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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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 12, 2017, 5:13 am
  #3976  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,127
Why does the comment at the end of this South Park clip seem relevant here....
Jimmie76 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:15 am
  #3977  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,110
Originally Posted by fly18725
Actually, United has given itself broad latitude to cancel the contract (ticket) with a passenger and provide a refund. The passenger's remedy is to bring the case to court, not try and maintain or reinstate the contract.

The contract is very much in favor with the airline.
If the guy had just gotten off the plane there wouldn't be a video that very much makes the airline looking like the bad guy. The contract doesn't really matter right now because United will probably do a lot of things to keep this out of the courts. Instead of getting $800 or so this guy is going to get 6 figures or more.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:15 am
  #3978  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: K+K
Programs: *G
Posts: 4,866
Originally Posted by DrunkCargo
1.He was welcomed onboard.
2.He was given a seat assignment.
3.He was then told he was no longer welcome onboard.
4.At this point, trespass.
so after #2 , following common expectation (i.e., "i paid for this seat i sit down and you transport me"), without any warranted action...... we simply accelerate to #3 just like that?

perhaps not exact technical definition but sounds like a form of entrapment.
deniah is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:15 am
  #3979  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: Ice Cream Club, AC SE MM, Bonvoy Life Plat
Posts: 2,803
Originally Posted by WorldLux
Nope.
Originally Posted by GuyverII
ROTFL
Alright alright.. Let me concede on the criminal trespass piece. Civil trespass is not relevant wrt to oinky... so let's say UA should not have brought in the bacon... bad bacon...

So what recourse would United have? You have a passenger who has demonstrated an unwillingness to comply with instructions, but indeed, his assessment is assumed correct: the instruction was not valid. Just like if an FA asked me to hand over my wallet, I probably would refuse.

IDB someone else who would have been #5th to be picked? That hardly seems fair... so perhaps another option would be to offload the entire cabin and reload, this time denying boarding to let's say 10 people allowed for in the CoC, and only when the 4 employees were seated then load the remainder to fill gaps?

Again, I think all three parties have some culpability here: cops, UA, pax. Who will be spanked the hardest? UA.
DrunkCargo is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:16 am
  #3980  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: Ice Cream Club, AC SE MM, Bonvoy Life Plat
Posts: 2,803
Originally Posted by deniah
perhaps not exact technical definition but sounds like a form of entrapment.
I assumed entrapment only applied to law enforcement, of which UA is not.
DrunkCargo is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:20 am
  #3981  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
If the guy had just gotten off the plane there wouldn't be a video that very much makes the airline looking like the bad guy. The contract doesn't really matter right now because United will probably do a lot of things to keep this out of the courts. Instead of getting $800 or so this guy is going to get 6 figures or more.
$800 was the VDB amount. IDB could be higher and payable in cash.

Certainly an additional settlement with both United and the police may be warranted based on the circumstances.
fly18725 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:32 am
  #3982  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by halls120
No, the police officers United summoned did that job for them. Unnecessarily, at United's direction.
It could be argued that those police officers in the video of this incident were acting as agents of United.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:33 am
  #3983  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,110
Originally Posted by fly18725
$800 was the VDB amount. IDB could be higher and payable in cash.

Certainly an additional settlement with both United and the police may be warranted based on the circumstances.
I did say $800 or so.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:33 am
  #3984  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,405
Originally Posted by DrunkCargo
IDB someone else who would have been #5th to be picked?
Get the crew on another flight. This wasn't a case of IDB. Even UA admitted that the flight wasn't overbooked, hence preventing any IDB as provided in the regulations and terms of their agreements with each individual passenger.

---

Honestly I don't see what the pax should be blamed for. Because he had the balls to stand up to GA/FAs thinking they are above the law (and their own contractual terms)?

Granted the airline can't be blamed for the cops using excessive force, but they surely can be blamed for causing the situation in the first place. As I've said it on other threads: I have absolutely no problem with overbooking, VDBs, IDBs and giving up my seat if the airline needs it (which was the case in this instance), but the airline has to own up to their mistake, i.e. make an offer that a passenger can and will accept.

What I don't accept is that an airline, who may get away with the practice of overbooking in 99 cases and thus makes a profit without having to deliver (particularly with non-refundable tickets), should be as accommodating as possible in the situation where no volunteers wants to step of the airplane.

And that is another major issue in this case: UA wanted to be cheap and only offer $800 vouchers (which, BTW, is worthless thanks to the many strings attached to the voucher and if you don't fly UA regularly). Cash is king. They probably would've found volunteers for 800 to 1000$ or given two vouchers to the passenger that was ready to leave for $1600 in vouchers.

And don't get me wrong. I don't blame the crew or ground staff for doing what they did. They are bound by intern policies and would get hammered if they made a customer oriented decision that would hurt the UA bottom line.

To remediate to such situation, I inclined to agree with a poster on an other thread. Prohibit or severely restrict IDB and thus force airlines to negotiate with their passengers. There's always someone ready to accept a fair deal. And leave those bloody vouchers...
WorldLux is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:33 am
  #3985  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 143
Originally Posted by DrunkCargo
So what recourse would United have? You have a passenger who has demonstrated an unwillingness to comply with instructions, but indeed, his assessment is assumed correct: the instruction was not valid. Just like if an FA asked me to hand over my wallet, I probably would refuse.
.
Pick another person for IDB, fly the passenger, ban them from future flights, and pursue civil remedies in the courts.

Using the police to enforce your interpretation of the contract is wrong. Having that implicit force to do so promotes arrogance and diminishes accountability.
George Purcell is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:36 am
  #3986  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 143
Originally Posted by GrayAnderson
I do have to wonder why there isn't more use of standby ticketing on the part of the airlines (as opposed to the whole overbook-and-compensate game).
Because in the old days standby tickets weren't the highest revenue seats; go read old travel books and you'll often find advice about hanging around airports to see if you can get a standby seat just prior to flight because the prices would be slash to near marginal cost.
George Purcell is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:40 am
  #3987  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Germany
Programs: BA Executive Club Silver, Virgin Atlantic Flying Club, Alamo Insiders, Avis Preferred, Hertz Gold
Posts: 90
Originally Posted by DrunkCargo
Alright alright.. Let me concede on the criminal trespass piece. Civil trespass is not relevant wrt to oinky... so let's say UA should not have brought in the bacon... bad bacon...

So what recourse would United have? You have a passenger who has demonstrated an unwillingness to comply with instructions, but indeed, his assessment is assumed correct: the instruction was not valid. Just like if an FA asked me to hand over my wallet, I probably would refuse.

IDB someone else who would have been #5th to be picked? That hardly seems fair... so perhaps another option would be to offload the entire cabin and reload, this time denying boarding to let's say 10 people allowed for in the CoC, and only when the 4 employees were seated then load the remainder to fill gaps?

Again, I think all three parties have some culpability here: cops, UA, pax. Who will be spanked the hardest? UA.
There is absolutely no need for you to refer to law enforcement as "oinky" or "bacon".

United should have just offered something more substantial to attracted volunteers, e.g. $1,500 in cash or gift cards. That would have solved the issue and everybody would have gone away happy.
BertieWooster is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:43 am
  #3988  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Midwest (ORD)
Programs: UA 1P, HHonors Gold, Hertz Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by deniah
so after #2 , following common expectation (i.e., "i paid for this seat i sit down and you transport me"), without any warranted action...... we simply accelerate to #3 just like that?

perhaps not exact technical definition but sounds like a form of entrapment.
True or untrue? "Anyone bumped involuntarily should receive a written statement describing their rights and explaining how the airline decides who can fly on an oversold flight and who doesn’t."
TimezoneCST is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:47 am
  #3989  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: K+K
Programs: *G
Posts: 4,866
Originally Posted by DrunkCargo
I assumed entrapment only applied to law enforcement, of which UA is not.
not arguing the legalese or technicalities... simply the absurdity of the notion of inviting someone in and immediately withdrawing the offer to cause trespass.

"hey bob want to come in and have a beer? psych -- youre in my garage get out or i shoot"
deniah is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 5:54 am
  #3990  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 6,433
Originally Posted by fly18725
Actually, United has given itself broad latitude to cancel the contract (ticket) with a passenger and provide a refund. The passenger's remedy is to bring the case to court, not try and maintain or reinstate the contract.

The contract is very much in favor with the airline.
They may have broad latitude, but it does not appear that their contract of carriage gives them enough latitude to cancel this passenger's ticket. The CoC only allows them to refuse to transport for specified reasons and none of those reasons appear to apply.
richarddd 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.