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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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
- Muńoz 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 10, 2017, 5:26 pm
#1006
Join Date: May 2005
Location: SEA
Programs: AS; Hyatt Globalist; Hilton Gold; NEXUS
Posts: 977
AS doesn't milk the overbooking game nearly as much as UA/AA/DL. VDB/IDB does happen, but they are usually pretty proactive about it and are able to get volunteers.
I know we like to [deleted per Rule 16] moan a lot over in the AS forum, but their customer service is significantly better than the others.
Last edited by Pat89339; Apr 10, 2017 at 5:46 pm Reason: TOS 16
Apr 10, 2017, 5:27 pm
#1007
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 259
Thankfully, in this country we don't accept "beating" as an appropriate extrajudicial response to being a jerk or refusing the orders of a crew member (however unlawful/lawful/appropriate/inappropriate that order may be).
to the ground crew that set this in motion.
to the ground crew that set this in motion.
Apr 10, 2017, 5:27 pm
#1008
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 16,901
By law they are required to ask for volunteers and offer compensation. If this does not yield the desired outcome, they can pick people to offload.
It's the same principle as overtime at work. It's voluntary until there's not enough volunteers. At that point it becomes 'mandatory'. I guess I could always count on the sympathy of several posters here if I got fired for refusing to do it.
It's the same principle as overtime at work. It's voluntary until there's not enough volunteers. At that point it becomes 'mandatory'. I guess I could always count on the sympathy of several posters here if I got fired for refusing to do it.
Apr 10, 2017, 5:28 pm
#1009
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Global
Posts: 5,998
I asked this a while back in the thread but I'm still wondering why no one else on the aircraft thought to volunteer to IVDB (contradiction I know) in this man's place when it was clear he was a doctor trying to get to his patients. Or why the GA, upon learning he was a doctor, didn't appeal for volunteers a second time using this information...
As I mentioned above, more money would have solved it, quick.
Ring your call button if you will get off this plane for... $900... $1000... $1200... $2000. At some point, you would have 4 volunteers.
Apr 10, 2017, 5:28 pm
#1010
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 432
Can anyone imagine this sort of thing happening on ANA? Everyone from the CEO down to the flight crew to the gate agent would be immediately dragged before the cameras to publicly bow in shame and resign for treating a customer so disgracefully. The problem here is that we have a culture among US airlines (and this is by no means confined to UA) where the passengers are "the enemy" and are routinely treated as such.
Apr 10, 2017, 5:28 pm
#1011
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: YVR
Posts: 1,847
You don't see it because, like myself, you fly a lot of AS.
AS doesn't milk the overbooking game nearly as much as UA/AA/DL. VDB/IDB does happen, but they are usually pretty proactive about it and are able to get volunteers.
I know we like to ..... and moan a lot over in the AS forum, but their customer service is significantly better than the others.
AS doesn't milk the overbooking game nearly as much as UA/AA/DL. VDB/IDB does happen, but they are usually pretty proactive about it and are able to get volunteers.
I know we like to ..... and moan a lot over in the AS forum, but their customer service is significantly better than the others.
Apr 10, 2017, 5:28 pm
#1012
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: MP
Posts: 224
In summary, I think every party involved is in a little bit of wrong here, each with their own justifications.
UA messed up realizing too late they had to fly 4 extra crew members, had they realized this before boarding this would not have been a mess. But still, having to choose between denying 4 passengers or cancel a whole flight the next day, I understand how it has to be the 4 who has to go. UA could also tried a little harder on the incentives, maybe a maximum $1350. But, if it seems like there wasn't going to be a volunteer anyway, then drawing lots it is.
Securities messed up in probably being a bit too "violent" (although the guy did fall and hit his head). But by that point they were only instructed to remove a passenger from the plane. It's kind of their job to "forcibly" remove a person who wouldn't "voluntarily" be removed from the plane.
The man should've just listened to his FA. Once you're on the plane and they tell you to get out, you should just listen. Arguing with your FA will only gets you into more trouble, especially once securities have been called. What do you expect the outcome to be? They give up and let you fly? The best he could have hoped for is to plea for any other passengers to understand his urgency and volunteer in his stead. Someone had to go and he got the short end of the straw. But yes, he shouldn't have to be kicked out the first place.
Everyone also seemed to be punished. Security got put on leave. Man got injury. Personally, I think UA is getting hit the hardest with the PR they're receiving.
Maybe some of you think it's justified? I don't know.
UA messed up realizing too late they had to fly 4 extra crew members, had they realized this before boarding this would not have been a mess. But still, having to choose between denying 4 passengers or cancel a whole flight the next day, I understand how it has to be the 4 who has to go. UA could also tried a little harder on the incentives, maybe a maximum $1350. But, if it seems like there wasn't going to be a volunteer anyway, then drawing lots it is.
Securities messed up in probably being a bit too "violent" (although the guy did fall and hit his head). But by that point they were only instructed to remove a passenger from the plane. It's kind of their job to "forcibly" remove a person who wouldn't "voluntarily" be removed from the plane.
The man should've just listened to his FA. Once you're on the plane and they tell you to get out, you should just listen. Arguing with your FA will only gets you into more trouble, especially once securities have been called. What do you expect the outcome to be? They give up and let you fly? The best he could have hoped for is to plea for any other passengers to understand his urgency and volunteer in his stead. Someone had to go and he got the short end of the straw. But yes, he shouldn't have to be kicked out the first place.
Everyone also seemed to be punished. Security got put on leave. Man got injury. Personally, I think UA is getting hit the hardest with the PR they're receiving.
Maybe some of you think it's justified? I don't know.
Apr 10, 2017, 5:29 pm
#1013
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: YVR TLS
Programs: Air France Flying Blue, Altitude SE-100k, AAdvantage, United Mileage Plus, WS rewards, BonVoy Titan
Posts: 912
wow, this story made it on the page of a very reputable German newspaper ... http://www.faz.net/aktuell/gesellsch...-14966998.html UA is getting a ton of horrible press these days, even international. And what do they do ... nothing as far as I can tell. $400 was a joke of an offer and even $800 is not the end of the story. Before forcefully dragging out pax they should have gone way higher, especially if it is for their crew! Truly pathetic and if they didn't see that PR disaster coming ... I don't know.
Apr 10, 2017, 5:29 pm
#1014
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 259
Can anyone imagine this sort of thing happening on ANA? Everyone from the CEO down to the flight crew to the gate agent would be immediately dragged before the cameras to publicly bow in shame and resign for treating a customer so disgracefully. The problem here is that we have a culture among US airlines (and this is by no means confined to UA) where the passengers are "the enemy" and are routinely treated as such.
It's a power thing.
"We are primarily here for your safety"
Apr 10, 2017, 5:30 pm
#1015
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 506
He's just paying lip service. Which I guess is better than under the previous CEO? Smi-suck would have kicked the guy off the plane himself. 
This is eerily reminiscent of my last experience with United. Crew availability blew out the departure a day (it was either that or take a lap around the country after waking up at 3:30am for a 5am flight to make the original international connection.) Regional flight is hideously oversold, but they *board the plane anyway* and then come up and try to trick my partner out of her paid F seat on a paid J itinerary for a GS who was having a massive flip-out. Only after I started talking about how bad this would look and how much compensation we would both be pursuing if they kicked us off did they relent.
This is eerily reminiscent of my last experience with United. Crew availability blew out the departure a day (it was either that or take a lap around the country after waking up at 3:30am for a 5am flight to make the original international connection.) Regional flight is hideously oversold, but they *board the plane anyway* and then come up and try to trick my partner out of her paid F seat on a paid J itinerary for a GS who was having a massive flip-out. Only after I started talking about how bad this would look and how much compensation we would both be pursuing if they kicked us off did they relent.
Apr 10, 2017, 5:31 pm
#1016
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,405
I asked this a while back in the thread but I'm still wondering why no one else on the aircraft thought to volunteer to IVDB (contradiction I know) in this man's place when it was clear he was a doctor trying to get to his patients. Or why the GA, upon learning he was a doctor, didn't appeal for volunteers a second time using this information.
If doctors are excluded from IDB, we would've to exclude soldiers, judges, important businessmen and lawyers that want to close important deals, politicians, students writing an exam the next day, etc. The list would be endless.
If the doctor is heading back to do his regular (planned) surgeries, in which case getting home a day earlier is never a bad idea (there's always a risk of extraordinary circumstances ; if the flight was cancelled due to weather, he would've had the same problem). If the doctor is traveling to treat an emergency, I can't be much of an emergency: If it's a life or death situation, you usually don't fly in a doc (and certainly not on commercial).
All of that said, this doesn't justify UA staff to call LE to drag out customers and injuring them in the process, because UA is incapable of planing ahead despite having purpose built computer systems to do just that. When seeing these situations, I sometimes wonder how we survived 40 years ago, when computers with live updates and predictive algorithms weren't around.
Apr 10, 2017, 5:31 pm
#1017
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,092
I have a feeling this past week will change that stat significantly. And the point is that DL is not morally opposed to overbooking. It's standard practice to maximize load factors.
Apr 10, 2017, 5:31 pm
#1018
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, UA Gold, WN, Global Entry; +others wherever miles/points are found
Posts: 14,405
In the UK (and I realise things may be different in the US), if I leave my house and someone comes in and squats in my house, the police won't help me drive him/her out. I have to sort this out in the courts. Problematic and very unpleasant? Yes, but this is a civil matter, not a criminal matter (i.e. the squatter is not assaulting me).
Absolutely. Depending on the circumstances, maybe after arguing heatedly with the GA. But after a police officer sets foot on the plane? Absolutely.
Apr 10, 2017, 5:31 pm
#1019
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Northern California
Programs: I want to be free! Free!
Posts: 3,454
The man should've just listened to his FA. Once you're on the plane and they tell you to get out, you should just listen. Arguing with your FA will only gets you into more trouble, especially once securities have been called. What do you expect the outcome to be? They give up and let you fly? The best he could have hoped for is to plea for any other passengers to understand his urgency and volunteer in his stead. Someone had to go and he got the short end of the straw. But yes, he shouldn't have to be kicked out the first place.
Apr 10, 2017, 5:32 pm
#1020
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 16,901
Can anyone imagine this sort of thing happening on ANA? Everyone from the CEO down to the flight crew to the gate agent would be immediately dragged before the cameras to publicly bow in shame and resign for treating a customer so disgracefully. The problem here is that we have a culture among US airlines (and this is by no means confined to UA) where the passengers are "the enemy" and are routinely treated as such.