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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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, 1:47 pm
  #586  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 812
Originally Posted by George Purcell
It's actually kind of an interesting question. What you have, fundamentally, is a civil disagreement about the terms of the CoC between the passenger and United. United was able to get LEO officers to enforce their interpretation of that contract.
I'm actually tempted to spend an hour on Westlaw on this, but I really shouldn't.
sincx is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:48 pm
  #587  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NCL
Programs: UA 1MM/*G. DL Gold for one more year.
Posts: 5,305
Originally Posted by Vulcan
Exactly! If Denny Flannigan was the Captain, he would have pulled out his wallet and handed put as many 1,000s of dollars needed to resolve the issue.
This is a bit part of the problem isn't it? The kind of integrity and guts that would have been required to defuse this situation is way beyond the pay grade of a United Express captain.
Passmethesickbag is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:48 pm
  #588  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 115
I'm not a fan of overregulation, but I think regulation is warranted here. There should be no such thing as involuntary declined boarding. Keep upping the offer until you get an acceptance. Everybody has his price. Eventually somebody will either say yes or the price will get so high that another alternative (e.g. hiring a private jet) will be cheaper.

The result: prices go up for all of us a little bit, but none of us will ever be subject to getting kicked off a flight for unsuitable compensation, and we'll all get lottery tickets to a big $1500 or $2000 payday. If it's a regulation that every airline has to obey, no airline is disadvantaged by it.
bfwolf is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:48 pm
  #589  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: PHX, SEA
Programs: Avis President's Club, Global Entry, Hilton/Marriott Gold. No more DL/AA status.
Posts: 4,422
Originally Posted by mre2b9
https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurabe.../#65e48ec04de1

Delta kept upping the pay until someone took it. In this case $1350/person. The obvious solution for United was to keep offering more until enough people took it.

Forcing anyone off the plane is insane. United should buy them off the plane.
That's what I think. United cheaped out, and instead of costing them $5400 to move those crew (which would probably be worth it versus delaying an entire other aircraft), they are suffering far more than that value in bad PR.

At this point, less than 2 weeks after Leggingsgate, Oscar is going to have to buy a $5 million Super Bowl commercial to apologize.
Gig103 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:48 pm
  #590  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 10
Very disturbing. After trying and achieving GS status for the past five years or so.. I am seriously thinking about giving up. Not that this is the only reason.
davidc1 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:50 pm
  #591  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,043
Originally Posted by George Purcell
It's actually kind of an interesting question. What you have, fundamentally, is a civil disagreement about the terms of the CoC between the passenger and United. United was able to get LEO officers to enforce their interpretation of that contract.

This.


Originally Posted by gold23
I don't think there is an expectation that a passenger would refuse, and then esxcessive force would be used against him. UA deserves a TON of bad pub on this, and they absolutely need to alter their policies. But blaming them for the passenger getting beaten up is a bridge too far, imo.
See above. United basically used law enforcement for a non-security issue. I think that is inappropriate and is the underlying problem.
GadgetFreak is online now  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:50 pm
  #592  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 957
Originally Posted by kthomas
Thanks for making the point. Likely a Republic pilot came from a private training channel, and may not have been very mature or experienced. The incident may demonstrate why those channels tend to produce less valuable personnel. (It also seems likely to me, that the rules are written with the assumption that most pilots will have military experience).

That this was a vessel probably matters a lot-- my maritime law expert is showering, alas. Presuming you have local law enforcement board a vessel that is under improper or insufficient command ...
This is a tremendous distinction. UAX employees are almost never as seasoned as mainline. You were likely dealing with individuals lacking the experience and/or communication abilities of their brethren.
gold23 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:50 pm
  #593  
us2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Southern California/In the air
Programs: DL
Posts: 10,382
Originally Posted by Ber2dca
I think corporate comms isn't the main culprit here. They actually did a decent job getting a good quote from Oscar into most articles. This is an ops-created problem and ops should take it on the chin. I don't even think it's United-specific, it's all over the industry.

There's a culture in aviation where the term 'self-loading freight' isn't just a quip, it's basically reality. If airport staff operate in a culture where paying customers are at best viewed as a number and often enough as a necessary evil and nuisance, then one can't be surprised if staff lack the common sense to avoid drama such as this.
A good quote? Not. it's actually a good case study in what NOT to say. It was an Orwellian nightmare of corporate and PR doublespeak These passengers were not "reaccommodated". They were abruptly forced off an aircraft they already boarded.
us2 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:51 pm
  #594  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 71
The revenue United will lose, plus the lawsuit that will ensue will be in the millions. Raising the bonus $s for voluntary de planing would have been under $5,000. A no brained in my opinion.
decabea is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:51 pm
  #595  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: medford lakes nj
Programs: usair platinum
Posts: 4
Originally Posted by BayAreaPilot
Definitely bad form for the gate agents to board passengers they may have to IDB, but the passenger should have gotten off the plane when asked. The FAA is not amused by passengers who fail to comply with crewmember instructions.
I can say with certainty if I'm a doctor with a paid ticket who's quietly in my seat and some person says "we need our own people not operating this flight to use your seat to get somewhere else", I likely won't be complying with crewmember instructions.
blbpdsusa is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:52 pm
  #596  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Minneapolis, formerly the shores of Lake Minnetonka
Programs: DL PM (and KM)
Posts: 394
Originally Posted by Diabeetus
If he's in clinic next day:
He has to make decisions about the health and well-being of patients the next day. I wouldn't want a doctor to have to drive 5.5 hours overnight, after being IDB'd a flight, before seeing myself or my family.

if he's doing procedures the next day:
See clinic comment, except my coronaries or my colon.
You clearly have no idea of what a physician's schedule looks like. Many times they are working with minimal sleep and long hours at the hospital.
Ebes1099 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:52 pm
  #597  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: YVR
Programs: UA Premier Platinum
Posts: 3,759
Originally Posted by us2
A good quote? Not. it's actually a good case study in what NOT to say. It was an Orwellian nightmare of corporate and PR doublespeak These passengers were not "reaccommodated". They were abruptly forced off an aircraft they already boarded.
+1 Oscar would be better off saying nothing if he cannot muster an earnest, unreserved apology.
eigenvector is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:52 pm
  #598  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: South Yorkshire, UK
Programs: A3*G, LH FTL, VS Red, Avis Preferred, Hertz President's Circle, (RIP Diamond Club)
Posts: 2,364
I bet if UA execs could pay $2000 for this to never have happened then they would do it in a nano-second. They could've offered that in IDB comp in the first place. It'll cost them way more than that now.
roberino is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:53 pm
  #599  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: K+K
Programs: *G
Posts: 4,871
Originally Posted by gold23
Two things. First, this is not a good analogy. If Dell had a policy where they reserved the right to claw back my laptop, and attempted to do so, it would be apt. But they don't. UA (and every airlines) does have a COC that states this may occur.

Second, let's say the police showed up at my door attempting to collect my laptop. I knew they had no right to do so, but they were standing there as officers of the law. What should I do? It's a no brainer. I surrender the laptop (possibly filming the situation), and fight it legally. I don't barricade myself in the house if they have a warrant and legal rights to remove the laptop. That would end up in my arrest.

The terrible thing that occured here was the force in which this passenger was removed. We don't have the whole recording. If he was warned five times prior to being removed, and warned that it would be forcible? I actually have no sympathy. If the officer did not provide fair warning and acted in this manner? I have tremendous sympathy, and hope the officer is reprimanded..or worse. But all of that doesn't make refusing legitimate police orders ok. Passenger was wrong.
to get anything accomplished, all that needs to be done is:

1. send the police
2. produce 5 verbal warnings

what a gloriously elegant universal solution
deniah is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 1:53 pm
  #600  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: BOS
Posts: 3,534
This is an embarrassment to UA. There's plenty of blame to hand out but in the end it's going to be UA blaming the police and the police stating proper procedures were followed after UA's request to have a passenger removed. I highly doubt anything will happen to the people who manhandled the person off the plane. After all, he was 'disorderly' and 'resisting'.

Were the UA employees sufficiently empowered to handle the situation differently? If they had increased the offer or not deboarded the passenger, would the GA have been called into a meeting today to be fined, reprimanded or fired without international media coverage? Apparently when it comes down to it, passengers are worth $800 or a threat of random IDB to United.
Lurker1999 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.