Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

Man pulled off of overbooked flight UA3411 (ORD-SDF) 9 Apr 2017 {Settlement reached}

Community
Wiki Posts
Search
Old Apr 10, 2017, 8:42 pm
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
WELCOME, THREAD GUIDELINES and SUMMARY PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

If you are new to us, welcome to FlyerTalk! Who we are: FlyerTalk features discussions and chat boards that cover the most up-to-date traveler information; an interactive community dedicated to the topic of travel (not politics or arguments about politics or religion, etc. – those discussion are best in the OMNI forum)

The incident discussed in this thread has touched a nerve for many, and many posters are passionate about their opinions and concerns. However we should still have a civil and respectful discussion of this topic. This is because FlyerTalk is meant to be a friendly, helpful, and collegial community. (Rule 12.)

1. The normal FlyerTalk Rules apply. (Including not discussing moderation actions in thread). Please be particularly attentive to "discussing the idea and not the poster" when you have a disagreement. Civility and mutual respect are still expected and are what we owe each other as a community.

2. You are expected to respect the FlyerTalk community's diversity, and therefore refrain from posting inflammatory comments about race, religion, culture, politics, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. Do not cite, copy, or report on such.

3. While you can disagree with an opinion, the holder of that opinion has the same right to their opinion as you have to yours. We request all to respect that and disagree or discuss their point of views without getting overly personal and without attacking the other poster(s). This is expected as a requirement in FT Rule 12.

4. Overly exaggerative posts as well as posts with information that has been posted several times previously may be summarily deleted.

5. In addition, those who repeatedly fail to comply with FlyerTalk Rules, may be subjected to FlyerTalk disciplinary actions and, e.g., have membership privileges suspended, or masked from this forum.

If you have questions about the Rules or concerns about what another has posted in this or other threads in this forum, please do not post about that. Rather, notify the moderators by using the alert symbol within each post or email or send a private message to us moderators.

Let’s have this discussion in a way that, when we look back on it, we can be proud of how we handled ourselves as a community.

The United Moderator team:
J.Edward
l'etoile
Ocn Vw 1K
Pat89339
WineCountryUA

N.B. PLEASE do not alter the contents of this moderator note
Statement from United Airlines Regarding Resolution with Dr. David Dao - released 27 April 2017
CHICAGO, April 27, 2017 /PRNewswire/ -- We are pleased to report that United and Dr. Dao have reached an amicable resolution of the unfortunate incident that occurred aboard flight 3411. We look forward to implementing the improvements we have announced, which will put our customers at the center of everything we do.
DOT findings related to the UA3411 9 April 2017 IDB incident 12 May 2017

What facts do we know?
  • UA3411, operated by Republic Airways, ORD-SDF on Sunday, April 9, 2017. UA3411 was the second to last flight to SDF for United. AA3509 and UA4771 were the two remaining departures for the day. Also, AA and DL had connecting options providing for same-day arrival in SDF.
  • After the flight was fully boarded, United determined four seats were needed to accommodate crew to SDF for a flight on Monday.
  • United solicited volunteers for VDB. (BUT stopped at $800 in UA$s, not cash). Chose not to go to the levels such as 1350 that airlines have been known to go even in case of weather impacted disruption)
  • After receiving no volunteers for $800 vouchers, a passenger volunteered for $1,600 and was "laughed at" and refused, United determined four passengers to be removed from the flight.
  • One passenger refused and Chicago Aviation Security Officers were called to forcibly remove the passenger.
  • The passenger hit the armrest in the aisle and received a concussion, a broken nose, a bloodied lip, and the loss of two teeth.
  • After being removed from the plane, the passenger re-boarded saying "I need to go home" repeatedly, before being removed again.
  • United spokesman Jonathan Guerin said the flight was sold out — but not oversold. Instead, United and regional affiliate Republic Airlines – the unit that operated Flight 3411 – decided they had to remove four passengers from the flight to accommodate crewmembers who were needed in Louisville the next day for a “downline connection.”

United Express Flight 3411 Review and Action Report - released 27 April 2017

Videos

Internal Communication by Oscar Munoz
Oscar Munoz sent an internal communication to UA employees (sources: View From The Wing, Chicago Tribune):
Dear Team,

Like you, I was upset to see and hear about what happened last night aboard United Express Flight 3411 headed from Chicago to Louisville. While the facts and circumstances are still evolving, especially with respect to why this customer defied Chicago Aviation Security Officers the way he did, to give you a clearer picture of what transpired, I've included below a recap from the preliminary reports filed by our employees.

As you will read, this situation was unfortunately compounded when one of the passengers we politely asked to deplane refused and it became necessary to contact Chicago Aviation Security Officers to help. Our employees followed established procedures for dealing with situations like this. While I deeply regret this situation arose, I also emphatically stand behind all of you, and I want to commend you for continuing to go above and beyond to ensure we fly right.

I do, however, believe there are lessons we can learn from this experience, and we are taking a close look at the circumstances surrounding this incident. Treating our customers and each other with respect and dignity is at the core of who we are, and we must always remember this no matter how challenging the situation.

Oscar

Summary of Flight 3411
  • On Sunday, April 9, after United Express Flight 3411 was fully boarded, United's gate agents were approached by crewmembers that were told they needed to board the flight.
  • We sought volunteers and then followed our involuntary denial of boarding process (including offering up to $1,000 in compensation) and when we approached one of these passengers to explain apologetically that he was being denied boarding, he raised his voice and refused to comply with crew member instructions.
  • He was approached a few more times after that in order to gain his compliance to come off the aircraft, and each time he refused and became more and more disruptive and belligerent.
  • Our agents were left with no choice but to call Chicago Aviation Security Officers to assist in removing the customer from the flight. He repeatedly declined to leave.
  • Chicago Aviation Security Officers were unable to gain his cooperation and physically removed him from the flight as he continued to resist - running back onto the aircraft in defiance of both our crew and security officials.
Email sent to all employees at 2:08PM on Tuesday, April 11.
Dear Team,

The truly horrific event that occurred on this flight has elicited many responses from all of us: outrage, anger, disappointment. I share all of those sentiments, and one above all: my deepest apologies for what happened. Like you, I continue to be disturbed by what happened on this flight and I deeply apologize to the customer forcibly removed and to all the customers aboard. No one should ever be mistreated this way.

I want you to know that we take full responsibility and we will work to make it right.

It’s never too late to do the right thing. I have committed to our customers and our employees that we are going to fix what’s broken so this never happens again. This will include a thorough review of crew movement, our policies for incentivizing volunteers in these situations, how we handle oversold situations and an examination of how we partner with airport authorities and local law enforcement. We’ll communicate the results of our review by April 30th.

I promise you we will do better.

Sincerely,

Oscar
Statement to customers - 27 April 2017
Each flight you take with us represents an important promise we make to you, our customer. It's not simply that we make sure you reach your destination safely and on time, but also that you will be treated with the highest level of service and the deepest sense of dignity and respect.

Earlier this month, we broke that trust when a passenger was forcibly removed from one of our planes. We can never say we are sorry enough for what occurred, but we also know meaningful actions will speak louder than words.

For the past several weeks, we have been urgently working to answer two questions: How did this happen, and how can we do our best to ensure this never happens again?

It happened because our corporate policies were placed ahead of our shared values. Our procedures got in the way of our employees doing what they know is right.

Fixing that problem starts now with changing how we fly, serve and respect our customers. This is a turning point for all of us here at United – and as CEO, it's my responsibility to make sure that we learn from this experience and redouble our efforts to put our customers at the center of everything we do.

That’s why we announced that we will no longer ask law enforcement to remove customers from a flight and customers will not be required to give up their seat once on board – except in matters of safety or security.

We also know that despite our best efforts, when things don’t go the way they should, we need to be there for you to make things right. There are several new ways we’re going to do just that.

We will increase incentives for voluntary rebooking up to $10,000 and will be eliminating the red tape on permanently lost bags with a new "no-questions-asked" $1,500 reimbursement policy. We will also be rolling out a new app for our employees that will enable them to provide on-the-spot goodwill gestures in the form of miles, travel credit and other amenities when your experience with us misses the mark. You can learn more about these commitments and many other changes at hub.united.com.

While these actions are important, I have found myself reflecting more broadly on the role we play and the responsibilities we have to you and the communities we serve.

I believe we must go further in redefining what United's corporate citizenship looks like in our society. If our chief good as a company is only getting you to and from your destination, that would show a lack of moral imagination on our part. You can and ought to expect more from us, and we intend to live up to those higher expectations in the way we embody social responsibility and civic leadership everywhere we operate. I hope you will see that pledge express itself in our actions going forward, of which these initial, though important, changes are merely a first step.

Our goal should be nothing less than to make you truly proud to say, "I fly United."

Ultimately, the measure of our success is your satisfaction and the past several weeks have moved us to go further than ever before in elevating your experience with us. I know our 87,000 employees have taken this message to heart, and they are as energized as ever to fulfill our promise to serve you better with each flight and earn the trust you’ve given us.

We are working harder than ever for the privilege to serve you and I know we will be stronger, better and the customer-focused airline you expect and deserve.

With Great Gratitude,

Oscar Munoz
CEO
United Airlines
Aftermath
Poll: Your Opinion of United Airlines Reference Material

UA's Customer Commitment says:
Occasionally we may not be able to provide you with a seat on a specific flight, even if you hold a ticket, have checked in, are present to board on time, and comply with other requirements. This is called an oversale, and occurs when restrictions apply to operating a particular flight safely (such as aircraft weight limits); when we have to substitute a smaller aircraft in place of a larger aircraft that was originally scheduled; or if more customers have checked in and are prepared to board than we have available seats.

If your flight is in an oversale situation, you will not be denied a seat until we first ask for volunteers willing to give up their confirmed seats. If there are not enough volunteers, we will deny boarding to passengers in accordance with our written policy on boarding priority. If you are involuntarily denied boarding and have complied with our check-in and other applicable rules, we will give you a written statement that describes your rights and explains how we determine boarding priority for an oversold flight. You will generally be entitled to compensation and transportation on an alternate flight.

We make complete rules for the payment of compensation, as well as our policy about boarding priorities, available at airports we serve. We will follow these rules to ensure you are treated fairly. Please be aware that you may be denied boarding without compensation if you do not check in on time or do not meet certain other requirements, or if we offer you alternative transportation that is planned to arrive at your destination or first stopover no later than one hour after the planned arrival time of your original flight.
CoC is here: https://www.united.com/web/en-US/con...-carriage.aspx
Print Wikipost

Man pulled off of overbooked flight UA3411 (ORD-SDF) 9 Apr 2017 {Settlement reached}

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:13 pm
  #526  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 20
Originally Posted by fly18725
The passenger wasn't re-boarded. He reportedly broke away from the cops, ran onto the plane and refused to get off.
This is the first i'm hearing this part of the story. Where are you seeing that reported?

edit: nvm now i see it when he ran back on after being removed the first time.

Last edited by Liquid_G; Apr 10, 2017 at 1:21 pm
Liquid_G is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:14 pm
  #527  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: IL
Programs: UA-SIL MR-TIT HYT-GBL IHG-PLT HH-DIA WYN-PLT AMEX-PLT
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by Summa Cum Laude Touro Law Center
That would depend on the passengers conduct leading up to the moment where the videos of the situation commenced. If he remained quiet and orderly up to that point, United did not have a basis to remove him from the plane under Rule 21. If, however, he was "disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent," then yes, they could remove him under Rule 21.
OR: "Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;"
schertz is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:14 pm
  #528  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NCL
Programs: UA 1MM/*G. DL Gold for one more year.
Posts: 5,305
Tweet by Alastair Campbell (who was Tony Blair's Director of Communications in Downing Street):

"Mmm. Think United Airlines have solved their own over booking problem."
Passmethesickbag is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:15 pm
  #529  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: iad/dca
Programs: UA Million Mile Gold, Club, AA, Delta, Marriott, Hertz G, A/Club
Posts: 1,106
Originally Posted by ddarko
Those empty seats are paid for even if the people who bought them didn't show up. The only thing a ban on overbooking would do is prevent airlines from double-dipping, not deny them from getting revenue from those sold but empty seats. Arguably, depending on the number of empty seats, a airline might even save enough on fuel that they come out ahead flying with every seat paid for but not filled.

Even if I was more sympathetic to the airlines, the tremendous opportunity cost and disruption forced overbooking inflicts on passengers negates any justification for it. Since it's impossible to tell in advance of boarding whether a flight will have more boarding passengers than seats, it is impossible for passengers to plan around it which I think makes it particularly egregious. I'd prefer for overbooking to be banned entirely but if it is to continue, I'm with those who suggest it should be made entirely voluntary and airlines should have to keep raising the compensation (in cash, not travel credits) until enough passengers agree to voluntary bumps.
Have your lobbyist write it up for FAA approval.
iquitos is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:15 pm
  #530  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: CO
Programs: UA OG-1K, Marriott Plat, Hertz PC
Posts: 1,360
Originally Posted by schertz
Rule 21 could easily be invoked when he fails to follow instructions to de-plane.
Is that the "Get off the plane or you can't fly with us" rule? I though that was Catch 22?
PushingTin is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:16 pm
  #531  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: NYC
Posts: 38
Originally Posted by soonerborn








I am having the same issue. I have tried to quit UA but up until the last 6 months or so, they have had the best prices for me.
I'm having the same problem too. It's always been between United and Jet Blue for me and United prices have been better. Of course, now I can't get on to Jet Blue's site to compare fares.
sekhmet101 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:16 pm
  #532  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,372
Originally Posted by schertz
OR: "Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;"
Which of these three did the passenger do before he was removed from the flight?
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:16 pm
  #533  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 812
Some additional details on the injuries caused by UA's keystone kops:
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...flight-n744731

Police said the officers attempted to carry the man off the flight "when he fell."

"His head subsequently struck an armrest causing injuries to his face," police said, adding that the man was taken to a hospital and treated for non-life threatening injuries. An investigation into the incident was still ongoing.

. . .



But a few minutes later, the man who was removed from the flight ran back on the plane, saying he needed to get back home.

"Somehow he got back on," Bridges said. "He runs back on — dazed, bloodied, kind of in a mess — yelling 'I have to get home, I have to get home.'"

The man was removed on a stretcher, "resisting the whole time," Bridges said.
The amount of force used to resolve a situation has to be proportional to the situation. You can't have a trap door with spikes underneath to trap trespassers, for example, because that's excessive.

Here, United and its agent (the police) used incredible, possibly life-threatening force against a paid customer with a ticket and a seat assignment. Even if United did have a right to remove the passenger, United did not have a right to use disproportionate force to do so. That's illegal. Two wrongs don't make a right.

If I was the passenger's counsel, I would not settle for less than $1m. Any other passengers on the flight who suffered any sort of physical injury from the altercation should also seek compensation.
sincx is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:17 pm
  #534  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: IL
Programs: UA-SIL MR-TIT HYT-GBL IHG-PLT HH-DIA WYN-PLT AMEX-PLT
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by PushingTin
Is that the "Get off the plane or you can't fly with us" rule? I though that was Catch 22?
Crew member instructions -- there are X+1 people on the plane where capacity is X. You must leave per instructions. Your failure to leave is interference. Therefore you may be removed.

Very straight-forward
schertz is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:18 pm
  #535  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 812
Originally Posted by cerealmarketer
And now responsibility is being taken by a 2nd party - the Chicago department of aviation

https://twitter.com/krisvancleave/st...10238872293377

https://twitter.com/krisvancleave/st...10585669951490

"Airport security officer seen in video removing United Passenger from seat placed on leave effective today pending a thorough review"

"Chicago Dept of Aviation says the actions of aviation security officer are obviously not condoned by the Department."
This doesn't get United off the hook. The police officer was acting as an agent of United, and United--as the principal--is liable for damages caused by its agents.


Originally Posted by schertz
Crew member instructions -- there are X+1 people on the plane where capacity is X. You must leave per instructions. Your failure to leave is interference. Therefore you may be removed.

Very straight-forward
Disproportionate force may not be used. Our society has limits on using force to resolve issues for a reason. Two wrongs don't make a right. United is clearly liable here.
sincx is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:19 pm
  #536  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,025
Originally Posted by iquitos
And United has deep pockets for lawyers to buy the best justice available. They can't rase the VDB ante but they can pay through the nose for lawyers.
Yes, they have deep pockets, which is why every personal injury lawyer in the country is probably salivating at the thought of having a go at them. And it's on video.
GadgetFreak is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:19 pm
  #537  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: IL
Programs: UA-SIL MR-TIT HYT-GBL IHG-PLT HH-DIA WYN-PLT AMEX-PLT
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by schertz
Crew member instructions -- there are X+1 people on the plane where capacity is X. You must leave per instructions. Your failure to leave is interference. Therefore you may be removed.

Very straight-forward
Or even more simply: Your name is not on the load manifest -- we cannot leave with a passenger who is not listed on the final manifest. You must leave.
schertz is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:21 pm
  #538  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 321
Originally Posted by schertz
Crew member instructions -- there are X+1 people on the plane where capacity is X. You must leave per instructions. Your failure to leave is interference. Therefore you may be removed.

Very straight-forward
You mean like the part that they are not absolute? Not saying it is the case here, but Jesus tapdancing Christ, so many people seem to ignore that there is some degree of CONTEXT with this authority, scope, and that this means there certainly are areas this wouldn't cover.
Travelsonic is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:21 pm
  #539  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC: UA 1K, DL Platinum, AAirpass, Avis PC
Posts: 4,599
And just when you didn't think it could escalate further...

Graphic video of him bleeding

http://gizmodo.com/just-kill-me-horr...eng-1794181325
cerealmarketer is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:22 pm
  #540  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,025
Originally Posted by juggar
I agree, think of the massive damage this will cause to the company's image! There is always an amount that will get someone off.

Sure $12,800 is a LOT but thats a drop in the bucket compared to what this PR nightmare will cost them.

I dont care if he is in the wrong for not getting up, the fact is, this got WAY out of control and United could have done something to prevent it.

Guarantee almost overnight they raised the limit on what can be offered for people to leave their seats.
Agreed. I think it has probably already cost them more than $12,800 just in time for their CEO and PR department to deal with it. And it's going to cost them a LOT more I expect.
GadgetFreak is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.