Kevin AA

The point of this thread was how to avoid IDB, not how to reduce the VDB amounts even further. UA is cheap enough as it is, now you want to make things more complicated and even cheaper? Why?

"cheap" as in, crummy

erlich

It would never happen, unless there is zero spare capacity in the entire transportation system, but that would only happen in a catastrophic national emergency where rules don't apply. Otherwise someone can just hire a private jet. It does not cost $100k plus, not even close.

You're overthinking this. Just pay the market price and stop trying to steal value from someone else (the paying customers).

dinanm3atl

This seems to be so easy. If they need 4... take the 4 lowest. And easily just have the app ask "Do you want to volunteer". Then choose Cash, Miles, Voucher, Food, Hotel and whatever else it wants to add. Or a combo of them.

In this system I can almost assure they will find the amount they need. Almost every time.

And if not... quick gate announcement "If you have the United app we need 3 volunteers and you can put in your request now via the app and your 'my trips' page. If not please come see us at the desk to put in your bid."

Wait 10min and again I bet you now have what you need. The airlines make billions... even if you have to drop 1500x3 to bump 3 people. Is it REALLY going to make a big blip on the radar? It's not...

STS-134

No, that's a floor, not a cap. If you are denied boarding and arrive at your destination more than 4 hours after you were originally scheduled to, the airline owes you at least 4 times the fare paid, up to a maximum of $1350. In other words, the floor has a cap. Even if you paid $1000 for your fare, the airline still owes you at least $1350, since 4 times the fare exceeds $1350. However they can, at least under the current rules, be glad they don't owe you at least $4000. They are, of course, allowed to pay you more, but they generally don't.

robinhood

I don't think the system is broken per se, it's just that the $$'s involved are way too low and like everything else set up in the airline's favor. There isn't any complex auction scheme that can make the likelihood of an IDB zero. What happens with a big equipment swap and 40 people have to be left behind? The easy solution is to just keep the current system with dramatically higher payouts.

Currently 4x your fare could conceivably be just a couple hundred dollars, which is clearly inadequate. Make it 4x the full walk up fare of your whole ticket, not just the segment, to a max of $10,000. This reduces the airline's incentive to just go after people on award tickets or who paid lower fares.

I also agree with an earlier poster that they should be mandated to accomodate you on the next available flight to your destination regardless of airline, whether VDB or IDB. No interline agreement? Tough cheese, better pony up for a walk up full fare on your competitor. I bet all of these interline agreements that the airlines (I'm lookin at you Delta) are so eager to discard will make a comeback.

rickg523

I think that's the crux of the problem. Someone flies once or twice a year. They arrange time off work, prepay hotels and buy a ticket which they expect will get them there in time to stay in the rooms theyve bought.
But unbeknownst to them, until this week, there's a secret proprietary list with maybe dozens of categories of passengers who, if the airline deems it "necessary," will be given their purchased and confirmed seat, apparently even if they're sitting in it. I refer not just to this case in Chicago, but to the case in Hawaii as well.
I guess if the airline revealed just how many types of passengers could bump them, passengers could maybe use that information as well as price when making purchase decisions.

lutorm

I can't help but think that it would work a lot better if the GA could quickly pull up a list of re-routes for all the passengers, sorted by delay. That way they could quickly find out which of the passengers would be least inconvenienced by being bumped and get in touch directly with them. You can't know what to bid unless you know the full alternative.

izhar

There is something in this whole UA "overbooked" flight that I don't understand, and forgive me in advance for my appalling ignorance.
Airlines claim they have to use the practice of overbooking because in the event of a "no show" the empty seat can not be sold and that means loss of money.
But my logic tells me that even when a passenger is a "no show" his or her ticket is still payed for, since airline tickets are generally payed for in advance, and can not be refunded AFTER the plane took off. So why does the airline care if the seat is empty?
Where am I wrong here?

I.M.

IamBartman

Some random, somewhat related thoughts after perusing these suggestions:

1. What I would be curious in is the bifurcation of IDB metrics by those who are IDB'd pre- and post-boarding (whatever the correct definition of boarding is). What I think will happen is airlines will continue their current minimalist approach while people are in the boarding area, and then for those rare times when people are on the plane and need to get taken off, change their policies to be more generous and try to solve the problem with VDB.

2. You bet your bottom dollar that every CoC will be revised to CYA the airlines on things like what constitutes boarding, etc. that were lacking in this case. They will probably make their CoC and other crucial policies are more available to both at the gate, and in-seat, while not necessarily promoting them a whole lot.

3. I think this event could potentially set an interesting precedent for how VDM compensation is determined in the event it needs to be offered to those on the plane. Whether the winning bid is set based on an auction, or the GA asking via the PA whether people are willing to take X dollars/vouchers, this only gets most flyers part of the way.

Some flyers are completely indiscriminate in their travel plans. In this case, placing the bid/taking the offer clears the situation and we move on. But what if the winning bidder will only take it if he stays in business class/gets upgraded. Or can do an 8 hour layover, but not an overnight? Normally this haggling occurs at the gate. Once VDB is needed of passengers on the plane, after this incident no one is going to dare leave their seat to walk to the gate desk and begin their negotiation.

Thus do we find ourselves in the situation where the GA, on the plane, needs a tablet setup that is as efficient as if he/she is working at the desk? Given how fun it is to try to sort out itinerary changes at the gate... I think there is a lot of improvement needed in systems across the board for this to come to fruition.

Now iterate enough times as people are not happy with their alternative itineraries. For a smaller plane it may be easier to just de-plane everyone before IDB-ing who they need to get the flight closed (if that is even possible now after this incident). Or do we set it so if your bid wins, you have to take whatever itinerary they give you?

3.a Again, I go back to part of point #1 about the percentage of IDB that occurs in the plane. Is all this time needed to iterate an auction worth it for an incident that occurs very infrequently?

4. I think one of the major issues that makes this such a bear to deal with is just how large these carriers are. I think IamBartman Air, with one gate at SFO, could easily have a policy for VDB compensation that is truly dependent on the situation at hand. This is because the employee making all decisions is located at ground zero.

I am not sure it is feasible for companies with tens of thousands of employees to give excessive latitude to deal with these kinds of situations. There are all hosts of potential problems: operational risk, fraud, etc. that are usually solved by implementing policies, frameworks, procedures, controls and audit functions. This standardization also engenders a unified image, as travelers should have a reasonable expectation of the process at hand.

Just imagine if Airport A was extremely generous with VDB offers, while Airport B did their auction in such a way that was much more stingy with compensation. As a corporate function, how do you even proceed to manage or forecast such an operation?

I think some of this could be eliminated with a proper escalation process, though that has its limitations. Firstly, it is only as good as its weakest link. If the GA does not convey the proper information to their supervisor, or if the supervisory is more worried about keeping the aircraft on time, then you will have these sorts of black swan events.

5. If the new paradigm for dealing with situations such as this is to spend more time and work with passengers to find the optimal solution, then I think there needs to be changes to airline fines for delays associated with determining VDB compensation.

Anyways, that's enough for now.

IamBartman

6. I think the idea of bidding in an auction with a list of alternative itineraries shown is a bit premature. If the App, or any UA computer system could be that efficient, then why do we all still call the UA helpline when we miss our flights, Wx or Mx?

I think that kind of AI is years away, and even if it was technically available with something like Watson... I am not sure any airline is capable of implementing such a system given current costs.

GrayAnderson

False dichotomy. I think what most of us want is for the airline to have their "stuff" together enough to have "must-rides" worked out in advance, even if it means slinging more pax onto standby-type tickets and/or holding some confirmations until boarding time. Yes, this might mean having to have more crew around (or other arrangements in place to move them in a pinch)...but over-rationalization is the problem here.

Oh, good grief. There's a difference between an IDB such as most of us have discussed and a "safety/security removal". I don't think anyone is talking about barring the removal of unsafe/unruly pax.

Another false dichotomy. I think JetBlue has a no-overbooking policy, and there are other options for the airlines to pursue. I think many of us would also not mind too horribly if ticket prices went up by a few percent across the board in exchange for IDBs being, at a minimum, vanishingly rare.

GrayAnderson

Ok, this idea has been in and out of my mind for a while...we've all talked about apps and whatnot, but what about a checkbox of some sort: "In exchange for a 5% discount at the time of booking I agree to be bumped to a later flight arriving at my destination within four hours of my originally-scheduled arrival time."

I've actually pondered whether a ticket which does not come with a seat on a specific flight (or flight pair) but instead simply guarantees travel from A to B on a given day (or within a time range) at the airline's discretion (so long as the airline informs you of the flight times...say, 48 hours in advance) in exchange for a discounted up-front price would be a winner? Basically "You'll travel on Monday but you're agreeing that we can put you on whatever flight set has the lowest load factors".

GUWonder

Minors shouldn't be subject to IDB.

wetrat0

I agree with all those who say that IDB needs to be effectively eliminated. Airlines get the upside of overbooking, so they should have to bear the downside risk as well. In particular, I think they get away with a lot by only offering vouchers for volunteers and the cash payment for IDB is only 4x the fare paid (which others have mentioned may be extremely small as it is calculated on segment basis).

My proposal is that at some defined point in time (say, within 15 minutes of scheduled departure) if there are not enough volunteers the airline should be required to offer cash payments rather than vouchers/miles, and should be required to increase the cash offer until they get enough volunteers. If you are worried about situations where the bidding gets excessive, you could put a cap of say 4x the highest fare paid by any passenger on the plane (in which case IDB would still exist but it would be much rarer, because this would probably let the bidding get up to $5000 on most domestic flights).

In addition, a couple more ways to make IDB more fair would be to require IDBed passengers to be placed on the next flight on the same carrier (even if that means overbooking the next flight), or if no flight on the same carrier is within 12 hours, to be placed on the next flight on another carrier provided seats are available for purchase.

Neither of these proposals require drastic change to the system. They make overbooking slightly less lucrative but given the current profits I don't see why passengers shouldn't be treated fairly.

GadgetFreak

Under the current system it's not the airlines taking the risk, its unwitting (for the most part) passengers who are at risk of having their planned activities interfered with because of an IDB caused an airline overbooking. That's what has to end. The airlines should be forced to pay enough for volunteers as you suggest.