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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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, 9:23 am
  #4126  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicagoland, IL, USA
Programs: WN CP, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 14,184
Originally Posted by NotSoOftenFlyer
I know this might horrify some people here but
CNN: Travelers are so angry they're cutting up their United cards
http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/travel...rnd/index.html
Watch for a 100000 offer from Chase soon.
toomanybooks is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:24 am
  #4127  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA MileagePlus (Premier Gold); Hilton HHonors (Gold); Chase Ultimate Rewards; Amex Plat
Posts: 6,664
Originally Posted by rickg523
Bingo.
Publicly traded companies change from enterprises whose primary purpose is to fill a need in the marketplace to entities whose sole purpose is to increase shareholder value. The actual business they are in is immaterial and practices which served the initial purpose are discarded if they interfere with the new one.
All you need to be a good company is a CEO with some balls. I mean, Steve Jobs was, in all reports I've read, sometimes a jerk, but he also never bowed to the pressure from Wall St. He did what he thought was best for his company and his customers.
STS-134 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:27 am
  #4128  
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 Visconti
What I hadn't realized is that once seated, except for very specific reasons, I don't have to move. Basically, if I don't consume alcohol, I can politely refuse any FA requests to change or switch seats.
Whenever I've been asked to change seats, when I don't want to, I ask them if I am being ordered to switch. The answer has always been no. This happened once on a UA flight from AMS to the US. A 767 where business class had 2-2-2 configuration. A family of four boarded and wanted 4 seats together. I was already seated in a one of the center 2 seats. I was asked repeatably to change seats, and I politely said " I selected this seat because it was aisle access and no one would be climbing over me. Your alternative seat would have my seat mate climb over me. Are you ordering me to change seats?" I prevailed, though the family glared at me the entire flight. Jerks (the family and United for harassing me).
mre5765 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:29 am
  #4129  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 125
Originally Posted by rickg523
You can say a customer service failure, but according to United - leaving aside the goons, who they're running away from - they acted within their written rules. They just don't want to show the public those rules. Because the public didn't even know until yesterday, that if they buy a full fare ticket, but don't have airline status, there are entire categories of flyers that United will give their seat to whether they like it or not, according to their written, but secret, rules. (Less likely but can still happen even with status, but most flyers with status already know that. One of the reasons they went after status.)
Another thing the public found out yesterday is the legal max is $1350 cash. That will now be the price of a VDB in the US.
I think it's funny that people seem to think that if a LEO tells you to do something, you HAVE to do it no matter what. You get this is America, right? That people have certain inalienable rights? Cops need probable cause of a crime being committed. That's great that you, personally, would adhere to whatever the LEO said, but it doesn't mean everyone has to.

It seems United's standing in having authority to deplane this passenger is razor thin. That by refusing to get off the plane, bc United had no authority under their COC to actually deplane him, he was interfering with the FA and thus United now had the authority. I tell you to do something im not legally or contractually allowed to do, but if you refuse, I now have unilateral authority to do whatever I want. Seems like insane circular logic that would never hold up with a jury.

Munoz seems to have ended any court battle in his interview just now. He basically just admitted guilt.

/rant
Klimo is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:30 am
  #4130  
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: 100,393
Originally Posted by LondonElite
Maybe it's just me but I don't get all the fuss here. Pilot decides that four people must come off the plane to make room for crew. No volunteers so four get chosen at random. Three go, one refuses. Captain's orders are to get the fourth one off the plane. He's had a chance to go peacefully, so then police take him off. Not in any way condoning the behaviour, but the affected passenger seems to have made life very difficult for himself when he didn't need to. I suspect the ensuing melee was partly the fault of both sides. A bunch of 'I'm sorry' should go around, but those talking of million dollar lawsuits need their heads examined. Take it up with the Chicago PD for 'brutality' if you want.
There's no indication that the pilot was involved in the decision. [Similarly, there's no indication that the FAs who were working as cabin crew on this flight wanted the passenger removed or were involved in the decision.] All of the VDB/IDB stuff was handled by the GA and then the manager who came on board.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:31 am
  #4131  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,446
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
There's no indication that the pilot was involved in the decision. [Similarly, there's no indication that the FAs who were working as cabin crew on this flight wanted the passenger removed or were involved in the decision.] All of the VDB/IDB stuff was handled by the GA and then the manager who came on board.
Don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant!
Kacee is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:32 am
  #4132  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: Chase, Amex, Citi, basically all of them
Posts: 72
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.
Sure, UA might or might not have prevailed (read the post and some analyses, it's far from clear) but you missed his original point. It's a civil matter. Just like I can't call the police to beat up my tenant for not paying his rent or my vendor for failing to provide on his contract. If he was dangerous, then that's a police matter and sure then get them involved. He wasn't by all accounts.

By the way, before you argue contra, note that the aviation securities industry has pretty much confirmed the same: http://triblive.com/local/allegheny/...e-for-airlines
newaliases is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:35 am
  #4133  
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 richarddd
If the builder does not have permission to be on the property, the police might well remove him. Police often remove protesters from private property. In some cases, an owner can give permission, but has the right to revoke the permission.

A more relevant analogy would be if the builder paid for the right to occupy the lawn and the agreement did not give the owner the right to remove him under the circumstances (and he wasn't violating any laws). In that case, the police should not get involved. They might anyway, but that doesn't mean they or the owner would be right.
It's the same analogy. Anyone with any familiarity with a contract to build a house on land the builder doesn't own knows that the contract is most likely written to give the builder the right to be present on the land and often to deny the owner the right to occupy the land while the home is being built. A cop with a clue knows this, and isn't going to insert himself.

Just as, as we have learned and the CEO now admits, the pax had a right to that seat, and he was illegally ejected. The cop should have known what most of here knew, and he will pay the price.
mre5765 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:35 am
  #4134  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: Chase, Amex, Citi, basically all of them
Posts: 72
Originally Posted by LHR/MEL/Europe FF
(my bolding)

Please provide the legal basis where the passenger 'has' to be offloaded at this point with no other option open to the airline or the airline would be in contravention of US law?
He's basically saying so long as anybody with apparent authority gives you an instruction it is a crime for you to disobey. Forget that the is instruction was false or maybe even flat out illegal, you must obey. It's the type of thinking that enables police states and dictatorships.
newaliases is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:35 am
  #4135  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 2,172
Originally Posted by nk15
This case will be taught in schools in the future as a landmark case for customer service, PR, and social media.
What about law enforcement brutality?
IncyWincy is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:36 am
  #4136  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: Chase, Amex, Citi, basically all of them
Posts: 72
Thumbs up

Originally Posted by deniah
one could win an olympic medal with this display of mental gymnastics
newaliases is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:37 am
  #4137  
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 WorldLux
Time for an US Emirates subsidiary flying the A380 everywhere including ORD-SDF. No more overbooking problems
It would be wonderful if Cathay, Japan Airlines, the gulf 3, etc. had open skies for domestic flights in this country.
mre5765 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:38 am
  #4138  
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: 100,393
Originally Posted by leungy18
Can we just take a step back and reflect on how badly UA handled this from a PR standpoint?

Keep in mind that the average American does not have the CoC nor the DoT rules memorized. Munoz doubled down and did not relent until the stock price took a beating. Had he hired a crisis management firm at Monday noon, perhaps the media's narrative last night would be different.

The average Joe out there now knows that UA will resort to violence in response to their disorganization (failure to arrange transport for deadheading crew).

Narrative across the pacific is worse. The average Wong out there now knows that UA will resort to violence in response to their disorganization, and not only that, pick an Asian to kick out.

It doesn't matter what the technicalities are, whether race was involved, whether UA followed the rulebook.
Why doesn't a huge public firm keep a crisis management firm on retainer?

Last edited by MSPeconomist; Apr 12, 2017 at 8:42 pm Reason: Typo
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:39 am
  #4139  
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 newaliases
He's basically saying so long as anybody with apparent authority gives you an instruction it is a crime for you to disobey. Forget that the is instruction was false or maybe even flat out illegal, you must obey. It's the type of thinking that enables police states and dictatorships.
^

Welcome to FT!
mre5765 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:39 am
  #4140  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Silicon Valley
Programs: UA GS, WN A-List, AA Exec Plat, National Emerald
Posts: 1,020
So when Munoz says this won't happen again, does that mean I don't have to leave my seat if this happens to me? (and yes, it has happened to me!)
reamworks 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.