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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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}
#1921
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 411
Apologies if I'm repeating anything upthread, but I'm really not interested in reading 127 pages, and you can ignore my comments as well.
While I don't disagree that sometimes airlines, and their agents, behave egregiously, please take the following FACTS into consideration.
UA was paying $800. ORD to SDF by car is 5 hours (okay, it's Google Maps, but we can consider it a reasonable estimate). For a 1-way car rental I'm getting a quote of $175 from carrentals.com.
My calculus would be, carry on like a child and risk bodily harm (and detainment by the "authorities"), or take the $600 net and a couple of hours inconvenience (with the potential to go back to UA to get some additional compensation) and, as an adult, figure lemons...lemonade.
Unless, of course, becoming a social-media thing with your 15 minutes (or less) of fame is on your bucket list.
Possibly the greatest irony is that this wasn't a UA-operated flight - it was UX, operated by Republic. Doesn't excuse any of this, but I do find it of some amusement that the two latest and greatest dust-ups for UA involve a) violations of express dress codes in conjunction with "buddy passes" (the leggings bit), and b) a flight that UA markets but doesn't operate. For all of the critics out there, especially the ones who will never ever give UA any more business, please enlighten us as to your experience at the level of complexity of operations of a major airline, and how you were perfect.
I am neither an employee of, nor an apologist for UA or any other airline, just a long-time traveler, and citizen of the world who understands that sometimes, {things} happens, and it stinks, and, if the worst thing that ever happens to me is losing a couple of hours during travel, I consider myself extremely fortunate.
While I don't disagree that sometimes airlines, and their agents, behave egregiously, please take the following FACTS into consideration.
UA was paying $800. ORD to SDF by car is 5 hours (okay, it's Google Maps, but we can consider it a reasonable estimate). For a 1-way car rental I'm getting a quote of $175 from carrentals.com.
My calculus would be, carry on like a child and risk bodily harm (and detainment by the "authorities"), or take the $600 net and a couple of hours inconvenience (with the potential to go back to UA to get some additional compensation) and, as an adult, figure lemons...lemonade.
Unless, of course, becoming a social-media thing with your 15 minutes (or less) of fame is on your bucket list.
Possibly the greatest irony is that this wasn't a UA-operated flight - it was UX, operated by Republic. Doesn't excuse any of this, but I do find it of some amusement that the two latest and greatest dust-ups for UA involve a) violations of express dress codes in conjunction with "buddy passes" (the leggings bit), and b) a flight that UA markets but doesn't operate. For all of the critics out there, especially the ones who will never ever give UA any more business, please enlighten us as to your experience at the level of complexity of operations of a major airline, and how you were perfect.
I am neither an employee of, nor an apologist for UA or any other airline, just a long-time traveler, and citizen of the world who understands that sometimes, {things} happens, and it stinks, and, if the worst thing that ever happens to me is losing a couple of hours during travel, I consider myself extremely fortunate.
I would say, why not United send the 4 crew members on a 5 hour car trip rather than delaying and pulling pax out with force.
I bet that a one way car rental would have been much cheaper when the person bought this ticket. But the traveller choose to buy the air ticket instead of renting a car. So it was his choice and may be he values his time. Not everyone will be willing to drive 5 hrs for a measly united voucher. They should have increased the amount till it would have sounded reasonable for someone to take the offer.
#1922
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Singapore
Posts: 324
Anytime I encountered an IDB pax I did my best to explain it to them, promised them I would do everything in my power to get them to where they need to be asap, and make sure I assist them in any compensation I can get them because I hated that the airline put me in that position. Fortunately the only times I ever had to get LEO's involved on IDB boarding is because the pax was intoxicated and unfit to fly.
#1923
Join Date: Sep 2016
Programs: United, AA
Posts: 44
Frankly, I can't believe that that salaried adult United employees weren't using critical thinking or problem solving skills. After the man refused to be coaxed by FA, an employee could have used foresight to predict potential violence and said something to security like, don't use force. Or better yet, sense that this was a possibility and pursued other avenues altogether. You don't have to be a McKinsey consultant to realize this.
#1924
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: AUS after 40+ SFO/OAK
Programs: UA MM (recovering former 1K), Marriott Titanium Lifetime
Posts: 550
$600 net on a voucher is not the same as $600 cash. No way would I agree to lose nearly a day of work for that pittance.
Furthermore, he likely doesn't fly often, as the airlines often go for pax with no status/low fares. Perhaps he knew the $800 would never be redeemed.
Furthermore, he likely doesn't fly often, as the airlines often go for pax with no status/low fares. Perhaps he knew the $800 would never be redeemed.
But, you obviously have extra insight and know that he doesn't fly often. I also don't get your math ("lose nearly a day of work") - by my calc, he should've been in Louisville before 1 AM if he rented the car, given the 5:40 PM scheduled departure and the 1 hour time zone difference.
Like I said...lemons...lemonade. YMMV.
#1925
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: DEN
Programs: UA Plat
Posts: 754
UA has a hierarchy somewhat like the involuntary downgrade order. As always, the highest paid fare and GS trumps all else. UA rates passengers on their perceived value as revenue producers. NRPS are totally immune, so the 4 crew, once added to the manifest, could not be deboarded.
#1926
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 811
something is not smelling right here.....was this this "doctor" removed from the plane once already before the cameras starting filming & if yes, how did he get away from the cops & get down the jetway & back on the plane ? he might not be the sweet polly purebred many here are trying to portray him as.
#1927
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: West of CLE
Programs: Delta DM/3 MM; Hertz PC; National EE; Amtrak GR; Bonvoy Silver; Via Rail Préférence
Posts: 5,377
I was an eyewitness to a passenger ejection back in 2008, where a man was drunk and disorderly; the police there acted a lot more professionally than they did on the UA/Republic flight.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/delta...afternoon.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/delta...afternoon.html
#1928
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,012
Yes, as does everyone. I actually do feel UA could have done a better job overall, but it was their right to remove the man. Trust me I am just as hard on airline personnel as I am lenient at times because I've been there.
Anytime I encountered an IDB pax I did my best to explain it to them, promised them I would do everything in my power to get them to where they need to be asap, and make sure I assist them in any compensation I can get them because I hated that the airline put me in that position. Fortunately the only times I ever had to get LEO's involved on IDB boarding is because the pax was intoxicated and unfit to fly.
I am however sick of reading people who really don't know what goes on or how it goes on, being outraged. Not so much on here, but in the general public overall. Especially a lot of the people out there right now who don't bother to know the rules before travel.
Anytime I encountered an IDB pax I did my best to explain it to them, promised them I would do everything in my power to get them to where they need to be asap, and make sure I assist them in any compensation I can get them because I hated that the airline put me in that position. Fortunately the only times I ever had to get LEO's involved on IDB boarding is because the pax was intoxicated and unfit to fly.
I am however sick of reading people who really don't know what goes on or how it goes on, being outraged. Not so much on here, but in the general public overall. Especially a lot of the people out there right now who don't bother to know the rules before travel.
#1929
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Francisco
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, Hilton Diamond, UA 1K, Hertz Platinum
Posts: 286
UA has a hierarchy somewhat like the involuntary downgrade order. As always, the highest paid fare and GS trumps all else. UA rates passengers on their perceived value as revenue producers. NRPS are totally immune, so the 4 crew, once added to the manifest, could not be deboarded.
0 sympathy for this "doctor".. btw has this fact even been check? the human race is full of people who lie to get their way regardless to whom and the circumstances
#1930
Join Date: May 2001
Location: HNL
Posts: 1,013
Remember the good 'ole days when United only broke guitars... quite the leap to move on to noses and kneecaps! So much for "your safety is our first priority". On the bright side, it shouldn't be long before everyone is moved up a status level again this year to stave off the en masse defections resulting from this debacle. Maybe we'll even see some double EQM promotions.
#1931
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 812
something is not smelling right here.....was this this "doctor" removed from the plane once already before the cameras starting filming & if yes, how did he get away from the cops & get down the jetway & back on the plane ? he might not be the sweet polly purebred many here are trying to portray him as.
Take your dogwhistles and loaded questions elsewhere.
#1932
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 146
something is not smelling right here.....was this this "doctor" removed from the plane once already before the cameras starting filming & if yes, how did he get away from the cops & get down the jetway & back on the plane ? he might not be the sweet polly purebred many here are trying to portray him as.
also.. what was the man's wife doing while all this was going on?
#1933
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton ♦ , Hyatt Carbonado, Wyndham ♦, Marriott PE, "Stinking Bum" elsewhere.
Posts: 4,986
something is not smelling right here.....was this this "doctor" removed from the plane once already before the cameras starting filming & if yes, how did he get away from the cops & get down the jetway & back on the plane ? he might not be the sweet polly purebred many here are trying to portray him as.
#1934
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: LIT
Programs: Blinged Out
Posts: 715
Oh sure, UA with their vaunted IT was able to discern that the $800 would never be redeemed.
But, you obviously have extra insight and know that he doesn't fly often. I also don't get your math ("lose nearly a day of work") - by my calc, he should've been in Louisville before 1 AM if he rented the car, given the 5:40 PM scheduled departure and the 1 hour time zone difference.
Like I said...lemons...lemonade. YMMV.
But, you obviously have extra insight and know that he doesn't fly often. I also don't get your math ("lose nearly a day of work") - by my calc, he should've been in Louisville before 1 AM if he rented the car, given the 5:40 PM scheduled departure and the 1 hour time zone difference.
Like I said...lemons...lemonade. YMMV.
If they offered vouchers to GS members or 1ks, they would be redeemed 100% of the time within a year.
If they kick a few kettles off, they may or may not be fully redeemed in a year.
#1935
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 43
Now you are quoting my reply to another poster and not the similar (but different) one to you right after. I can understand your reasoning for not wanting to quote my reply to you.
Once again, you won't be honest and admit what your search found about "weight/balance" was incongruous with your position to the point of even chiding me about my statement (which was, in fact, correct). Instead, you decided to deflect with an irrelevant question.
You have been harping about when boarding occurs and I was giving you just one example of when a passenger could be denied boarding involuntarily after the door was initially closed for weight/balance restrictions and its characterization under the COC as constituting "an oversold flight".
And yet you now want to yell that my "interpretation is wrong" 3x.
Once again, you won't be honest and admit what your search found about "weight/balance" was incongruous with your position to the point of even chiding me about my statement (which was, in fact, correct). Instead, you decided to deflect with an irrelevant question.
You have been harping about when boarding occurs and I was giving you just one example of when a passenger could be denied boarding involuntarily after the door was initially closed for weight/balance restrictions and its characterization under the COC as constituting "an oversold flight".
And yet you now want to yell that my "interpretation is wrong" 3x.