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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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 11, 2017, 5:45 am
  #2371  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,616
Originally Posted by NFH
Does anyone have a link to the relevant legislation that requires passengers to obey crew? As I'm in the UK, Google is mostly giving me UK-centric results. For example the relevant UK legislation states "Every person in an aircraft must obey all lawful commands which the pilot in command of that aircraft may give for the purpose of securing the safety of the aircraft and of persons or property carried in the aircraft, or the safety, efficiency or regularity of air navigation". Obviously UK legislation is irrelevant, but I would be very surprised if the equivalent US legislation required passengers to obey absolutely any command by crew. For example, passengers would not have to obey a command to undress and run down the aisle naked. There will be limits as to purpose of commands that must be obeyed, and I'm guessing that leaving the aircraft for the purpose in this scenario might not be one of them.
The passenger was wrong to refuse the request/order to deplane. That isn't in serious debate. That he was wrong doesn't in the least bit excuse UA's subsequent actions, from the physical act of removal to their continued tone deaf PR response.
halls120 is online now  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:45 am
  #2372  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 146
Originally Posted by njcommodore
well he is the one that caused this whole mess.

UA has an obligation, to its passengers wanting to get to their destination both that night and the following morning. They are a private company who made a business decision to choose this guy as one of the four IDBs. The other three followed the rules, he did not.
someone who used his position as a doctor for drug trafficking probably had less respect for the law, as well as the well-being of others(in which case, the other passengers), not to mention he could still be using something that caused his reaction to being removed.
ShutteLag is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:45 am
  #2373  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 72
Originally Posted by njcommodore
well he is the one that caused this whole mess.

UA has an obligation, to its passengers wanting to get to their destination both that night and the following morning. They are a private company who made a business decision to choose this guy as one of the four IDBs. The other three followed the rules, he did not.
No, United's decision to treat a valued customer as cargo caused the problem. They could have upped the compensation until enough people took the bump. Instead they will pay far more in settlements and lost business. It is about respect which United did not give the customer.
moreofless is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:46 am
  #2374  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 401
Originally Posted by NFH
Does anyone have a link to the relevant legislation that requires passengers to obey crew? As I'm in the UK, Google is mostly giving me UK-centric results. For example the relevant UK legislation states "Every person in an aircraft must obey all lawful commands which the pilot in command of that aircraft may give for the purpose of securing the safety of the aircraft and of persons or property carried in the aircraft, or the safety, efficiency or regularity of air navigation". Obviously UK legislation is irrelevant, but I would be very surprised if the equivalent US legislation required passengers to obey absolutely any command by crew. For example, passengers would not have to obey a command to undress and run down the aisle naked. There will be limits as to purpose of commands that must be obeyed, and I'm guessing that leaving the aircraft for the purpose in this scenario might not be one of them.
The second one listed here. http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com...rewmember.htm#

On a side note, if the captain says he won't fly with a certain passenger onboard, they're offloaded. I don't think anyone flying a US airline has an experience contradictory to this. We don't know if the captain relayed to the FA to have them call LEO and have him removed either.
MDJennings is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:47 am
  #2375  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: NYC
Programs: UA 1K, GE/Nexus, Marriott Gold
Posts: 266
Originally Posted by Tblack15
I can't take your post seriously if you think someone refusing to get off an airliner during IDB is the same as the civil rights movement.

Nothing this guy did was "illegal". He agreed to the CoC.

This will be multiple waves of PR issues: Now, when this guys sues and when UA wins.

Cue the protest signs: "we all have feelings and even when we're wrong we are right".
This is not IDB, is it? The guy boarded and was in his seat.
As for the rest, well, it is high time for passenger rights movement - the power equation between an airline and passengers in the US is way slanted in favor of the airlines. What United did - removing a paying customer involuntarily AFTER he is in his seat and for reasons of United's operational needs should be illegal.
nikolastojsin is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:48 am
  #2376  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Btwn EWR and PHL
Programs: UA 1K; Marriott Gold
Posts: 241
Originally Posted by TheHak
The truth of the matter is that if United had proposed the maximum 1350 to find volunteers and that none had proposed himself then there could be a real debate. Choosing to call the police to save a few hundred $ is unexcusable.
*And* it ignores the value (and cost) of the officer's time. I mean, United doesn't directly pay for the officer. Instead we all pay his salary. But net net it costs more.

And in this situation it is actually going to cost United WAY more.
Bushdog is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:49 am
  #2377  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: KBL
Programs: FB Gold - M&S Gold
Posts: 279
Originally Posted by jjmoore
After having a night to dwell on the happenings Sunday at ORD, here are a few thoughts:

[...]

4) The forcibly disembarked passenger - guilty - though the legality of this man's removal from the aircraft may be in question with regard to the CoC, the bottom line is that he disobeyed flight attendant and police orders. I feel bad that he was injured in the incident, but the choice was entirely his to make a willful or unwillful exit from the aircraft. We will let the courts decide whether excessive force was used... and if necessary, the authority responsible for those police officers should be held to account for this component of the incident (not UA). UA will have to deal with the legality of the IDB in this man's case.
So it was unlawful/illegal to remove him from the plane but resisting that unlawful/illegal removal was unlawful/illegal as well?
Enthilza is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:50 am
  #2378  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: UA Gold, AA DL
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by NFH
Does anyone have a link to the relevant legislation that requires passengers to obey crew? As I'm in the UK, Google is mostly giving me UK-centric results. For example the relevant UK legislation states "Every person in an aircraft must obey all lawful commands which the pilot in command of that aircraft may give for the purpose of securing the safety of the aircraft and of persons or property carried in the aircraft, or the safety, efficiency or regularity of air navigation". Obviously UK legislation is irrelevant, but I would be very surprised if the equivalent US legislation required passengers to obey absolutely any command by crew. For example, passengers would not have to obey a command to undress and run down the aisle naked. There will be limits as to purpose of commands that must be obeyed, and I'm guessing that leaving the aircraft for the purpose in this scenario might not be one of them.
Your assumption is correct. FAA rules require that passengers comply with any crew member instruction. The pilot can ask you to leave the plane for any reason or no reason at all, so long as it is not based on unlawful discrimination based on protected classes of race, gender, age, etc.

you can google around for FAA regulations passengers must obey crew instructions or something similar, it comes up a lot in everything from how much alcohol can be served to storing overhead luggage.

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/.../AC121-24C.pdf
jwh212 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:51 am
  #2379  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: LBB
Programs: UA 1K 1MM ★G | Marriott LTT | Hilton ♦ | Hertz PC | Global Entry TSA Pre ✓
Posts: 2,820
Originally Posted by Enthilza
So it was unlawful/illegal to remove him from the plane but resisting that unlawful/illegal removal was unlawful/illegal as well?
From the standpoint of CoC, UA was likely not allowed to IDB the guy.... but what I'm saying is that the moment the man disobeyed the flight crew AND the police, he was in the wrong... regardless of ANY circumstance.

Respect authority in the moment, but follow up with the legal system if injustice is suspected.

I don't understand what is so difficult to understand about this......?
jjmoore is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:51 am
  #2380  
Hyatt Contributor BadgeMarriott Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Programs: HH Diamond, Marriott Titanium/LTG, IHG Platinum
Posts: 1,921
I am pissed off, big time.

United Airlines can go crash and burn as far as I am concerned from now on.

To those who think the passenger didn't follow crew instructions, hope you never get dragged off a plane. If this premise is correct, then airlines do not have to offer any monetary compensation to get people off ... all they need to do is tell person A, B, C and so on, "you need to get off the plane now, no reason needed, because we told you so, we are the crew - DYKWIA, the crew!".

If I was the man involved, I would be finding a high profile plaintiff attorney immediately and taking this to court and seeking actual damages and more importantly punitive damages to the extreme. If any of my family members saw the video, the distress caused - again, a good plaintiff attorney will be helping seeking some form of actual damages plus lots of punitive amounts too.

This is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG on all levels.
alanslegal is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:53 am
  #2381  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: National Capitol Region
Programs: Delta Dirt Medallion,AA,USairways, WN Rapid Rewards, National Emerald Club
Posts: 3,912
Callous, indifferent, stupid and greedy, in other words everything we have come to expect from the American legacy carriers.
hazelrah is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:53 am
  #2382  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Programs: AA Plat, UA 1K>Plat>moving to Silver
Posts: 2,090
[QUOTE=jp12687;28160252]My opinion on this? The cops over reached when they removed the guy. That said what were they supposed to do with a passenger refusing to leave a plane?

UA asked him to leave several times (also what did the other 3 passengers do). I have been IdB'ed before it sucks. I have also witnessed people asked off a plane (for double booked seats and for being ragingly drunk). I have seen it on pretty much every major airline.

end of day the guy didn't follow instructions and then repeatedly came back into the plane? Officers acted correctly at that point.

You can not like it all you want. You can file endless lawsuits about it AFTER. But in the moment comply with an offers orders or the officer acts and you lose.

The passanger made this this worse by failing to comply. He was in a non winning situation (UAs fault) and made it worse and caused escalation to that point.

that said I hope more people boycott united in tired of over filled clubs and maybe some more of my upgrades will clear.[/QUOTE]

Agree 100%. Unfortunately, I suspect most of this "boycott UA" talk is just that, by people who don't fly much anyway.
Artpen100 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:53 am
  #2383  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: K+K
Programs: *G
Posts: 4,871
Originally Posted by WorldLux
Completely agree with you. So why do you keep defending UA by leaving that man injured at the gate?


Praise our corporate overlords. They managed to turn customers against other customers that are victim of the reckless behaviour of corporations.
I suppose if one grovels enough on the forum, UA Insider will bump one up the Complimentary Premier Upgrade list on one's next booking.
deniah is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:53 am
  #2384  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: SYD | HGH
Programs: CX DM, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton DM, Marriott Plat
Posts: 2,121
What UA did was terrible and wrong.
To start with, buying an airline ticket is a business contract, they simply cannot off load a pax when they think someone else would be more important to use that seat.

Whoever beat the pax was not legal, even though he's law enforcement but they sure used unnecessary violence. Even when police needed to arrest someone, they wouldn't need to use such violence.

I don't travel to US often and only flied with UA twice, I will personally avoid flying UA.
Ausriver is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 5:54 am
  #2385  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Programs: American Airlines Platinum, National Executive
Posts: 3,790
This is Example #1 why I won't fly an airline on which I don't have status.

UA should have just offered more than $800 to deplane. At some price level, someone would have accepted the offer.
ibrandsguest 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.