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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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, 2:28 pm
  #3331  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 628
Originally Posted by Michael899
My sense in two decades of dealing with C-suite folks is that the first, knee-jerk response is usually more reflective of their genuine thoughts and feelings. While Tuesday's email from Munoz strikes a more reasonable tone with regards to the gravity of the situation and backtracks a bit from UA's denial of culpability, the damage (especially with Monday's internal email) has been done and continues to resonate. Blaming the victim was a terrible strategy to deploy publicly--by both Munoz and Bethune, among other proxies.

At this juncture, unless Munoz commits to full transparency with regards to how selection of IDB happens generally at UA and specifically in this case, I fear it will not quell the perception that the passenger was in part targeted due to his race. This perception is ricocheting through Asian mass and social media in part due to dramatically varying accounts. Thus far, we've read accounts that varies from "random picks" to "algorithm selected" to mystery computer determination to gate agent determination to manifest notations to the passenger previously volunteering but withdrawing after hearing the next flight won't be until the next day. Which is it and is it in line with the established UA IDB procedure? UA needs to address this before the 4/30 self-imposed deadline to (hopefully) quell the ugly rumors.
I don't know why he was picked, but there was another thread that predates this incident about a disabled passenger being removed from a UA flight and frankly, I think that was a far more serious situation. The guy was dumped on the jetway in his wheelchair and left there. IDBs aren't supposed to be totally random, because unaccompanied minors and disabled passengers are supposed to be exempt.

It is irrelevant to me that the person targeted is 69 years old. My spouse is older, do you think people of that age are automatically equivalent to disabled? That they suffer the same challenges, automatically, by being that age? Do you think a given race makes someone equivalent to disabled, or unaccompanied minor, even if they aren't either?

I understand that people have strong feelings about this, but just because we might say "their motives were x or y" doesn't mean that was the case. It's all speculation.
simpleflyer is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:28 pm
  #3332  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: I 35 south bound, finally stopped
Programs: LT Plt, 4mm, *A GLD, burned out medical provider, executing our estate plan
Posts: 1,665
Originally Posted by austin_modern
So, a felon who attempted to assault the police was hurt in the process of extracting him.

That of course wont go viral, but I always find details after the fact to be so interesting. Who would have thought this guy had the back story he did? Who would have thought that... I dont know... perhaps he wasnt just sitting there calmly.
Just a wierd guy on a plane. I have seen worse flying out of Detroit. I take back my concussion theory now. However, his wife the pediatrician was with him according to the PNR notes. Her story will be the one that could refute what the security guards (I decline to call them LEOS) and GAs say. And oh yeah, if in fact he didn't resist according to unbiased witnesses, the words below are meaningless.
From a news report citing UA spokes people, no mention of assault or intimidation. http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/man-r.../10/id/783545/

Saying no is not an assault or intimidating. Google is your friend.
Assault- make a physical attack on.
Intimidation- to make timid or fearful

An individual on an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States who, by assaulting or intimidating a flight crew member or flight attendant of the aircraft, interferes with the performance of the duties of the member or attendant or lessens the ability of the member or attendant to perform those duties, or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both.
boerne is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:28 pm
  #3333  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,405
Originally Posted by Will Dearborn
...they've really stepped in it...
"Please don't short us. Please don't short us. Please don't short us. Please don't short us. Please don't short us. Please don't short us. Please don't short us. Please don't short us. Please don't short us. ..."
WorldLux is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:29 pm
  #3334  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,664
Originally Posted by M60_to_LGA
Um, I think you're mistaken. The CTA is the outfit that runs the L and the buses.
Ya I think they are thinking of the Chicago Department of Aviation.
ROCAT is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:30 pm
  #3335  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 413
Originally Posted by WorldLux
Have you ever talked to a cop abroad vs a cop here in the US. It's usually a totally different tone. .
I can vouch for that and i'm sure it has a lot to do with the fact that because the US has so many guns in society, US cops are always wary of who is armed with a firearm
Peterpack is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:30 pm
  #3336  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: SNA
Programs: AA gold, DL Gold, HHonors Diamond, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Plat
Posts: 446
Sure, Oscar's 3rd attempt seems sincere, yes, he really cares about the passenger, lol!!!

It is telling that overall public perception is overwhelmingly with the passenger even though the airline is using its paid PR machinery, attorneys, contradictory memos, employees on social media(!) etc. All we have from the passenger is a grainy video taken by another passenger. Just to be balanced can someone release personal information on the GA/manager/cops and let us know how many therapy sessions these folks have attended and what their foibles are ...
PilgrimsProgress is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:31 pm
  #3337  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,405
Originally Posted by mre5765
No doubt. And on appeal reduced to 4 figures.
Still a lot more than the 1,600$ someone proposed to give up their seat ...
WorldLux is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:31 pm
  #3338  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Cle
Posts: 574
Get over it

This was a police action problem--not an employee problem.
The passenger could have ended the problem quickly by getting
off the plane and dealing with it at the airport.

Social media should spend time on real world problems
trk1 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:31 pm
  #3339  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,092
Originally Posted by DrPSB
I don't wish to be argumentative here, but you've been reposting these same points over and over. And it is by no means as clear cut as you'd like to believe. Was the passenger given written notification, as mandated by the Department of Transport, explaining his rights and compensation? Was it truly a lawful order by law enforcement for him to deplane, as he had committed no crime? Was he in violation of the CoC which talk about involuntary denial of boarding, when he'd already boarded by any normal use of the term? Was United able to offer higher compensation and did not do so because they knew that law enforcement would settle a civil dispute on their behalf? There are a lot of angles to this story which is why it continues to be discussed.
This thread has like 5000 posts or something. Everything has been re-hashed including all those questions you ask. The answers provided to those questions are speculative for the most part and we probably will never know the true answers to some of the questions.

Now, I keep bringing up points that people who are screaming "What monsters!" at the top of their lungs reliably ignore.

The whole episode has indeed many angles and United don't come off smelling like roses here, but the internet mob assembled here subscribes to a narrative that is at odds with the reality of the situation.

Pax Joe Average won't get dragged off the plane by police. End of story. Joe Average may not fly on the flight he booked to fly on - a reality all too familiar and accepted as the price of doing business by every half-way seasoned flier.
Ber2dca is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:32 pm
  #3340  
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 newaliases
As anyone who has rented before, you can't just call the police to beat your squatter into submission just because they are squatting.

If he was given a ticket, a seat and allowed to board and seat? Sorry, that's analogous to the "tenant" who understood she or he had a lease.
The legal rights of a residential tenant are in no way analogous to any other business/customer relationship.
Beckles is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:33 pm
  #3341  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Washington DC
Programs: Former 1k, Lifetime UA Gold, Starwood Gold; Avis Preferred; Hertz Gold
Posts: 1,732
Originally Posted by aceflyer2
Too late. He should resign immediately.
Nah, but his PR team should!
DCEsquire is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:33 pm
  #3342  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SJC, SFO, YYC
Programs: AA-EXP, AA-0.41MM, UA-Gold, Ex UA-1K (2006 thru 2015), PMUA-0.95MM, COUA-1.5MM-lite, AF-Silver
Posts: 13,437
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
Pity he trotted out this lie:
Federal law caps the total possible payout at $1,350
No, federal law sets the maximum an airline must pay at $1350. UA could have paid more for VDB, whether in cash, UA credits, gift cards, other comp or a combination thereof. UA is free to try to buy those seats for whatever it wants to pay. This has been the case since Carter deregulated airlines.

Originally Posted by DCEsquire
Nah, but his PR team should!

Obviously the original PR team has been cast out of the inner circle.
mre5765 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:34 pm
  #3343  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 812
Originally Posted by mre5765
No doubt. And on appeal reduced to 4 figures.
You wish.

A state appellate court in a deep-red state owned by a few large corporations? Maybe. But not in federal court (or Illinois state court).
sincx is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:34 pm
  #3344  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: MSN
Programs: Delta DM, Bonvoy LT Titanium, Hertz PC
Posts: 1,987
This guy's background doesn't matter as it is not relevant to the incident. Just as the GA/FA's background don't matter unless they are violent. Same for the LEO/Security. Stick to the present.
bergamini is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2017, 2:34 pm
  #3345  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,111
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.
Part of the answer.

The security guy in jeans in the video works for City of Chicago Department of Aviation. They seem to be sworn officers but are not allowed to be armed. Finding it hard to get any real information on these people. Chicago police are also in the airport so not sure what these guys do exactly.

One article I found:

http://abc7chicago.com/news/more-tha...armed/1407649/
Boggie Dog 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.