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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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 12, 2017, 9:10 pm
  #4471  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,203
Originally Posted by Chevelter
First of all, the passenger might be a doctor but the media should verify it before reporting that as fact. He may have just said so.

Second, this was a Republic Airlines flight operating as United Express.

Third, the passenger should not have failed to comply with crew-member instructions.

The man looks like he has mental issues to me.
1 - how does it mattter if he was a doctor or not?
2 - does it matter that it was RA? (if so, why was Munooz apologizing?)
3 - you are certainly entitled to your opinion but helpfully seeing reaction of billion plus people all over the world makes you reconsider that viewpoint
4 - really? you can detect mental issues from 15 second clip???

Last edited by desi; Apr 12, 2017 at 9:20 pm
desi is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:12 pm
  #4472  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,319
Typical jailhouse tactics. Pick a random scapegoat, make impossible/demeaning/otherwise unrealistic demands of him, when he fails to comply, punish the rest while pointing the scapegoat as the culprit. "Hey, boys, you will be left without dinner tonight because *this guy* did not lick my boots". 9 out of 10 times this gets the expected result - the scapegoat becomes the enemy to the rest. It's important to keep in mind that the actual cause of this situation is whatever authority that caused it.

In this case - the situation is of UA's doing. There does not exist any possible valid or acceptable course of events that begins with poor business planning (no matter how common or generally accepted such poor planning may be) and ends with physical assault on an arbitrary customer. None. Never. It's important to keep eyes on the ball and not get distracted by all the shuffling, strawman arguments and such.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 12, 2017 at 9:45 pm Reason: Discuss the issues, not the poster
br2k is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:14 pm
  #4473  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Programs: Top Tier with all 3 alliances
Posts: 11,668
Originally Posted by desi
1 - how does it mattter if he was a doctor or not?
2 - does it matter that it was RA? (if so, why was Munooz apologizing?)
3 - you are certainly entitled to your opinion but helpfully seeing reaction of billion plus people all over the world makes you reconsider your victim blaming mentality (or at least give you a pause before posting on FT)
4 - really? you can detect mental issues from 15 second clip???
I think you are responding to posts from page 8 three days ago, we are now at page 300....
nk15 is online now  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:15 pm
  #4474  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis, MN (MSP)
Programs: DL DM, UA 1K MM, Subway Club Member
Posts: 1,988
If I was United I would be pissed at the City of Chicago. It was their guy who did the beating and I'd argue this entire thing is the City's fault. I doubt anyone at United thought they would see a semi-conscious passenger pulled up the aisle because they overbooked the flight. What seems to have happened is a City employee was more than happy to use a significant amount of physical force with (based on the video) with little attempt to diffuse the situation and, clearly, no common sense about context and the clear option to use much less force or just go back to United and say the situation does not justify force. Instead, the City beat the .... out of the guy; not surprising really considering the decades (if not century) long pattern of abuse by the City of Chicago's various law enforcement agencies (of which the Department of Aviation Security is one).

Why aren't any of these people (http://www.flychicago.com/business/C...s/default.aspx) on CNN defending their employees? Specifically Commissioner Ginger S. Evans, you'd think she would be right up there with Munoz saying they are conducting a full investigation and promise to change. BTW Commission Evans can be reached at [email protected], perhaps we could all ask her what her department is planning to do.

United is one of Chicago's largest employers and it is crazy that the City is happy to let them stand alone here.

Last edited by kenn0223; Apr 12, 2017 at 9:23 pm
kenn0223 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:18 pm
  #4475  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: The Island of Hawai'i
Posts: 2
Hello all,
I've been reading FT occasionally for a while but never posted anything until this pushed me over the edge... I almost always fly UA since they have the only mainland flight from Hilo, so I guess it hit close to home.

Anyway, lots of good info here, I've actually read, or at least skimmed, most of the posts.

One point that I don't think has been made is that wrt forced deplaning, it seems obvious to me that the rules must be different if passengers have to be deplaned because it is physically impossible for the flight to legally proceed to its destination (W&B, performance, seat malfunctions) versus if the airline prefers to replace seated passengers with someone else.

In the former case, physics prevents the plane from leaving with all seated passengers and no policy can change that. Someone has to be denied transportation and we can argue over what the correct procedure for picking who that passenger is. Personally, I'd say they can use market pricing to get people to volunteer, but ultimately an involuntary de-planing might make sense.

In the latter case, the airline wants to make a substitution. In that case, it seems perfectly reasonable to me to say that once the passenger has had their boarding pass scanned and is seated on the aircraft, that ship has sailed. If they want to switch out passengers at that point, they can try to make a deal with a passenger, who is under no obligation to accept. They either buy them out or they ride.

Like other people have said, I can find no justification for airlines on the one hand being allowed to overbook and reap the benefits of that, and then on the other hand not being exposed to the potential downside of doing so by being allowed to refuse to transport ticketed passengers while paying a legally mandated compensation with a ridiculously low cap. They want to both have their cake and eat it, and that's neither right nor in accordance with free market policy. If the airlines were all going bankrupt, it would be one thing, but that is no longer the case.
lutorm is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:18 pm
  #4476  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,969
Originally Posted by SFOFastAir
I haven't read through all 298 pages of this thread so I apologize if this information has been previously posted.

I seems if Dr. Dao has a somewhat checked past and this may account for his reluctance to comply with law enforcement personnel.
...
I am not sure if it is a good idea for someone who appears to be a UA employee to post this....

Last edited by username; Apr 12, 2017 at 9:57 pm
username is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:20 pm
  #4477  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: IAH
Programs: UA 1K 2.7MM, Marriott Titanium/LT Plat, IHG Spire
Posts: 3,317
Originally Posted by br2k

Also - anyone bringing up "moral character" of the victim is either a corporate stooge or paid shill.
Disagree. I am neither and think that it's relevant. There is a lot of interesting info here: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documen...irlines-879032 The man was a sexual predator who abused his position as a physician to exchange drugs for sex. He was the subject of "many complaints" at a hospital where he worked and because of his "disruptive behavior" was referred for anger management counseling. A peer review explicitly stated that "He is generally not forthright regarding details of events" (seems relevant!). His license was suspended for ten years because of all of this and he was convicted of ninety-eight felonies.

Since we don't have the video of the entire incident, start to finish, and are trying to figure out what happened, I think that his past behavior is relevant to what might have been his behavior here. And I'm not convinced that "victim" is the right label to apply here.

Last edited by JNelson113; Apr 12, 2017 at 9:26 pm
JNelson113 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:21 pm
  #4478  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 18
Originally Posted by raehl311
He didn't do anything wrong, except what he did wrong.
....
He was asked to leave by the employees of the owner of the property he was on. He refused. That's wrong.
He paid fare for that flight/seat. United didn't own it anymore.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 12, 2017 at 9:47 pm Reason: repaired quote
net222 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:23 pm
  #4479  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 599
Angry

Originally Posted by JNelson113
Disagree. I am neither and think that it's relevant. There is a lot of interesting info here: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documen...irlines-879032 The man was a sexual predator who abused his position as a physician to exchange drugs for sex. He was the subject of "many complaints" at a hospital where he worked and because of his "disruptive behavior" was referred for anger management counseling. His license was suspended for ten years because of all of this.

Since we don't have the video of the entire incident, start to finish, and are trying to figure out what happened, I think that his past behavior is relevant to what might have been his behavior here. And I'm not convinced that "victim" is the right label to apply here.
[Unduly personalized text edited by Moderator.] There has been enough video (look at the wiki) and the reactions of the fellow passengers clearly indicates that his background did not play a factor in this. Full stop. End of story.

Last edited by Ocn Vw 1K; Apr 12, 2017 at 9:29 pm Reason: Per FT Rule 12.
quantumslip is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:25 pm
  #4480  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: EAU
Programs: UA 1K, CO Plat, NW Plat, Marriott Premiere Plat, SPG Plat, Priority Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 4,712
Originally Posted by net222
Originally Posted by raehl311
He didn't do anything wrong, except what he did wrong.
....
He was asked to leave by the employees of the owner of the property he was on. He refused. That's wrong.
He paid fare for that flight/seat. United didn't own it anymore.
That's ridiculous.

Buy a movie ticket and see if you don't get kicked out for talking on your phone during the movie. Or filming. Or talking a lot.

Nowhere, including airplanes, does buying a ticket preclude the property owner from kicking you out.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 12, 2017 at 9:48 pm Reason: repaired post
raehl311 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:26 pm
  #4481  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: EAU
Programs: UA 1K, CO Plat, NW Plat, Marriott Premiere Plat, SPG Plat, Priority Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 4,712
Originally Posted by quantumslip
Stop it with the Ad hominem attacks. There has been enough video (look at the wiki) and the reactions of the fellow passengers clearly indicates that his background did not play a factor in this. Full stop. End of story.
Nope, just his criminal behavior.
raehl311 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:28 pm
  #4482  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,875
Originally Posted by raehl311
Nope, just his criminal behavior.
Is your history relevant to your posting? It sure is. It always is. But we (as a society) have chosen to say that your bad does not define your present nor future
s0ssos is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:28 pm
  #4483  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 18
Originally Posted by raehl311
That's ridiculous.

Buy a movie ticket and see if you don't get kicked out for talking on your phone during the movie. Or filming. Or talking a lot.

Nowhere, including airplanes, does buying a ticket preclude the property owner from kicking you out.
He sit there quiet until United asking him leave.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 12, 2017 at 10:41 pm Reason: repaired quote
net222 is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:32 pm
  #4484  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,413
Originally Posted by Artpen100
I think it would have to be a captain's call, and unless it happened a lot, I think DOT will generally defer to a pilot's judgment. Also, presumably if they reboarded the deadheaders and everyone but the 4 bumped passengers (whose BPs would no longer scan), depending on the length of time, it might just be a delay and they might not owe the reboarded passengers anything, only the four that got bumped. (I seem to recall having to deplane once because they decided to top off the fuel one time and there were fumes; we got back on afterwards and took off. I don't see that exercise requires that there be a new flight.)

But the chances of that should be remote. I'm somewhat more concerned that now FAs will be reluctant to call law enforcement when it is really needed, like a belligerent passenger.
I would find it objectionable if an airline even once uses the trick of cancelling the flight and immediately reinstating it under a new number as a device to avoid VDBs/IDBs. If this is allowed, the threshold for it being economically advantageous to do this would be very low. What does it cost to deplane everyone, change flight status to cancelled, and then create the new flight, including filing its flight plan, using the same aircraft and same gate, and reboard only those passengers you want. You wouldn't even need to change seat assignments, although of course some airlines seem to routinely shuffle the seating around whenever there's even a minor schedule change.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Apr 12, 2017, 9:33 pm
  #4485  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Programs: AAdvantage, Skymiles
Posts: 156
Originally Posted by raehl311
Anyone can ask you to leave their property at any time, and the only acceptable response is to leave their property. If you refuse to leave their property, law enforcement will show up and they will remove you, by force if necessary, and if you force law enforcement to use force to remove you

If you're a multi-national corporation who's primary customers are members of the general public (and not other corporations) the world is quite simply, well, not that simple. United has more than enough highly compensated executives to figure that out long before this incident ever happened.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 12, 2017 at 10:42 pm Reason: repaired quote
mdkowals 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.