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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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 13, 2017, 5:29 pm
  #5131  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by WorldLux
We must have seen different videos. Dr. Dao didn't impress me as someone wanting to escalate things. Moreover, this still wouldn't excuse the attitude you so aptly described: "Call the cops to get rid of this nuisance. They'll either intimidate him into submission or drag his a$$ out!"
You don't have to be belligerent to escalate things. Just ask my wife

Compare his injuries to the injuries the cop received... oh right ... he wasn't. Call me old-fashioned, but if when a police officer, who's job is to protect and serve, knocks out 2 teeth, breaks a nose and gives a passenger a concussion for refusing to comply with an unjust refusal of carriage, then we have a problem and it's definitely not the fault of the victim.
Hmmm, I must have missed where they Rodney Kinged him then.

I don't think it's any cop's place to tell them to resolve the situation. Staying out of it and saying it's civil and figure it out? Sure. But asked to leave and refusing? Ok, things can get ugly - intentionally or not. At that point, it's not really going to matter what's justified or not in the moment (and I'm NOT saying that that's right). At that point, I can either comply with the unjust demand and file complaints and, if applicable, lawsuits later or I can get my @ss kicked. It's not a choice I should have to make, but it is what it is at that point. Personally, I'd rather file complaints after the fact, demand compensation, and never give them a cent again vs getting decked. Sure, the latter may "pay" better in the end, but is it worth all the pain, suffering, surgeries, disfigurement, etc?

You know what would've happen if a cop with a little more critical thinking would have done? Talked to both sides. Have them make better offers. Deal with this peacefully. These guys acted as UA private security and not sworn officers. That's a different issue though.
And that's part of the risk one has to assess when the cops show up. Ideally, you get the ones you mention come up. If that's the case, by all means, plead your case and hope for the best. If they sided with UA, then there's not much you can do at that moment, so the choice then is to leave or escalate. And even with the "good" cops, something can go wrong when things get physical.

I think the difference is you (and many others) are looking at this idealistically and what should have happened. Sure, in a perfect world, UA would have managed its schedule or dealt with the crew issue behind the scenes and the pax never would have known. I'm looking at it more pragmatically. I agree 100% that the ideal should have happened, but it didn't. So the question becomes is this something I'm really willing to take that stand on? In some instances, that answer would be yes. But for an airline seat? I'm thinking not.

But even if it were a situation such as my mother or wife dying, if an unjust request is made to deboard, I'm not making it home on that flight regardless. If my wife died while dealing with other arrangements, you're damn right I'd be pissed I wasn't there. But with noncompliance, I'm not seeing the funeral and in the absolute worst case, I'd be joining her. With the latter, I'd be late but still get there.

I doubt that the frequently mentioned EU261 regulation would be better. Europe does however IMO have much better consumer protection laws, which would apply to CoC and contracts of carriage. Plenty of US companies that had clauses in the T&C or contracts voided, because they didn't comply with consumer protection laws.
I think it makes them think a lot harder before doing an IDB, especially when there are simpler procedures for filing a complaint and the compensation is pretty cut and dry. When messing with DoT on the other hand ...
Superguy is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:31 pm
  #5132  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by leungy18
Extortion?

Many FTers here have suggested a reasonable solution here: make IDB hurt for UA so that this never happens again.

IDB should hurt the airline. A pax who buys a ticket has a logical expectation to fly on the plane in the fare class they paid for. If an airline is unable to fulfill that expectation because they sold the same seat to two people, then they should be forced via "auction" to offer reasonable VDB.

Common sense and customer service is not extortion. Hold your airlines to a higher standard, whether that's through boycotts or conversations with your elected officials.
Thing is, they're not going to pay more for a VDB than an IDB (which is set by regulation) - funny money or not. They'll just cancel it. Then everyone loses it.
Superguy is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:34 pm
  #5133  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by LHR/MEL/Europe FF
Battle lost? Sure. But war won. Not only for the passenger, but for the rest of us as well.

I was involved in a weather related delay in SDF several years ago. The weather was out of UA's control, but their handling of the delay was not. The handling by the gate agent was atrocious... she called the police and three officers bullied passengers into submission. Passengers were advised they couldn't even ask for flight information or they would be removed.

Let's hope no more of that rubbish in the future either.
And thank you for making my point. I'm not saying the war's over by any means. Keep fighting and hold them accountable for that behavior. And if they don't make it right - well, vote with your wallet. I've left lots of airlines in the past for service issues and stupidity. I know I'm not the only one.

But in that moment with 3 LEOs and a nasty GA? Yeah, you're not going to win that battle no matter how right you are.
Superguy is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:34 pm
  #5134  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,443
Originally Posted by GadgetFreak
I understand the difference. But a rule change or law change should obviate that clause of the contract. Let UA work out the compensation details with their pilots union.
FWIW, the pilots at issue were not UA, so United's relationship with its pilots is irrelevant to the present matter... I'm not debating the merits, just pointing out the nature of the arrangement as a matter of fact.
EWR764 is online now  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:35 pm
  #5135  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: SNA
Programs: AA gold, DL Gold, HHonors Diamond, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Plat
Posts: 446
In an email obtained by CNN, the airline told its passengers it was offering them $500 flight vouchers but only if they agreed not to sue the company.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/13/travel...eak/index.html
PilgrimsProgress is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:38 pm
  #5136  
sw3
Used to be 'etrevino'
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: MTY
Programs: AA, BA, AM Plat, HH Silver, SPG Gold, Amex Plat
Posts: 134
Originally Posted by DrPSB
On April 9, 2017, United Express Flight 3411, operated by Republic, was preparing to depart Chicago O’Hare (ORD) to Louisville (SDF). Republic Airline made the decision to assign four of their crewmembers to deadhead on Flight 3411 within minutes of the scheduled departure. Although four passengers would have to be removed from this flight to accommodate the Republic crew
I wonder if the whole timeline of all related events has been confirmed somewhere. There was a flight from Denver to Louisville operated by Trans State, not Republic, that was being delayed precisely around the moment the Republic 3411 was boarding, and ultimately was delayed for more than two hours, making that Trans State crew ineligible to operate the 9:20 flight next day. I'd bet on the 3411 flight having to accommodate Trans State ERJ145 crew, not Republic crew. See my post here, nothing confirmed, just a likely sequence of what really happened taken from public data.
sw3 is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:39 pm
  #5137  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 561
Originally Posted by Superguy
Thing is, they're not going to pay more for a VDB than an IDB (which is set by regulation) - funny money or not. They'll just cancel it. Then everyone loses it.
I suspect that UA and others will be rethinking this quite a bit. More moolah (especially more useful moohlah) in VDB would generally avoid bad feelings all the way around. Cheap at the price. Back when airlines gave real "anywhere in the Continental US we fly" tickets for VDB there were generally more takers than seats that were needed. Of course, back then, gate agents apparently had a lot more authority to do what seemed reasonable rather than what a computer restricted them to do.
lupine is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:39 pm
  #5138  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by GadgetFreak
Define lost. I'm guessing he's getting somewhere around $5,000,000 for standing his ground and maybe changes to how airlines operate. He paid some for it, but many more have paid much more for far less.
I don't call $5M for getting my butt kicked and having to live with the consequences for the rest of my life winning. I might be wealthy, but I certainly wouldn't have won.

Having been in a life changing accident where I will have some remaining disability for the rest of my life, money won't bring back the function I lost or get rid of the scars. If I came into money, I'd much rather be able to enjoy it fully rather than it just be a make up for something lost. YMMV.
Superguy is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:41 pm
  #5139  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,420
Originally Posted by PilgrimsProgress
In an email obtained by CNN, the airline told its passengers it was offering them $500 flight vouchers but only if they agreed not to sue the company.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/13/travel...eak/index.html
Here's the quote:
A United spokesperson told CNN affiliate WBBM, "All customers on flight 3411 from Sunday, April 9 are receiving compensation for the cost of their tickets." In an email obtained by CNN, the airline told its passengers it was offering them $500 flight vouchers but only if they agreed not to sue the company.
This just keeps getting worse and worse.
Kacee is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:41 pm
  #5140  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by lupine
I suspect that UA and others will be rethinking this quite a bit. More moolah (especially more useful moohlah) in VDB would generally avoid bad feelings all the way around. Cheap at the price. Back when airlines gave real "anywhere in the Continental US we fly" tickets for VDB there were generally more takers than seats that were needed. Of course, back then, gate agents apparently had a lot more authority to do what seemed reasonable rather than what a computer restricted them to do.
True that.

Doing the right thing up front may cost more up front, but usually a lot less than cleaning up the mess when you gamble and lose big.
Superguy is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:43 pm
  #5141  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis, MN (MSP)
Programs: DL DM, UA 1K MM, Subway Club Member
Posts: 1,988
Originally Posted by lupine
I suspect that UA and others will be rethinking this quite a bit. More moolah (especially more useful moohlah) in VDB would generally avoid bad feelings all the way around. Cheap at the price. Back when airlines gave real "anywhere in the Continental US we fly" tickets for VDB there were generally more takers than seats that were needed. Of course, back then, gate agents apparently had a lot more authority to do what seemed reasonable rather than what a computer restricted them to do.
DL gives AMEX cash cards for VDBs.
kenn0223 is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:46 pm
  #5142  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,401
Originally Posted by Superguy
And thank you for making my point. I'm not saying the war's over by any means. Keep fighting and hold them accountable for that behavior. And if they don't make it right - well, vote with your wallet. I've left lots of airlines in the past for service issues and stupidity. I know I'm not the only one.

But in that moment with 3 LEOs and a nasty GA? Yeah, you're not going to win that battle no matter how right you are.
Voting with your wallet is unlikely to achieve anything. Certainly not get the attention of congress. 'Is overbooking a problem?' they'd ask the airlines... who'd respond with 'no, we manage it just fine'.

But they don't 'manage it just fine'. This has brought the publicity it needs. Voting with your wallet wouldn't get the CEO of UA confirming law enforcement won't be used in similar situations in the future. It's effected substantial and immediate change... both for airline policy and law enforcement policy.

Would I have the guts to do it? Probably not. But this guy did.
LHR/MEL/Europe FF is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:48 pm
  #5143  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis, MN (MSP)
Programs: DL DM, UA 1K MM, Subway Club Member
Posts: 1,988
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
I think the status of these guys is pretty murky but there is, or was, an effort before the Chicago Aldermen to approve these folks authority to be armed. I would think that would require LEO status, whatever that means, in that state.
I bet whoever was pushing the idea that these security guards be armed is thanking their lucky stars that it wasn't approved. Can you imagine if they shot him? Not only would there be an even larger public reaction but there would likely be an airplane (and maybe some of the surrounding passengers) with extra holes.
kenn0223 is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:48 pm
  #5144  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by GrayAnderson
The IDB option needs to exist to prevent an extortion situation from arising out of an overbook. Let's presume that there were no legal IDB option...what's to prevent the pax onboard from more or less banding together and trying to force a demand of $70k out of United with an agreement to split up the proceeds? So there arguably does need to be a lever at times.

However, that lever should hurt. Maximum damages of $1350 (potentially held down by various ways of monkeying around with the calculation of the flight cost, ensuring that the cheapest ticket is the one they cancel, etc.) doesn't strike me as something that actually really hurts. If the airline is defaulting to IDBing after only offering to absorb a liability of around $300-350 ($200 for the voucher at 25% of face value plus a presumed $100-150 for the hotel, etc.) on a 24-hour delay, that tells me that the incentives to avoid IDBing are insufficient.
I agree that it should hurt. Fines if it happens more than a certain percentage of times may also help encourage them. But yeah, I agree with the balance too. I'm thinking length of flight, fare paid, time inconvenienced, international/domestic, should factor in. It'd be dumb to have to pay the same IDB for a transcon as a short hop. Granted, short hops can be expensive too hence the cost factor. But at the same time an arbitrary cap can encourage them to roll the dice too.

I'd even suggest throwing in the person's cost of missed accommodations, tours, etc caused by an IDB.
Superguy is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 5:49 pm
  #5145  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Programs: Amtrak Guest Rewards (SE), Virgin America Elevate, Hyatt Gold Passport (Platinum), VIA Preference
Posts: 3,134
Originally Posted by Superguy
I don't call $5M for getting my butt kicked and having to live with the consequences for the rest of my life winning. I might be wealthy, but I certainly wouldn't have won.

Having been in a life changing accident where I will have some remaining disability for the rest of my life, money won't bring back the function I lost or get rid of the scars. If I came into money, I'd much rather be able to enjoy it fully rather than it just be a make up for something lost. YMMV.
Legal pleadings aside, it really depends on the scars, the "actual" damage from the incident, and what you do with it. A prominent-but-not-disfiguring scar on par with what one might get from a sports accident of some kind? Keep your chin up and consider it a conversation piece. Hell, as popular as both CPD and the airline industry are you might get more than a few free drinks. I'm actually getting an image in my mind of some vet at the local Legion hall being asked about some scars: "I got this one in Iraq, this one in Afghanistan..." "What about that one?" "United flight. So, no .... there I was..."
GrayAnderson 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.