Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

Man pulled off of overbooked flight UA3411 (ORD-SDF) 9 Apr 2017 {Settlement reached}

Old Apr 10, 2017, 8:42 pm
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
WELCOME, THREAD GUIDELINES and SUMMARY PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

If you are new to us, welcome to FlyerTalk! Who we are: FlyerTalk features discussions and chat boards that cover the most up-to-date traveler information; an interactive community dedicated to the topic of travel (not politics or arguments about politics or religion, etc. – those discussion are best in the OMNI forum)

The incident discussed in this thread has touched a nerve for many, and many posters are passionate about their opinions and concerns. However we should still have a civil and respectful discussion of this topic. This is because FlyerTalk is meant to be a friendly, helpful, and collegial community. (Rule 12.)

1. The normal FlyerTalk Rules apply. (Including not discussing moderation actions in thread). Please be particularly attentive to "discussing the idea and not the poster" when you have a disagreement. Civility and mutual respect are still expected and are what we owe each other as a community.

2. You are expected to respect the FlyerTalk community's diversity, and therefore refrain from posting inflammatory comments about race, religion, culture, politics, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. Do not cite, copy, or report on such.

3. While you can disagree with an opinion, the holder of that opinion has the same right to their opinion as you have to yours. We request all to respect that and disagree or discuss their point of views without getting overly personal and without attacking the other poster(s). This is expected as a requirement in FT Rule 12.

4. Overly exaggerative posts as well as posts with information that has been posted several times previously may be summarily deleted.

5. In addition, those who repeatedly fail to comply with FlyerTalk Rules, may be subjected to FlyerTalk disciplinary actions and, e.g., have membership privileges suspended, or masked from this forum.

If you have questions about the Rules or concerns about what another has posted in this or other threads in this forum, please do not post about that. Rather, notify the moderators by using the alert symbol within each post or email or send a private message to us moderators.

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}

Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:34 am
  #181  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SJC, SFO, YYC
Programs: AA-EXP, AA-0.41MM, UA-Gold, Ex UA-1K (2006 thru 2015), PMUA-0.95MM, COUA-1.5MM-lite, AF-Silver
Posts: 13,437
Originally Posted by fly18725
Outside of your supposition, there is nothing to indicate this was a W&B issue.
The pax was boarded. Ergo, it was not an over booking.

The plane was an RJ and every seat taken. Ergo it was overweight.

I've seen pax pulled off boarded plans countless times; I used to live in COS.
mre5765 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:34 am
  #182  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: ORF, RIC
Programs: UA LT 1K, 3 MM; Marriott Titanium; IHG Platinum
Posts: 6,930
Originally Posted by BRAISKI

The media will have a day with this and the passenger being an MD makes the story even better.
It appears on the headline page of USAtoday.com now. It will have negative impacts on UA, unfortunately.
Kmxu is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:34 am
  #183  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: North America
Posts: 2,265
Originally Posted by Dieuwer
Then the FA will scream "terrorism!" and you will be beaten and dragged of the plane like an animal. Is that what you want?
FA's have extreme power these days with their "comply or else" attitude.
This.
CodeAdam10 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:34 am
  #184  
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: 100,368
Originally Posted by phltraveler
This is what I don't get. Some news sources say the passenger was dragged off by "security officers". United's current statement says they notified law enforcement.

If they're private security then UA is liable for whatever they did (or at least looks worse for it). If it's cops and the passenger won't leave when given a lawful order to leave the aircraft, they have to arrest him or remove him involuntarily. The optics look horrible from the videos/controversy but as long as it was cops and not UA private security/flight crew physically removing him how is this UA's fault?



He's not saying that a 70 seater can't have weight issues, but under the DOT regs if it's a 30-60 seat aircraft you can IDB for it and there's no need to give the person the regulation compensation under that rule. 70 seaters they can.

Other news articles mention the reason as needing to have four Republic Airlines employees deadheading to fly a flight from the destination airport the next morning, so it was an IDB to get their employees to the distant airport.
The video looked like the first two guys who boarded weren't wearing police uniforms but had what looked like black fleece jackets or sweatshirts that said POLICE on the back. The guy who actually pulled the passenger off the flight came a bit later and did not wear a uniform or anything that indicated law enforcement. He was wearing blue jeans and some kind of black fleece jacket or sweatshirt, but it did NOT say police.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:35 am
  #185  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Originally Posted by deniah
When he paid for the ticket he entered into a contract. That means very much.

If you go back to root-cause, the very clearest mistake is the carrier overselling the seats. Not the guy being denied service at the absolute last second. Therefore it is on them to resolve the situation in a way more amicable than physically yanking someone off against their will.
United has the contractual right to deny boarding, which I suppose they'd argue can take place up until the door closes. There are contractual specified remedies for denied boarding.
fly18725 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:35 am
  #186  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Programs: WN, AA, UA, DL
Posts: 1,313
Originally Posted by phltraveler
He's not saying that a 70 seater can't have weight issues, but under the DOT regs if it's a 30-60 seat aircraft you can IDB for it and there's no need to give the person the regulation compensation under that rule. 70 seaters they can.

Other news articles mention the reason as needing to have four Republic Airlines employees deadheading to fly a flight from the destination airport the next morning, so it was an IDB to get their employees to the distant airport.
I know that what's the poster said. I'm saying that with the 60-seat rule there would be no incentive for the airline to claim that.
minnyfly is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:35 am
  #187  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Somewhere in EWR
Programs: UA GS, HH Diamond
Posts: 858
Originally Posted by mysterym
We live in America and that means being afforded certain rights such as freedom of speech and expression...
The rights of free speech and expression only apply to when the government attempts to curtail them.
AugustusM is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:36 am
  #188  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Programs: AA Plat, UA 1K>Plat>moving to Silver
Posts: 2,075
UA was certainly tone-deaf from a business perspective on this, but if anyone thinks their paying for a seat is some sort of guarantee they will get that seat and get to their destination on time, I do not think they have travelled much. I am sure the average occasional flyer is under that impression since most of the time it works out fine. But the Contract of Carriage is what controls, and it is largely one-sided towards the airline.
Artpen100 is online now  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:36 am
  #189  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: K+K
Programs: *G
Posts: 4,865
Originally Posted by iquitos
What criteria are used to select a passenger for IDB? time of check-in, status, fare paid, etc. Or is it jus shenanigans at the podium which I suspect are more common that was want to believe.
In the united CoC it's actually a combination of these
deniah is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:36 am
  #190  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,718
Originally Posted by zombietooth
So we are all making judgements with incomplete information.
What's interesting is that Flyertalk is coming out pro-airline and anti-passenger, and Reddit is coming out the other way round.
BearX220 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:36 am
  #191  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: LHR, HKG
Programs: gate lice
Posts: 315
[Unduly personalized text edited by Moderator per FT Rule 12.]

There is absolutely no excuse to support what happened to that man. Oh, it's just another case of the internet going ham! It's his fault for not driving instead! It's Republic Airlines and UA Express, not UA! Maybe he wasn't a doctor. He only claimed he was, the media didn't verify it, blah blah blah. I don't care. Doctor or not, no pax should be treated that way, and the fact that some FTers here are trying to play around with semantics trying to defend UA in every way possible is ridiculous.

I applaud this man for standing his ground. Customer service needs to be held to a higher standard, and the number of you here who cave so easily to incompetent management is why customer service will continue to suck. This would never, ever happen on a CX or NH or SQ flight.

This is why I avoid U.S. carriers and U.S. transits as much as I can, despite the cheap prices. Rent-a-thug cops and third-world infrastructure. FAs and GAs who look at you as if you just strangled their firstborn after the slightest of questions.

Yes, I know that the GAs offered what they needed for IDB -- 4 x $100 = $400. They did what they had to based on the contract of carriage. But it's a bloody disgrace for any airline to do the bare minimum that they are required to do to accommodate a passenger who paid for a seat, and heck, and already sitting in that seat! It would not bankrupt UA to offer $1,000 or $2,000.

Doing the bare minimum required is why UA is disappointing to say the least, and why U.S. carriers are generally inferior.

I can't deny I've heard great things about Oscar. This is another chance to prove he's not all talk.

Last edited by Ocn Vw 1K; Apr 10, 2017 at 9:45 am Reason: See note above.
leungy18 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:37 am
  #192  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SJC, SFO, YYC
Programs: AA-EXP, AA-0.41MM, UA-Gold, Ex UA-1K (2006 thru 2015), PMUA-0.95MM, COUA-1.5MM-lite, AF-Silver
Posts: 13,437
Originally Posted by Dieuwer
Then the FA will scream "terrorism!" and you will be beaten and dragged of the plane like an animal. Is that what you want?
FA's have extreme power these days with their "comply or else" attitude.
I wrote GA.

I was referring to what happens at the gate when the con to accept a VDB in an IDB situation starts.

Yes I quite agree that onboard, even when the plane is parked, ones freedom to use a mobile device is at the whim of the FA and cabin crew.
mre5765 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:37 am
  #193  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,404
UA is paying a huge price lately for not taking active steps to rid itself of legacy staff who view the customer as an enemy.
Kacee is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:37 am
  #194  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 34
Originally Posted by PushingTin
And he gets back on somehow?
https://mobile.twitter.com/Tyler_Bri...663552/video/1

Love to get the inside story on this.
I'm going to guess: The gate agent saw this poor guy being dragged down the jetway all roughed up and bloodied, which clearly wasn't the intent. They panicked and hurriedly pushed him back into the plane, hoping that it would all just go away. The rest is history.
shinbob is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 9:38 am
  #195  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: New York
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott LTPP, Hertz Five Star
Posts: 1,075
Originally Posted by chavala
imagine what this world would be like if we all just shut up and did as we were told by various "authorities" . This guy stood up for his rights, he knew he hadn't done anything wrong. He faced a huge humiliation, and in return he will come out looking like a hero. Good on him.
This is not an issue of rights, it's an issue of contract. US DOT regulations (The law) and United's Contract of Carriage allows them to involuntarily deny boarding to passengers after they have sought volunteers to be voluntarily denied boarding and received none/not enough vs. need to bump. You can argue that oversale is a ...... practice (it might of not even be the culprit in this case - news reports are saying they needed to get 4 deadheading crew to the destination airport for them to operate a flight the next morning, if they didn't have confirmed seats it's likely an earlier flight to take them out was cancelled or the original crew was there but exceeded hours).

I'm sure with the PR nightmare and news fiasco this guy will end up doing just fine, but UA was allowed to (under their own contract and the law), and with the current airline rules IDBs are a rare but distinct possibility. Maximizing your rights under the law (e.g. IDB compensation) is totally justified, but refusing to leave the plane when ordered to by a flight crew is just a bad idea, period.
phltraveler is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.