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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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 11, 2017, 2:01 pm
  #3286  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,092
Originally Posted by trouble747
You know, it can be true both that the man disobeyed a lawful order AND that United should have never allowed the situation to occur in the first place.

It also may be the case that the responding officers behaved in manner that contributed to the situation. The employing agency has stated that SOP was not followed and that the officer's actions were not condoned.
We know too little about the cops' actions to judge them in detail. The PR statement from their spokesperson should also be seen in the context of the 'public outrage' last night. It wouldn't be the first time that frontline staff get thrown under the bus for other people's mistakes.

My comment is merely about whether the passenger 'did nothing wrong'. He did do *something* wrong in the moment by refusing to follow the instructions from the officers of the peace. Unlike various posts and jibes in this thread and elsewhere suggest, you won't be dragged out of an airplane by police if you 'do everything right'.
Ber2dca is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:03 pm
  #3287  
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
TIME: "United Debacle Shows Airline Lost Faith In Its Own Business Model"

Good analysis, quickly turned, from David von Drehle. Link here, in case you'd like a break from legalistic angels-on-head-of-a-pin debates:

http://time.com/4734931/united-airli.../?xid=homepage

Key extract:

"Munoz’s defiance in the face of public outrage suggests that he is counting on his monopoly power to carry him through this mess. But he could easily have avoided the hammering of United stock—investors bailing out of the super-hot shares cut close to $1.5 billion from the company’s value Tuesday morning—if he had focused on a different aspect of today’s airline business.

"I’m talking about dynamic pricing...

"Passengers on the overbooked flight were dynamically pricing their willingness to surrender their seats... United lost faith in dynamic pricing and resorted to monopoly thuggery. And that was a foolish thing to do."
BearX220 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:04 pm
  #3288  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 239
Originally Posted by soonerborn
I don't understand some of the replies here.

The answer is simple, when UA overbooks they should up the offer until they get takers. Its cheaper than all this bad PR.

And why in the world would they let them board, knowing they would have to remove 4 people.

Obviously security went overboard and thats not UAs fault, but the entire situation would have been avoided if they had simply done the above.
AIUI, the final offer was $1K in "vouchers". I could see why this was not enough to entice someone other than someone who travels a whole lot (which usually means he is a businessman that can't afford to take a voluntary bump). Had that offer been in $1K CASH, I would have a problem believing that there were not enough takers. Heck, once when I went for a 2-month (non-business) trip (from USA to Europe), I happily gave up my seat for one the next day for only 400 EUR CASH.

There needs to be federal legislation that requires a suitably sufficient offer in COLD HARD CASH before any involuntary bumping is allowed.
swampwiz is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:04 pm
  #3289  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: IAD
Programs: UA 1K, Marriott Rewards - LTPP
Posts: 4,240
Originally Posted by The smallest state
The man who forcibly removed Dr. Dao, who does he work for?
-Chicago PD
-Chicago Transit Authority
-United Airlines
-Air Marshall.

Why is he unarmed and is he a law enforcement officer that can make an arrest (not citizens arrest) when a crime is committed?


This is a case study in how to turn bad PR into a PR crisis, then a PR disaster.
Chicago Transit Authority. They're the ones who said one of their staff was put on admin leave. Not sure why they have some unarmed officers, but yes they have arrest powers.
njcommodore is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:04 pm
  #3290  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: iah
Programs: ua-mm *G, hilton-gold
Posts: 704
should have been handled thunderdome style.
bearkatt is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:05 pm
  #3291  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by qukslvr619
The hit job on this UA passenger makes me even less sympathetic to UA's excuses for this incident.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:05 pm
  #3292  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 563
Originally Posted by ariel_sjo
UA says they offered $1,000 to volunteers but some sources say it was capped at $800...
What's the real story here? Is it true that UA contract of carriage allows a $2,500 compensation for overbooking? If it does, why it was capped at $800-$1000? I'm pretty sure that at 1,500 one person happily have stood up.
Munoz, the CEO, disingenuously stated he had been offered "$1000 compensation" which I believe was a hotel room the man did not want to be in and a voucher with United he didn't want either. There has been mention in these discussions on a cap for reimbursement but I am unclear if this cap is what is legally required as a maximum or if the airline can go higher if they so choose. It's unclear to me what the rules say about what the minimum reimbursement is, can the passenger be told they are getting twenty dollars in coupons for Chuckie Cheese and a hotel room plus rebooking, or are they mandated to give the four times fare as a minimum. The rules seem to say he should have been given a written notice that outlines his rights. The lack of clarity here was being played with by United to try and give out a $400 voucher which didn't work, nor did the $800 offer. And since the police are willing to act as enforcers instead of standing aside in a civil conflict and allow the airline and passengers to resolve the situation, United is glad to leverage the police to lowball passengers.
DrPSB is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:06 pm
  #3293  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: where lions are led by donkeys...
Programs: Lifetime Gold, Global Entry, Hertz PC, and my wallet
Posts: 20,340
Just offer cash, not the crappy waste of space vouchers.
Silver Fox is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:07 pm
  #3294  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: YYZ / FRA
Programs: IHG RA; Avis First
Posts: 1,444
Originally Posted by BearX220
Good analysis, quickly turned, from David von Drehle. Link here, in case you'd like a break from legalistic angels-on-head-of-a-pin debates:

http://time.com/4734931/united-airli.../?xid=homepage

Key extract:

"Munoz’s defiance in the face of public outrage suggests that he is counting on his monopoly power to carry him through this mess. But he could easily have avoided the hammering of United stock—investors bailing out of the super-hot shares cut close to $1.5 billion from the company’s value Tuesday morning—if he had focused on a different aspect of today’s airline business.

"I’m talking about dynamic pricing...

"Passengers on the overbooked flight were dynamically pricing their willingness to surrender their seats... United lost faith in dynamic pricing and resorted to monopoly thuggery. And that was a foolish thing to do."
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/war...ons-2017-04-11


I don't think Warren Buffett and the Board Members will be happy, might be time for the CEO to be "re-accommodate".
BRAISKI is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:07 pm
  #3295  
Original Member and FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Kansas City, MO, USA
Programs: DL PM/MM, AA ExPlat, Hyatt Glob, HH Dia, National ECE, Hertz PC
Posts: 16,579
Originally Posted by swampwiz
AIUI, the final offer was $1K in "vouchers". I could see why this was not enough to entice someone other than someone who travels a whole lot (which usually means he is a businessman that can't afford to take a voluntary bump). Had that offer been in $1K CASH, I would have a problem believing that there were not enough takers. Heck, once when I went for a 2-month (non-business) trip (from USA to Europe), I happily gave up my seat for one the next day for only 400 EUR CASH.

There needs to be federal legislation that requires a suitably sufficient offer in COLD HARD CASH before any involuntary bumping is allowed.
Part of the problem is also the reports I've seen said they were also offering hotel accommodations, which of course means they weren't planning on getting you home that day. If they had offered $1,000 in even vouchers plus a six hour van ride to Louisville that night the result may have been entirely different.
Beckles is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:07 pm
  #3296  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,664
Originally Posted by squeakr
So if UA/Republic had the misfortune to want to IDB someone who freaked out about not getting home on time that's their bad luck. In my case, if I was so upset that the airline passed on me and went to someone else - maybe that wouldn't be "fair" on some scale, but would it have been fair on another broader one?
I don't have any answers especially as there's so much misinformation I don't think anyone knows the whole story.
Also how do you then decide whose sob story to prioritize? If people know that all they need to do to avoid being IDBed is to have some sad story or be too important then that is what tons of people will be. They will just keep going through the list until they find someone that admits the truth, how is that fair?
ROCAT is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:08 pm
  #3297  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,012
Originally Posted by Ber2dca
We know too little about the cops' actions to judge them in detail. The PR statement from their spokesperson should also be seen in the context of the 'public outrage' last night. It wouldn't be the first time that frontline staff get thrown under the bus for other people's mistakes.
Fair enough, but that is highly unusual for a law enforcement agency. Almost unheard of.

My comment is merely about whether the passenger 'did nothing wrong'. He did do *something* wrong in the moment by refusing to follow the instructions from the officers of the peace. Unlike various posts and jibes in this thread and elsewhere suggest, you won't be dragged out of an airplane by police if you 'do everything right'.
Sure, that's true. I don't believe that United was justified in calling for security and thus I think the resulting actions by security should not have happened, but it seems his refused to comply with an officer's order.
trouble747 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:08 pm
  #3298  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Denver, CO
Programs: Bonvoy LT Plat, MP Gold, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 123
Originally Posted by aceflyer2
He should resign immediately!
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ent/100317166/

United admits flight was NOT overbooked. Finally, I could not stomach the references to overbooked flight on all of the prior reporting. They removed passengers to accommodate crew - that is NOT an overbooked scenario. Not a good look for United. Unfortunately, they will feel the results in their pocketbook. Talk a about a bad few weeks for the brand. Pathetic.
fullnelson3 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:09 pm
  #3299  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Programs: UALifetimePremierGold, Marriott LifetimeTitanium
Posts: 71,107
Funny or Die video - short (30 seconds) Intercut of UA's friendly skies ad w/ orchestra playing on the plane to the doc getting dragged down the aisle.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/...nes_video.html

"In this new Funny or Die video, a classic strategy is implemented to truly savage effect: Use their own words against them.

Here, the exact, calming voiceover of the United Airlines’ popular 2013 ad “Flyer-Friendly” is replayed, without any edit, against that horrifying viral video of a passenger being literally dragged off a United plane. “Every thought, every movement, carefully coordinated and synchronized,” we hear, as we watch the victim scream and those around him shriek in confusion. “Performing together with a single United purpose: That’s what makes the world’s leading airline flyer-friendly.” Oof."

SkiAdcock is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:09 pm
  #3300  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by swampwiz
AIUI, the final offer was $1K in "vouchers". I could see why this was not enough to entice someone other than someone who travels a whole lot (which usually means he is a businessman that can't afford to take a voluntary bump). Had that offer been in $1K CASH, I would have a problem believing that there were not enough takers. Heck, once when I went for a 2-month (non-business) trip (from USA to Europe), I happily gave up my seat for one the next day for only 400 EUR CASH.

There needs to be federal legislation that requires a suitably sufficient offer in COLD HARD CASH before any involuntary bumping is allowed.
Just to clarify - the federal rules say exactly what you ask for. Involuntary bump, a passenger is entitled to have demand the compensation in cash/check but the amount he get is determined by a formula. It's voluntary bumping where the airline can offer vouchers which is likely why they failed to convince enough passengers to accept.
ddarko 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.