Notices

United Airlines

 
Old 04-11-2017, 10:10 AM
  #81  
Moderator
 
Mizouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Las Vegas
Age: 35
Posts: 56,788
Received 1,378 Likes on 974 Posts
Mizouse is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 10:15 AM
  #82  
Stay Metal
 
Doom878's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Age: 40
Posts: 25,261
Received 821 Likes on 643 Posts
Originally Posted by leedogg View Post


Originally Posted by thoiboi View Post
I believe that is true as well.

But there is nothing that says the passengers must accept that. In situations like this, typically they keep going. I've personally seen it gone up to $1500.
I was responding to Nicks because I don't think he knew the overnight was offered.
Doom878 is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 10:23 AM
  #83  
Registered Member
 
Nicks2001tl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: New Berlin, WI.
Age: 48
Posts: 3,515
Received 505 Likes on 378 Posts
Stay classy United.........
Nicks2001tl is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 10:25 AM
  #84  
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
 
justnspace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 81,214
Received 14,176 Likes on 10,524 Posts
lol at dooms suggestion of ALM.

justnspace is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 10:26 AM
  #85  
RAR
 
leedogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: DC Metro
Age: 42
Posts: 10,524
Received 1,089 Likes on 625 Posts
leedogg is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 10:32 AM
  #86  
_
 
AZuser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 16,417
Received 2,372 Likes on 1,422 Posts
Originally Posted by srika View Post
I'll explain: he was not so chemically balanced upstairs. This is why he caused a ruckus. Most all passengers would have got off the plane when asked by officials.
Being convicted of issuing "fraudulent prescriptions for controlled substances" and ing a "patient who used to work for his practice" = not so chemically balanced upstairs???
AZuser is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 10:42 AM
  #87  
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
 
justnspace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 81,214
Received 14,176 Likes on 10,524 Posts
used marijuana ONE time.....
shrieks for life..


NEVER inject your marijuana
justnspace is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 10:58 AM
  #88  
Moderator Alumnus
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Ronkonkoma, NY
Age: 46
Posts: 4,116
Received 52 Likes on 44 Posts
From this post: https://www.reddit.com/r/airplanes/c...enger/dg3eqzt/

=====================================
Lawyer here. This myth that passengers don't have rights needs to go away, ASAP. You are dead wrong when saying that United legally kicked him off the plane.
  1. First of all, it's airline spin to call this an overbooking. The statutory provision granting them the ability to deny boarding is about "OVERSALES", specifically defines as booking more reserved confirmed seats than there are available. This is not what happened. They did not overbook the flight; they had a fully booked flight, and not only did everyone already have a reserved confirmed seat, they were all sitting in them. The law allowing them to denying boarding in the event of an oversale does not apply.
  2. Even if it did apply, the law is unambiguously clear that airlines have to give preference to everyone with reserved confirmed seats when choosing to involuntarily deny boarding. They have to always choose the solution that will affect the least amount of reserved confirmed seats. This rule is straightforward, and United makes very clear in their own contract of carriage that employees of their own or of other carriers may be denied boarding without compensation because they do not have reserved confirmed seats. On its face, it's clear that what they did was illegal-- they gave preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, in violation of 14 CFR 250.2a.
  3. Furthermore, even if you try and twist this into a legal application of 250.2a and say that United had the right to deny him boarding in the event of an overbooking; they did NOT have the right to kick him off the plane. Their contract of carriage highlights there is a complete difference in rights after you've boarded and sat on the plane, and Rule 21 goes over the specific scenarios where you could get kicked off. NONE of them apply here. He did absolutely nothing wrong and shouldn't have been targeted. He's going to leave with a hefty settlement after this fiasco.
=====================================

But here's the thing - it's just corporate greed.
I'll admit upfront that I've gotten screwed over by United more than all other airlines combined, so I'm biased.

Yes, they apparently offered a non-interesting amount which nobody accepted.
Instead of increasing their offer (and apparently other passengers have said that if they offered $1300, they would have taken it) ,
they chose to do THIS instead. Now it has gone public, and they've cost themselves FAR more because now there are people swearing off United
and/or cancelling flights. Did nobody think "Gee, is this a good idea? Won't we get burned by this?". Of course not.
It's just arrogance.

I recall a Long time ago, I was about take some flight, and they were also overbooked. So of course, they offered a voucher.
Nobody took it. They increased the offer. Nobody took it. They kept increasing and increasing it. I forgot what I had to do
the next day, but I recall thinking, "Man, I wish I could take it". Finally someone took it.
ChodTheWacko is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:01 AM
  #89  
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (5)
 
KaMLuNg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Age: 36
Posts: 15,454
Received 927 Likes on 675 Posts
Originally Posted by srika View Post
Post from a friend who has been a flight attendant for United for a couple decades. Before you jump to more conclusions though, I am not personally affiliated with United, nor am I invested in anything regarding them. I rarely ever fly them, in fact I hadn't used them since the 90's, until this past March when I took them on a flight to Vegas, just because the booking site went that way.

5. The flight wasn't originally oversold until the inbound crew encountered a missed connect due to weather impacting operations and legality issues which is why these 4 inflight personnels had to get onto this particular flight to avoid a cancellation of the morning flight as this particular flight from Chicago only flies once at 3pm.
the legality issue those four crew members faced was timing out and not being able to work... forcing United to have to either short call another crew or cancel the flight they were supposed to work... every passenger is just a number... i'm going to sacrifice your seat and piss off 1 person vs pissing off a whole flight of 100 people... or have to pony up paying another crew to cover...

IMHO the inbound crew got held up due to weather... what happens when i (paying passenger) get delayed due to weather and i miss my connection? do you then bump someone on the next available flight for me even though i'm a paying customer? NO. you put me on standby until you have open seats... why shouldn't it work like that for commuting employees??? maybe i'm missing it...
KaMLuNg is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:04 AM
  #90  
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (5)
 
KaMLuNg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Age: 36
Posts: 15,454
Received 927 Likes on 675 Posts
Chod is right.. the process just scream corporate greed... if they went to $2k or even a $3k voucher... it would have been much cheaper than the beating their stock is taking...

United?s stock is falling 3.7% and wiping $830 million off the airline?s market cap - MarketWatch
KaMLuNg is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:06 AM
  #91  
Senior Moderator
 
srika's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 54,007
Received 7,403 Likes on 3,974 Posts
After reading further today, my attitude on the matter has shifted towards the passenger. It does look like United was in the very wrong here, and I am seeing reports that once you buy an airline ticket you cannot be removed from a plane once you have taken your seat.... It's not looking good for United.

I might even take the stance that the doctor "took one for the team", as this is going to setup huge precedents that will likely benefit customers..... assuming ticket prices don't skyrocket, which they could...
srika is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:10 AM
  #92  
Chapter Leader
(Northeast Florida)
iTrader: (1)
 
gatrhumpy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Age: 39
Posts: 33,731
Received 1,210 Likes on 814 Posts
gatrhumpy is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:12 AM
  #93  
Registered Member
 
oonowindoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 15,779
Received 2,587 Likes on 1,810 Posts
Originally Posted by thoiboi View Post
Two wrongs don't make a right. that's not hindsight bias... Like many people here have said already, overbooking is common. Airlines do it all the time because more often than not, people will mis-connect or won't show up. Regardless of the 'amount' making business sense, they take a risk every day by overbooking. Now that they have confirmed passengers which are overbooked, they should have resorted to voluntary denied boarding aka upping the compensation before forcing people 'at random' to not fly.

The whole, "should have listened to avoid getting your face smashed into an armrest" argument is what I use during the BLM/cops with excessive force movement but you also have to look back at the bigger picture and see what had happened beforehand.
actually in this incident, i disagree. BLM/Cops or protest are protected by the Constitution.

When an private airline asks someone to get the hell off their plane, that is their right. If they don't offer compensation, then that is another story. If they do, as unreasonable and unethical it may sound, suck it up and get off the plane and hoping to get more $$ out of them for your inconviennce.

I would ask for a free international round trip tix, business class of course.
oonowindoo is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:15 AM
  #94  
RAR
 
leedogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: DC Metro
Age: 42
Posts: 10,524
Received 1,089 Likes on 625 Posts
Originally Posted by srika View Post
After reading further today, my attitude on the matter has shifted towards the passenger. It does look like United was in the very wrong here, and I am seeing reports that once you buy an airline ticket you cannot be removed from a plane once you have taken your seat.... It's not looking good for United.

I might even take the stance that the doctor "took one for the team", as this is going to setup huge precedents that will likely benefit customers..... assuming ticket prices don't skyrocket, which they could...
supply and demand will stay the same so I dont see why prices will go up. The airlines will learn how to manage incidents like this better or they'll pay the price, it's as simple as that.
leedogg is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:17 AM
  #95  
Moderator
 
thoiboi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SoCal, CA
Posts: 38,427
Received 5,934 Likes on 4,758 Posts
Originally Posted by oonowindoo View Post
actually in this incident, i disagree. BLM/Cops or protest are protected by the Constitution.

When an private airline asks someone to get the hell off their plane, that is their right. If they don't offer compensation, then that is another story. If they do, as unreasonable and unethical it may sound, suck it up and get off the plane and hoping to get more $$ out of them for your inconviennce.

I would ask for a free international round trip tix, business class of course.
But the private airline also has a Contract of Carriage which would be the equivalent "Constitution" in this case. They made their beds and now they're sleeping in them. I'm curious to see which lawyer takes up this case for him.

Also, that is your price. Everyone has their own. I'm sure someone would have done it for a bit more than $800
thoiboi is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:19 AM
  #96  
Registered Member
 
Nicks2001tl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: New Berlin, WI.
Age: 48
Posts: 3,515
Received 505 Likes on 378 Posts
The plot thickens, now United has pissed off China and Vietnam, Trump can`t even do that.

Outrage has erupted on Chinese and Vietnamese social media over the removal of a passenger from an overbooked United Airlines flight.
United Airlines: Chinese and Vietnamese anger at passenger removal - BBC News
Nicks2001tl is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:20 AM
  #97  
Senior Moderator
 
Yumcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 147,254
Received 15,156 Likes on 9,406 Posts
If this was a , would it be wacist and really horrid of me to think there would've been riots...?
Yumcha is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:22 AM
  #98  
Moderator
 
thoiboi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SoCal, CA
Posts: 38,427
Received 5,934 Likes on 4,758 Posts
Originally Posted by Nicks2001tl View Post
The plot thickens, now United has pissed off China and Vietnam, Trump can`t even do that.



United Airlines: Chinese and Vietnamese anger at passenger removal - BBC News

god damnit

Dear world,

Even as a please don't make this about race... it was NOT about race.

Last edited by thoiboi; 04-11-2017 at 11:25 AM.
thoiboi is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:24 AM
  #99  
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (5)
 
KaMLuNg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Age: 36
Posts: 15,454
Received 927 Likes on 675 Posts
don't worry they will... because it's too easy not to...
KaMLuNg is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:27 AM
  #100  
Registered Member
 
Nicks2001tl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: New Berlin, WI.
Age: 48
Posts: 3,515
Received 505 Likes on 378 Posts
Originally Posted by thoiboi View Post
god damnit

Dear world,

Even as a please don't make this about race... it was NOT about race.
I know that and you know that but the social media crowd has there own opinion. You know FB and Twitter the greatest news source besides real news.
Nicks2001tl is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:28 AM
  #101  
_
 
AZuser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 16,417
Received 2,372 Likes on 1,422 Posts
Originally Posted by srika View Post
After reading further today, my attitude on the matter has shifted towards the not so chemically balanced upstairs passenger.
AZuser is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:33 AM
  #102  
Senior Moderator
 
Yumcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 147,254
Received 15,156 Likes on 9,406 Posts
It's always about wace.



They moved him out cuz he was ...and we are too polite and nice.
Yumcha is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:42 AM
  #103  
Registered Member
 
Nicks2001tl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: New Berlin, WI.
Age: 48
Posts: 3,515
Received 505 Likes on 378 Posts
Nobody wants to blame an enormous Black Man for yanking this passenger but the few that have a cellphone at there disposal want to make it about race, Lame!
Nicks2001tl is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:42 AM
  #104  
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (5)
 
juniorbean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The QC
Posts: 28,417
Received 1,662 Likes on 1,012 Posts
Originally Posted by ChodTheWacko View Post
From this post: https://www.reddit.com/r/airplanes/c...enger/dg3eqzt/

=====================================
Lawyer here. This myth that passengers don't have rights needs to go away, ASAP. You are dead wrong when saying that United legally kicked him off the plane.
  1. First of all, it's airline spin to call this an overbooking. The statutory provision granting them the ability to deny boarding is about "OVERSALES", specifically defines as booking more reserved confirmed seats than there are available. This is not what happened. They did not overbook the flight; they had a fully booked flight, and not only did everyone already have a reserved confirmed seat, they were all sitting in them. The law allowing them to denying boarding in the event of an oversale does not apply.
  2. Even if it did apply, the law is unambiguously clear that airlines have to give preference to everyone with reserved confirmed seats when choosing to involuntarily deny boarding. They have to always choose the solution that will affect the least amount of reserved confirmed seats. This rule is straightforward, and United makes very clear in their own contract of carriage that employees of their own or of other carriers may be denied boarding without compensation because they do not have reserved confirmed seats. On its face, it's clear that what they did was illegal-- they gave preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, in violation of 14 CFR 250.2a.
  3. Furthermore, even if you try and twist this into a legal application of 250.2a and say that United had the right to deny him boarding in the event of an overbooking; they did NOT have the right to kick him off the plane. Their contract of carriage highlights there is a complete difference in rights after you've boarded and sat on the plane, and Rule 21 goes over the specific scenarios where you could get kicked off. NONE of them apply here. He did absolutely nothing wrong and shouldn't have been targeted. He's going to leave with a hefty settlement after this fiasco.
=====================================

I recall a Long time ago, I was about take some flight, and they were also overbooked. So of course, they offered a voucher.
Nobody took it. They increased the offer. Nobody took it. They kept increasing and increasing it. I forgot what I had to do
the next day, but I recall thinking, "Man, I wish I could take it". Finally someone took it.
I was going to post that exact reply as I had read it earlier. It seems to directly conflict with what underdog posted on page 1. Interesting to see all of the different point of views. Bottom line is that whatever the legality of it... the PR of it is a shit-show.

I think the biggest issue is that this was not an overbooked flight. Everyone who paid had a seat. It was an issue with crew needing to be in a different location. I'm sure there are several ways United could have handled this without having to bump paying customers involuntarily... but that's the route they went with and now it's going to cost them a lot more than a voucher...
juniorbean is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:46 AM
  #105  
Moderator
 
thoiboi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SoCal, CA
Posts: 38,427
Received 5,934 Likes on 4,758 Posts
Agreed.


100% not an overbooking issue... Overbooking IS an issue, but not the one at hand.


After delving into United's contract of carriage and 14 CFR 250 (federal statute regarding denied boarding involuntarily)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/part-250 United will most likely be liable to this passenger. There is a completely separate section for removal of passengers from denied boarding on their contract of carriage. The only relevant section regarding refusal of transport or removal reads as follows.

"Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond UAs control including, but not limited to, acts of God, force majeure, strikes, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, terrorist activities, or disturbances, whether actual, threatened, or reported."

This is a stretch to claim that a force majeure is the reason for only his removal and not everyone else on the plane.

Then there is the federal statute regarding denied boarding. However, he wasn't denied boarding, he was already on the plane. That is different from being removed from the plane. The real reason this matters, is because the contract of carriage differentiates between the two. United themselves interpret the difference between removal from a flight and being denied board.

Additionally, being denied board due to oversales is hard to claim once paid passenger are all boarded. The rerouted crew were added after all the passengers had boarded.

Regardless, United most likely has opened themselves to some big liability. Even though the government enforcement caused the physical harm, if not for United's improper removal the harm would never have occurred. Additionally any emotional harm suffered as a result of this situation increases his likely award/settlement.

Now back to more important stuff...
thoiboi is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:48 AM
  #106  
Q('.')=O
iTrader: (1)
 
imj0257's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: DFW, TX
Age: 35
Posts: 22,853
Received 626 Likes on 449 Posts
imj0257 is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:56 AM
  #107  
Moderator Alumnus
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Ronkonkoma, NY
Age: 46
Posts: 4,116
Received 52 Likes on 44 Posts
Originally Posted by juniorbean View Post
I'm sure there are several ways United could have handled this without having to bump paying customers involuntarily... but that's the route they went with and now it's going to cost them a lot more than a voucher...
You know, what's funny?

If they had announced:
"Look, there is a flight emergency, we really need to get these pilots/crew to an airplane
at the destination airport. " and then jacked up the voucher to say, $3000, then I could totally see:

1) People would have been freakin' fighting over the vouchers
2) People would be posting online about this amazing voucher someone got - free pub
3) The people "kicked off" would have thought they won the lottery
4) I could almost imagine more sales by people hoping to get in on the action

Instead...... no.
Let's try to save some bucks, and violently drag someone off. What could go wrong?
We're Geniuses!

Problems/unfortunate situations ALWAYS happen in life.
It's how we deal with those situations that shows your true character.

And how did United respond when the doctor said: "I need to be on the plane - I have patients to see in the morning"?
Basically: "Well, sucks to be them?"
They couldn't pick someone else at that point?

I get angrier and angerer the more I think about it.

The last time I flew united, our flight was delayed and delayed.
Then they couldn't find the pilot.
Then they found another pilot.
Then more waiting, and then they annouced that the new pilot "had been awake too many hours and couldn't fly"
and so they cancelled the flight. And they'd screwed around so long that it was now so late that
there were no more other available flights. So we had to spend the night,
and take some godawful early flight, like 7 am.

We did, at least, get a hotel room. We got something like $20 total for dinner - not enough to pay for a meal.
&(#&[email protected]#$
ChodTheWacko is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 11:57 AM
  #108  
Moderator
 
thoiboi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SoCal, CA
Posts: 38,427
Received 5,934 Likes on 4,758 Posts
Agreed Chod... Simple simple resolution.. so avoidable. much fail on United's part.
thoiboi is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 12:02 PM
  #109  
Alright, alright, alright
 
Legend2TL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 12,253
Received 1,721 Likes on 1,126 Posts
You're Not Mad at United Airlines; You're Mad at America

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articl...d-at-amer.html


Very good commentary on the state of some US corporations and their shallow insensitivity to people.
Legend2TL is offline  
Old 04-11-2017, 12:08 PM
  #110  
I am #76,361,211,935
 
underdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ottawa,Ontario
Posts: 1,038
Received 218 Likes on 133 Posts
Originally Posted by srika View Post
post from a friend who has been a flight attendant for united for a couple decades.
5. The flight wasn't originally oversold until the inbound crew encountered a missed connect due to weather impacting operations and legality issues which is why these 4 inflight personnels had to get onto this particular flight to avoid a cancellation of the morning flight as this particular flight from chicago only flies once at 3pm.
Originally Posted by thoiboi View Post
after delving into united's contract of carriage and 14 cfr 250 (federal statute regarding denied boarding involuntarily)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/part-250 ... There is a completely separate section for removal of passengers from denied boarding on their contract of carriage. The only relevant section regarding refusal of transport or removal reads as follows.

"force majeure and other unforeseeable conditions whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond uas control including, but not limited to, acts of god, force majeure, strikes, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, terrorist activities, or disturbances, whether actual, threatened, or reported."
1 + 1 = ?
underdog is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 12:14 PM
  #111  
Moderator
 
thoiboi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SoCal, CA
Posts: 38,427
Received 5,934 Likes on 4,758 Posts
Underdog, I get that having previously been employed by UA in some form, you have somewhat of a bias there, but you have to also agree that this was an easily avoidable situation had they just upped compensation.


Were they ' in the right' by the Involuntary Denied Boarding? I'm sure someone can argue that. But could this entire debacle have been avoided by simply offering a couple more bucks as per their typical SOP (despite your previous responses that it was 'more than fair')?
thoiboi is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 12:17 PM
  #112  
I am #76,361,211,935
 
underdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ottawa,Ontario
Posts: 1,038
Received 218 Likes on 133 Posts
Originally Posted by thoiboi View Post
Agreed Chod... Simple simple resolution.. so avoidable. much fail on United's part.
Coulda, woulda shoulda ...
Hindsight makes all the right choices so obvious! Unfortunately this time an absolutely ordinary event
got turned into an extra-ordinary incident.

C'est la vie.
underdog is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 12:19 PM
  #113  
Excels at nothing
 
svtmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago
Age: 54
Posts: 36,117
Received 2,834 Likes on 1,547 Posts
Originally Posted by underdog View Post
1 + 1 = ?
I don't think the butterfly effect of weather is considered Force Majeure. Weather directly affecting the advisability of operating that flight would.
svtmike is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 12:20 PM
  #114  
Moderator
 
thoiboi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SoCal, CA
Posts: 38,427
Received 5,934 Likes on 4,758 Posts
Originally Posted by underdog View Post
Coulda, woulda shoulda ...
Hindsight makes all the right choices so obvious! Unfortunately this time an absolutely ordinary event
got turned into an extra-ordinary incident.

C'est la vie.
I've flown almost every week for the last 3.5 years and have never been on a flight where they had to IDB someone without continuing to offer a higher compensation. Their own greed got the best of them here.
thoiboi is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 12:23 PM
  #115  
Registered Member
 
oonowindoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 15,779
Received 2,587 Likes on 1,810 Posts
Originally Posted by thoiboi View Post
But the private airline also has a Contract of Carriage which would be the equivalent "Constitution" in this case. They made their beds and now they're sleeping in them. I'm curious to see which lawyer takes up this case for him.

Also, that is your price. Everyone has their own. I'm sure someone would have done it for a bit more than $800
and United did just that. They asked 4 people to get off, offered more than what the law required. When no one volunteered, computer picked 4 passengers based on certain criteria. IMO, United followed their requirement.
Then, one refused and caused a scene and the Airport police fuck shit up even worse.

We can talk about if their SOP is fair and reasonable. But when a passenger bought the ticket, they pretty much agreed and acknowledged with their SOP and requirement.

But i agree with you that they definitely could have handled the situation better, like you said, maybe resolve the issue BEFORE everyone boarded the plane, which i have seen that have happened so many times at the gate.
oonowindoo is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 12:24 PM
  #116  
I am #76,361,211,935
 
underdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ottawa,Ontario
Posts: 1,038
Received 218 Likes on 133 Posts
Originally Posted by thoiboi View Post
Underdog, I get that having previously been employed by UA in some form, you have somewhat of a bias there, but you have to also agree that this was an easily avoidable situation had they just upped compensation.


Were they ' in the right' by the Involuntary Denied Boarding? I'm sure someone can argue that. But could this entire debacle have been avoided by simply offering a couple more bucks as per their typical SOP (despite your previous responses that it was 'more than fair')?
Yeah, for the record I am not now, nor have I ever been an employee of United and I do not hold any of their
stock in my portfolio. My work does sometimes results in moderate length contracts with airlines and aerospace
companies. I did work a contract with United for several years and so got pretty well acquainted with their practices
as well as airline practices in general so i thought I would share what I know.
underdog is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 12:25 PM
  #117  
Moderator
 
thoiboi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SoCal, CA
Posts: 38,427
Received 5,934 Likes on 4,758 Posts
whoops.. Sorry for that inference


Your input is very much appreciated though!
thoiboi is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 12:26 PM
  #118  
Registered Member
 
oonowindoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 15,779
Received 2,587 Likes on 1,810 Posts
Originally Posted by imj0257 View Post

I am sure i can find thousands of people complaining about Southwest too.
Bottom line is all US carriers domestic or international are shits when compared to rest of the world. That is why there has not been an US airliine on the world top 10 airline list for many many years.. if ever?
oonowindoo is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 12:40 PM
  #119  
I am #76,361,211,935
 
underdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ottawa,Ontario
Posts: 1,038
Received 218 Likes on 133 Posts
50,000 passengers 'denied boarding' on British flights every year

Around 50,000 airline passengers a year are bumped off British flights, many of which have been deliberately overbooked, according to the aviation watchdog.

50,000 passengers 'denied boarding' on British flights every year Express & Star

Like I said, an absolutely ordinary event got turned into an extra-ordinary incident.
underdog is online now  
Old 04-11-2017, 12:40 PM
  #120  
Stay Metal
 
Doom878's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Age: 40
Posts: 25,261
Received 821 Likes on 643 Posts
What is the proper procedure to take out a passenger in this scenario? What if it's a very large person that cannot simply be dragged?
Doom878 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.