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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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
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.
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
- Passenger one row behind and on the aisle footage BEFORE man was dragged off https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=655_1492004707
- Videos of man being removed https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4b7_1491983214 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nAZEk6nsNE
- Video of man re-entering plane https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNEQDWpYbZA (link dead)
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
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.
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
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
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
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
- Chicago Aviation Department said on the Monday afternoon after the incident that the officer who had dragged the passenger off the plane had been placed on leave pending an investigation. Spokesperson Karen Pride said in an email that "The incident on United flight 3411 was not in accordance with our standard operating procedure and the actions of the aviation security officer are obviously not condoned by the Department."
- 4/12/17: Two more Chicago Aviation officers involved are suspended
- Muñoz does ABC interview, announcing United will no longer use law enforcement to remove passengers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90jSUe_vdhM
- United announces policy change that crews traveling on their aircraft must be booked at least 60 minutes prior to departure.
- United releases multiple changes in overbooking / denied boarding policies "We are making changes to ensure that we always put customers first" (http://newsroom.united.com/2017-04-2...mer-Experience) released 27 April 2017
- Statement from United Airlines Regarding Resolution with Dr. David Dao - released 27 April 2017
- Response to Senate Commerce Committee questions - 1 May 2017
- United Airlines PR Boss to Step Down
- James Long, one of several officers involved in removing David Dao from the April 9, 2017, flight to make room for airline employees, filed suit on Tuesday against United, Chicago’s Department of Aviation and its commissioner, Ginger Evans. The lawsuit, filed in the circuit court of Cook County, Illinois, alleges he was not properly trained on how to use force.
Poll: Your Opinion of United Airlines
Poll link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/KP68GYG
Results link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/results...Q6B2B/instant/
Reference MaterialResults link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/results...Q6B2B/instant/
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.aspxIf 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.
Man pulled off of overbooked flight UA3411 (ORD-SDF) 9 Apr 2017 {Settlement reached}
#5416
Original Member and FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Kansas City, MO, USA
Programs: DL PM/MM, AA ExPlat, Hyatt Glob, HH Dia, National ECE, Hertz PC
Posts: 16,579
While this was a Republic operated flight, selling tickets on the flight is the responsibility of United, not Republic. VDB/IDB is solely a United problem, it can't be pawned off on their contract carriers.
#5417
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Programs: UA GS
Posts: 2,438
e-mail from Oscar
Anyone else get this email this morning? Not sure if it only went to GS (and I couldn't find it in this impossible thread):
Dear Mr. villox,
I've heard a lot of understandable anger and disappointment this week from customers and, as one of our most valued customers, I wanted to be sure you heard directly from me.
The awful event that occurred on Flight 3411 has elicited many responses from our customers: outrage, anger, disappointment. I share all of those sentiments. For me personally, I'd add shame. No one should ever be mistreated this way.
In addition to offering my profound apologies to the customer forcibly removed, as well as all the passengers aboard that particular flight, I also offer my sincere apology to you for not living up to the values you expect of us.
Our customers' satisfaction must be the center of everything we do and your opinion of our service is the measure of our success. We know we did not measure up, and for that we will redouble our efforts to earn your trust.
This situation has provided a humbling learning experience from which we will take immediate, concrete action. I have committed to our customers and our employees that we are going to make this right so nothing like this ever happens again.
First, we are committing that United will not ask law enforcement officers to remove passengers from our flights unless it is a matter of safety and security. Second, we've started a thorough review of policies that govern crew movement, incentivizing volunteers in these situations and how we handle oversold situations. Third, we will fully review and improve our training programs to ensure our employees are prepared and empowered to put our customers first. Our values will guide everything we do. We'll communicate the results of our review and the actions we will take by April 30.
You expect more from us and I promise we can and will be better. I am committed to putting proof behind our promise.
Thank you for granting us the opportunity to re-earn your trust.
Sincerely,
Oscar Munoz
CEO
United Airlines
I've heard a lot of understandable anger and disappointment this week from customers and, as one of our most valued customers, I wanted to be sure you heard directly from me.
The awful event that occurred on Flight 3411 has elicited many responses from our customers: outrage, anger, disappointment. I share all of those sentiments. For me personally, I'd add shame. No one should ever be mistreated this way.
In addition to offering my profound apologies to the customer forcibly removed, as well as all the passengers aboard that particular flight, I also offer my sincere apology to you for not living up to the values you expect of us.
Our customers' satisfaction must be the center of everything we do and your opinion of our service is the measure of our success. We know we did not measure up, and for that we will redouble our efforts to earn your trust.
This situation has provided a humbling learning experience from which we will take immediate, concrete action. I have committed to our customers and our employees that we are going to make this right so nothing like this ever happens again.
First, we are committing that United will not ask law enforcement officers to remove passengers from our flights unless it is a matter of safety and security. Second, we've started a thorough review of policies that govern crew movement, incentivizing volunteers in these situations and how we handle oversold situations. Third, we will fully review and improve our training programs to ensure our employees are prepared and empowered to put our customers first. Our values will guide everything we do. We'll communicate the results of our review and the actions we will take by April 30.
You expect more from us and I promise we can and will be better. I am committed to putting proof behind our promise.
Thank you for granting us the opportunity to re-earn your trust.
Sincerely,
Oscar Munoz
CEO
United Airlines
#5418
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,575
Indeed, I've never had an airline book a rental car for me. I'm sure it's liability...and I've never even seen anything like a voucher system between airlines and rental agencies (like there is for hotels).
#5419
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 2
Hi all. Long time flyertalk reader, but never posted. This incident moved me to action.
First off $800 is a ridiculous limit on the gate agent compensation.
Second, the flight where they violently drag Dr. Dao was not an overbooked flight, the United crew that wanted his seat was not booked for the flight, they had seated all the passengers already and a United flight crew for another flight showed up and the airline decided they needed to put them in this flight and throw off their passengers. My guess is crew had late members for another scheduled flight for the crew, not going to speculate why they were late, but regardless it was not overbooked. This makes the compensation limit even more ridiculous.
Last, but not least what kind of idiotic booting prioritization system does not take the person's profession into account. A pilot rated to fly on that type of plane and medical physicians have uses in emergencies (case in point above) and should be one priority level up since they will render free aid in the event of an emergency. Maybe even higher, your gold status isn't going to help my heart attack or acute appendicitis.
First off $800 is a ridiculous limit on the gate agent compensation.
Second, the flight where they violently drag Dr. Dao was not an overbooked flight, the United crew that wanted his seat was not booked for the flight, they had seated all the passengers already and a United flight crew for another flight showed up and the airline decided they needed to put them in this flight and throw off their passengers. My guess is crew had late members for another scheduled flight for the crew, not going to speculate why they were late, but regardless it was not overbooked. This makes the compensation limit even more ridiculous.
Last, but not least what kind of idiotic booting prioritization system does not take the person's profession into account. A pilot rated to fly on that type of plane and medical physicians have uses in emergencies (case in point above) and should be one priority level up since they will render free aid in the event of an emergency. Maybe even higher, your gold status isn't going to help my heart attack or acute appendicitis.
Last edited by elcaudillo; Apr 14, 2017 at 8:01 am
#5420
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 825
An unfortunate effect of the "Great Airline Consolidation" is that the airlines have greatly down-gauged their capacities. I remember an experience I had with a disruption on the old Northwest airlines due to a cancellation. NW used to have 8 mainline flights a day non-stop from DTW to Green Bay thus allowing easy re-accommodation, now Delta has 3 and 2 of these are smaller partner flights.
The Over-sales CFR refers to delays of 2 and 4 hours, which unfortunately has become a bit of a joke. More common are longer delays such as the 22 hours which Dr. Dao was quoted for re-accommodation which IMO is simply unacceptable.
The Over-sales CFR refers to delays of 2 and 4 hours, which unfortunately has become a bit of a joke. More common are longer delays such as the 22 hours which Dr. Dao was quoted for re-accommodation which IMO is simply unacceptable.
I think this incident plus Delta's giant mess last week have demonstrated that capacity on many routes is now TOO low. The airlines haven't cared much until now, because they were able to push the resulting negative externalities onto individual passengers who had no real recourse. Now there's no covering up the issue any more.
And if dealing with the issue causes ticket prices to go up, so be it. A properly priced item is one where the cost charged incorporates the true cost of negative externalities. An item that does not incorporate those costs is priced artificially low.
#5421
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 193
So they didn't actually provide me with a rental car, but they did pay for it.
#5422
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Nawthun Virginia
Programs: Air: UA (Gold), AA, WN, DL; Hotel: Hilton (Diamond), plus all the rest
Posts: 135
#5423
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,413
2. Part of the problem is that the guys who responded were *not* law enforcement officers, although it wouldn't have been a good idea for UA to get real law enforcement officers to handle the situation either.
#5424
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Cleveland, OH
Programs: UA-GS 1MM), Hertz Pres Circle, Starriott Titanium)
Posts: 1,966
#5427
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,460
It's a super lame letter. They don't get it. "Let's just tinker with our IDB procedures and everything will be just fine. Nothing else wrong here. And by the way, I'm not going to apologize for blaming the victim and totally mishandling this situation for the first 36 hours."
I don't think Oscar is up to this task.
#5428
Join Date: Aug 2012
Programs: AA PLT, SPG Gold
Posts: 2,405
I tried to find the posts regarding that blog post in this thread but that's worse than trying to find the proverbial needle. That blog post does seem heavy on hyperbole and light on facts, however - at least to this untrained eye.
Question for those of you legally inclined: I'm debating this incident with a friend. She's insistent that the passenger is in the wrong for not obeying the airline staff/rent-a-cops and therefore isn't owed anything. I'm countering that it's highly debatable whether UA or the rent-a-cops had any grounds for removing him from the plane. He already boarded so can't be denied boarding, and from what I've seen, nowhere does UA's COC say that passengers can be refused transport if a "must-ride" passenger needs their seat (especially after already boarding). In addition, I can't find any federal law/reg mandating the transport of "must-ride" passengers at the expense of ticketed passengers outside of an airline's COC. So of course an airline can deny boarding to ticketed passengers if they need to accomodate must-rides, but I don't find any legal basis for the forcible removal of a boarded, seated passenger - to accomodate a must-ride. And Dr. Dao - flawed character that he is - certainly had not been a threat or disruptive until the hired goons arrived.
Am I way off base here? IMO yes you generally need to obey the commands of a LEO/airline crew, however if those commands are not within the law, then you are not obligated to follow them - amirite? I.e. if a FA tells you to pour boiling water on another passenger, you certainly are not breaking any laws by refusing to do so (crude example but y'all get the point).
Question for those of you legally inclined: I'm debating this incident with a friend. She's insistent that the passenger is in the wrong for not obeying the airline staff/rent-a-cops and therefore isn't owed anything. I'm countering that it's highly debatable whether UA or the rent-a-cops had any grounds for removing him from the plane. He already boarded so can't be denied boarding, and from what I've seen, nowhere does UA's COC say that passengers can be refused transport if a "must-ride" passenger needs their seat (especially after already boarding). In addition, I can't find any federal law/reg mandating the transport of "must-ride" passengers at the expense of ticketed passengers outside of an airline's COC. So of course an airline can deny boarding to ticketed passengers if they need to accomodate must-rides, but I don't find any legal basis for the forcible removal of a boarded, seated passenger - to accomodate a must-ride. And Dr. Dao - flawed character that he is - certainly had not been a threat or disruptive until the hired goons arrived.
Am I way off base here? IMO yes you generally need to obey the commands of a LEO/airline crew, however if those commands are not within the law, then you are not obligated to follow them - amirite? I.e. if a FA tells you to pour boiling water on another passenger, you certainly are not breaking any laws by refusing to do so (crude example but y'all get the point).
Last edited by no1cub17; Apr 14, 2017 at 8:37 am
#5429
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,597
1K, no letter.
It's a super lame letter. They don't get it. "Let's just tinker with our IDB procedures and everything will be just fine. Nothing else wrong here. And by the way, I'm not going to apologize for blaming the victim and totally mishandling this situation for the first 36 hours."
I don't think Oscar is up to this task.
It's a super lame letter. They don't get it. "Let's just tinker with our IDB procedures and everything will be just fine. Nothing else wrong here. And by the way, I'm not going to apologize for blaming the victim and totally mishandling this situation for the first 36 hours."
I don't think Oscar is up to this task.
#5430
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC: UA 1K, DL Platinum, AAirpass, Avis PC
Posts: 4,599
Okay, thanks--that part of the account was confusing from the start.
But the point stands: He probably paid much more than the $100 that United assigned to this leg, and being at the top of the stuckee list because of low-spend would therefore seem like nonsense.
Of course, the witnesses reported that the selection was made by the computer, or randomly, depending on which account one reads. (And most people who had not read the CofC, which is most people, would have conflated those two anyway.) So, it probably seemed entirely arbitrary to him.
If it does turn out that the GA walked the aisle with a manifest looking for easy targets, then that would make bad news for the GA even worse. But I don't assume that's what happened.
But the point stands: He probably paid much more than the $100 that United assigned to this leg, and being at the top of the stuckee list because of low-spend would therefore seem like nonsense.
Of course, the witnesses reported that the selection was made by the computer, or randomly, depending on which account one reads. (And most people who had not read the CofC, which is most people, would have conflated those two anyway.) So, it probably seemed entirely arbitrary to him.
If it does turn out that the GA walked the aisle with a manifest looking for easy targets, then that would make bad news for the GA even worse. But I don't assume that's what happened.
My reading of the CoC policy is that fare 'class' is what drives the sorting (i.e. L, T, Q, V), with check-in time as a tiebreaker. So the splitting of fare by segment wouldn't influence the priority.
One scenario is he was on an award ticket, and his wife wasn't.
Is it possible CEO Munoz has been asked for his resignation? Just curious since the course of events here continues to escalate. Note the United Pilots official statement distancing themselves from this mess. Maybe Munoz will announce he is taking a "medical leave" as a way of hiding from this? My own guess is that if CEO Munoz does not do at least one Sunday morning talk show, odds on that he's gone by month end.
United is announcing earnings on Tuesday, April 18.
They will be asked if this is having an impact on bookings.
My guess is with only a few days of data, yes there will be something to note. But no one knows the persistence of it.
He'll stick around unless things look bad next quarter.
But even the Target CEO stuck around after that debacle. That one had more grass roots, organized support that's contributed to the decline.
Last edited by cerealmarketer; Apr 14, 2017 at 8:32 am