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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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, 8:21 am
  #2641  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,012
Originally Posted by jjmoore
I understand this, and regardless of whether this LEO is ultimately found guilty of excessive force or not, the bottom line is that the pax disobeyed an order from a LEO. Are you disputing that?
Perhaps some are offering a bit more sympathy for the passenger, particularly in light of the fact that the officer was apparently violating procedure and the fact that, without even a complete investigation, his employing agency has disowned his actions. Do you know, for a fact, that the passenger was given a clear, legal order, and then failed to comply before force was used?
trouble747 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:22 am
  #2642  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Isle of Man
Programs: IHG Platinum Elite, BA Pleb
Posts: 347
Originally Posted by Tblack15
I think it's high time people understand EVERYTHING they sign up for when they buy a ticket.
Legal =/= Ethical.

But this is the power of PR. The news leads with an old doctor getting his face smashed open on an armrest because UA wanted a staffer to have his seat.

We all understand they can do this. But that doesn't mean they should. UA PR clearly haven't got this yet.
Arctic Troll is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:23 am
  #2643  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bern, Swiss-o-land
Programs: M&M (LX/LH) Silver, Marriott Platinum, Accor Silver, AF/KL Silver, Swiss Railway
Posts: 791
Originally Posted by caverunner17
Then book with BA or AF/KL.

Sorry, if you're flying Star and not going to a location that LH/LX fly, you're going to be on a UA flight.
Then AF/KL is the way to go.
Gigantor is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:23 am
  #2644  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
Originally Posted by mre5765
I still don't believe this was due to 4 crew arriving after boarding completed (and after the cut off). I.e. I still think it was w&b. I think UA was lying. One million miles on this airline, and I've never seen rev pax pulled off a plane to board crew after boarding cut off, But if UA is telling the truth, then 3 of 4 crew managed to board. Two FAs are needed only if there are 51 pax. So it is better to IDB 19 pax tomorrow than to beat up a pax.
Cabin crew minimums for flights operating pursuant to FAR Part 121 are determined by configuration, not load, so that doesn't hold water. Neither does the W&B argument, given it was four (4) pax on a 250nm sector, seated near the aircraft's CG.

OTOH, needing to invol pax to move 4 RP crewmembers (2 pilots, 2 FA) to staff a RP E-Jet the next morning at SDF makes sense.
EWR764 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:23 am
  #2645  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: UA Gold, AA DL
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by trouble747
I mean...I'm just not entirely certain this is the hill I'd personally want to die on ("While our actions were completely reprehensible, they were, in fact, legal!").

Everyone is well aware that United had the power to instruct authorities to forcibly remove the man from the plane--that's what happened.
Why would I be dying on this hill? I have no skin in this game, im just commenting on this current event on a message board. I'm glad you are not confused on what the airline has the right to do with regard to removing passengers, there are many in this thread who are not as clear.
jwh212 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:24 am
  #2646  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Cleveland, OH
Programs: UA-GS 1MM), Hertz Pres Circle, Starriott Titanium)
Posts: 1,966
Originally Posted by c2cflyer
So my question is - what the heck was going on in Louisville this week that every flight there was oversold AND no one was willing to get off for compensation?
Probably has more to do with getting OUT of Chicago than the destination.
LordHamster is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:24 am
  #2647  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Philadephia, PA
Programs: AA Platinum, Marriott Titanium/Lifetime Titanium, Hyatt Globalist, UA Silver, Hilton Gold, Hertz 5*
Posts: 477
Originally Posted by jwh212
He broke the law by refusing to obey crew instruction (CFR 122.580). Sworn officers can then detain or arrest him for this violation at their discretion. The police only have to take the complaint and probably only have to observe the passenger not obeying the instruction to leave the plane once or twice before they remove him. The video obviously is not including a lot of interaction between the crew and the passenger beforehand.
A gate agent or a supervisor aren't crew members. And I seriously question whether 121.580 could really be invoked before the door is closed and the aircraft is ready to depart.

Having said that, United doesn't need 121.580 to remove someone from their plane; they have the right to do so as it's their property. Having the right to remove him doesn't make it right for them to do so though.
fordan is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:24 am
  #2648  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: National Capitol Region
Programs: Delta Dirt Medallion,AA,USairways, WN Rapid Rewards, National Emerald Club
Posts: 3,912
Originally Posted by Tblack15
I think it's high time people understand EVERYTHING they sign up for when they buy a ticket. (not saying people should be dragged off, just saying that IDB is a cost of doing business, just like IRROPS and mean FAs)
I think its high time commercial carriers understand EVERYTHING they sign up for when they sell a ticket. Was the customer apprised of his rights under IDB? Was he provided a written statement of his IDB rights?
hazelrah is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:25 am
  #2649  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,048
I worked really hard to get the 2000th post on this thread and then in an example if IDP some posts were pruned and mine dropped to 1997. I stayed up till like 2:45 AM to get it too.
GadgetFreak is online now  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:25 am
  #2650  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: OCONUS
Programs: Presidential Airways High Value Target, Catfish Air Flare, Hootch Honors Gold
Posts: 9,050
Originally Posted by jwh212
He broke the law by not leaving the plane when instructed to do so. If he wants to sue over a potential breach in contract law, that indeed is for a judge to decide in a civil court.
You keep saying he broke the law? Given that he hasn't been charged with anything, how can that possibly be true? Apparently the people whose job it is to investigate and prosecute offenses against the law don't agree with you.

Regards,
-Bouncer-
Bouncer is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:26 am
  #2651  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,012
Originally Posted by jwh212
Why would I be dying on this hill? I have no skin in this game, im just commenting on this current event on a message board. I'm glad you are not confused on what the airline has the right to do with regard to removing passengers, there are many in this thread who are not as clear.
I mean, I personally have not seen a deluge of posts suggesting United's employees committed a criminal offense. That's why I find the constant refrain a little puzzling.
trouble747 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:27 am
  #2652  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 72
Originally Posted by jwh212
He broke the law by not leaving the plane when instructed to do so. If he wants to sue over a potential breach in contract law, that indeed is for a judge to decide in a civil court.
In the court of public opinion an elderly doctor who had to see patients was dragged off a plane while bloody. That is what will impact the bottom line of United. Your comment will have no effect since the court of public opinion has already overwhelmingly convicted United. United will end up making a big settlement to the passenger to try to make this go away but the genie is already out of the bottle and is not going back in. This shortsighted decision by one or a few United employees and the support of the CEO will cost the bottom line of United millions.

This is about a large corporation not respecting its customers. Laws, regulations, and policies are completely out the window in this situation.
moreofless is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:29 am
  #2653  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas
Programs: DL Platinum, AA Lifetime Gold, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Platinum, Radisson Premium
Posts: 6,638
http://m.tmz.com/#article/2017/04/11...ted-drugs-sex/

TMZ's piece on the passenger
demkr is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:30 am
  #2654  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,048
Originally Posted by simpletastes
DO NOTHING. Let the airline sort it out by offering higher compensation or by getting their own staff to be driven to their destination.
Exactly. As I posted yesterday, the airlines have outsourced some of their customer "service" to the cops by making everything to do with airline travel a security issue. There is a price that would have gotten a volunteer and it is a LOT less than the price UA is paying in bad publicity, not to even consider lawsuits.
GadgetFreak is online now  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 8:30 am
  #2655  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: SFO/CDG
Programs: UA 1k
Posts: 211
When cooler heads (hopefully) prevail in this extraordinary situation it would have been best to deplane everyone then IDB and re-board. Most people will focus on the actions of the police and the link to UA because it is sensational. The real corporate failing is that in these abnormal situations the gate needs to be controlled by a senior manager that is empowered to make the decisions that deescalate conflict but resolve the problem.

That said (and not excusing any behavior by UA or the airport police) this incident also is a reflection of how much we have lost connections to our fellow travelers. Certainly there were 4 people on the plane that could be inconvenienced at minimal disruption to their lives, allowing the remaining passengers to travel on time.

Originally Posted by fly18725
Since this was a Republic crew, I assume they were going to operate an E-170/175 flight. That aircraft requires 2 flight attendants, regardless of passenger loads.



Getting everyone off the plane is a good idea.
SFO28L 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.