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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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, 5:37 pm
  #1036  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: AA Concierge Key, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Platinum
Posts: 31
Originally Posted by pon18n
He wasn't beaten.
Of course not. He "fell".
DynamoLA is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:37 pm
  #1037  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,405
Originally Posted by robinhood
Can anyone imagine this sort of thing happening on ANA?
That's impossible to even imagine. After all, we are talking about a country, where the average delay for a major train line is measured in seconds.


I doubt that this would've happened anywhere else in the civilized world. Even to US standards, this was completely unorthodox: IDB does usually happen at the gate and never involves LE (the exception being a violent passenger).

I can't imagine European police forces applying this sort of violence in such a case. There's always a middle way, but it seems that the cabin crew was unwilling to go down that one.
WorldLux is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:37 pm
  #1038  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Programs: WN, AA, UA, DL
Posts: 1,313
Originally Posted by 330West
Note to self ... don't fly United. I haven't in about five years and once I've moved to SF next month, I'll be sticking with American, even if I have to connect every time I travel.
I think it's ironic considering you statistically have a higher chance of IDB on American. Doubly so if you're connecting and adding flights.
minnyfly is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:38 pm
  #1039  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 43
Originally Posted by findark
+1,000,000 ^

The guy was selected according to the IDB policy, which is again by the book. At this point, he repeatedly refused the instructions of the crew and gate staff to leave the aircraft, and then refused again when the police arrived. Perhaps there was a better way to get him to come off of his own free will, but if having three police officers order you out, and then reach for you to grab you isn't enough... I just don't know what else you expect. Even if you think the process was wrong, at this point you're trespassing on UA's property and it's as simple as that. If the orders of the police are wrong, you follow them now, and then call your attorney to lodge a suit against United (or the police).
1. The IDB policy in United's Contrract of Carriage DOES NOT allow United to remove passengers from the plane. This is in contrast to other provisions in United's Contract of Carriage that explicitly allows United to remove passengers from planes.

2. The passenger was a lawful licensee on the plane in conformance with all of the terms and conditions of his licensee. As such, he was not trespassing and United did not have the right to remove him.
Summa Cum Laude Touro Law Center is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:38 pm
  #1040  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: YYZ
Programs: Only J via Peasant Points, 777HDPeasant or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance and Narcissism.
Posts: 5,951
Originally Posted by DynamoLA
Of course not. He "fell".
Nah bro, he hit himself with a can of pepsi. If he only knew how to share it with them cops
Jumper Jack is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:39 pm
  #1041  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: YVR
Posts: 1,465
It's all over international news. It's close to the top news even in Russia:
https://news.yandex.ru/yandsearch?lr...ocs&from=story

This could only happen in the totalitarian country which the USA had become. It's unthinkable in any civilized country.
echino is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:39 pm
  #1042  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,092
Originally Posted by aCavalierInCoach
It honestly doesn't matter how wrong this guy was -- he didn't deserve to be beaten, and the chain of responsibility here starts with United.
I haven't seen anything that indicates he was beaten. He was bloodied because it's near impossible to physically remove someone from a window seat on an airplane against their will without exerting considerable force. At any point he can throw up his hands and say "Guys, alright, I've had enough. I'm getting outta here and will never fly United again." and the situation is over.

The cop's reaction was obviously cold and disinterested which is pretty bad. I imagine that's why he's in trouble. But as far as that cop's concerned, this is probably just some crazy dude who needs to be taken off a plane. I would actually agree that this type of thing shouldn't be treated in such a nonchalant fashion by the cops or the airline staff. But to be honest, airlines are part logistics companies, part service companies. Those two things don't go together very well. Logistics are about getting stuff from A to B as cheaply and efficiently as possible - it doesn't matter if 'stuff' has a good time during that process.
Ber2dca is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:39 pm
  #1043  
 
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 Summa Cum Laude Touro Law Center
1. The IDB policy in United's Contrract of Carriage DOES NOT allow United to remove passengers from the plane. This is in contrast to other provisions in United's Contract of Carriage that explicitly allows United to remove passengers from planes.

2. The passenger was a lawful licensee on the plane in conformance with all of the terms and conditions of his licensee. As such, he was not trespassing and United did not have the right to remove him.
I'm not sure where you get your legal ideas from, but United's contract of carriage pretty clearly limits a customer's remedies to the price of their ticket for delays, cancellations, or denied boardings, other than otherwise required by law. IDBs are covered by law.
Joshua is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:39 pm
  #1044  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: LAX
Programs: UA MM | BA Silver
Posts: 7,193
Originally Posted by Jumper Jack
Nah bro, he hit himself with a can of pepsi. If he only knew how to share it with them cops
anc-ord772 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:40 pm
  #1045  
 
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
Originally Posted by Summa Cum Laude Touro Law Center
1. The IDB policy in United's Contrract of Carriage DOES NOT allow United to remove passengers from the plane. This is in contrast to other provisions in United's Contract of Carriage that explicitly allows United to remove passengers from planes.

2. The passenger was a lawful licensee on the plane in conformance with all of the terms and conditions of his licensee. As such, he was not trespassing and United did not have the right to remove him.
not true, a pax can be removed for any number of reasons...
james dean is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:40 pm
  #1046  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: MP
Posts: 224
Originally Posted by dmo580
I think more of the fault lies on UA though, because you have to realize once you call for security, it might as well be interpreted as a potentially violent passenger, and they should realize the ramifications. We also don't know what happened leading up to the whole incident. How much coaxing did UA do to get the passenger to leave? If they spent 30 minutes warning him he'll get forcibly removed, then obviously I think they did their part.

However, I think they could've tried alternative approaches, and this is where customer service comes in:
  • Offer a higher amount than $800, maybe $1000 or $1200?
  • Draft a list of 6-8 people instead so if you get unhappy passengers, you can pull someone else?
  • As for pulling someone else, the FA could've easily announced something like "Well thanks to Mr. Uncooperative in 26A, we're going to have to ask another passenger to deboard." Maybe people will glare at him and he will finally leave, or that might be enough guilt to get him to get up and deplane.
  • Offer additional incentives to the passenger who was uncooperative--hey we will fly you in on another airline, we will put you in a stretch limo to drive all the way down, etc.

As for security, I do agree we need to rethink our security whether its law enforcement or air marshals or whatever. Use of force and escalation need to be rethought and I think 95% of most arguments that turn physical can be resolved through de-escalation. The problem is law enforcement in the US just seems to have that power tripping attitude.

I just returned to the US and even CBP is on a power trip too. Someone brought up ANA, and I'm just remembering what it's like to go to immigration at NRT/HND or any other Asian airport like HKG/SIN/TPE/ICN. You have average desk/office workers reviewing your passport, and they grill you like you're a criminal and then you move on.
If someone has an option to "opt out" or "plea" from not being "involuntarily" DB, then it kinds of stop being involuntarily. You know for a fact nobody was willing to take $800 before. Seriously when the FA offered $800 for volunteer and nobody spoke up, it means if you get the short end of the stick, you need to go.

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.

If your matter is really urgent, your best chance is to plea for other passengers to volunteer. But if they don't, then you're SOL
pon18n is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:40 pm
  #1047  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: YYZ
Programs: Only J via Peasant Points, 777HDPeasant or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance and Narcissism.
Posts: 5,951
Originally Posted by Joshua
I'm not sure where you get your legal ideas from, but United's contract of carriage pretty clearly limits a customer's remedies to the price of their ticket for delays, cancellations, or denied boardings, other than otherwise required by law. IDBs are covered by law.
{Those} who kept on citing IDB are covered by law seems to forget the dude ALREADY BOARDED

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 10, 2017 at 5:45 pm Reason: Discuss the issues, not the poster
Jumper Jack is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:40 pm
  #1048  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,410
Originally Posted by DENviaLAX
Reading the article I'm a bit confused. It says they needed four people to give up their seats because the flight was overbooked. But it also says they needed the seats for a crew going to SDF to work a flight in the morning....then also called them standby. If they were going to work a flight, they wouldn't be standby, they'd be deadheading.
Or maybe the reporter didn't know the difference between standby and deadheading.

Originally Posted by BearX220
I don't know if you're unfamiliar with US airline practices, but what you've described is exactly what normally happens, only it occurs at the gate before boarding. Something went drastically wrong here, probably with the gate agents running the departure.
This (albeit before boarding) usually works. The problem comes when there are a lot of determined passengers and they don't go high enough with their offers.

Originally Posted by sincx
The amount of force used to resolve a situation has to be proportional to the situation. You can't have a trap door with spikes underneath to trap trespassers, for example, because that's excessive.

Here, United and its agent (the police) used incredible, possibly life-threatening force against a paid customer with a ticket and a seat assignment. Even if United did have a right to remove the passenger, United did not have a right to use disproportionate force to do so. That's illegal. Two wrongs don't make a right.

If I was the passenger's counsel, I would not settle for less than $1m. Any other passengers on the flight who suffered any sort of physical injury from the altercation should also seek compensation.
And if I were on the jury I wouldn't give him anything. His injuries are entirely from resisting a lawful order. The reality is the cops will apply the force needed to accomplish the objective--if you restrict the force you end up saying that anyone who resists too hard is immune to the law. The guy chose to resist, fell and got hurt. Too bad.
Loren Pechtel is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:40 pm
  #1049  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,719
Originally Posted by Ber2dca
I think this is also where United's reputation for operational unreliability hurts them. People just don't have a lot of trust in the airline, so are more hesitant to cooperate in situations like this.
Indeed, you shouldn't trust United to keep promises re: rebooking or compensation. That may be why experienced flyers in this case kept a low profile.

Originally Posted by leungy18
Well, it is a global PR disaster. When Asian media outlets are reporting "Asian man gets violently dragged off flight"...not good.
Originally Posted by cfischer
wow, this story made it on the page of a very reputable German newspaper...
Unfortunately for UA, this story will have legs overseas because it confirms the forming meta-narrative about the US being violent, scary, mean to foreigners, etc.

Originally Posted by jamar
...other airlines offer more compensation. Like Delta. (Speaking of which they must be very glad that the heat has been taken off them for now).
Delta has been through days of trouble, but DL's trending social media imagery is mainly free pizza. UA's is a bloody, woozy passenger dragged down the aisle. UA loses.
BearX220 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 5:41 pm
  #1050  
 
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 dmo580
I think more of the fault lies on UA though, because you have to realize once you call for security, it might as well be interpreted as a potentially violent passenger, and they should realize the ramifications. We also don't know what happened leading up to the whole incident. How much coaxing did UA do to get the passenger to leave? If they spent 30 minutes warning him he'll get forcibly removed, then obviously I think they did their part.

However, I think they could've tried alternative approaches, and this is where customer service comes in:
  • Offer a higher amount than $800, maybe $1000 or $1200?
  • Draft a list of 6-8 people instead so if you get unhappy passengers, you can pull someone else?
  • As for pulling someone else, the FA could've easily announced something like "Well thanks to Mr. Uncooperative in 26A, we're going to have to ask another passenger to deboard." Maybe people will glare at him and he will finally leave, or that might be enough guilt to get him to get up and deplane.
  • Offer additional incentives to the passenger who was uncooperative--hey we will fly you in on another airline, we will put you in a stretch limo to drive all the way down, etc.

As for security, I do agree we need to rethink our security whether its law enforcement or air marshals or whatever. Use of force and escalation need to be rethought and I think 95% of most arguments that turn physical can be resolved through de-escalation. The problem is law enforcement in the US just seems to have that power tripping attitude.

I just returned to the US and even CBP is on a power trip too. Someone brought up ANA, and I'm just remembering what it's like to go to immigration at NRT/HND or any other Asian airport like HKG/SIN/TPE/ICN. You have average desk/office workers reviewing your passport, and they grill you like you're a criminal and then you move on.
Things simply don't work this way. The system for IDB is very objective. If they need 4 people, they will select those with the cheapest tickets. Saver awards, then standard awards, then cheapest fares. Nothing is random about it, as has been reported in the media. They will choose the IDB's, and they don't care what personal circumstances are in play. This is one of the inherent risks of air travel these days, especially if you have no status on an airline.

And yes... they should have gone up to $1200 like I have seen in other instances. I have taken $1000 to take a flight the next day before... $$ talks. Keep upping the amount.
jjmoore 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.