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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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, 10:07 pm
  #1726  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: New Orleans, AA EXP, DL PM, SPG PLT, HH Diamond
Posts: 3,750
Were the UA employees trying to get to Louisville for a flight the next morning or just to get home so they could sleep in their beds?


Originally Posted by George Purcell
1) This was IDB.
2) IDB and making him spend a whole day rather than putting him on the next available flight was insulting.

But, hey, UA will "overbook" deadhead crews who don't want to live in their station...customers aren't anywhere NEAR as important as Employee Class.
aceflyer2 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:07 pm
  #1727  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
Originally Posted by waxearwings
My god, the stunning idiocy of that Munoz letter. He says they raised the offer to $1000 (contrary to pax reports) and then acts as if the only alternative after that is forcibly yanking a guy off the plane. Like once you get to a grand, they are just compelled to rob someone of their dignity.

listen, your employees messed up, and the flight was boarded too soon. You got to pay up. You try to go cheap, and you end up showing the world your dark side.

​​​​​​
Time for Oscar to go. Things are not really getting better. If $1000 offered and not accepted, try $1100, $1200, $1300, $1400, $1500, up to $2000 or $2500. If he was on the plane he was not denied boarding.

United fell near the bottom of the consumer complaint ranking at No. 8, and American No. 9. Alaska, Delta and Virgin were 1, 2, & 3.

If $1000 was offered and not accepted apparently it was not worth it to those on the plane.

A few years ago there was a down grade of aircraft and they needed about 50 volunteers. They said we will give you $300, fly you to San Jose and bus you to SFO. If you don't accept we will involuntary bump and you will get less.

The policy that drives draconian practices comes from the top.
BF263533 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:09 pm
  #1728  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton ♦ , Hyatt Carbonado, Wyndham ♦, Marriott PE, "Stinking Bum" elsewhere.
Posts: 4,998
Originally Posted by aceflyer2
Were the UA employees trying to get to Louisville for a flight the next morning or just to get home so they could sleep in their beds?
Supposedly, this was a replacement crew, without which, the return flight would have to be cancelled. We'll see what the truth is with the DOT report.
zombietooth is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:09 pm
  #1729  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: New Orleans, AA EXP, DL PM, SPG PLT, HH Diamond
Posts: 3,750
no possibilty of getting a small private jet to take them??


Originally Posted by c2cflyer
Pilots on long haul flights often have a sleep area with a bed. I would be happy to be proven wrong but doubt that 'crew rest' would be acceptably achieved / defined as a 5.5 hour car ride with someone else driving

Would you want your pilots to have flown in the night before and slept 6+ hours in a private hotel room or to have spent those 6 hours in the back of a car with 3 other crew members trying to nod off between bumps, bridges, snores, jolts etc.
aceflyer2 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:09 pm
  #1730  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Brunei
Programs: Enrich Sapphire. Kris Flyer Silver.Le Club Accorhotels,Starwood.
Posts: 2,201
Originally Posted by SMK77
Everything in the airline world has a cut-off time and that shouldn't be any different here. If United needs to fly employees for operational reasons, they can put them on any plane that hasn't started boarding so that they can deny boarding to passengers as United deems fit.

Removing a passenger that was admitted to board the plane and has taken the seat he was assigned to, should not be allowed to be labeled IDB.

Those employees obviously didn't have a need to take that flight up until someone decided otherwise. And for that someone UA3411 should have no longer been available as a mean of transportation for said four employees.
I have to agree with you on this. There is more to this story than UA are prepared to share as to when the boarding agents knew about the 4 crew members needing to board this particular flight and how much time they had prior to boarding.

It would seem this would be a last minute intervention by the company given everyone had already boarded and were seated and no prior action was taken before passengers started boarding.

I honestly do not care much for all the nonsense that has been posted about rules/regulations and what have you.

Some common decency and sensible thinking was missing in how the agents went about handling this.
wolf72 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:09 pm
  #1731  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 43
Originally Posted by ND Sol
Even if "the passenger was boarded on the plain [sic]", they can be removed for operational reasons. For example, everyone is loaded and additional calculations are made to find that the take-off weight now exceeds the runway length parameters so a few passengers need to be removed. Under your interpretation, no one can be removed from the plane without their consent.
No. Under your W&B scenario, Rule 21 of Contract for Carriage clearly provides that United can "remove" passengers from a flight for the reasons states thereunder, which does not.include oversold flights. Rule 25 concerns oversold flights does not provide such United with that option. Again, your example only further supports illustrates why you are wrong.

Rather than trying to make the same poor argument over and over again, how about you just follow the lead of UA's CEO, who admits that the passenger had boarded the plane.
Summa Cum Laude Touro Law Center is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:10 pm
  #1732  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: BART Platinum, AA Plat Pro
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted by Joshua
I don't have these problems since, if the police ORDER me to move (or the Chicago aviation police, whoever they are), you better bet I'm going to move. And I'll certainly pursue my rights once off the plane. But on the plane is not the place for a confrontation with people who clearly hold authority.
I think most, if not all, of us would have complied in this situation. Some (many?) of us nevertheless the identify with it because it is consistent with what we'd expect of UA customer service when taken to its logical conclusion. They'd rather see the customer beaten up and forcibly removed than spend a few more bucks in lousy high breakage vouchers. Again, it's less coincidence than culture.
milypan is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:12 pm
  #1733  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Programs: AA ex-EXP, 2MM (ex DL, ex TWA)
Posts: 1,427
National media are **not** buying the UA/UA-shill line - LA Times article.
http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...410-story.html
Wexflyer is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:13 pm
  #1734  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 144
Originally Posted by aceflyer2
no possibilty of getting a small private jet to take them??
They would have had to go outside of their system to do such a thing and likely wouldn't have been able to get it done in a reasonable time.


There system did, however, permit them to bump passengers to put the crew on the flight they controlled.

So thats what they did. And they do it all the time.
c2cflyer is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:13 pm
  #1735  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: ATL
Programs: DL DM, Hyatt LT DM, Wyndham DM, Hertz PC, HH Gold, SPG Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 2,038
Originally Posted by SMK77
Everything in the airline world has a cut-off time and that shouldn't be any different here. If United needs to fly employees for operational reasons, they can put them on any plane that hasn't started boarding so that they can deny boarding to passengers as United deems fit.

Removing a passenger that was admitted to board the plane and has taken the seat he was assigned to, should not be allowed to be labeled IDB.

Those employees obviously didn't have a need to take that flight up until someone decided otherwise. And for that someone UA3411 should have no longer been available as a mean of transportation for said four employees.
Exactly.

People boarded. Then they decided we need to REMOVE four people. If people don't agree to our offer. You will be forced to agree.

United handles their portions wrong too to bottom. You can agree or disagree but regardless the PR spin would be a nightmare. Even if the person didn't resist getting off and started calling news stations. It's he same story minus getting beat up.

Think about this. You make reservation at an eatery. They seat you. And 5min later the hostess comes and says we can give you 50'doars, only can use here, and you wait for a table later. If you don't accept we will force you to do this. We have some employees that want to eat right now.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 10, 2017 at 10:25 pm Reason: Discuss the issues, not the poster
dinanm3atl is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:13 pm
  #1736  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,111
Was this truly a case of IDB? The passenger was already boarded when the deadhead crew showed up. I would argue that the passenger was boarded and United improperly applied the IDB rule.

United screwed the pooch on this one legally or not.

edit to add: Time for United's BOD to look for new senior management.
Boggie Dog is online now  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:14 pm
  #1737  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: ATL
Programs: Skypass, IHG
Posts: 161
Originally Posted by PittAir
Rearrange the crews in SDF to accommodate this. Tough noogies. Could have been done with some creativity and care for the passengers they serve.
I am sure United can find 4 alternate crews for SDF if it tried. Those 4 original crews could have started the day later on the next day, with the first flight out ORD to SDF, to start work from SDF. Anyhow, United thinks it is too good for all these hassles. Much simpler to just bump pax, even if that means calling cops on them.

GA & crews thought, cops acted badly? Not their problem.
t_cliff is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:14 pm
  #1738  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 144
Originally Posted by zombietooth
Supposedly, this was a replacement crew, without which, the return flight would have to be cancelled. We'll see what the truth is with the DOT report.
That makes sense and also explains the late arrival to the flight.


As stated many times, United's terrible PR response aside, the little breadcrumbs of facts about what happened before ' the incident ' really don't point to anything other than business as usual, following procedure and normal operations of trying to keep planes flying on time - which is what United is in the business of doing.
c2cflyer is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:15 pm
  #1739  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 143
Originally Posted by wolf72
There is more to this story than UA are prepared to share as to when the boarding agents knew about the 4 crew members needing to board this particular flight and how much time they had prior to boarding.
I believe this as well. I think this was a case of deadheading for employee convenience as is so common at UA.
George Purcell is offline  
Old Apr 10, 2017, 10:15 pm
  #1740  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NY Metro
Programs: SPG Titanium, United Premier 1K
Posts: 1,601
Actually I can see a lawyer argue that the IBD rules don't apply here for two reasons:

1. The flight wasn't oversold. UA tried to accommodate 4 non revs which isn't included as part of the IDB rules.

2. The moment UA allowed the Pax to board, the IDB rules don't apply anymore and Ua didn't have a legit reason to remove him from the flight afterwards.

So I can see UA having to pay and arm and a leg for this one. Should have just offered $1000, $2000, $3000 or whatever amount to resolve this once they saw this was headed in this direction.
PrivatePilot 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.