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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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, 11:15 am
  #2941  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Programs: WN, AA, UA, DL
Posts: 1,313
Originally Posted by trouble747
A passenger who has already boarded a plane cannot logically be "denied boarding" of that same plane that he has already boarded. When a term is not given a particular definition, its common usage is adopted. The CoC similarly discuss the removal of an already-boarded passenger in other contexts and utilizing different language--but not in regards to an oversell situation.
Being seated on the plane is not officially being boarded. End of story.

Originally Posted by Summa Cum Laude Touro Law Center
My definition of "boarded" is perfectly inline with its common meaning from the perspective an ordinary individual. When one party to a contract is an ordinary consumer, terms of the contract will not be interpreted in accordance with the meaning applied to those terms by industry specialists.
One again, prove where UA broke WRITTEN rules. Answer my questions as to how your definition is practical or implied by WRITTEN rules. Stop your misinformation campaign.
minnyfly is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:16 am
  #2942  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,203
The unfortunate incident (irrespective of whom you want to assign fault), should not have happened in a civilized society. But things do happen. Society as a whole should learn and try to rectify it.

What is more distrurbing?

- People trying to defend the action? (is it really bad thinhg? Just see whom those people voted for in the last election. That damange to country is going to be much worse.

Personally, found response from United Chairman much more disturbing. More effective to vote using pocketbook. Half a million of united revenue in 2016 will not happen in 2017. A drop in bucket for United. But got satisfaction of doing my bit.

Last edited by J.Edward; Apr 11, 2017 at 11:22 am Reason: If you have a concern about moderation, please PM a Sr. Mod or the Community Director.
desi is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:16 am
  #2943  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by DENviaLAX
The only thing that would make sense would be that something happened last minute with whatever crew was supposed to work whatever SDF flight Monday morning, and needed to get a replacement crew there on this flight. But that would also mean that the flight wasn't actually technically overbooked with revenue passengers, just that the best way to inconvenience the least amount of people was to bump four people off this flight and get the crew on vs have to cancel or severely delay flight out of SDF tomorrow. That's always a crappy situation, but ultimately makes sense to me.

I suppose it's extremely rare that an airline is unable to find volunteers out of 50+ people, especially given the high money offers. I personally didn't even know what the procedure was for involuntarily denying boarding, but I can definitely see how it can cause a lot of tension. Then again, the flight could've been just as easily canceled for any number of reasons, and the net result would've been the same (worse, technically) for that individual passenger, so I don't quite understand the extreme reaction on his part.
If they knew they were going to have to bump passengers, boarding the plane was a key mistake. It would be much harder to get people who are already on the plane to give up their seats, because they then have to fact the additional inconveniences of getting off the plane and reboarding an unspecified new one in addition to the inconvenience of being delayed.

If I were the airline and faced with that situation, I would TELL THE PASSENGERS why they needed volunteers before making the request. People's normal assumption would be that they were looking for volunteers because some sort of privileged Uber Frequent Flyer needed to be accommodated. They would naturally resent the fact that there are some passengers who are more equal than others, and would cheer the possibility of some privileged passenger having to suck it up and be delayed for a change.
Shirley Marquez Dulcey is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:18 am
  #2944  
NFH
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: London (LCY)
Programs: BA bronze, Hilton gold, Marriott gold, IHG plat, Meliá gold, Radisson gold, Hyatt disc, AmexPlat
Posts: 977
Originally Posted by minnyfly
No, he forced the physical response by continuously disobeying lawful orders to leave. What you describe as an "option" is extortion.
The orders to leave were unreasonable in the circumstances. That why he disobeyed them. If United and the police had behaved reasonably, then there would have been no incident.
NFH is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:19 am
  #2945  
jbb
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Programs: SQ *Gold
Posts: 871
Originally Posted by sbrower
But if 100,000 other people have been IDB'd before they got on the plane, and if 10,000 other people have complied with a request from UA personnel to leave the plane in similar circumstances, and if 100 others waited for LEO and then complied, and if 10 got physically pulled off the plane (without hitting their face on the seat and/or without being videoed), then how should UA have known that THIS time with THIS passenger it should be different?
With due respect, this is a spurious argument. First of all, I absolutely could have predicted this would have happened eventually if you are pulling passengers off flights after boarding. It would be a fairly obvious response that some would be very upset and frustrated by this and would opt not to move from their seat. So, the idea that a passenger would choose not to move is eminently predictable and United clearly had a policy where there policy response is to quickly escalate and get security/police involved to forcibly remove said passenger. The use of police or security officers, or whatever these guys were, was a judgement call by UA staff. They made the call to escalate when they could have continued to negotiate.

This is also the result of years of bad service by the airline and deep mistrust between airlines and passengers that has occurred owing to airline practices of inconsistent compensation, incomplete information communication etc. When told to deplane, the passenger may not have understood why, likely did not understand his rights and probably did not know what the contingency plan was - all things the airline, given time, should have been able to discuss with him, if they had the patience and wherewithal to be sensible.
jbb is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:19 am
  #2946  
Original Member
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Programs: AA (Life Plat), Marriott (Life Titanium) and every other US program
Posts: 6,411
Originally Posted by trouble747
How often do seated passengers get IDB'd?
At least 2 others on this exact same plane. I have made about 2000 flights (maybe more) and I have never been IDB, on or off the plane. But I have seen it happen to a few people.
sbrower is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:20 am
  #2947  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: EMA (how boring) but BHX is more convenient.
Posts: 2,378
Which of the following would you all prefer to fly on?

1. United Airlines
2. Air Koryo

????
OccasionalFlyerPerson is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:20 am
  #2948  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 43
Originally Posted by minnyfly
No, he forced the physical response by continuously disobeying lawful orders to leave. What you describe as an "option" is extortion.
There was definitely some extortion by way of threatening physical force going on here, it just wasn't the ticket-holding passenger who was entitled to remain in his seat pursuant to the CoC who was engaging in such unsavory behavior.
Summa Cum Laude Touro Law Center is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:21 am
  #2949  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,012
Originally Posted by demkr
Past beligerent behavior is relevant to present day beligerent behavior.
Legally it's actually not, at all. And I just cannot see how the doctor's prior bad behavior has anything to do with what happened here, apart from the fact that it allows those defending the airline to trash the individual for something wholly unrelated.
trouble747 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:21 am
  #2950  
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 BearX220
Makes no sense as w&b is a more palatable rationale for deplaning than late-arriving deadheaders.

And while lying to passengers is entirely acceptable in United culture it is not good business advice.
If your ultimate move is the police, which has a high percentage of death of a pax, lying is justifiable as a penultimate.
mre5765 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:21 am
  #2951  
Original Member
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Programs: AA (Life Plat), Marriott (Life Titanium) and every other US program
Posts: 6,411
Originally Posted by jbb
With due respect, this is a spurious argument. First of all, I absolutely could have predicted this would have happened eventually if you are pulling passengers off flights after boarding. It would be a fairly obvious response that some would be very upset and frustrated by this and would opt not to move from their seat. So, the idea that a passenger would choose not to move is eminently predictable and United clearly had a policy where there policy response is to quickly escalate and get security/police involved to forcibly remove said passenger. The use of police or security officers, or whatever these guys were, was a judgement call by UA staff. They made the call to escalate when they could have continued to negotiate.

This is also the result of years of bad service by the airline and deep mistrust between airlines and passengers that has occurred owing to airline practices of inconsistent compensation, incomplete information communication etc. When told to deplane, the passenger may not have understood why, likely did not understand his rights and probably did not know what the contingency plan was - all things the airline, given time, should have been able to discuss with him, if they had the patience and wherewithal to be sensible.
Today I have about 150,000 LT miles on UA and 3.4 million on AA because I got mad at UA in 1974. So I am not a UA booster. But they have been doing this (VDB/IDB) for about 20 years and there are not many (how many do you know???) equivalent reports.
sbrower is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:22 am
  #2952  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Programs: WN, AA, UA, DL
Posts: 1,313
Originally Posted by Summa Cum Laude Touro Law Center
There was definitely some extortion by way of threatening physical force going on here, it just wasn't the ticket-holding passenger who was entitled to remain in his seat pursuant to the CoC who was engaging in such unsavory behavior.
Sorry, numerous government laws and airline contracts disagree with you. Good try "expert".
minnyfly is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:23 am
  #2953  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Hawai'i Nei
Programs: Au: UA, Marriott, Hilton; GE
Posts: 7,146
Originally Posted by jetsetter
1. What are the circumstances by which the doctor re-boarded 3411 after he was initially ejected by the police officers?

5. I'm assuming he was just detained by LEO's, but never arrested or charged with a crime?

8. What level of ORD police responded to the gate, and authorized the use of force. I.e. was a commanding officer such as a sargent or Lieutenant consulted about the amount of force or the operational tactics that should have been used in this case?

9. What are the "right" operational tactics for a LEO in a case like this, i.e. pax refused to vacate the plane when ordered to do so.
1. He reboarded himself because he was not properly restrained by LEOs, probably because they were compassionate people who for some unfathomable reason thought they were dealing with a rational person.

5. He was handed over to EMS, so a formal arrest would occur after being released from medical care, if at all.

8 & 9. Once police officers make a decision to intervene with a case, based upon the facts presented and obvious, and their knowledge of law and experience, the following occur:

A. Issue verbal request to comply
B. Issue verbal command to comply
C. Use that amount of physical force necessary to ensure compliance.

This was never a case of the LEOs using excessive force. It is unfortunate when someone gets injured during the course of an arrest, but that happens when the perpetrator refuses to comply with lawful orders and physical force is necessary.

Too bad that the Chicago Airport Police are not standing by their LEOs. Apparently, they have better PR advice than UA.
747FC is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:23 am
  #2954  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Tübingen, Germany
Posts: 2,732
Without reading the complete thread:
Why did UA need to percistant about removing exactly this pax after he explained that he was a doctor and had appointments nexrpt morning, rather than trying to ask anybody else ?
Why did not UA get a limo / bus for their staff if they needed to be in Louisville next day - about 300 miles - should not be more than 5 hours ?
tcswede is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 11:23 am
  #2955  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: PHL
Programs: UA 1K 1MM, Marriott Gold, IHG Platinum, Raddison Platinum, Avis Presidents Club
Posts: 5,271
Originally Posted by trouble747
Very, very few have suggested he is any sort of "hero." I think generally the feeling is that he shouldn't have ended up in the situation to begin with because United should have resolved its staffing issue in some other way than telling an already boarded and seated passenger to get off the plane.
From my limited observations, I believe UA typically will try to resolve these issues before boarding. That doesn't mean they are able to do it 100% of the time. It certainly is not an excuse for a passenger to not comply.

Originally Posted by jbb
The crux of my disagreement with you centers on this. He did not "force" a physical response. The airline had other options and it is a disgusting society that tolerates institutional violence as a course of action at such a low threshold. They could have reasoned with him, talked to him and continued talking to him until they convinced him or someone else volunteered to go and take higher compensation. There were MANY options on the table at this point.
No one recorded what was said prior to the video so no one knows. I would find it hard to believe that MULTIPLE people did not talk to him prior to getting security involved. UA is under no obligation to offer him more than what is legally required. Acting like a child and refusing to move should not be rewarded with more compensation.

Originally Posted by DiscHandler
Yep, funny I'm the other way. I usually defend UA but I think this is too much. I think of my elderly parents on a plane being asked to suddenly de-board after sitting and I think they would be super-confused and probably non-responsive to the idea.
Ignorance isn't an excuse. I would hope that your elderly parents would eventually comply once being confronted with possible arrest by the police.

Originally Posted by NFH
Not moving does not force a physical response. It should have prompted an increased cash offer. If you want a customer to waive his contractual right to remain in his seat, then you offer him money, not beat him up directly or by proxy.
Ofcourse not moving forced the physical response. If he refuses to leave, someone must "physically" move him. If he then resists physical movement, people may get injured and he is responsible for any of those injuries. Should they have cancelled the entire flight (any any following flights) or moved everyone else to another plane? What if you decide you want to lay down and take a nap in the middle of a busy intersection? You're not moving but the police would be right to physically move you. You buy a ticket, you agree to the rules. He has no contractual right to the seat. The contract clearly allows for IDB.

Originally Posted by deniah
This is about as far removed from DYKWIA behavior as can be. Unless we have a very conflicting fundamental understanding of what that means.

"I demand a free upgrade to F seat because i fly 5 times a year"

is a bit different from

"Im sitting perfectly still in the assigned seat i paid for, why are you throwing me off this plane".


As an example of tremendous irony, one of the few dissenting voices here against the bleeding pax, has himself complained on FT about negligence from airline staff for not paying attention to the fact that he cut himself shaving just prior to flying............
He is the definition of a DYKWIA. "I have no status and bought the cheapest ticket on the plane and have been IDB, but I'm a doctor so I'm going to hold up 70+ people and potentially hundreds others on following flights"

You don't pay for the seat, you pay for transport to your destination. There is no guarantee of a specific seat.
eng3 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.