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}

Man pulled off of overbooked flight UA3411 (ORD-SDF) 9 Apr 2017 {Settlement reached}

    Hide Wikipost
Old Apr 13, 18, 1:33 pm   -   Wikipost
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been on FT for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
Wiki Link

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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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:
Ocn Vw 1K

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


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.


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.


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
United Airlines
Poll: Your Opinion of United Airlines
Poll link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/KP68GYG
Results link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/results...Q6B2B/instant/
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

Old Apr 19, 17, 10:35 pm
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,856
Originally Posted by wolf72 View Post
But releasing the passenger's name because he was asian was not lunancy right?

Amazing logic!
Do we know who released the doctor's name?

If he wanted his privacy to be protected, it should have been protected.
BF263533 is offline  
Old Apr 19, 17, 10:40 pm
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 575
I wouldn't be surprised if he released it himself so he could have his pick of lawyers knocking on his door.
flyerbaby19 is offline  
Old Apr 19, 17, 10:42 pm
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: AA Advantage
Posts: 11
Talking lol

Originally Posted by Carl Johnson View Post
Your numbers are much too big. If I were on that plane and witnessed the incident, I wouldn't have any claim for any trauma caused by witnessing it. I'd feel indignation, but not any kind of danger or anxiety. Your 200 million figure, I think it would be malpractice for a lawyer to recommend sticking at a demand like that and going to trial in the face of a reasonable offer. And the 2 million figure, no witness has any claim anywhere near that size.

Dr. Dao's responsibility is to himself. He has no obligation to onlookers, he has no obligation to crusade for justice. He should make his own choices. As soon as he asks my opinion, I'll think the matter over and tell him what I think. But I'm not sitting by my phone waiting for it to ring.
Are you telling me they would not pay that amount? Because the damage in court will be much much more expensive to their reputation and possible change in legislation due to what is being said in court. Remember they have admitted to guilt. Not to mention daos lawyer will try and show a pattern of abuse. Which could lead to huge sums in class action. They can pay a lot now or pay DEARLY later. In court the jury decides and it will be less money but very painful to your stock, reputation and most likely get a lot of passenger control nuked with a passengers bill of rights. In settlement there is no jury and the sky is the limit and you can keep most of your secret control rules. Then United can focus on making sure congress doesn't give passengers more rights. Personally I'd love to see this go to court but that's me.

Last edited by nitzer; Apr 19, 17 at 10:50 pm
nitzer is offline  
Old Apr 19, 17, 10:43 pm
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: RNO
Programs: AA/DL/WN/ex-UA elite
Posts: 5,726
Originally Posted by wolf72 View Post
But releasing the passenger's name because he was asian was not lunancy right?

Amazing logic!
What difference does the victim's ethnicity make? The claims I've heard that he was chosen because he's Asian have no basis in fact. The UA computers, which don't store your ethnicity in the PNR, picked him using a secret formula because the GA was too lazy to get permission to go over the measly $800 for VDB.
Kevin AA is offline  
Old Apr 19, 17, 10:45 pm
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: AA Advantage
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by tom911 View Post
Well, in the particular incident we're discussing today, it's not clear that the agent deserves any discipline at all and may have been following published UA policy. Hard to fire someone who is following company policy and has the public support of the CEO. I would hope the same would hold for UA employees in Asia.
I read someone offered $1600 cash for their seat. She laughed in their face.
I also heard one of the passengers said the cops were laughing at him as they dragged him down the aisle. That will come out in the trial.
nitzer is offline  
Old Apr 19, 17, 10:46 pm
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,856
United Airlines says it will testify at House hearing




Last edited by BF263533; Apr 19, 17 at 10:52 pm
BF263533 is offline  
Old Apr 19, 17, 10:47 pm
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Francisco
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, Hilton Diamond, UA 1K, Hertz Platinum
Posts: 286
Originally Posted by wolf72 View Post

If the good doctor

Sorry to disappoint you but what happened with the good doctor .
let's stay on point, yes he is a doctor, but good.?
sex for drugs
had his license to practice suspended
drug trafficking

there is no need to name specific UA employees to put themselves and their families at risk by Dao sympathizers. The UA employees did their job. Blame the pretend Chicago airport police instead. Or better yet, Dao for not getting out of his seat like 99.9% of what normal passengers do daily when they are asked.
zxsuxr is offline  
Old Apr 19, 17, 10:48 pm
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: AA Advantage
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by Kevin AA View Post
What difference does the victim's ethnicity make? The claims I've heard that he was chosen because he's Asian have no basis in fact. The UA computers, which don't store your ethnicity in the PNR, picked him using a secret formula because the GA was too lazy to get permission to go over the measly $800 for VDB.
That secret formula will come under intense scrutiny in the courtroom. What happens if it doesn't match other IVBD situations when they have come onto an aircraft. They will find that out in the discovery process.
nitzer is offline  
Old Apr 19, 17, 10:53 pm
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: SFO
Programs: UA GS 1MM / Hilton Diamond / SPG Platinum / Hertz PC
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by wolf72 View Post
But releasing the passenger's name because he was asian was not lunancy right?

Amazing logic!
The passengers name was not released because he was Asian. Period. Full stop. Let's keep this to a minimum level of intelligence.
HoyaSFOIAD is offline  
Old Apr 19, 17, 11:16 pm
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: 83,653
Originally Posted by tom911 View Post
Well, glad I'm not an airline employee in Brunei. Doesn't sound like airline employees there would have the level of protection/legal representation, airline employees have in the U.S. Just not sure of the need to publicize airline employees name immediately and who, exactly, that benefits. If I was the employee,and had followed written protocols, I would not want my name out there while a police investigation and internal investigation might still be underway.

If Mr. Munoz hadn't offered his support, the UA gate agent may very well have been in need of union appointed legal representation. She still may need legal help, which UA should provide as her employer, on any civil cases going forward.
I suspect that Dr Dao did not want his name out there either. In fact, the police aren't even investigating him, so there's even less reason to release his name or other details.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Apr 19, 17, 11:44 pm
Join Date: May 2006
Location: PMD
Programs: UA*G, NW, AA. WR, HH, IHG, Accor. TT-GE.
Posts: 2,103
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist View Post
I suspect that Dr Dao did not want his name out there either. In fact, the police aren't even investigating him, so there's even less reason to release his name or other details.
Leaked or not, it would have come out one way or another over the next few days. And his records would've been RE-mentioned one way or another. The incident having received that much attention, it was unavoidable. Plus he's a doctor.

Many would say his past has no relevance. I disagree. His bravery was because he had been arrested before and had gone through lengthy legal process in the past, and he's 69, financially not in need, and future career not a concern. A threat of arrest does not scare such a person. He said it recorded that he'd rather go to jail that relinquishing his seat.
HkCaGu is offline  
Old Apr 19, 17, 11:51 pm
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bellingham/Gainesville
Programs: UA-G MM, Priority Club Platinum, Avis First, Hertz 5*, Red Lion
Posts: 1,836
Originally Posted by wolf72 View Post
But they were willing to allow physical harm to be done to a 68 year old Grandfather? That's fine with you?
This is the part that I can't get out of my head, the fork in the road. If UA approached my parents to IDB (they have minor medical conditions for this age), either choice is bad. Denied the flight and have to deal with the extension of their trip, which is significant at that age. Or if they are stubborn UA beats up old people to show them who's boss.

It just makes me sick.
prestonh is online now  
Old Apr 19, 17, 11:53 pm
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Benicia CA
Programs: Alaska MVP Gold 75K, AA 3.8MM, UA 1.1MM, enjoying the retired life
Posts: 31,124
Rahm Emanuel casts doubt on future of aviation security force

A few lines from this article:
Under pointed questioning, Evans revealed that she had ordered aviation security officers to remove the word “police” from their uniforms.

But she could not explain why the directive she issued in January was not enforced and why the video clearly shows the word “police” on the jacket of at least one of the three aviation security officers who boarded the plane.

Even more infuriating to aldermen was the fact that O’Hare security chief Jeff Redding could not articulate what, if any, use of force policy had been given to aviation security officers.
So, we still don't know why the aviation officers are wearing police gear still, and now we don't know what instructions they've been given on the use of force, either. Just gets more interesting each new day.
tom911 is offline  
Old Apr 20, 17, 12:07 am
Moderator: United Airlines; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Gold 1.85MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Gold
Posts: 47,586
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist View Post
I suspect that Dr Dao did not want his name out there either. ...
Have seen multiple reports that google image search from one of the on aircraft videos was used to identify the passenger (a bit of a scary possibility).

Including this FT report
Originally Posted by ShutteLag View Post
not to take this off-topic, but that's why Google Image Search scares me to death...

just photoshop the blood off the man's face and use Google Image Search's "Search by Image" function... his other photos from last year came right up.
WineCountryUA is offline  
Old Apr 20, 17, 12:16 am
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Vancouver
Programs: Aeroplan, Mileage Plus, SPG Gold, AMEX Plat
Posts: 1,375
Originally Posted by BF263533 View Post
I have been very constructively critical of United on this situation, but executive management and the board created the culture at United. There is no need to bring the gate agent's names into this. The fish rots from the head, and that is Munoz, executive management and the board.

There are a lot of crazy people in this country and you don't want to condemn violence by generating more violence by releasing agent's names.

When you get to people 60 and over there is a good chance their health may not be amenable to an IDB, and may even risk committing prohibited disability discrimination. And when you are dealing with a doctor, in terms of "the greater good," he may have patients who waited months for an appointment, so his IDB could have possibly created the risk of serious harm to some patients.

The police or security officers names are likely to be brought up though.
Some reports are that the passenger was making a connection and had been traveling for 20+ hours. Add age and fatigue to the mix and I can see how he is not going to be in a good mood.

Then have someone basically go to him and say what amounts to: our software has decided that based on your frequent flyer status, check in time, fare your one of the four least import passengers on the flights so you should be inconvenienced for another 24 Hours to permit our staff to have your seat get out now or we will arrest you so get out.
Fiordland is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread