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}

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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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.

Lets 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.

Its never too late to do the right thing. I have committed to our customers and our employees that we are going to fix whats 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. Well 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.

Thats 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 dont go the way they should, we need to be there for you to make things right. There are several new ways were 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 youve 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}

Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:11 am
  #2491  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 321
In my opinion this is a United issue. I left United after being 1K or platinum for many years, because they became so revenue driven, and forgot about their passengers. They quit rewarding passengers who were loyal unless they were spending on high revenue tickets. I now fly whoever has the best price on a route, so jetblue gets a lot of my business.
easykristine is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:13 am
  #2492  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,397
Originally Posted by jwh212
Part 121 OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS
Subpart T--Flight Operations

Sec. 121.580

[Prohibition on interference with crewmembers.]

[No person may assault, threaten, intimidate, or interfere with a crewmember in the performance of the crewmember's duties aboard an aircraft being operated under this part.]

Amdt. 121-270, Eff. 1/7/99


emphasis added above. Refusing to follow crewmember instruction is considered interference with the crew member's duties. As the US is a common law jurisdiction, the exact wording there does not need to be written the law as it might be within a civil law jurisdiction. this has been clarified over the decades via hundreds of legal cases.

here are some stats on the number of unruly passenger fines which are levied each year:

https://www.faa.gov/data_research/pa...ly_passengers/

some references to case law here:

https://www.justice.gov/usam/crimina...endants-49-usc

more plain english analysis:

http://blogs.findlaw.com/celebrity_j...-on-plane.html
I think these provisions need to be read in the right context. Here it doesn't appear to be a case of interfering with crew member duties - the crew was not mid flight, they weren't preparing the aircraft for any critical stage of the journey. They didn't have any duties to perform. The passenger was simply sitting there, not wanting to move. There was no intimidation.

Had the aircraft been in flight and the passenger refused to follow lawful instructions, or otherwise done some act which diverted, distracted or occupied crew members from performing functions that might be a different story.
LHR/MEL/Europe FF is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:14 am
  #2493  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Global
Posts: 5,975
Originally Posted by jwh212
Every bit of press I have seen states clearly that the air crew asked the man to deplane numerous times (as politely as they could, and offered him a $1000 voucher plus overnight hotel accommodation). ...
That statement alone is wrong, which is what makes me think this is being incorrectly reported. (Reporters are notoriously lazy in making this distinction.)

I have NEVER seen FA or flight crew make any offers to deplane. It is ALWAYS the gate agents.

AFAIK - There is no video showing this man becoming unruly.

Originally Posted by fly18725
Yes, not sitting where the airline tells you to is a safety issue....
True. But not relevant. The passenger was sitting in his assigned seat. He was not asked to move for safety reasons. He was not asked to move by the flight crew.

Originally Posted by fly18725
..If the FA can't seat ticketed passengers, including the deadheaded crew, they'd be indirectly involved.
Outside of moves ordered by the captain, or for specific safety reasons, the FAs are NOT allowed to move people around. (For smaller jets it could affect weight and balance, and thus, is reserved fro the captain or ground crew.) That responsibility is spelled out in the various union contracts.

The captain decides who to boot off a plane for safety reasons, such as unruly passenger. AFAIK this never happened.
Global321 is online now  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:15 am
  #2494  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: PHL
Programs: UA 1K 1MM, Marriott Gold, IHG Platinum, Raddison Platinum, Avis Presidents Club
Posts: 5,256
So what happened to the "doctor"? Did he get on another flight and make it home? How many of his patients ended up dying or switching to another doctor? Was he arrested and charged with something?
eng3 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:15 am
  #2495  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 570
Facebook CEO post :


Email CEO to United employers :
HHQX888 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:15 am
  #2496  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: LHR, HKG
Programs: gate lice
Posts: 315
Originally Posted by Rdenney
Nobody is doubting crazy passengers--and like many here my mileages are higher than yours. But the question of the existence of crazy pax is not the issue in this case. None of the eyewitnesses being interviewed suggested any craziness on the part of this passenger until he was physically removed.

What I have seen in the last three or four hears is a marked increase in surliness and parental dictation from airline employees, particularly including United. It is not impossible that what you are seeing and what I am seeing are related.
Originally Posted by spainflyer
So, it was thugs in old blue jeans and tee shirts, not authorized to carry weapons, who beat up the doctor. That makes it a lot better, Oscar.
Really disappointed with Oscar here. Heard all these great stories, but can't look a pax in the eye and apologize when under pressure from toxic employees? Boo. I know I shouldn't expect much from UA, but Smi-suck is not supposed to be the benchmark of corporate responsibility.
leungy18 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:16 am
  #2497  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,400
Originally Posted by simpletastes
Soon Verizon will be sending cops to knock on your door for unpaid bills.
*to knock on your door for undue bills that you refuse to pay.
WorldLux is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:16 am
  #2498  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 146
Originally Posted by makin'miles
To maintain public safety and ensure that criminal actions are addressed. Not to act as judge, jury and executioner in cases of contract or civil law.
and if someone refuses to leave a business(in this case, the aircraft), who is ultimately responsible for extricating the passenger out of his/her seat? I'm pretty sure no United employee is authorized to use physical force, unless it's an emergency.
ShutteLag is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:17 am
  #2499  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: UA Gold, AA DL
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by leungy18
But this is not a legal matter.

This is a PR and customer service matter, and UA has done pretty badly. The fact that they chose to muscle a paying pax out instead of offering slightly higher compensation shows the disdain UA has with their customers.

On the international front, this only goes to show how U.S. airlines completely disregard service as opposed to ME3 and Asian carriers.
there are two components to this story:
-Was what happened lawful?
-Was what happened what people generally expect from their airline?

I've only been commenting on the first part, I think the second part is pretty obvious that nobody expects this kind of treatment from their airline.

That said, we haven't seen how this guy was acting prior to the cops showing up. I've seen 3 people forcibly removed from flights for being unruly, two of them appeared to be having some kind of mental episode when it happened. One guy just stood up after the door was closed and started yelling "NO!" over and over and wouldnt sit down, the air marshall put him in a full nelson and dragged him off the plane, after an hour back at the gate we took off an left. The third guy I saw get ejected was highly intoxicated, they didnt even leave the gate in that case.
jwh212 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:18 am
  #2500  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 143
Here's what I fundamentally do not get. How can it simultaneously be true that:

A) United is somehow right to jam four deadheaders on at the last minute for their own convenience and force an "oversold" situation (even though it doesn't meet the requirements for oversale in their CoC) while

B) United cannot then take the IDB passenger and create an actual oversale situation on the last flight of the evening? In fact, United wouldn't even get him on the first flight of the next morning?

No, United was really trying to screw this guy. No cash, only a voucher, and a terrible reaccomodation flight.

"We're sorry we have to ask you to get off the plane. Here's a check for $500 and you're confirmed on a flight two hours from now" and none of this happens.
George Purcell is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:18 am
  #2501  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 259
Originally Posted by ShutteLag
and if someone refuses to leave a business(in this case, the aircraft), who is ultimately responsible for extricating the passenger out of his/her seat? I'm pretty sure no United employee is authorized to use physical force, unless it's an emergency.
Making him to leave the aircraft is not the only solution, despite United saying that they have no other choice. Offer more compensation or get a driver for their employees!
simpletastes is online now  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:19 am
  #2502  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,400
Originally Posted by ShutteLag
and if someone refuses to leave a business(in this case, the aircraft), who is ultimately responsible for extricating the passenger out of his/her seat?
That's the business's problem. They refused to service their customer despite that customer having paid for services. Unless the passenger is violent or, more generally speaking, a threat to others or himself, there's no need in getting cops involved, particularly when the business is originally at fault.
WorldLux is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:20 am
  #2503  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: West of CLE
Programs: Delta DM/3 MM; Hertz PC; National EE; Amtrak GR; Bonvoy Silver; Via Rail Prfrence
Posts: 5,354
Originally Posted by GrayAnderson
UAL/RPA had a right to call the police.
UAL/RPA did not have the right to file a false police report. The passenger did not do anything wrong. The fuzz should not have intervened in a private contractual dispute.
ND76 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:21 am
  #2504  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Nawthun Virginia
Programs: Air: UA (Gold), AA, WN, DL; Hotel: Hilton (Diamond), plus all the rest
Posts: 135
Originally Posted by MDJennings
These are sworn LEO--not rent-a-cop.
Then why weren't they wearing a proper uniform and behaving like professional cops? It seems to me a professional cop would have talked to both sides to determine the situation, seen the man's boarding pass, and told the GA that there was really nothing he could do--the man had not committed any crime. Being there is not a crime, even if they have the contractual right to ask him to leave (which I cannot find in the CofC plain language).

Nothing I have found in a plain reading of the CofC gives them the right to use force to remove a person from a plane who is behaving as this man was.

Lots of rent-a-cops are also sworn officers, but that doesn't make them infallible. Even if the airline accused the man of making a disturbance, which was not at all substantiated by the witness accounts I read in the media, the cops would have a duty to investigate enough facts to have probable cause of a crime (not a civil breech of contract) being committed before they can arrest him.
Rdenney is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 7:21 am
  #2505  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: West of CLE
Programs: Delta DM/3 MM; Hertz PC; National EE; Amtrak GR; Bonvoy Silver; Via Rail Prfrence
Posts: 5,354
Originally Posted by WorldLux
That's the business's problem. They refused to service their customer despite that customer having paid for services. Unless the passenger is violent or, more generally speaking, a threat to others or himself, there's no need in getting cops involved, particularly when the business is originally at fault.
This could be argued to be theft on the part of UAL/RPA under Illinois law, 720 ILCS 5/ 16-1.
ND76 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.