Apr 10, 2017, 8:42 pm
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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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
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.
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
- Passenger one row behind and on the aisle footage BEFORE man was dragged off https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=655_1492004707
- Videos of man being removed https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4b7_1491983214 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nAZEk6nsNE
- Video of man re-entering plane https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNEQDWpYbZA (link dead)
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
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.
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
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
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
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
- Chicago Aviation Department said on the Monday afternoon after the incident that the officer who had dragged the passenger off the plane had been placed on leave pending an investigation. Spokesperson Karen Pride said in an email that "The incident on United flight 3411 was not in accordance with our standard operating procedure and the actions of the aviation security officer are obviously not condoned by the Department."
- 4/12/17: Two more Chicago Aviation officers involved are suspended
- Muñoz does ABC interview, announcing United will no longer use law enforcement to remove passengers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90jSUe_vdhM
- United announces policy change that crews traveling on their aircraft must be booked at least 60 minutes prior to departure.
- United releases multiple changes in overbooking / denied boarding policies "We are making changes to ensure that we always put customers first" (http://newsroom.united.com/2017-04-2...mer-Experience) released 27 April 2017
- Statement from United Airlines Regarding Resolution with Dr. David Dao - released 27 April 2017
- Response to Senate Commerce Committee questions - 1 May 2017
- United Airlines PR Boss to Step Down
- James Long, one of several officers involved in removing David Dao from the April 9, 2017, flight to make room for airline employees, filed suit on Tuesday against United, Chicago’s Department of Aviation and its commissioner, Ginger Evans. The lawsuit, filed in the circuit court of Cook County, Illinois, alleges he was not properly trained on how to use force.
Poll: Your Opinion of United Airlines
Poll link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/KP68GYG
Results link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/results...Q6B2B/instant/
Reference MaterialResults link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/results...Q6B2B/instant/
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.aspxIf 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.
Man pulled off of overbooked flight UA3411 (ORD-SDF) 9 Apr 2017 {Settlement reached}
Apr 13, 2017, 4:08 pm
#5041
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Refusal of an unfair request is not belligerence. I know there are law-and-order types who want to believe it is, but we conservatives actually value the individual over the collective, and should relax our law-and-order reflexes when they impinge on our value as individuals.
There were many ways this situation could have been dealt with. It definitely didn't have to end like this. There are many ways one can make a stand against unfair treatment.
Things can be tilted very much the other to skew way too much to the individual. We now have a culture of over-entitled pantywaists that can't even bear the thought of someone having a different opinion. "Me" can be just as bad as "We" when taken to extremes.
Apr 13, 2017, 4:10 pm
#5042
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,408
Just as well he didn't use the idiom 'over my dead body'. I don't think 'drag me out' was intended as a literal invitation.
Apr 13, 2017, 4:10 pm
#5043
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 118
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.
“[The] woman blew by gate agent and didn’t check in because she wasn’t an early boarder and [felt she] deserved overhead bin space,” her fellow passenger claims.
Apr 13, 2017, 4:10 pm
#5044
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Independent! But mostly BKK, BCN, SFO, PDX, SEA...
Programs: Lawl COVID
Posts: 1,060
No $hit. Hadn't checked this thread in a few days, but I see in the wiki that another passenger volunteered to give up their seat for $1600? That is insane if true - because that means UA could've gotten out of all of this for a mere $800 more in monopoly money? Wow. Just wow.
Do the GAs not have any ability to call a supervisor (who can call their supervisor) to get an extra $800 authorized? I mean holy $hit - that is unbelievable to think about - this 300+ page thread exists merely because an hourly employee at a corporation with a market cap of over $20 billion didn't have the authority to print another $800 in funny money. Damn.
And has this passenger done any interviews? I would've called every major news outlet offering to do an interview if it'd been me. This is just nuts.
Do the GAs not have any ability to call a supervisor (who can call their supervisor) to get an extra $800 authorized? I mean holy $hit - that is unbelievable to think about - this 300+ page thread exists merely because an hourly employee at a corporation with a market cap of over $20 billion didn't have the authority to print another $800 in funny money. Damn.
And has this passenger done any interviews? I would've called every major news outlet offering to do an interview if it'd been me. This is just nuts.
Never mind the long-term impacts, or the notion that something like this could go off the rails and send their expenses wildly out of control, with no end in sight. They bet that, with the culture they've installed since the merger, that no one would dare put up a fight. They were probably mad that the offer went up to 800$ in the first place. The most they were going to give up that night was 3200"$" in fake United vouchers.
Look at where United came from. Munoz's changes are little more than window dressing. Things in the Smisek era were so unbelievably, irretrievably bad that Munoz's inputs -- until this weekend -- made him look like a star. But it's still the same rotten core underneath, as what this event exposed. United still operates under the culture of, how much money will we save tonight? Until they address that (and unless Dr. Dao forces them to with his multi-million $ lawsuit), they are in for a long, hard road.
I mean, come on, when you have the king of "You'll be back" in Ben Baldanza dogging you, it's time to have a think about your current direction.
Last edited by FiveMileFinal; Apr 13, 2017 at 6:48 pm
Apr 13, 2017, 4:11 pm
#5045
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Programs: AA ex-EXP, 2MM (ex DL, ex TWA)
Posts: 1,433
Apr 13, 2017, 4:11 pm
#5046
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: San Diego, CA
Programs: Southwest A-List; Alaska MVPG; Hilton Diamond; Avis PreferredPlus; Marriott Bonvoy Platinum Elite
Posts: 920
I think United was out of line. However, some have said that there is a federal regulation about "Must Fly" or "Positive Space" crew tickets. If it's true (and I don't know if it's true or not, I haven't found a relevant DOT or other federal regulation), but IF it's true, then United can claim that they were removing him under Rule 21.B.
Apr 13, 2017, 4:11 pm
#5047
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
You're right - I guess they should have just let him sit there, or cancelled the whole flight so nobody got where they wanted to be. That would have solved everything.
Apr 13, 2017, 4:13 pm
#5048
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 563
So we're now down to feelings being a valid reason for not complying with a request to leave? Should an airline be forced to figure out how to IDB based on how embarrassed someone might be it?
To that I give a big - and I'm pretty anti-UA since CO came into the picture.
I'm not saying UA IDBing people after boarding isn't crappy, but shame isn't a valid reason for noncompliance. Getting deboarded certainly sucks, but it's not like he was alone, nor would he have been ridiculed if he got up and left. Inconvenienced and deserving of compensation? You bet. Pissed at UA? For sure.
There's also the fact that the plane is private property, and not complying with a request to leave can be considered trespassing. Whether or not the request is justified is moot at that point - especially when LEOs get involved. At that point, you lose that round - you're not law abiding. On a plane, you're best bet is to get off and fight it out with the GA, Twitter, customer service, etc over compensation and accommodation. Whether voluntarily or forcefully removed, you're not going to be on that flight. Period.
That said, if I were IDB'ed, it'd make my day under most circumstances. The one time UA IDB'ed me in FRA, it worked out very well for me.
And another here.
There's a big difference between taking a voluntary bump and no-showing for work vs. being IDB'ed. Few employers would put up with the former, but with the latter, what are they going to do? If the airline doesn't let you fly, it doesn't let you fly. The best I can do at that point is to do due diligence in finding another way there, if available, or we all roll with the delay. It's just like any weather or mechanical delay. It's travel. It happens. It's happened to all of us at some point. It sucks, but it's the nature of the beast.
If an employer fired me for not getting there because the airline IDB'ed me? I'd question why I even worked for them to begin with.
There's plenty of blame to go around in this situation, and it's really unfortunate it came out the way it did. You have a perfect storm of bad corporate practices, an entitled culture, overzealous police, and social media witch hunts.
I don't think anyone really wins here. Even when he gets his payday, I'm sure Dr. Dao would rather have just gotten to his destination rather than needing surgery and dentures.
To that I give a big
- and I'm pretty anti-UA since CO came into the picture.I'm not saying UA IDBing people after boarding isn't crappy, but shame isn't a valid reason for noncompliance. Getting deboarded certainly sucks, but it's not like he was alone, nor would he have been ridiculed if he got up and left. Inconvenienced and deserving of compensation? You bet. Pissed at UA? For sure.
There's also the fact that the plane is private property, and not complying with a request to leave can be considered trespassing. Whether or not the request is justified is moot at that point - especially when LEOs get involved. At that point, you lose that round - you're not law abiding. On a plane, you're best bet is to get off and fight it out with the GA, Twitter, customer service, etc over compensation and accommodation. Whether voluntarily or forcefully removed, you're not going to be on that flight. Period.
That said, if I were IDB'ed, it'd make my day under most circumstances. The one time UA IDB'ed me in FRA, it worked out very well for me.
And another
here.There's a big difference between taking a voluntary bump and no-showing for work vs. being IDB'ed. Few employers would put up with the former, but with the latter, what are they going to do? If the airline doesn't let you fly, it doesn't let you fly. The best I can do at that point is to do due diligence in finding another way there, if available, or we all roll with the delay. It's just like any weather or mechanical delay. It's travel. It happens. It's happened to all of us at some point. It sucks, but it's the nature of the beast.
If an employer fired me for not getting there because the airline IDB'ed me? I'd question why I even worked for them to begin with.
There's plenty of blame to go around in this situation, and it's really unfortunate it came out the way it did. You have a perfect storm of bad corporate practices, an entitled culture, overzealous police, and social media witch hunts.
I don't think anyone really wins here. Even when he gets his payday, I'm sure Dr. Dao would rather have just gotten to his destination rather than needing surgery and dentures.
The argument the airplane was private property and the same as a person trespassing on private property does not wash.
Apr 13, 2017, 4:15 pm
#5050
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: ROC/NYC/MSP/LAX/HKG/SIN
Posts: 3,215
My two cents
When I landed at SFO on Monday morning I realized the thread but thought it's just another typical IDB story. At the EOB, it's grown into 115 pages, and I realized how much I was mistaken.
Oscar thought exactly how I perceived in the first place. Chief of staff probably didn't tell him how serious it looked in the video. Apparently, in a airline and service industry thought they could just do their job and follow the IDB procedure then everything is fine. However, the failure to realize as the airline industry they have to do above and beyond to ensure the customer satisfaction. In this particular instance, you cannot play bully and just IDB the passengers because you need to get the four crew members in. IIRC, getting crew in is not oversale. Something is screwed up:
1. Crew scheduling system
2. Crew take it for granted and assume they have the ultimate pass to a flight.
3. Apparently the officer is way overboard to drag a passenger like a pig out of the aircraft.
4. CEO's tone-deaf response. Billions of dollars spent on Polaris are all going to waste.
5. GA played bully and assumed they could just kick people out any time they want. It's pretty obvious to see the pax was laughed off when asking for $1600. What's exactly was funny? When you need a seat, you gotta pay.
Verdict and ways to improve:
1. Bump offers must go up. It's pathetic to say $800 is already a lot when AA/DL offers way more than that.
2. Stop just following protocols when you are in airline/service industry. In this case, call the station manager and figure it out. Learn how to go above and beyond. Friendly skies? Apparently that's not the case in this incident.
3. Pax history does not matter whether he has the right to board in the flight. Therefore, for the love of god, explain to the pax who would be IDBed why they were the ones to be picked. In addition, it's great to see the suggestions from others that doing it RIGHT at the gate is the best thing to do.
Oscar thought exactly how I perceived in the first place. Chief of staff probably didn't tell him how serious it looked in the video. Apparently, in a airline and service industry thought they could just do their job and follow the IDB procedure then everything is fine. However, the failure to realize as the airline industry they have to do above and beyond to ensure the customer satisfaction. In this particular instance, you cannot play bully and just IDB the passengers because you need to get the four crew members in. IIRC, getting crew in is not oversale. Something is screwed up:
1. Crew scheduling system
2. Crew take it for granted and assume they have the ultimate pass to a flight.
3. Apparently the officer is way overboard to drag a passenger like a pig out of the aircraft.
4. CEO's tone-deaf response. Billions of dollars spent on Polaris are all going to waste.
5. GA played bully and assumed they could just kick people out any time they want. It's pretty obvious to see the pax was laughed off when asking for $1600. What's exactly was funny? When you need a seat, you gotta pay.
Verdict and ways to improve:
1. Bump offers must go up. It's pathetic to say $800 is already a lot when AA/DL offers way more than that.
2. Stop just following protocols when you are in airline/service industry. In this case, call the station manager and figure it out. Learn how to go above and beyond. Friendly skies? Apparently that's not the case in this incident.
3. Pax history does not matter whether he has the right to board in the flight. Therefore, for the love of god, explain to the pax who would be IDBed why they were the ones to be picked. In addition, it's great to see the suggestions from others that doing it RIGHT at the gate is the best thing to do.
Apr 13, 2017, 4:16 pm
#5051
Used to be 'etrevino'
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: MTY
Programs: AA, BA, AM Plat, HH Silver, SPG Gold, Amex Plat
Posts: 134
Of course it includes that as "other" means anything else not mentioned and the condition does not need to happen to the same flight, everything that can happen anywhere can be an "other". Same reason why on many contracts and terms of service there are words like: perpetual; at any time; worldwide; throughout the universe; by any means; including but not limited to; any technology known or yet to be discovered; all current and future heirs and successors living or yet to be born; etc.
Apr 13, 2017, 4:17 pm
#5052
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 563
No, but would it also have been right to force a stalemate where everyone sits on the plane and goes nowhere?
You're right - I guess they should have just let him sit there, or cancelled the whole flight so nobody got where they wanted to be. That would have solved everything.
You're right - I guess they should have just let him sit there, or cancelled the whole flight so nobody got where they wanted to be. That would have solved everything.
Apr 13, 2017, 4:19 pm
#5053
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,579
No, but would it also have been right to force a stalemate where everyone sits on the plane and goes nowhere?
You're right - I guess they should have just let him sit there, or cancelled the whole flight so nobody got where they wanted to be. That would have solved everything.
You're right - I guess they should have just let him sit there, or cancelled the whole flight so nobody got where they wanted to be. That would have solved everything.
There's no excuse for police brutality against a small, unarmed, nonviolent 69-year-old man who hasn't committed any crime to begin with.
None.
If United wanted to impose a stalemate and cancel the flight just to prove that nobody f**ks with the cartel and gets away with it, fine. (Or they could have, y'know, went back to the guy who already volunteered for $1600...
)But the rentacops should have turned to United and said "This isn't a security situation requiring force. You need to solve it yourselves."
Apr 13, 2017, 4:19 pm
#5054
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,484
No, but would it also have been right to force a stalemate where everyone sits on the plane and goes nowhere?
You're right - I guess they should have just let him sit there, or cancelled the whole flight so nobody got where they wanted to be. That would have solved everything.
You're right - I guess they should have just let him sit there, or cancelled the whole flight so nobody got where they wanted to be. That would have solved everything.
If you really believe UA had "no choice" but to have this man assaulted, well . . . .
Apr 13, 2017, 4:19 pm
#5055
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
And therein lies the rub. The culture at United Airlines is how much money they saved tonight.
Never mind the long-term impacts, or the notion that something like this could go off the rails and send their expenses wildly out of control, with no end in sight. They bet that, with the culture they've installed since the merger, that no one would dare put up a fight. They were probably mad that the offer went up to 800$ in the first place. The most they were going to give up that night was 3200"$" in fake United vouchers.
Look at where United came from. Munoz's changes are little more than window dressing. Things in the Smisek era were so unbelievably, irretrievably bad that Munoz's inputs make him look like a star. But it's still the same rotten core underneath, as what this event exposed. United still operates under the culture of, how much money will we save tonight? Until they address that (and unless Dr. Dao forces them to with his multi-million $ lawsuit), they are in for a long, hard road.
I mean, come on, when you have the king of "You'll be back" in Ben Baldanza dogging you, it's time to have a think about your current direction.
Never mind the long-term impacts, or the notion that something like this could go off the rails and send their expenses wildly out of control, with no end in sight. They bet that, with the culture they've installed since the merger, that no one would dare put up a fight. They were probably mad that the offer went up to 800$ in the first place. The most they were going to give up that night was 3200"$" in fake United vouchers.
Look at where United came from. Munoz's changes are little more than window dressing. Things in the Smisek era were so unbelievably, irretrievably bad that Munoz's inputs make him look like a star. But it's still the same rotten core underneath, as what this event exposed. United still operates under the culture of, how much money will we save tonight? Until they address that (and unless Dr. Dao forces them to with his multi-million $ lawsuit), they are in for a long, hard road.
I mean, come on, when you have the king of "You'll be back" in Ben Baldanza dogging you, it's time to have a think about your current direction.
And now we just lost VX.
I don't think any of the mergers should have been allowed to happen as they did. Maybe a big one picking up a regional here or there or something, but not the big consolidation we had. Back when we had multiple choices and ways of getting there with AA, UA, CO, US, HP, NW, TW, DL, WN, F9, FL and more, it actually mattered how they treated us.
Hub captive? You get destinations, but only one real carrier and high prices. Non-hub flyer? If you're lucky, you'll have a little competition, but even now, that's dwindled down to a few flights a day each to hubs with crappy schedules and connections.
I think we would have had a healthier market and better competition had some airlines been allowed to fail, allowing the others to pick the desirable parts of the carcass in BK.
We all lost over the last 20 years or so. It's just now really starting to come to a head.