77H wrote:

The incident involving UA and a Mother who had told her infant in her lap was posted on the PR Incident thread but an article in Hawaii News Now states she as officially decided to sue.

Link below:
http://m.hawaiinewsnow.com/hawaiinewsno ... d=F1vpD9E9

In my opinion this lawsuit is obnoxious. UA apologized, refunded both her ticket and her son's as well as provided lounge access and an upgrade to business class on their return leg. She claims these tokens of good will were disingenuous and that she is suing to ensure something like this doesn't happen to anyone else.

Personally her reasons for suing seem disingenuous. She is suing for financial compensation for herself so this doesn't happen to others? While I can imagine that her 3.5 hour trip was made inconvenient and more uncomfortable I believe UA has more than tried to atone for the mistake. Both fares were fully refunded amounting to ~$2,000 according to the passenger when the story broke. She was also provided with lounge access and a complimentary upgrade from BOS to HNL. That upgrade alone for two passengers was probably another $2K.

I don't argue that UA staff didn't make a mistake in this incident but the mother mentioned that she did not immediately speak up at the gate when the issue first presented itself. All the passenger has claimed is that when she brought it to the attention of the flight attendant she was ignored. I think the key here is when did she finally speak up, once the door was closed, during taxi, after airborne.

Her lawyer also sounds like a piece of work. Sounds like an ambulance chaser that probably riled her up and talked her into suing hoping to take a sizeable chunk of the settlement. While I know UA will likely settle out of court I really wish they'd take this head one and counter for legal fees. UA acknowledged and apologized for their mistake, refunded their airfare and provided lounge access and upgrades on their return. Her and her scrappy lawyer are just looking for a quick payout under the half baked guise of championing for the people.

77H

ME720 wrote:

77H wrote:

The incident involving UA and a Mother who had told her infant in her lap was posted on the PR Incident thread but an article in Hawaii News Now states she as officially decided to sue.

Link below:
http://m.hawaiinewsnow.com/hawaiinewsno ... d=F1vpD9E9

In my opinion this lawsuit is obnoxious. UA apologized, refunded both her ticket and her son's as well as provided lounge access and an upgrade to business class on their return leg. She claims these tokens of good will were disingenuous and that she is suing to ensure something like this doesn't happen to anyone else.

Personally her reasons for suing seem disingenuous. She is suing for financial compensation for herself so this doesn't happen to others? While I can imagine that her 3.5 hour trip was made inconvenient and more uncomfortable I believe UA has more than tried to atone for the mistake. Both fares were fully refunded amounting to ~$2,000 according to the passenger when the story broke. She was also provided with lounge access and a complimentary upgrade from BOS to HNL. That upgrade alone for two passengers was probably another $2K.

I don't argue that UA staff didn't make a mistake in this incident but the mother mentioned that she did not immediately speak up at the gate when the issue first presented itself. All the passenger has claimed is that when she brought it to the attention of the flight attendant she was ignored. I think the key here is when did she finally speak up, once the door was closed, during taxi, after airborne.

Her lawyer also sounds like a piece of work. Sounds like an ambulance chaser that probably riled her up and talked her into suing hoping to take a sizeable chunk of the settlement. While I know UA will likely settle out of court I really wish they'd take this head one and counter for legal fees. UA acknowledged and apologized for their mistake, refunded their airfare and provided lounge access and upgrades on their return. Her and her scrappy lawyer are just looking for a quick payout under the half baked guise of championing for the people.

77H

She probably still felt "abused" even after all the perks and refunds. What happened is horrible, and UA will have to take responsibility. She is right, if the airline is made to pay a huge compensation such a thing will be unlikely to occur again, while if they get away with it by just refunding and bumping her up a travel class.. well, if it happens again, very cheap solution for the airline. On the other hand, I am not sure that UA would have refunded and upgraded her had she not gone public with her ordeal!

mjoelnir wrote:

Typical airline apologist you are 77H. How could she have told somebody at the gate? Should she have deboarded about the time the door is closed to tell the gate agent? She buys two tickets with two seats, checks in and boards. The airline than sends a stand by passenger that takes the seat she bought for her child. Why is it her fault that the airline made a mistake while scanning her boarding pas? No reaction from that pax that takes the seat from the child, nor from the F/A she complains to. That F/A seems to have looked on a FAA rule being broken.

mjoelnir wrote:

Typical airline apologist you are 77H. How could she have told somebody at the gate? Should she have deboarded about the time the door is closed to tell the gate agent? She buys two tickets with two seats, checks in and boards. The airline than sends a stand by passenger that takes the seat she bought for her child. Why is it her fault that the airline made a mistake while scanning her boarding pas? No reaction from that pax that takes the seat from the child, nor from the F/A she complains to. That F/A seems to have looked on a FAA rule being broken.

77H wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

Typical airline apologist you are 77H. How could she have told somebody at the gate? Should she have deboarded about the time the door is closed to tell the gate agent? She buys two tickets with two seats, checks in and boards. The airline than sends a stand by passenger that takes the seat she bought for her child. Why is it her fault that the airline made a mistake while scanning her boarding pas? No reaction from that pax that takes the seat from the child, nor from the F/A she complains to. That F/A seems to have looked on a FAA rule being broken.

I'm not apologizing for the airline. I have said in both posts that the airline made a mistake. It doesn't make me an apologist for expecting an adult woman to take charge of her situation. If she felt the airline staff had the wrong idea or made a mistake she should have spoken up the second the other passenger came to sit in a seat she paid for. People make mistakes. She admitted to not speaking up when the other passenger went to take her seat. If he was a stand by passenger, rev or non-rev he was most likely the last person on the aircraft. She could have pressed the call button and politely explained that her son was over 2 and that she paid for the seat. She admits to not doing that at first and no article I've ever read about this incident states when she finally spoke up to the FA that ignored her.

If she waited until the door closed to say anything it probably too late at that point. If she said something after the aircraft was underway or airborne it's too late. The FA shouldn't have ignored her if that really happened but once the plane pushes back what is the FA to do? Phone the captain and ask him to go back delaying that flight and the flight that was to use the gate next? Should the flight have diverted?

I personally think she should have politely spoken up because I believe most people would, especially us Americans who don't take kindly to inconveniences.

Now that we are on the same page as far as the airline was at fault, question for you. Do you believe that after the airline admitted fault, apologized and refunded both tickets and upgraded them on the return that she should still sue? Or do you think the airline made a good faith effort to put right their mistake ? Do you also believe that in light of all the airline did to apologize that she is truly suing for personal financial compensation because she doesn't want this to happen to anyone else like her and her lawyer claim? Or is she just riding the airline PR train to Paydayville?

77H

77H wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

Typical airline apologist you are 77H. How could she have told somebody at the gate? Should she have deboarded about the time the door is closed to tell the gate agent? She buys two tickets with two seats, checks in and boards. The airline than sends a stand by passenger that takes the seat she bought for her child. Why is it her fault that the airline made a mistake while scanning her boarding pas? No reaction from that pax that takes the seat from the child, nor from the F/A she complains to. That F/A seems to have looked on a FAA rule being broken.

P.s. Maybe next time let's try not calling names to someone expressing their personal opinion on a topic. You have a differing opinion, fine. I can respect that. If you want to share your opinions as to why you feel my opinion is wrong I can respect that to. What I don't respect is being called names from an adult hiding behind a keyboard.

77H

mjoelnir wrote:

77H wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

Typical airline apologist you are 77H. How could she have told somebody at the gate? Should she have deboarded about the time the door is closed to tell the gate agent? She buys two tickets with two seats, checks in and boards. The airline than sends a stand by passenger that takes the seat she bought for her child. Why is it her fault that the airline made a mistake while scanning her boarding pas? No reaction from that pax that takes the seat from the child, nor from the F/A she complains to. That F/A seems to have looked on a FAA rule being broken.

P.s. Maybe next time let's try not calling names to someone expressing their personal opinion on a topic. You have a differing opinion, fine. I can respect that. If you want to share your opinions as to why you feel my opinion is wrong I can respect that to. What I don't respect is being called names from an adult hiding behind a keyboard.

77H

You are right, I should not.

77H wrote:

ME720 wrote:

77H wrote:

The incident involving UA and a Mother who had told her infant in her lap was posted on the PR Incident thread but an article in Hawaii News Now states she as officially decided to sue.

Link below:
http://m.hawaiinewsnow.com/hawaiinewsno ... d=F1vpD9E9

In my opinion this lawsuit is obnoxious. UA apologized, refunded both her ticket and her son's as well as provided lounge access and an upgrade to business class on their return leg. She claims these tokens of good will were disingenuous and that she is suing to ensure something like this doesn't happen to anyone else.

Personally her reasons for suing seem disingenuous. She is suing for financial compensation for herself so this doesn't happen to others? While I can imagine that her 3.5 hour trip was made

inconvenient and more uncomfortable I believe UA has more than tried to atone for the mistake. Both fares were fully refunded amounting to ~$2,000 according to the passenger when the story broke. She was also provided with lounge access and a complimentary upgrade from BOS to HNL. That upgrade alone for two passengers was probably another $2K.

I don't argue that UA staff didn't make a mistake in this incident but the mother mentioned that she did not immediately speak up at the gate when the issue first presented itself. All the passenger has claimed is that when she brought it to the attention of the flight attendant she was ignored. I think the key here is when did she finally speak up, once the door was closed, during taxi, after airborne.

Pathetic reasoning! You probably work for a horrible
Her lawyer also sounds like a piece of work. Sounds like an ambulance chaser that probably riled her up and talked her into suing hoping to take a sizeable chunk of the settlement. While I know UA will likely settle out of court I really wish they'd take this head one and counter for legal fees. UA acknowledged and apologized for their mistake, refunded their airfare and provided lounge access and upgrades on their return. Her and her scrappy lawyer are just looking for a quick payout under the half baked guise of championing for the people.

77H

She probably still felt "abused" even after all the perks and refunds. What happened is horrible, and UA will have to take responsibility. She is right, if the airline is made to pay a huge compensation such a thing will be unlikely to occur again, while if they get away with it by just refunding and bumping her up a travel class.. well, if it happens again, very cheap solution for the airline. On the other hand, I am not sure that UA would have refunded and upgraded her had she not gone public with her ordeal!

What happened to her was horrible? She had to hold her 2 year, 3 month old child for 3.5 hrs. Uncomfortable and inconvenient, surely, but horrible? Parents traveling with infants up to two years old hold their children on longer flights than IAH to BOS. Growing up my parents held all their children on trips to and from the Midwest to Hawaii and back all the way up to the two year mark. I'm sure they would have done it past two if that was an option instead of paying for a seat.

United admitted to their mistake, apologized for it, compensated her for it and threw in additional perks that cost them money. Lounge access is not free and upgrading her and her son to business class is neither free, nor cheap. UA could have made a lot more selling those seats or upgrading customers with status, a perk mind you that keeps high spender customers loyal.

She admitted to initially not speaking up for her and her son and no article has mentioned when she finally decided to speak up. At that point it may have been too late for any staff to do something about the matter. Doesn't sound like it was brought up when staff initially came back to see if the son was onboard. Sounds like the staff involved assumed it was a lap child which was also their mistake. It could have been cleared up had she vocalized that she paid for a seat for him.

77H

77H wrote:

ME720 wrote:

77H wrote:

The incident involving UA and a Mother who had told her infant in her lap was posted on the PR Incident thread but an article in Hawaii News Now states she as officially decided to sue.

Link below:
http://m.hawaiinewsnow.com/hawaiinewsno ... d=F1vpD9E9

In my opinion this lawsuit is obnoxious. UA apologized, refunded both her ticket and her son's as well as provided lounge access and an upgrade to business class on their return leg. She claims these tokens of good will were disingenuous and that she is suing to ensure something like this doesn't happen to anyone else.

Personally her reasons for suing seem disingenuous. She is suing for financial compensation for herself so this doesn't happen to others? While I can imagine that her 3.5 hour trip was made inconvenient and more uncomfortable I believe UA has more than tried to atone for the mistake. Both fares were fully refunded amounting to ~$2,000 according to the passenger when the story broke. She was also provided with lounge access and a complimentary upgrade from BOS to HNL. That upgrade alone for two passengers was probably another $2K.

I don't argue that UA staff didn't make a mistake in this incident but the mother mentioned that she did not immediately speak up at the gate when the issue first presented itself. All the passenger has claimed is that when she brought it to the attention of the flight attendant she was ignored. I think the key here is when did she finally speak up, once the door was closed, during taxi, after airborne.

Her lawyer also sounds like a piece of work. Sounds like an ambulance chaser that probably riled her up and talked her into suing hoping to take a sizeable chunk of the settlement. While I know UA will likely settle out of court I really wish they'd take this head one and counter for legal fees. UA acknowledged and apologized for their mistake, refunded their airfare and provided lounge access and upgrades on their return. Her and her scrappy lawyer are just looking for a quick payout under the half baked guise of championing for the people.

77H

She probably still felt "abused" even after all the perks and refunds. What happened is horrible, and UA will have to take responsibility. She is right, if the airline is made to pay a huge compensation such a thing will be unlikely to occur again, while if they get away with it by just refunding and bumping her up a travel class.. well, if it happens again, very cheap solution for the airline. On the other hand, I am not sure that UA would have refunded and upgraded her had she not gone public with her ordeal!

What happened to her was horrible? She had to hold her 2 year, 3 month old child for 3.5 hrs. Uncomfortable and inconvenient, surely, but horrible? Parents traveling with infants up to two years old hold their children on longer flights than IAH to BOS. Growing up my parents held all their children on trips to and from the Midwest to Hawaii and back all the way up to the two year mark. I'm sure they would have done it past two if that was an option instead of paying for a seat.

United admitted to their mistake, apologized for it, compensated her for it and threw in additional perks that cost them money. Lounge access is not free and upgrading her and her son to business class is neither free, nor cheap. UA could have made a lot more selling those seats or upgrading customers with status, a perk mind you that keeps high spender customers loyal.

She admitted to initially not speaking up for her and her son and no article has mentioned when she finally decided to speak up. At that point it may have been too late for any staff to do something about the matter. Doesn't sound like it was brought up when staff initially came back to see if the son was onboard. Sounds like the staff involved assumed it was a lap child which was also their mistake. It could have been cleared up had she vocalized that she paid for a seat for him.

77H

77H wrote:

P.s. Maybe next time let's try not calling names to someone expressing their personal opinion on a topic. You have a differing opinion, fine. I can respect that. If you want to share your opinions as to why you feel my opinion is wrong I can respect that to. What I don't respect is being called names from an adult hiding behind a keyboard.

77H

TVNWZ wrote:

[I can tell you for sure, a child that size on your lap for that trip was excruciatingly horrible.

Aesma wrote:

There is no doubt that the airline made a mistake.

There is also no doubt that such a lawsuit should not happen, or only in a small claims court.

mjoelnir wrote:

After the airline has a history of beating up passengers that take charge of their situation? That action worked better to intimidate passengers than I would have believed.

Aptivaboy wrote:

I'm not a fan of frivolous lawsuits. However, neither am I a fan of corporations misbehaving. It may take a few lawsuits, either taken to a jury verdict or settled out of court, to wake UAL up and ensure that this never happens again. Let me give you an example. At my work, we had a serious pothole in the sidewalk outside of one of our buildings, deep but sloping and easily missed visually if you didn't know to look for it. Did admin fix it? Nope, it was cheaper to ignore the problem and if someone was hurt, to simply let workers comp handle it. Seriously. All of this changed when a visitor fell in it and sued for her medical expenses. I kid you not, there was a paving crew out there the very next day after the legal papers hit. I view UAL the same way. Offering a seat upgrade or a refund or whatever is all well and good, but doesn't actually fix the problem. Rather, the threat of losing money is what changes behaviors. I suspect UAL will offer a reasonable cash settlement, another apology, and a flurry of behind the scenes directives to flight attendants and gate agents will occur to ensure that this (hopefully) never happens again, especially if the passenger who took the boy's seat was a non-rev, as was theorized on this board when the incident first occurred.

AirAfreak wrote:

Aptivaboy wrote:

I'm not a fan of frivolous lawsuits. However, neither am I a fan of corporations misbehaving. It may take a few lawsuits, either taken to a jury verdict or settled out of court, to wake UAL up and ensure that this never happens again. Let me give you an example. At my work, we had a serious pothole in the sidewalk outside of one of our buildings, deep but sloping and easily missed visually if you didn't know to look for it. Did admin fix it? Nope, it was cheaper to ignore the problem and if someone was hurt, to simply let workers comp handle it. Seriously. All of this changed when a visitor fell in it and sued for her medical expenses. I kid you not, there was a paving crew out there the very next day after the legal papers hit. I view UAL the same way. Offering a seat upgrade or a refund or whatever is all well and good, but doesn't actually fix the problem. Rather, the threat of losing money is what changes behaviors. I suspect UAL will offer a reasonable cash settlement, another apology, and a flurry of behind the scenes directives to flight attendants and gate agents will occur to ensure that this (hopefully) never happens again, especially if the passenger who took the boy's seat was a non-rev, as was theorized on this board when the incident first occurred.

I agree with you 100%.

It's time to hold the airlines accountable. It's time to make them wake up and pay - frivolous or not. Passengers are finally speaking up. Not everyone can afford to charter their own plane, but at least we now have video recording devices and social media to bring these airlines to the courtrooms for their bad behavior.

Airline loyalty is slowly-diminishing thanks to all the basic things we used to see here in the good ole USA taken away from us year after year. I'm tired of hearing post-9/11 did "this" and post-9/11 did "that!"

There is no excuse for poor treatment of a paying passenger especially for piss-poor planning as in the case of Doctor Dao and the airline staff needing his seat to report to Louisville for duty. If you can afford to pay millions of dollars in airline executive bonuses, then you sure as hell can afford to charter a jet for those Louisville-bound flight attendants and crew or just cancel the damn flight!

Post-9/11 has been a constant excuse to where airport and inflight employees of the U.S.-based airlines have abused their power by taking advantage of these laws imposed by the administration of the Department of Homeland Security and the FAA. It's time for change. It's time to make some noise.

Not all passengers are angels, but I hope this lady wins a cool million just to prove a point. I would rather it her win additional cash compensation versus it going to another greedy airline executive.

It's funny how the tables turn.

AirAfreak wrote:

Aptivaboy wrote:

I'm not a fan of frivolous lawsuits. However, neither am I a fan of corporations misbehaving. It may take a few lawsuits, either taken to a jury verdict or settled out of court, to wake UAL up and ensure that this never happens again. Let me give you an example. At my work, we had a serious pothole in the sidewalk outside of one of our buildings, deep but sloping and easily missed visually if you didn't know to look for it. Did admin fix it? Nope, it was cheaper to ignore the problem and if someone was hurt, to simply let workers comp handle it. Seriously. All of this changed when a visitor fell in it and sued for her medical expenses. I kid you not, there was a paving crew out there the very next day after the legal papers hit. I view UAL the same way. Offering a seat upgrade or a refund or whatever is all well and good, but doesn't actually fix the problem. Rather, the threat of losing money is what changes behaviors. I suspect UAL will offer a reasonable cash settlement, another apology, and a flurry of behind the scenes directives to flight attendants and gate agents will occur to ensure that this (hopefully) never happens again, especially if the passenger who took the boy's seat was a non-rev, as was theorized on this board when the incident first occurred.

I agree with you 100%.

It's time to hold the airlines accountable. It's time to make them wake up and pay - frivolous or not. Passengers are finally speaking up. Not everyone can afford to charter their own plane, but at least we now have video recording devices and social media to bring these airlines to the courtrooms for their bad behavior.

Airline loyalty is slowly-diminishing thanks to all the basic things we used to see here in the good ole USA taken away from us year after year. I'm tired of hearing post-9/11 did "this" and post-9/11 did "that!"

There is no excuse for poor treatment of a paying passenger especially for piss-poor planning as in the case of Doctor Dao and the airline staff needing his seat to report to Louisville for duty. If you can afford to pay millions of dollars in airline executive bonuses, then you sure as hell can afford to charter a jet for those Louisville-bound flight attendants and crew or just cancel the damn flight!

Post-9/11 has been a constant excuse to where airport and inflight employees of the U.S.-based airlines have abused their power by taking advantage of these laws imposed by the administration of the Department of Homeland Security and the FAA. It's time for change. It's time to make some noise.

Not all passengers are angels, but I hope this lady wins a cool million just to prove a point. I would rather it her win additional cash compensation versus it going to another greedy airline executive.

It's funny how the tables turn.

77H wrote:

AirAfreak wrote:

Aptivaboy wrote:

I'm not a fan of frivolous lawsuits. However, neither am I a fan of corporations misbehaving. It may take a few lawsuits, either taken to a jury verdict or settled out of court, to wake UAL up and ensure that this never happens again. Let me give you an example. At my work, we had a serious pothole in the sidewalk outside of one of our buildings, deep but sloping and easily missed visually if you didn't know to look for it. Did admin fix it? Nope, it was cheaper to ignore the problem and if someone was hurt, to simply let workers comp handle it. Seriously. All of this changed when a visitor fell in it and sued for her medical expenses. I kid you not, there was a paving crew out there the very next day after the legal papers hit. I view UAL the same way. Offering a seat upgrade or a refund or whatever is all well and good, but doesn't actually fix the problem. Rather, the threat of losing money is what changes behaviors. I suspect UAL will offer a reasonable cash settlement, another apology, and a flurry of behind the scenes directives to flight attendants and gate agents will occur to ensure that this (hopefully) never happens again, especially if the passenger who took the boy's seat was a non-rev, as was theorized on this board when the incident first occurred.

I agree with you 100%.

It's time to hold the airlines accountable. It's time to make them wake up and pay - frivolous or not. Passengers are finally speaking up. Not everyone can afford to charter their own plane, but at least we now have video recording devices and social media to bring these airlines to the courtrooms for their bad behavior.

Airline loyalty is slowly-diminishing thanks to all the basic things we used to see here in the good ole USA taken away from us year after year. I'm tired of hearing post-9/11 did "this" and post-9/11 did "that!"

There is no excuse for poor treatment of a paying passenger especially for piss-poor planning as in the case of Doctor Dao and the airline staff needing his seat to report to Louisville for duty. If you can afford to pay millions of dollars in airline executive bonuses, then you sure as hell can afford to charter a jet for those Louisville-bound flight attendants and crew or just cancel the damn flight!

Post-9/11 has been a constant excuse to where airport and inflight employees of the U.S.-based airlines have abused their power by taking advantage of these laws imposed by the administration of the Department of Homeland Security and the FAA. It's time for change. It's time to make some noise.

Not all passengers are angels, but I hope this lady wins a cool million just to prove a point. I would rather it her win additional cash compensation versus it going to another greedy airline executive.

It's funny how the tables turn.

With that in mind lets hope the airlines start to seek financial compensation for disruptions caused by unruly passengers (like HA) and for damages to aircraft caused by passengers. For instance, a customer breaking an bin while forcing their carry on in the overhead or for children using pens and markers on the tray tables and sidewalls. Or perhaps come after passengers who make an extraordinary mess while on board. I was on a SFO-OGG flight 2 months ago where a lav had to be place inop due to fecal matter smeared all along the sidewalls of the lav. I was the unfortunate passenger who discovered it. I immediately notified the FA. They later became aware of the culprit. Should that customer receive a bill for cleaning and sanitation? The knife cuts both ways.

I'm not sure how much other posters travel, or how much time the spend observing fellow passengers but I travel quite frequently and some of the behaviors I've seen from passengers are quite abhorrent. Common sense, respect and basic decency seem to be left curbside. I always try to be very friendly and polite to airline staff and fellow passengers and I have never had a bad experience on UA or any airline for that matter.

77H

NeBaNi wrote:

I agree the lawsuit is frivolous, but I also agree with the idea of suing United for something like this. IMO, this lawsuit should net very little money for the mother, but United should be fined for allowing a child older than two years old to sit on the mother's lap for the whole flight. That way, United improves its practices so this doesn't happen in the future, the wronged mother gets fairly compensated, the industry improves, and we move on...

B737900ER wrote:

Imagine you go to a restaurant and order a steak. There happened to be some miscommunication between the wait staff and the kitchen, and they bring you a hamburger. After you eat the hamburger you complain to the restaurant and they admit the mistake, apologize, refund the meal, and then give you meals in excess of what you originally ordered. Should you then sue them?

If someone sues everytime a business makes a mistake, there won't be many businesses left. You can't expect a company who transports millions of people annually to have 100% positive customer interactions. It's just not reasonable.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

Perhaps we should go one step further and have the fine be on the flight crew member(s) that allowed it to happen?

PlanesNTrains wrote:

The only thing to add would be that the hamburger was actually not legal to serve, and the restaurant goes out of it's way to make sure that you know that in advance and so pay for a steak.

ASFlyer wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

After the airline has a history of beating up passengers that take charge of their situation? That action worked better to intimidate passengers than I would have believed.

United doesn't have a "history of beating up passengers" that "take charge of their situation". The Chicago Airport Authority Police Department does - and they didn't see it as someone "taking charge of their situation", rather they likely viewed it as someone that was defiantly refusing to leave the private property of a business that no longer wanted to serve them. Was United right in what they did? Absolutely not. United doesn't have a team of goons that go around beating up their passengers though. They called the airport police to come and remove the passenger. I'm quite sure they didn't ask the police to "rough em up a little on the way out".

B737900ER wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

Perhaps we should go one step further and have the fine be on the flight crew member(s) that allowed it to happen?

How does that work? Do flight crews accompany you to the lav to make sure you don't flush your tablecloth down the toilet? Does the airline provide baby sitters so your kids don't write on side walls, tray tables, and windows?

Flight crews don't "allow" bad behavior, people behave badly, and they are doing so now more and more and growing bolder doing it.

B737900ER wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

The only thing to add would be that the hamburger was actually not legal to serve, and the restaurant goes out of it's way to make sure that you know that in advance and so pay for a steak.

A mistake was made. Have you ever made a mistake? They happen. One happened here. The airline admitted it. They apologized, they gave the money back, they received no extra revenue from the mistake, and they upgraded the passenger on the return. Please show me the malicious intent involved where a lawsuit for damages is necessary.

NeBaNi wrote:

I agree the lawsuit is frivolous, but I also agree with the idea of suing United for something like this. IMO, this lawsuit should net very little money for the mother, but United should be fined for allowing a child older than two years old to sit on the mother's lap for the whole flight. That way, United improves its practices so this doesn't happen in the future, the wronged mother gets fairly compensated, the industry improves, and we move on...

rwsea wrote:

Sounds like this lady was sheepish and afraid to be more assertive at the time; afraid of confrontation. She had paid for two seats and had two boarding passes, there's no reason she should have just sat there and given it away, then deciding to sue later. Why was it so difficult to call over a FA and show them the two boarding passes when someone else tried to sit down? Whenever I've had people seated in my seat, I either ask them what's going on or go to a FA. Problem always gets sorted out within seconds.

mjoelnir wrote:

ASFlyer wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

After the airline has a history of beating up passengers that take charge of their situation? That action worked better to intimidate passengers than I would have believed.

United doesn't have a "history of beating up passengers" that "take charge of their situation". The Chicago Airport Authority Police Department does - and they didn't see it as someone "taking charge of their situation", rather they likely viewed it as someone that was defiantly refusing to leave the private property of a business that no longer wanted to serve them. Was United right in what they did? Absolutely not. United doesn't have a team of goons that go around beating up their passengers though. They called the airport police to come and remove the passenger. I'm quite sure they didn't ask the police to "rough em up a little on the way out".

If you hire a goon to beat somebody up, you are still responsible. UA had no right to deplane a seated passenger with a valid boarding pass, it is to late in the process. So yes UA has a history of beating up passengers who stand on their rights.

mjoelnir wrote:

Typical airline apologist you are 77H.

mjoelnir wrote:

rwsea wrote:

Sounds like this lady was sheepish and afraid to be more assertive at the time; afraid of confrontation. She had paid for two seats and had two boarding passes, there's no reason she should have just sat there and given it away, then deciding to sue later. Why was it so difficult to call over a FA and show them the two boarding passes when someone else tried to sit down? Whenever I've had people seated in my seat, I either ask them what's going on or go to a FA. Problem always gets sorted out within seconds.

She did tell the FA. The comment from the FA was, that the flight was fully booked.

ASFlyer wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

ASFlyer wrote:

United doesn't have a "history of beating up passengers" that "take charge of their situation". The Chicago Airport Authority Police Department does - and they didn't see it as someone "taking charge of their situation", rather they likely viewed it as someone that was defiantly refusing to leave the private property of a business that no longer wanted to serve them. Was United right in what they did? Absolutely not. United doesn't have a team of goons that go around beating up their passengers though. They called the airport police to come and remove the passenger. I'm quite sure they didn't ask the police to "rough em up a little on the way out".

If you hire a goon to beat somebody up, you are still responsible. UA had no right to deplane a seated passenger with a valid boarding pass, it is to late in the process. So yes UA has a history of beating up passengers who stand on their rights.

They didn't hire a "goon to beat someone up", anymore than someone that called the Police because they see a house broken into hires a cop to come kill someone. The police act as they wish and not one person on the plane would have been able to step in and stop them once they started dragging that man out of the plane. Try stopping a cop next time you see them pulling someone over and see how that goes for you. So no, United does not have a history of beating up passengers who stand on their rights. And lets not also forget that the passenger in question acted irrationally also. Maybe you would let it get to the point where you're being drug down an airplane aisle but I would have stopped short of that.

bgm wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

Typical airline apologist you are 77H.

I'm pretty sure 77H works for United, hence the cringe-worthy apologist mentality. Can their slogan "Flyer Friendly" become any more ironic?

I hope this woman takes UA to the cleaners. It's the only language these big airlines understand, and the only way to stop them pulling off this sh!t again.

Money talks.

mjoelnir wrote:

ASFlyer wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

If you hire a goon to beat somebody up, you are still responsible. UA had no right to deplane a seated passenger with a valid boarding pass, it is to late in the process. So yes UA has a history of beating up passengers who stand on their rights.

They didn't hire a "goon to beat someone up", anymore than someone that called the Police because they see a house broken into hires a cop to come kill someone. The police act as they wish and not one person on the plane would have been able to step in and stop them once they started dragging that man out of the plane. Try stopping a cop next time you see them pulling someone over and see how that goes for you. So no, United does not have a history of beating up passengers who stand on their rights. And lets not also forget that the passenger in question acted irrationally also. Maybe you would let it get to the point where you're being drug down an airplane aisle but I would have stopped short of that.

They organised the beating, they looked on while the police beat the doctor up, they did not intervene to say it has gone to far. Did they tell the police not to get to physical? What did the UA staff tell the police? Did they lie to the police, to get him removed? Why do you compare it to a house broken in? What crime did the doctor commit?
So in what way did the good doctor act irrational? Is it irrational to stand on ones right, because than the goon squad is called to beat you up? If somebody offers to remove you illegally by force you comply?

Yes UA has got a history of beating up passengers that stand on their rights. Even that lady mentioned it and was afraid to make further fuss about the situation

ASFlyer wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

ASFlyer wrote:

They didn't hire a "goon to beat someone up", anymore than someone that called the Police because they see a house broken into hires a cop to come kill someone. The police act as they wish and not one person on the plane would have been able to step in and stop them once they started dragging that man out of the plane. Try stopping a cop next time you see them pulling someone over and see how that goes for you. So no, United does not have a history of beating up passengers who stand on their rights. And lets not also forget that the passenger in question acted irrationally also. Maybe you would let it get to the point where you're being drug down an airplane aisle but I would have stopped short of that.

They organised the beating, they looked on while the police beat the doctor up, they did not intervene to say it has gone to far. Did they tell the police not to get to physical? What did the UA staff tell the police? Did they lie to the police, to get him removed? Why do you compare it to a house broken in? What crime did the doctor commit?
So in what way did the good doctor act irrational? Is it irrational to stand on ones right, because than the goon squad is called to beat you up? If somebody offers to remove you illegally by force you comply?

Yes UA has got a history of beating up passengers that stand on their rights. Even that lady mentioned it and was afraid to make further fuss about the situation

United did no such thing. But gotta love the enthusiasm with which you try to make United look like a bunch of thugs. Organizing a beating would mean they were aware that it was going to happen. They weren't Again, once the police start getting involved, it's between that man and the police. Try intervening in a police situation and telling the police that they're behaving poorly and see how that goes for you. The police were called because he was asked to leave and refused. At that point he was trespassing on private property. United owns the plane, it's their property and they reserve the right to kick off whoever they want. It's poor business to do so, but that's their business. Consumers can vote with their wallets. Nobody's civil rights were being violated - air travel is not a civil right, or any other kind of right. It wasn't illegal to remove him, his actions were the reason force was used.

Also, to answer your question - you suggest that United is responsible for whatever the police do once they've called them - my comparison to a private citizen that calls the police is easy - you suggest United is responsible, how is the private citizen not also responsible for the police actions? Neither are actually, but that's your assertion

77H wrote:

bgm wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

Typical airline apologist you are 77H.

I'm pretty sure 77H works for United, hence the cringe-worthy apologist mentality. Can their slogan "Flyer Friendly" become any more ironic?

I hope this woman takes UA to the cleaners. It's the only language these big airlines understand, and the only way to stop them pulling off this sh!t again.

Money talks.

What about me expressing my personal opinions on this incident are cringe worthy to you? I read the articles and interpreted them in my own way, and expressed my opinions on the subject matter. It matters not what airline I work for. If this exact scenario happened on any airline, or a similar scenario happened in any industry I would likely come to the same conclusion. I am not an airline or OEM fan boy, I am not pro airline or pro passenger. There have been plenty of airline threads I have called out the airlines in, including threads involving United. You don't know me, know where I work, or how I interact with people at my place of employment.

My posts on this thread and others are derived from my interpretation of the reports and articles I've read and placed against personal experiences traveling or personal feelings about the situation. Just because my interpretation of the event isn't in line with yours doesn't make it cringe-worthy, or give me an apologist mentality.

My personal views are that the airline, in this case UA, made a mistake, admitted fault, apologized and took several steps to atone. More than that, my personal views are that the mistake airline staff made was compounded by the passenger not speaking up. Please explain to me how those personal opinions are cringe-worthy or how those personal opinions relate in anyway to where I may work. It is one thing to disagree with my personal opinions and beliefs and offer up counter arguments as to why my beliefs are incorrect. Its another to hide behind your keyboard on slander someone you don't know.

So please, provide me with specific input as to why my beliefs are cringe worthy or tantamount to an apologist mentality.

77H

SFOThinker wrote:

I despise lawsuit abuse, but United needs to feel some pain here in order to prompt system-wide changes in rules to prevent repetition. There is only one language they understand. The compensation they offered of lounge access and business class upgrades cost them no cash, just opportunity costs, assuming the lounges were full and business class was sold out. The refund cost some cash, but not much.

mjoelnir wrote:

77H wrote:

bgm wrote:

I'm pretty sure 77H works for United, hence the cringe-worthy apologist mentality. Can their slogan "Flyer Friendly" become any more ironic?

I hope this woman takes UA to the cleaners. It's the only language these big airlines understand, and the only way to stop them pulling off this sh!t again.

Money talks.

What about me expressing my personal opinions on this incident are cringe worthy to you? I read the articles and interpreted them in my own way, and expressed my opinions on the subject matter. It matters not what airline I work for. If this exact scenario happened on any airline, or a similar scenario happened in any industry I would likely come to the same conclusion. I am not an airline or OEM fan boy, I am not pro airline or pro passenger. There have been plenty of airline threads I have called out the airlines in, including threads involving United. You don't know me, know where I work, or how I interact with people at my place of employment.

My posts on this thread and others are derived from my interpretation of the reports and articles I've read and placed against personal experiences traveling or personal feelings about the situation. Just because my interpretation of the event isn't in line with yours doesn't make it cringe-worthy, or give me an apologist mentality.

My personal views are that the airline, in this case UA, made a mistake, admitted fault, apologized and took several steps to atone. More than that, my personal views are that the mistake airline staff made was compounded by the passenger not speaking up. Please explain to me how those personal opinions are cringe-worthy or how those personal opinions relate in anyway to where I may work. It is one thing to disagree with my personal opinions and beliefs and offer up counter arguments as to why my beliefs are incorrect. Its another to hide behind your keyboard on slander someone you don't know.

So please, provide me with specific input as to why my beliefs are cringe worthy or tantamount to an apologist mentality.

77H

Cringe worthy is your trying to put blame on the passenger. The passenger did speak up, talked to the FA, the FA did not react.

Can you tell us what the initial reaction of UA was when the passenger complained after the flight? Did UA do something before the story was on the news?