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 Do not cite, copy, or report on such.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 19, 2018, 5:20 pm
  #6886  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Chicago IL US
Programs: UA 1K; National Executive Elite; Hertz PC & Hotels Galore
Posts: 946
Originally Posted by Italian_Kayaker
Interesting, didn't know that. In this NY case, a man was awarded $15K for false arrest, and $500K for the attendant injuries.

https://www.newyorkinjurycasesblog.c...ards-affirmed/
Very interesting. Gil's award was against the NYPD / NYC. In Dao, the equivalent award for injuries would be against City of Chicago and not against UA.

Now in Gil, the policemen acted on their own volition to arrest, without probable cause. In Dao, reasonable suspicion to detain clearly existed by virtue of the fact that there was a third-party complainant (UA staff) requesting assistance and (purportedly) claiming trespass/disturbance/failure to comply with crew instruction. Even if we were to assume that the mere complaint of a UA employee wasn't sufficient to establish probable cause to arrest for trespass/disturbance/noncompliance, the probable cause standard for obstruction/resisting was clearly met as soon as Dao resisted the officers attempts to detain him. There can be no false arrest when probable cause exists.

To recap - Illinois standards require 'reasonable articulable suspicion' to detain and 'probable cause' to arrest. UA's mere complaint satisfied 'reasonable articulable suspicion' and Dao acts to obstruct/resist gave rise to probable cause to arrest. There was no false arrest.
onthesam is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 5:53 pm
  #6887  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,038
Originally Posted by joe_miami
I'd bet passengers have a better chance of being IDB'd than seeing the police involved or threatened in an airline-passenger dispute (let alone wrongly involved or threatened) — and the IDB rate was roughly 1 in 10,000 last year.
Which may or may not be true and doesn’t mean much in any case.
Originally Posted by onthesam
Very interesting. Gil's award was against the NYPD / NYC. In Dao, the equivalent award for injuries would be against City of Chicago and not against UA.

Now in Gil, the policemen acted on their own volition to arrest, without probable cause. In Dao, reasonable suspicion to detain clearly existed by virtue of the fact that there was a third-party complainant (UA staff) requesting assistance and (purportedly) claiming trespass/disturbance/failure to comply with crew instruction. Even if we were to assume that the mere complaint of a UA employee wasn't sufficient to establish probable cause to arrest for trespass/disturbance/noncompliance, the probable cause standard for obstruction/resisting was clearly met as soon as Dao resisted the officers attempts to detain him. There can be no false arrest when probable cause exists.

To recap - Illinois standards require 'reasonable articulable suspicion' to detain and 'probable cause' to arrest. UA's mere complaint satisfied 'reasonable articulable suspicion' and Dao acts to obstruct/resist gave rise to probable cause to arrest. There was no false arrest.
Was there any kind of arrest?

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 19, 2018 at 7:20 pm Reason: merging consecutive posts by same member; please use multi-quote
GadgetFreak is online now  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 5:58 pm
  #6888  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Chicago IL US
Programs: UA 1K; National Executive Elite; Hertz PC & Hotels Galore
Posts: 946
Yes he was detained and arrested but ultimately not charged.

EDIT: as I think of it, you ask a great question. Did arrest occur? IMO arrest did. I think we can all agree detention did as well based on the video.
onthesam is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 5:58 pm
  #6889  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Miami, Florida
Programs: AA ExPlat, Hyatt Globalist, IHG Spire, Hilton Gold
Posts: 4,009
Originally Posted by GadgetFreak


Which may or may not be true and doesn’t mean much in any case.
You said there's a "big problem" of airlines being "way too quick" to involve or threaten the police. In three decades of flying, I've never seen it once, and it's certainly not something that gets mentioned here very often.
joe_miami is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 6:38 pm
  #6890  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,038
Originally Posted by joe_miami
You said there's a "big problem" of airlines being "way too quick" to involve or threaten the police. In three decades of flying, I've never seen it once, and it's certainly not something that gets mentioned here very often.

I’ve seen it threatened multiple times.
Originally Posted by onthesam
Yes he was detained and arrested but ultimately not charged.

EDIT: as I think of it, you ask a great question. Did arrest occur? IMO arrest did. I think we can all agree detention did as well based on the video.
Yes, he was detained on the plane. I think he was only arrested outside the plane but I’m not certain.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 19, 2018 at 7:28 pm Reason: merging consecutive posts by same member; please use multi-quote
GadgetFreak is online now  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 7:26 pm
  #6891  
Moderator: United Airlines
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.995MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,850
Moderator Topic Check

Please remember this is the United Airlines forum and discussion should relate to the UA incident. Let's not drift off to other non-UA incidents or discussion greater legal / civil rights issues -- this is not the appropriate forum for that discussion.
Also, let's please avoid posting and reposting essentially the same thoughts over and over. The purpose here is not to convince other posters or to "win" an argument but rather to inform each other or to exchange information that we can use to enhance our UA travel experiences.

WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
TWA884 likes this.
WineCountryUA is offline  
Old Apr 20, 2018, 7:00 am
  #6892  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: YYZ/YTZ/YUL
Programs: BA Gold, TK Elite
Posts: 1,558
Originally Posted by jsloan
What I can say is that the fallout to me, personally, has been substantial -- fares are up and VDB opportunities are way, way down. I imagine many others are in the same boat.
post hoc, ergo propter hoc...
TravellingSalesman is offline  
Old Apr 20, 2018, 8:41 am
  #6893  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,402
Originally Posted by TravellingSalesman
post hoc, ergo propter hoc...
Oh, for heaven's sake.

UA said that they were changing their policies to restrict the number of oversales. If you look at the VDB thread, there is a sharp downtick in VDB reports that corresponds with the time that UA said this. And as for fares -- you didn't think UA was going to respond by reducing the number of tickets sold at the highest prices, did you?

There are other reasons that fares are higher, but the reduction in overbooking is definitely a contributing factor. And the reduction in overbooking is specifically due to this incident.
jsloan is online now  
Old Apr 20, 2018, 9:28 am
  #6894  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bellingham/Gainesville
Programs: UA-G MM, Priority Club Platinum, Avis First, Hertz 5*, Red Lion
Posts: 2,808
Originally Posted by onthesam
Any exposure to UA for money damages resulting from injuries sustained would have related to the injuries occuring on UA property, and that case would be a stretch at best, IMO. So, getting away from personal injury damages, if we were to accept the argument that a ''theft' or some other tort occurred, by how much was Dao damaged? I don't believe in that context he was damaged beyond the cost of his ticket + other costs related to being reaccomodated. It doesn't explain the big money settlement (whereas PR does).
The plane was already boarded so IDB rules do not apply . Dao was refused transport, there was not a seemingly valid reason provided for that refusal, “disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent” (Rule 21H1) or causing a “disturbance” (Rule 21H4) then he was coerced by the police acting on UA's behalf. UA stepped way beyond their contract on this one and that's why they did not want it litigated.
prestonh is offline  
Old Apr 21, 2018, 11:31 am
  #6895  
Moderator: United Airlines
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.995MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,850
This thread was re-ignited by a suit filed against Chicago and UA by one of the ORD aviation officers fired over the April 2017 Dao incident. However, the restarted discussion has been focused instead on the original incident with no signs of any changes of opinions and too much discussion of each other and other FT rules issues.

So, the UA Moderating team has decided to close the thread as the recent discussion is no longer contributing to the forum. However, if any new information becomes available, please PM or Alert the Moderator Team and it will be added to the thread and perhaps re-opening the discussion.

On behalf of the UA Moderator team
WineCountryUA
FlyingNone likes this.
WineCountryUA is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2019, 10:05 am
  #6896  
Senior Moderator; Moderator, Eco-Conscious Travel, United and Flyertalk Cares
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Fulltime travel/mostly Europe
Programs: UA 1.7 MM;; Accor & Marriott Pt; Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 17,831
First interview with Dao:
The first few months were "horrible," he said. He suffered a concussion, lacerations to his mouth and nose, and several of his teeth were knocked out, he said. He was put on suicide watch by hospital staff and later spent months learning to walk again, he said.Dao relied on his faith during his recovery, he said, adding that he made a promise to God that if he got better, he would devote his time to charity work. Since then, he has helped residents in Texas displaced by Hurricane Harvey and traveled to Vietnam and Cambodia to help install solar power in villages with no electricity, he said. Even in the Far East, people knew his story, he said.


https://www.yahoo.com/gma/doctor-dra...opstories.html
l etoile is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2019, 12:01 pm
  #6897  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 698
Originally Posted by l'etoile
he needed to learn how to walk again? whattt
chavala likes this.
mysterym is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2019, 12:02 pm
  #6898  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Miami, Florida
Programs: AA ExPlat, Hyatt Globalist, IHG Spire, Hilton Gold
Posts: 4,009
The guy's a drama queen, through and through.
joe_miami is offline  
Old Apr 9, 2019, 12:09 pm
  #6899  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: MBS/FNT/LAN
Programs: UA 1K, HH Gold, Mariott Gold
Posts: 9,630
Wondering if UA did or didn't have an non disclosure agreement for the settlement.
jhayes_1780 is online now  
Old Apr 9, 2019, 12:37 pm
  #6900  
LIH
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: ORD | LGA | 2E
Programs: UA GS 1.6MM UC | AA CK 0.7MM AC | Bonvoy Ambassador | Hyatt Globalist | Hertz PC
Posts: 1,053
Originally Posted by joe_miami
The guy's a drama queen, through and through.
Or, more likely, he has a set of talking points from his attorney.

Zero chance the company would allow him to disclose the sum. The feedback loop on that legally would be bad enough that they'd pay way up for the opacity.
ginmqi likes this.
LIH 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.