ridefar

Totally agree. Kind of the last personality trait I would associate with any pilot I have talked to. Nevertheless it is a question. And if the answer is yes then that, for me, shows that if somebody can be removed for no reason it is likely this guy could be (legally) removed for the reason he was. (Set aside whether the manner of his removal was legal.). If the answer is no then somebody other than me can read the TOC and say if UA was in the right to request his removal. Again set aside the manner.

My guess if I had to is that UA was in the right.

I would also stipulate that this is a lot like the holidaying couple in the other thread where our intuition and moral sense of what is right does not necessarily accord with the letter of the law and TOC.

eigenvector

An excellent point but when airlines insist on following their COC (which sets out their minimum obligations) in these scenarios they are inviting the government to intervene and redefine what is acceptable.

jsfrSE

A PR nightmare.

http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...410-story.html

United finds a new way to make itself look awful, and then its CEO shows how to make things worse

Jumper Jack

I just read that so called email sent out by oscar
I would want to wipe my bottom with it but its already full of bs

24left

It doesn't matter if "UA was right". A large portion of the world has seen the videos, other pax onboard have posted and been interviewed. Oscar has made a very poor showing.

I really hope a large number of executives and employees from EVERY type of company learn from this.

This poster, wtnevi01, was on that flight and explains how the offers and other things were handled:

https://np.reddit.com/r/videos/comme...d_cia/dg3hshx/

Bonaventure

What a dumb thread.

24left

Awesome post.

Jumper Jack

Just another day on an UA flight

ridefar

I rather think it does. Not in the court of public opinion for sure. Where they are and will be rightfully skewered.

But it from a legal and regulatory perspective it certainly does.

24left

Doesn't change the end result, or what happened to that man, or what the other pax and children onboard saw and heard, or what the universe thinks.

Meanwhile, in the Excited States of America, and in boardrooms everywhere.....c-suites and the legals are huddled to review all those tiny font words they like to write but no one reads.

longtimeflyin

I did not think United could make this situation worse.

Their President, Oscar Munoz tweeted today

"This is an upsetting event to all of us here at United. I apologize for having to re-accommodate these customers."

Does that man have a brain?

"apologize for having to re-accomodate"?

Congress just got involved.

http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/04/1...ines-incident/

Jumper Jack

Have you read his email yet? Its even more #Golden

24left

And thinking about the title of this thread " Air Canada should abandon United Airlines and partner with someone else".....


Excellent post from Air Transport World:

United bumped passenger video damages all airlines

April 10 2017

http://m.atwonline.com/blog/united-b...s-all-airlines

ridefar

While the points about requiring regulation where airlines can't behave properly are certainly true I can't help but ask again if they are really required in this case. Does anybody think that there aren't already ample legally protections against the treatment the passenger suffered. I guess if they don't then more regulations are called for. But this guy will likely win a massive settlement with no additional legal or regulatory protections needed. Not because of whether they could remove him but because of how they did. Further I doubt that any amount of regulation would have prevented the abysmal treatment of the passenger by staff and police. You can't fix stupid and you can't regulate it out of existence. Minor caveat to the last point: so long as overbooking is permitted at all.

longtimeflyin

The policy of overbooking is one I support. If an airline expects 50% of its passengers to not show, then an airline will overbook. This results in a lower airfare for those that a) pay and b) show up for the flight. If an airline is no longer permitted to overbook, then they may very well charge a higher dollar amount.

While the traveling public may view overbooking as evil or use other choice words, overbooking is actually a blessing in disguise for passengers.

When a kerfuffle does unfold though, such as with the incident today, an airline needs to handle it better than the way United did today.

Air Canada and other such airlines that overbook should learn from United's horrid mistake to ensure that their staff behave professionally.