Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

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

Community
Wiki Posts
Search
Old Apr 10, 2017, 8:42 pm
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
WELCOME, THREAD GUIDELINES and SUMMARY PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

If you are new to us, welcome to FlyerTalk! Who we are: FlyerTalk features discussions and chat boards that cover the most up-to-date traveler information; an interactive community dedicated to the topic of travel (not politics or arguments about politics or religion, etc. – those discussion are best in the OMNI forum)

The incident discussed in this thread has touched a nerve for many, and many posters are passionate about their opinions and concerns. However we should still have a civil and respectful discussion of this topic. This is because FlyerTalk is meant to be a friendly, helpful, and collegial community. (Rule 12.)

1. The normal FlyerTalk Rules apply. (Including not discussing moderation actions in thread). Please be particularly attentive to "discussing the idea and not the poster" when you have a disagreement. Civility and mutual respect are still expected and are what we owe each other as a community.

2. You are expected to respect the FlyerTalk community's diversity, and therefore refrain from posting inflammatory comments about race, religion, culture, politics, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. Do not cite, copy, or report on such.

3. While you can disagree with an opinion, the holder of that opinion has the same right to their opinion as you have to yours. We request all to respect that and disagree or discuss their point of views without getting overly personal and without attacking the other poster(s). This is expected as a requirement in FT Rule 12.

4. Overly exaggerative posts as well as posts with information that has been posted several times previously may be summarily deleted.

5. In addition, those who repeatedly fail to comply with FlyerTalk Rules, may be subjected to FlyerTalk disciplinary actions and, e.g., have membership privileges suspended, or masked from this forum.

If you have questions about the Rules or concerns about what another has posted in this or other threads in this forum, please do not post about that. Rather, notify the moderators by using the alert symbol within each post or email or send a private message to us moderators.

Let’s have this discussion in a way that, when we look back on it, we can be proud of how we handled ourselves as a community.

The United Moderator team:
J.Edward
l'etoile
Ocn Vw 1K
Pat89339
WineCountryUA

N.B. PLEASE do not alter the contents of this moderator note
Statement from United Airlines Regarding Resolution with Dr. David Dao - released 27 April 2017
CHICAGO, April 27, 2017 /PRNewswire/ -- We are pleased to report that United and Dr. Dao have reached an amicable resolution of the unfortunate incident that occurred aboard flight 3411. We look forward to implementing the improvements we have announced, which will put our customers at the center of everything we do.
DOT findings related to the UA3411 9 April 2017 IDB incident 12 May 2017

What facts do we know?
  • UA3411, operated by Republic Airways, ORD-SDF on Sunday, April 9, 2017. UA3411 was the second to last flight to SDF for United. AA3509 and UA4771 were the two remaining departures for the day. Also, AA and DL had connecting options providing for same-day arrival in SDF.
  • After the flight was fully boarded, United determined four seats were needed to accommodate crew to SDF for a flight on Monday.
  • United solicited volunteers for VDB. (BUT stopped at $800 in UA$s, not cash). Chose not to go to the levels such as 1350 that airlines have been known to go even in case of weather impacted disruption)
  • After receiving no volunteers for $800 vouchers, a passenger volunteered for $1,600 and was "laughed at" and refused, United determined four passengers to be removed from the flight.
  • One passenger refused and Chicago Aviation Security Officers were called to forcibly remove the passenger.
  • The passenger hit the armrest in the aisle and received a concussion, a broken nose, a bloodied lip, and the loss of two teeth.
  • After being removed from the plane, the passenger re-boarded saying "I need to go home" repeatedly, before being removed again.
  • United spokesman Jonathan Guerin said the flight was sold out — but not oversold. Instead, United and regional affiliate Republic Airlines – the unit that operated Flight 3411 – decided they had to remove four passengers from the flight to accommodate crewmembers who were needed in Louisville the next day for a “downline connection.”

United Express Flight 3411 Review and Action Report - released 27 April 2017

Videos

Internal Communication by Oscar Munoz
Oscar Munoz sent an internal communication to UA employees (sources: View From The Wing, Chicago Tribune):
Dear Team,

Like you, I was upset to see and hear about what happened last night aboard United Express Flight 3411 headed from Chicago to Louisville. While the facts and circumstances are still evolving, especially with respect to why this customer defied Chicago Aviation Security Officers the way he did, to give you a clearer picture of what transpired, I've included below a recap from the preliminary reports filed by our employees.

As you will read, this situation was unfortunately compounded when one of the passengers we politely asked to deplane refused and it became necessary to contact Chicago Aviation Security Officers to help. Our employees followed established procedures for dealing with situations like this. While I deeply regret this situation arose, I also emphatically stand behind all of you, and I want to commend you for continuing to go above and beyond to ensure we fly right.

I do, however, believe there are lessons we can learn from this experience, and we are taking a close look at the circumstances surrounding this incident. Treating our customers and each other with respect and dignity is at the core of who we are, and we must always remember this no matter how challenging the situation.

Oscar

Summary of Flight 3411
  • On Sunday, April 9, after United Express Flight 3411 was fully boarded, United's gate agents were approached by crewmembers that were told they needed to board the flight.
  • We sought volunteers and then followed our involuntary denial of boarding process (including offering up to $1,000 in compensation) and when we approached one of these passengers to explain apologetically that he was being denied boarding, he raised his voice and refused to comply with crew member instructions.
  • He was approached a few more times after that in order to gain his compliance to come off the aircraft, and each time he refused and became more and more disruptive and belligerent.
  • Our agents were left with no choice but to call Chicago Aviation Security Officers to assist in removing the customer from the flight. He repeatedly declined to leave.
  • Chicago Aviation Security Officers were unable to gain his cooperation and physically removed him from the flight as he continued to resist - running back onto the aircraft in defiance of both our crew and security officials.
Email sent to all employees at 2:08PM on Tuesday, April 11.
Dear Team,

The truly horrific event that occurred on this flight has elicited many responses from all of us: outrage, anger, disappointment. I share all of those sentiments, and one above all: my deepest apologies for what happened. Like you, I continue to be disturbed by what happened on this flight and I deeply apologize to the customer forcibly removed and to all the customers aboard. No one should ever be mistreated this way.

I want you to know that we take full responsibility and we will work to make it right.

It’s never too late to do the right thing. I have committed to our customers and our employees that we are going to fix what’s broken so this never happens again. This will include a thorough review of crew movement, our policies for incentivizing volunteers in these situations, how we handle oversold situations and an examination of how we partner with airport authorities and local law enforcement. We’ll communicate the results of our review by April 30th.

I promise you we will do better.

Sincerely,

Oscar
Statement to customers - 27 April 2017
Each flight you take with us represents an important promise we make to you, our customer. It's not simply that we make sure you reach your destination safely and on time, but also that you will be treated with the highest level of service and the deepest sense of dignity and respect.

Earlier this month, we broke that trust when a passenger was forcibly removed from one of our planes. We can never say we are sorry enough for what occurred, but we also know meaningful actions will speak louder than words.

For the past several weeks, we have been urgently working to answer two questions: How did this happen, and how can we do our best to ensure this never happens again?

It happened because our corporate policies were placed ahead of our shared values. Our procedures got in the way of our employees doing what they know is right.

Fixing that problem starts now with changing how we fly, serve and respect our customers. This is a turning point for all of us here at United – and as CEO, it's my responsibility to make sure that we learn from this experience and redouble our efforts to put our customers at the center of everything we do.

That’s why we announced that we will no longer ask law enforcement to remove customers from a flight and customers will not be required to give up their seat once on board – except in matters of safety or security.

We also know that despite our best efforts, when things don’t go the way they should, we need to be there for you to make things right. There are several new ways we’re going to do just that.

We will increase incentives for voluntary rebooking up to $10,000 and will be eliminating the red tape on permanently lost bags with a new "no-questions-asked" $1,500 reimbursement policy. We will also be rolling out a new app for our employees that will enable them to provide on-the-spot goodwill gestures in the form of miles, travel credit and other amenities when your experience with us misses the mark. You can learn more about these commitments and many other changes at hub.united.com.

While these actions are important, I have found myself reflecting more broadly on the role we play and the responsibilities we have to you and the communities we serve.

I believe we must go further in redefining what United's corporate citizenship looks like in our society. If our chief good as a company is only getting you to and from your destination, that would show a lack of moral imagination on our part. You can and ought to expect more from us, and we intend to live up to those higher expectations in the way we embody social responsibility and civic leadership everywhere we operate. I hope you will see that pledge express itself in our actions going forward, of which these initial, though important, changes are merely a first step.

Our goal should be nothing less than to make you truly proud to say, "I fly United."

Ultimately, the measure of our success is your satisfaction and the past several weeks have moved us to go further than ever before in elevating your experience with us. I know our 87,000 employees have taken this message to heart, and they are as energized as ever to fulfill our promise to serve you better with each flight and earn the trust you’ve given us.

We are working harder than ever for the privilege to serve you and I know we will be stronger, better and the customer-focused airline you expect and deserve.

With Great Gratitude,

Oscar Munoz
CEO
United Airlines
Aftermath
Poll: Your Opinion of United Airlines Reference Material

UA's Customer Commitment says:
Occasionally we may not be able to provide you with a seat on a specific flight, even if you hold a ticket, have checked in, are present to board on time, and comply with other requirements. This is called an oversale, and occurs when restrictions apply to operating a particular flight safely (such as aircraft weight limits); when we have to substitute a smaller aircraft in place of a larger aircraft that was originally scheduled; or if more customers have checked in and are prepared to board than we have available seats.

If your flight is in an oversale situation, you will not be denied a seat until we first ask for volunteers willing to give up their confirmed seats. If there are not enough volunteers, we will deny boarding to passengers in accordance with our written policy on boarding priority. If you are involuntarily denied boarding and have complied with our check-in and other applicable rules, we will give you a written statement that describes your rights and explains how we determine boarding priority for an oversold flight. You will generally be entitled to compensation and transportation on an alternate flight.

We make complete rules for the payment of compensation, as well as our policy about boarding priorities, available at airports we serve. We will follow these rules to ensure you are treated fairly. Please be aware that you may be denied boarding without compensation if you do not check in on time or do not meet certain other requirements, or if we offer you alternative transportation that is planned to arrive at your destination or first stopover no later than one hour after the planned arrival time of your original flight.
CoC is here: https://www.united.com/web/en-US/con...-carriage.aspx
Print Wikipost

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

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:52 pm
  #1096  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,092
Originally Posted by simpletastes
My questions is:

(1) Do you believe this was in essence a commercial dispute?

If so:

(a) Was United right in calling the cops in what amounts to a commercial dispute?

(b) Were the cops right to intervene in a commercial dispute?
I am not saying I will always agree with this interpretation but the way things work on airplanes is that if you refuse to follow crew instructions and don't back down, your negative and unreasonable attitude indicates that you could also pose a security risk. At which point they can kick you off the plane. That's not a thing unique to the U.S. as far as I know. I seem to remember stories about crew responding in this way to pax questioning their decisions on other non-U.S. airlines as well.

In fact, it sometimes seems that it is an almost industry-wide way of getting pax to shut up and sit down.
Ber2dca is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:52 pm
  #1097  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,406
Originally Posted by pon18n
It doesn't matter how long you've been told you gotta go, you gotta go. The longer you're being persistent the longer you're delaying everyone on board. If you insist on not leaving then you're leaving the airline no option other than forcibly remove you.
I remember that for the future. Just in case I need to weasel out of a contract.

The first question is: Who is responsible for allocating more seats than available? The passenger? No, the airline. It earns extra money by doing so. If nobody wants to deplane for $800, they should've raised the offer. At some point, somebody will volunteer.

How would you feel if you booked a full fare Y ticket, that's more than $1000 than the super discounted ticket the next morning? If you agreed to the $800 to fly the next morning, you would effectively make a loss of $200, that you paid too much.

You might disagree with my opinion, but I firmly believe in the binding effect of contracts and the vision that both sides shall perform the contract as agreed upon. Regarding T&Cs/CoCs, I have a very critic opinion when it comes to agreements between professional parties and consumers and particularly if these documents contain unusual clauses that are unnecessarily unfavorable to consumers (given that most customers don't read them).
WorldLux is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:52 pm
  #1098  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 43
Originally Posted by james dean
still not true, this was an operational circumstance, the Airline can take precedent. Not agreeing in any way with how this was handled....
Throwing in the word "operational" does not magically make it alright. Rule 21 provides for a number circumstances, many of which may be considered "operational" considerations, where United can remove a passenger from a flight. None of those circumstances pertain to this passenger.
Summa Cum Laude Touro Law Center is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:53 pm
  #1099  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: UA GS>1K>Nothing; DL DM 2MM; AS 75K>Nothing>MVP
Posts: 9,341
Originally Posted by jjmoore
This person should be on the jury. The guy disobeyed a police order. If a police officer tells you to get up and deplane, why would you resist? You are going to get arrested.... or worse. I would have responded with a "yes sir" and been on my way. This guy got what he deserved.
Totally agree. And hopefully the guy will end up in jail.

And hopefully the politicians will stop writing sweetheart legislation to benefit airlines at the expense of the passengers.
5khours is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:53 pm
  #1100  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: BNE/OOL temporarily-permanently at CAK/PIT
Programs: UA*1K & UA Club, National Ex. Elite, Hertz Pres. Circ., Amex Plat., CLEAR
Posts: 1,703
Originally Posted by aCavalierInCoach
There's no "proximate cause" of someone calling the police, and the police then beating you. Your idea that there is legal liability on someone who calls the police is complete fiction.

If someone calls the police and makes a false report, etc., that is a separate crime, but nobody is alleging that happened here.
Joshua is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:53 pm
  #1101  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: NYC
Programs: UA 1K, GE/Nexus, Marriott Gold
Posts: 266
Great thread. Just a couple of quick pointers:

1. Bad GAs (and FAs) rather commonly use threat of police to settle disputes in their favor (I have seen it many times, and have stopped flying AA when it happened to me). It is a big part of a severely rotten culture.

2. Apart from refusing to comply with the arbitrary order by the FA/GA, poor doctor did not do anything wrong, and was no threat to anyone.

3. Cops' use of force was VASTLY disproportionate to the threat (as the reactions of other passengers and administrative leave for the primary police culprit clearly demonstrate).

4. Other passengers' reactions - mostly horror - clearly show where the public sympathies should be.

5. United comes across as positively awful (DUH!) - anytime a Chicago Police outfit comes ahead of you in reacting to a bad PR, you have a problem. Come fly friendly skies - where we summon the police to beat our customers, because they dared to question our arbitrary procedures. This airline is very close to critical mass - where noone would fly them - IMHO.

6. United can now forget about Chinese market, forever. Imagine if this was an Air China flight and the bloodied passenger was an American. Would any American subsequently fly Air China?

7. USA does not come across great either - a country where airlines summon police to resolve customer service disputes, preferably with Gestapo tactics.

What I suggest everybody does is call your local Senator, and House Representative, and tell them that this outrage clearly proves that US needs a EU-style Air Passenger Rights law. Also, a second look at all those mergers is probably merited, too.

Oh, and a quick note to those that would send poor doctor to jail (presumably for coming back to the plane) - good luck finding any jury that would convict him!

Finally, what Rosa Parks did was illegal, too.
nikolastojsin is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:54 pm
  #1102  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: LHR, HKG
Programs: gate lice
Posts: 315
Originally Posted by Joshua
Wrong. The chain of responsibility starts with every person who books the lowest fare possible, which is what creates an environment of overbooking, code shares, and generally very cheap operations.
Blame a consumer for exercising his rightful choice as part of the free market?

UA should offer higher fares.

Oh wait, they can't. Because their quality of service doesn't warrant those fares.

Anyone wonder why Cathay J charges $7k for transpacific round-trip and UA half that price? Take a guess...
leungy18 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:54 pm
  #1103  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: BNE/OOL temporarily-permanently at CAK/PIT
Programs: UA*1K & UA Club, National Ex. Elite, Hertz Pres. Circ., Amex Plat., CLEAR
Posts: 1,703
Originally Posted by WorldLux
I remember that for the future. Just in case I need to weasel out of a contract.

The first question is: Who is responsible for allocating more seats than available? The passenger? No, the airline. It earns extra money by doing so. If nobody wants to deplane for $800, they should've raised the offer. At some point, somebody will volunteer.

How would you feel if you booked a full fare Y ticket, that's more than $1000 than the super discounted ticket the next morning? If you agreed to the $800 to fly the next morning, you would effectively make a loss of $200, that you paid too much.

You might disagree with my opinion, but I firmly believe in the binding effect of contracts and the vision that both sides shall perform the contract as agreed upon. Regarding T&Cs/CoCs, I have a very critic opinion when it comes to agreements between professional parties and consumers and particularly if these documents contain unusual clauses that are unnecessarily unfavorable to consumers (given that most customers don't read them).
Anyone can choose to fly on an airline that doesn't overbook as much (the easiest way to do so is to avoid regional airlines who are codeshare partners, who overbook way more than their mainline partner tends to).

Of course nobody wants to do that since the fares would cost more.
Joshua is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:54 pm
  #1104  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: LBB
Programs: UA 1K 1MM ★G | Marriott LTT | Hilton ♦ | Hertz PC | Global Entry TSA Pre ✓
Posts: 2,820
Originally Posted by simpletastes
There are a million ways to resolve this without involving police intervention. Like not doing anything for instance and letting the plane stay. Like offering more money to volunteers.
As I mentioned before, they should have kept going... I've seen $1200 before, and people always take it when the price hits 4 digits. UA dropped the ball here too... don't get me wrong.

As a pax, I would NEVER disobey an order from a flight attendant or CERTAINLY NEVER a police officer.... ever.
jjmoore is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:54 pm
  #1105  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Global
Posts: 5,998
Originally Posted by 5khours
Totally agree. And hopefully the guy will end up in jail.

And hopefully the politicians will stop writing sweetheart legislation to benefit airlines at the expense of the passengers.
Are you sure it was a police officer dragging him off? Yes, you might be right. No? UA employee? UA is screwed.

If it was a gate agent saying get off the flight, does one need to comply? (UA and all airlines specifically do not include ground folks as flight crews.)

Everyone seems sure it was a police officer dragging him out of the seat. CBS News seemed to imply it was an employee. World of difference there.
Global321 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:54 pm
  #1106  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 43
Originally Posted by Ber2dca
I am not saying I will always agree with this interpretation but the way things work on airplanes is that if you refuse to follow crew instructions and don't back down, your negative and unreasonable attitude indicates that you could also pose a security risk. At which point they can kick you off the plane. That's not a thing unique to the U.S. as far as I know. I seem to remember stories about crew responding in this way to pax questioning their decisions on other non-U.S. airlines as well.

In fact, it sometimes seems that it is an almost industry-wide way of getting pax to shut up and sit down.
I don't doubt this is the airlines' view, but it is contrary to the law and United's Contract of Carriage. Now, United will pay the price for disregarding the law and its own contract.
Summa Cum Laude Touro Law Center is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:55 pm
  #1107  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: UA GS>1K>Nothing; DL DM 2MM; AS 75K>Nothing>MVP
Posts: 9,341
Originally Posted by aCavalierInCoach
Where is the full stop? If the FA asks for my lunch money am I required to hand it over? Please.
Yes you are.
5khours is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:55 pm
  #1108  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,406
Originally Posted by Ber2dca
In fact, it sometimes seems that it is an almost industry-wide way of getting pax to shut up and sit down.
I guess two of these rules, where causing this much trouble:
  • The tendency of flight crews of calling cops, whenever there is disagreement to their commands.
  • The tendancy of US cops of being rather brutal when it comes to meditating the situation they were called over for
WorldLux is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:56 pm
  #1109  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: YYZ
Programs: Only J via Peasant Points, 777HDPeasant or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance and Narcissism.
Posts: 5,957
Deleted

Last edited by Jumper Jack; Apr 16, 2017 at 2:51 am Reason: dE
Jumper Jack is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:56 pm
  #1110  
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 514
What pisses me off is the gate agent stopped at $800. She should have kept going. At least she could have gone for $1300, a first class seat, a hotel. She would have eventually gotten 4 passengers to volunteer. This whole thing was handled pretty crappy.
FlyerTom111 is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.