Well written post, but this paragraph still bothers me. You assume a cross-departmental conspiracy until someone from UA provides evidence (that they will not do...UA doesn't inform the general public of individual's circumstances) based on one person's observations.

I for one don't give my companion passes out to anyone (except DullesJason of the "Gate agents guide to operation upgrades" thread) becuase no matter how many times you explain the behavior that they are supposed to follow, you cannot be sure they will follow your advice, unless I am traveling with them. Grandparents are often quirky, and have different views on things. My grandmother once boarded the wrong plane (UA's fault for not checking her BP 30 years ago) as a NRSA, and th eplane on the tarmac returned to the gate. Had she been on my pass and consulted me, I would have advised her to not delay the 100+ other passengers, and fly it out, then come back on the next flight. How was she to know not to question if she would get the breakfast that the FFA came by and asked her about earlier?

I believe your view of guilty until UA refutes it is 100% wrong. People are innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around. One 3rd party witness trying to piece together what they think may have happened is far from meeting any burden of guilt. UA labor groups RARELY copnspire with each other. Far more often would they conspire aganist each other. As in any company with varying labor goups of different work schedules/compensation apckages, there is far more animosity than colaboration. Do any of you recall the IAM/AMFA fights when the mechanics split off from the IAM?

Now if this woman was wronged, and SHE complained, then UA would most likely do an investigation and dive into it, and discipline any guilty parties (doubtful termination on a 1st foul.) Even if this happened, no reps from UA would comoe on here and explain to the FT public the results of their internal investigations.