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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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 11, 2017, 9:37 am
  #2791  
J S
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 592
Originally Posted by skipmnyc
total BS. Paid passenger who needs to get to his destination is ASSAULTED for not "volunteering" his seat for a crew member. The airline should keep raising the offer until they get volunteers or find another solution for their crew issues. UA is going to get a PR sh**storm for this. And they deserve to get sued for it. FAIL.
This is one of the things that drives me crazy about airline behavior (not just UA--they all do this): they consistently put their staff ahead of their customers. Examples:
--Taking paying customers off a flight in order to accommodate crew.
--Delivering crew bags at baggage claim ahead of passenger bags
--Accommodating crew carryons in the cabin when passenger bags are gate checked
--Filling the overhead bins with crew bags (recently was in business class on another airline in bulkhead seats and found that the entire overhead bin was filled with crew bags--the mini cabin was only one row, so there was literally nowhere to put a carryon).
--Cutting in front of passengers at security checkpoints
--Reserving one lavatory just for crew use (rare, but I see it a few times per year)

I am not saying that they don't have an occasional late inbound aircraft and need to make a tight connection--just like some pax--and need to skip a line once in a while--just like some pax--but I cannot think of another business that puts employees ahead of paying customers on such a regular basis as normal operating procedure. It is just bad customer service.
J S is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:38 am
  #2792  
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: STL
Programs: United Global Services
Posts: 46
I guess maybe i take this much more in stride than a lot of you. IMHO, several things went wrong here to cause this situation. Much like an airline tragedy there are usually multiple things that if just one of them didn't occur, the situation wouldn't occur.

Reading through all these post (or at least a lot of them), I can respect everyone's opinions (ummm except a few crazy ones) and there are many good points. Bottom line is this should have and could have been avoided.

This has no bearing on who i choose or not choose to fly with. I personally have had fantastic experiences flying with United and fly them whenever i can.

I am really interested to see some post from people who are getting involuntarily denied boarding in the next day or two. Curious to see how the GA and the passengers deal will with it. Will someone else not de-board having seen public opinion? Will United even allow this type of thing to happen again? Generally i am more interested in how this impacts the future than trying to figure out who is to blame
gopony is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:38 am
  #2793  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: 10 months VLC, 2 months everywhere else
Programs: *A
Posts: 3,770
DELETED
GuyverII is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:38 am
  #2794  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 143
Originally Posted by SFO28L
Your interpretation is a completely reasonable reading except that the employees in that context are not crew but positive space travelers that are similar to normal passengers.
That is, at the least, open to interpretation. Oversold very specifically in the CoC talks about "ticketed" passengers. Mere placement on a manifest is not a ticket.
George Purcell is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:39 am
  #2795  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Programs: AA
Posts: 286
Intent of regulation

I would be curious to see this litigated.

I assume that the intent of the law that requires passengers to comply with uniformed flight crew is to maximize safety of flight.

In this case, while the passenger appears to have violated the letter of the law, if my presumption is true, Republic/United violated the spirit of the law.

Piss poor planning of their flight personnel is not really a safety of flight issue when, as many have said, the crew could have been transported via other means.
Beven12S is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:39 am
  #2796  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: SFO/CDG
Programs: UA 1k
Posts: 211
My reading skills are fine. UA IDBed the passenger. He was "violently assaulted" by airport police. I hope that the officers involved are appropriately punished for their actions according to the law. I would hope the same regardless of race/gender/ethnicity. There are many legitimate issues with race in our society but to suggest that UA would systematically treat passengers differently based on race/gender/ethnicity is irresponsible.

Originally Posted by no1cub17
Did I say that? No. I said I would love to see a 25 year old white man violently assaulted in the manner this Vietnamese-American gentleman was. Can you read?
SFO28L is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:42 am
  #2797  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,038
Originally Posted by GuyverII
DELETED

That was great. I'm all "Brokeback Mountain" about this thread.
GadgetFreak is online now  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:42 am
  #2798  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: SFO/CDG
Programs: UA 1k
Posts: 211
Positive space travel is ticketed travel. Not sure what there is to interpret.

Originally Posted by George Purcell
That is, at the least, open to interpretation. Oversold very specifically in the CoC talks about "ticketed" passengers. Mere placement on a manifest is not a ticket.
SFO28L is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:43 am
  #2799  
jbb
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Programs: SQ *Gold
Posts: 871
Originally Posted by erlich
The fare would rise by exactly the average amount they are now underpaying when kicking people off the plane either voluntarily or involuntarily times the average fraction of overbookings, plus the average sold fare times the average fraction of no-shows.

The first portion you are paying for anyway, just in a different way.
That's a lot of broad assumptions that I do not believe would play out in reality. Higher fares of that magnitude would directly impact demand and airlines would likely be able to find cost savings elsewhere to reduce the fare impact. Besides, there are many things that could be done beyond a blanket ban on overbooking as an in-between solution. I believe Europe has higher mandated minimums for IDB. greater financial disincentives for IDB could force airlines to try harder to find VDB to avoid precisely this situation without ending the practice of overbooking entirely.
jbb is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:44 am
  #2800  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,752
Originally Posted by LordHamster
Fixed it for ya'

Compensation of Involuntary Denied Boarding (IDB) situations are defined by the DOT. This situation would never have gotten to this point if they had offered appropriate incentives when asking for volunteers. Even at the point of IDB, nothing is stoping United from offering MORE than the compensation minimums defined by the DOT.
Of course, had UAL knew what was to transpire, they would have offered much more. Absent of any insights this would occur, there is no legal obligation to offer more. I can pay more for the sticker price of a car, but why would I?

Barring a crystal ball into future events, it makes zero sense for any business to routinely offer more compensation than what they legally must. The exception would be in specific instances where the extra compensation is warranted, but it's unrealistic to expect not only UAL employees, but any Airline GA to expect this PR nightmare would have unfolded.

No one had the luxury of hindsight during the decision making process.
Visconti is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:45 am
  #2801  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,583
Originally Posted by PV_Premier
my only question is, will this become the most commented/viewed thread in UA forum history? or at least for 2017?
"most" commented on, who knows. Fastest to 1000 posts, 2000 posts and now almost 3000, it sure seems like on this measurement, it is #1 .
halls120 is online now  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:46 am
  #2802  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: ORD
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Platinum/LT Platinum, Hilton Gold
Posts: 5,594
Originally Posted by jbb

Your last part is an over-statement. I am at least one person who would absolutely and have paid a premium to not fly United long-haul precisely because of what I feel is worse customer service relative to Asian or Middle East carriers. SQ charges a premium and offers a better product and that business model has worked much better for them over the past 5 decades then it has for United which had to file for bankruptcy in 2002.
But you're a frequent flier. If an incident like this happened on SQ, would you stop flying with them?

People who aren't frequent fliers, and aren't wealthy (i.e. the average American, who makes up most of UA's customer base) choose based on price, schedule, and nonstop vs. indirect routing. In fact, as a long time frequent flier, that's EXACTLY how I purchase for family members when I help them buy a ticket, because it's just common sense. Not once have any of those family members said "oh I can't fly UA because they broke a guitar, or won't let me wear leggings" or whatever happens on DL or AA, etc. Their questions are how much does that cost and what time do I get there.
JBord is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:47 am
  #2803  
J S
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 592
Originally Posted by Enhancements
Can't wait till this blows up in Asia (cough- China), given that the passenger was of Asian descent and the optics of this looks dreadful.


They've certainly made their bed here; they get to sleep in it now.
It already has: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/11/w...ged-china.html
J S is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:49 am
  #2804  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Houston/DC
Programs: UA 1K, 1MM
Posts: 564
Originally Posted by makin'miles
The fact that the doctor's past has now made the mainstream media will make this settlement even more expensive for United, as he will likely be able to successfully argue that United mistreating him will have a direct, financial effect on his ability to generate income.
His past is his past and I wish for anyone that they can move on from it and become a better person. I feel for him as I feel for all innocent victims of the internet mob. That includes people, organizations & corporations that are sometimes vilified in a flash for situations before all the facts are in.

That being said, I don't know how his future earnings potential due to his past actions being uncovered is United's liability.

If you want to blame anyone for ruining his future, look at yourself (a collective ourselves). It is the internet mob that is attacking United that did this as much as anyone. You can say it is not, but when stuff like this happens, the mob has to find out everything about everything to satisfy its appetite. It runs roughshod over everything in its path.

It is a statement to the lack of decorum that has developed over many years as people embrace the anonymity of sitting behind a keyboard
FlyngSvyr is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 9:50 am
  #2805  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Programs: UA 1K, 1MM
Posts: 504
Originally Posted by Visconti
Of course, had UAL knew what was to transpire, they would have offered much more. Absent of any insights this would occur, there is no legal obligation to offer more. I can pay more for the sticker price of a car, but why would I?

Barring a crystal ball into future events, it makes zero sense for any business to routinely offer more compensation than what they legally must. The exception would be in specific instances where the extra compensation is warranted, but it's unrealistic to expect not only UAL employees, but any Airline GA to expect this PR nightmare would have unfolded.

No one had the luxury of hindsight during the decision making process.
I don't know. especially after a plane has boarded you don't think the marginal difference between increasing VDB and forcing an IDB because of bottom line costs and pissing off passengers isn't a foreseeable event?
ACVBear 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.