily The two policeman would probably do not let the security guy (or anyone else) go so much hard on the passenger. I wonder which kind of law, if any empowered the "security" guy so much. Far West.