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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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 11, 2017, 1:15 pm
  #3181  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,664
Originally Posted by The smallest state
I just read that the four employees, were not even United employees, but employees of another airline. This is getting bizarro.......
It has been pointed out many times in this thread that the crew was from RPA, the flight was operated by RPA, the local management is likely RPA and the gate agent might be RPA but is possibly the only UAL operations employee in this whole issue. Which highlights the risk of outsourcing basicly everything.
ROCAT is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:16 pm
  #3182  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 27,220
Originally Posted by Steffo
The airlines will now change their CoC's to give themselves all of the powers that folks like Minnfly wish for them to have.
I think this argument over the definition of boarding is a red herring. You don't have some inalienable rights that are endowed to you once you scan your boarding pass, or once you pass the threshold of the aircraft, or once you take your seat. And pretty sure the CoC doesn't endow them either. So now perhaps they'll re-write it to explicitly exclude those rights, and we all lose. And maybe they'll also explicitly add "operational reasons" as a valid reason to remove a passenger from a plane, as a CYA in the future. But maybe perhaps they'll also reduce overbooking levels and/or increase maximum VDB compensation and/or further empower agents with discretion in these matters.

Maybe the net change will be positive for passengers. We can hope.
ijgordon is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:16 pm
  #3183  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Providence RI
Programs: American Exec Plat, Hyatt Refugeeist, Marriot Gold, Air Canada Cattle Class, Korean Air Morning Plat
Posts: 988
]

Originally Posted by SteveHK
UA employee here. Literally just got this in my inbox addressed to all employees.

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

This actually sounds somewhat good. Lets hope it is an announcement of an action plan, not corporate BS
The smallest state is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:16 pm
  #3184  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: somewhere north of stateside...
Posts: 4,142
Originally Posted by SteveHK
UA employee here. Literally just got this in my inbox addressed to all employees.

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

Thanks for sharing.

The same message was just posted to United's Twitter account.
makin'miles is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:16 pm
  #3185  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,012
Originally Posted by Bohemian1
Two different writers, I suspect.
It's a complete reversal of their initial PR strategy.
trouble747 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:17 pm
  #3186  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
Originally Posted by ROCAT
It has been pointed out many times in this thread that the crew was from RPA, the flight was operated by RPA, the local management is likely RPA and the gate agent might be RPA but is possibly the only UAL operations employee in this whole issue.
Well, not everyone has been following all 215 pages of this thread obsessively.

(C'mon. I went to bed and when I logged in this morning, 50 pages had happened. I wasn't going to read all of that.)
jkhuggins is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:18 pm
  #3187  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,092
Originally Posted by AK-business-traveler
Or maybe his behavior is somehow related to the assault and injuries he just received at the hands of the Chicago aviation security.
There's no evidence for that. We have seen evidence the person has been criminal and prone to problematic conduct in the past.
Ber2dca is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:18 pm
  #3188  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: LHR, HKG
Programs: gate lice
Posts: 315
Originally Posted by Bohemian1
Two different writers, I suspect.
Originally Posted by dinanm3atl
Back pedal... probably too late.
Yes and yes.

I wonder how UA manages to get itself into PR fiascos every so often. I bet this is one of those incidents that ends up being a "case study" in MBA courses decades later. LMAO.
leungy18 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:18 pm
  #3189  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Some where in the Mountains
Posts: 5,333
Originally Posted by dinanm3atl
Back pedal... probably too late.
How long before UA files chapter 11?
toadman is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:18 pm
  #3190  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK London / Salisbury
Programs: BA GGL, CCR, LTG
Posts: 542
Originally Posted by Bear4Asian
what relevance whatsoever does that have to the issue in question? That's correct. None.

I just bioked a trip trip where I had a United or Virgin America choice. Decision now made for me.
brentford77 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:18 pm
  #3191  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Redwood City, CA USA (SFO/SJC)
Programs: 1K 2010, 1P in 2011, Plat for 2012,13,14,15 & 2016. Gold in 17 & 18, Plat since
Posts: 8,824
My only really awful experience on United came after boarding a regional at ORD (ORD-MSN) with my daughter, valid tickets in hand, and told, after getting to our seats, sorry, we screwed up, those seats are already taken. I can't explain why, but it was really embarrassing leaving the plane. It felt like United was telling me I'd done something wrong, without every saying anything of the sort. It was just the action itself.

I don't know if that should have been an involuntary denied boarding situation or not; due to irrops, United rebooked us onto that flight shortly before departure. The bizarre thing was that it was only the beginning of my only customer service nightmare with United. Just an amazing day when everything went south that could, much of it within United's control. Maybe it was best that it all happened on that one insane day and got it out of their (and my) system!

Overall, I think United needs to look at not just the financial but the emotional impact of denied boarding. Some passengers are desperate to simply GET HOME. It likely doesn't help that some airports are really unfriendly places to begin with, ORD being up towards the top of that list. Few people, once having left ORD to get onto a plane, would want to go back inside. Never quite thought about it this way before. If the terminal is a very friendly place, being denied boarding might not seem so bad. I wouldn't mind spending a few extra hours in the new 6X wing at SFO, for example.

Geez, now that I think about it, maybe it should be automatic that denied boarding passengers get access to the United Club. A small, simple gesture, that might make a bigger difference than the $$$ payout.
Mike Jacoubowsky is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:19 pm
  #3192  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: K+K
Programs: *G
Posts: 4,865
Originally Posted by Ber2dca
In an open conversation on a discussion forum, diversity of opinions is to be welcomed and is a big part of what makes such a forum attractive.
And simultaneously the pax is being proverbially bashed for expressing his "opinion" against being unjustly offloaded, even if the 10000s of prior IDB went by peacefully?
deniah is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:19 pm
  #3193  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,012
Originally Posted by ijgordon
I think this argument over the definition of boarding is a red herring. You don't have some inalienable rights that are endowed to you once you scan your boarding pass, or once you pass the threshold of the aircraft, or once you take your seat. And pretty sure the CoC doesn't endow them either.
It's a contract dispute, not an issue of "inalienable rights." It's probably irrelevant in the sense that United will have no interest in litigating this disaster.
trouble747 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:19 pm
  #3194  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,664
Originally Posted by jkhuggins
Well, not everyone has been following all 215 pages of this thread obsessively.

(C'mon. I went to bed and when I logged in this morning, 50 pages had happened. I wasn't going to read all of that.)
The vast majority of the posts are the same posters posting the same thing over and over again adding nothing new. I would guess that 75% of the posts are by 10 people.
ROCAT is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 1:20 pm
  #3195  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: somewhere north of stateside...
Posts: 4,142
Originally Posted by ijgordon
I think this argument over the definition of boarding is a red herring. You don't have some inalienable rights that are endowed to you once you scan your boarding pass, or once you pass the threshold of the aircraft, or once you take your seat. And pretty sure the CoC doesn't endow them either. So now perhaps they'll re-write it to explicitly exclude those rights, and we all lose. And maybe they'll also explicitly add "operational reasons" as a valid reason to remove a passenger from a plane, as a CYA in the future. But maybe perhaps they'll also reduce overbooking levels and/or increase maximum VDB compensation and/or further empower agents with discretion in these matters.

Maybe the net change will be positive for passengers. We can hope.
DOT or Congress should just raise the minimum IDB threshold to $3000, cash only, with no basis on a ticket price.

I bet that would drop the number of IBD's to below one hundred a year, as airlines would actually have an incentive to get volunteers.

Congress is a bunch of free marketers, so let the market decide what the price is going to be to get on the plane, and what its going to be for the airline to get you off...
makin'miles 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.