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}

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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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}

Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:38 pm
  #4876  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC: UA 1K, DL Platinum, AAirpass, Avis PC
Posts: 4,599
Originally Posted by DL-Don
From the article, "The passenger who filmed the video told Rene’s Points travel blog that the woman refused to check in with the gate agent and “walked right on” the flight."

This women violated security and safety rules by boarding without approval. It did not occur last week during the ATL-mageddon. She also does not appear to have been beaten into submission.
Walking on while boarding is in process with a valid seat assignment for the flight doesn't seem like something that warrants arrest after being taken off the flight (which appears to be what happened). It's grey.

Difference here...

No injuries
Police is properly uniformed
No video of her being pulled out of the seat
No worry by the other passengers (there weren't 70 other people hoping hey wouldn't get picked to leave)

So it gets a news story and we all move on.
cerealmarketer is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:38 pm
  #4877  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SDF
Programs: DL:360/DM/6 MMer; Bonvoy: Lifetime Titanium 10+M pts, 3100+ nights;
Posts: 1,441
Originally Posted by MrAndy1369
Can you please give me a quick summary of what he was saying? I'm deaf and the video isn't captioned.
This one has some captions.
DL-Don is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:39 pm
  #4878  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Nawthun Virginia
Programs: Air: UA (Gold), AA, WN, DL; Hotel: Hilton (Diamond), plus all the rest
Posts: 135
Originally Posted by kenn0223
Furthermore, since the DOA security officers are unlikely "law enforcement officers" under IL law it will be interesting to see how the "lawful order" argument plays out. In the end, the guy refused to follow commands from low-level hourly employees of United, Republic, and the City of Chicago. I wouldn't be surprised if the entire incident occurred without a mid or senior manager of any of the organizations even knowing about it. My guess is there was some hourly United gate supervisor involved but that the guys in suits didn't show up until there was blood.
If that turns out to be the case, then those guys in suits need to be given jobs that don't require suits. There is simply no excuse for leaving decisions that have a reasonable probability of resulting in a violent confrontation to line employees. If I were a line employee, I would report it up the line immediately, as soon as it became apparent that the passenger was refusing to vacate his seat, especially if policy prevented implementing a volutary bump with a high enough incentive to attract volunteers, which is the obvious avoidance strategy. The last thing bosses want is to be surprised.

How and when would the GA call the cops? It wouldn't be an emergency request, or that would have been handled by CPD, not by DOA. I suspect much policy change will focus on that process.
Rdenney is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:41 pm
  #4879  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 143
Originally Posted by NotSoOftenFlyer
No this does not feel like a case that settles for mere money. This is a chance for Demetrio and Dao to be heroic (get airline policies changed, maybe change some laws, make everyone who flies feel a little more human / respected in future, which will make them respected by a lot of ordinary people). They're not gonna go quietly for some admittedly big number. That's too cheap.

I don't think UAL's in-house counsel are ready for someone who won't sign a confidentiality agreement & take a big payoff. They'll try and they'll get themselves the best outside litigators they can.

This will be a fascinating trial, WAY more interesting than People v. Simpson And the world will love it.
This is what I think as well--that Dao's interests are going to be much more about metaphorically pounding United's face into a seat and dragging them down the aisle than getting a check with lots of numbers after it. Not saying he won't get paid--he will--but what's the value to a guy in his situation of also causing huge damage to the business that robbed him?
George Purcell is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:42 pm
  #4880  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Miami Beach, Florida
Programs: AA Plat, Sixt Platinum, Hilton Gold, Hyatt Platinum, Avis First, Caesars TR Diamond, Mlife Gold
Posts: 4,928
"dragging more horrific than fleeing Vietnam"

Lawyer: United passenger David Dao has concussion, broken nose; says dragging more horrific than fleeing Vietnam

Crystal Pepper, Dao’s daughter, delivered a statement during the press conference expressing gratitude for the outpouring of support for her father and the medical staff that helped in his recovery.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawyer-un...154505304.html
gkbiiii is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:42 pm
  #4881  
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: 100,369
Originally Posted by desi
Why do these airlines (and politicians including the Flexident) insist that overbooking valid business practice?

Sure, empty seat is irreversible lost revenur but so is empty room in hotel and seats in baseball games.

Do they "re-accomodate" fans?
Even when hotel walks you, you do get room and it is free.

If airlines somehow ensures that you do reach your destination within couple of hours of scheduled time and while doing so they fully refund the money then can overbook.

Overbooking should be allowed but IDB should involve
a) Every effort by airline (at any cost) to make pax reach destination within 2 hours fo scheduled time including buying walkin-fare at competition (and ticket needs to be refunded in full plus some compensation for stress/inconvenience)
b) If they indeed cant arrange for that ,they need to make a signed statement stating that they have indeed tried their best and now will pay ten times the total fare (including tax) subject to some minimum for doing IDB
c) Remove any limits on what airlines can pay for VDB
d) All compensation has to be in CASh (no vouchers)

Airlines can still have their overbooking ability but at huge cost if they get it wrong
c) Currently there are no limits on VDB compensation or its form, although apparently UA gives internal limits to GAs that can be unrealistically low.

d) Why not permit VDB compensation to take any form that's agreeable to the airline and the displaced passenger? People who are confident that vouchers will be used can get more airline funny money than the cash they could have received. Perhaps to some people an upgrade on the new flight is more valuable.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:43 pm
  #4882  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 143
While my previous post was partially in jest (as you didn't have any qualifiers for the justification of force), I believe according to other sources, she was probably tazed.

Originally Posted by DL-Don
From the article, "The passenger who filmed the video told Rene’s Points travel blog that the woman refused to check in with the gate agent and “walked right on” the flight."

This women violated security and safety rules by boarding without approval. It did not occur last week during the ATL-mageddon. She also does not appear to have been beaten into submission.
kanny is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:44 pm
  #4883  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 143
Originally Posted by cerealmarketer
Reading reports of the press conference, doesn't look like the attorneys have much issue with the GA or the calling of police.

They are framing it on United overbooking policy and the police handling.

Given the injuries, Chicago is now on the hook for a lot more liability than it was when it just appeared to be a cut lip.
Actually, the lawyer went way out of his way to make the case that the primary responsible party was the Pilot who was (or should have been) in charge of his vessel. Gonna be really amusing to see the PPRUNE preeners about pilot supremacy twist over what happens to the guy.
George Purcell is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:44 pm
  #4884  
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: 100,369
Originally Posted by Flyer1M
If United was willing to pay $2.2M fine on the Chairmans Flight and keep Jeff out of jail (plus Jeff got his approx $8M bonus) this is going to be at least a $5M settlement.
Many corporations have rules that settlements above some (high) amount require approval of the Board of Directors. Does anyone know the rule on this for UA?

Last edited by MSPeconomist; Apr 13, 2017 at 2:16 pm Reason: Typo
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:44 pm
  #4885  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Programs: AAdvantage Executive Platinum, Delta Silver Medallion, Marriott Bonvoy Ambassador
Posts: 14,071
Originally Posted by tom911
There is no obligation for the police to read someone their rights prior to talking with them - if there was, every police interaction, field interview or vehicle stop would be accompanied by them. They're not going to stand in the airplane aisle to read him his rights.

The bigger issue in play is how you can use brute force to remove someone, cause severe injury, and deem that it's not an arrest. Still waiting for the police report to make an appearance to explain that. It's the elephant in the corner of the room that keeps making an appearance.
Thank you! Yes! LE is free to interview witnesses without any intention of arresting them, to get involved in situations in order to calm them (ever see police get in the midst of two drunks about to come to blows, separate them, and talk them down?), etc.

Something went off the rails here, when Dao ended up injured, and, as tom911 points out, there was no arrest. There is a reason for the suspension, and I imagine internal investigations are ongoing.
ysolde is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:45 pm
  #4886  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 960
Originally Posted by Plumber
A jury gave a woman $2.7M in 1994 because McDonalds coffee was too hot. That was a long time ago.
She was awarded $2.7m because McDonald's, by their own admission, sold food that had never been tested for its safety against burns, had injured over 700 other people in the previous ten years, some of which were caused by their own employees spilling hot coffee on customers (including children), and that they had no interest in making any changes to reduce the number of injuries. They even said that the number of injuries was statistically insignificant.

The award was reduced on appeal, ultimately settled for an undisclosed sum.
pdxer is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:45 pm
  #4887  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Independent! But mostly BKK, BCN, SFO, PDX, SEA...
Programs: Lawl COVID
Posts: 1,060
Originally Posted by kenn0223
There were no "cops" or "police" involved. The three officers involved are City of Chicago Aviation Security Officers. They are hourly employees and fall within the City's custodial pay schedule. Based on the public pay information from the City for 2016 their hourly rate is $21.69/hr (higher than the window washers and lower than the parking lot managers). They are not trained as law enforcement, they are not represented by the CPD's union, and are not under the jurisdiction of the IL Law Enforcement Training and Standards Board. I am not sure who decided to send the security guys instead of actual police officers but, if it wasn't UA, I think its reasonable to think that when the agent called for assistance they thought they'd get someone trained to deal with the situation professionally and not a team of rent-a-cops.

We should stop referring to them as police or law enforcement since they are neither.
Hold up...

In the video, one of them was clearly wearing a vest that said POLICE across the back. So ... do we have people impersonating LEOs at this point? Crazy to ask, yes, but then, this whole thing is crazy.
FiveMileFinal is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:45 pm
  #4888  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis, MN (MSP)
Programs: DL DM, UA 1K MM, Subway Club Member
Posts: 1,988
Originally Posted by Rdenney
If that turns out to be the case, then those guys in suits need to be given jobs that don't require suits. There is simply no excuse for leaving decisions that have a reasonable probability of resulting in a violent confrontation to line employees. If I were a line employee, I would report it up the line immediately, as soon as it became apparent that the passenger was refusing to vacate his seat, especially if policy prevented implementing a volutary bump with a high enough incentive to attract volunteers, which is the obvious avoidance strategy. The last thing bosses want is to be surprised.

How and when would the GA call the cops? It wouldn't be an emergency request, or that would have been handled by CPD, not by DOA. I suspect much policy change will focus on that process.
My guess is there is a number for the airlines to call that goes to some dispatcher at ORD who decides who to send (likely the same dispatcher the guard is talking to on his radio). I'd bet that there are enough incidents at ORD that its cheaper to first send the rent-a-cops and then send the CPD if things get ugly. It could also be that all available CPD officers were on other calls and these guys were the only ones available.
kenn0223 is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:47 pm
  #4889  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Nawthun Virginia
Programs: Air: UA (Gold), AA, WN, DL; Hotel: Hilton (Diamond), plus all the rest
Posts: 135
Originally Posted by DrPSB
If you have status with United, it's not a bad airline. You'll board early and be able to find an overhead bin and get to your destination on time and not be in too much discomfort. BUT - if you do not have status you are treated poorly. You'll have to fight your way to the front of the line and hope you can find a bin for your carry on, will be in seats which are designed to give you the minimum comfort possible, and will be very unlikely to get an upgrade. Many (most?) of those who post on flyertalk know how to navigate United's system to maximize their comfort and would be very unlikely to be involuntarily bumped.
This is true. But I fly for the gubmint, and thus have to take the contract carrier when I can't justify using United. I'm frequently enough on American or Delta where I have no privileges, and am in the later boarding groups. I show up early and get in line early. Yup, gate lice, that's me.
Rdenney is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 12:47 pm
  #4890  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by 1KChinito
I would also hope so for everyone's sake. However, it is a personal decision. He may have a skeleton in the closet he does not want the public to know.
Those skeletons are mainly already out. And it's a risky strategy to count on character assasinating a victim of what may be considered a violent crime.
GUWonder is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.