BBSHOPSINGER

The good news is the increased ceiling for VDB. The bad news is that it will probably be much harder to get VDB compensation. I virtually always volunteer, but very seldom actually am chosen. They hardly ever actually need volunteers. When they do, although I've volunteered at $150, I've never received less than $300. I'm afraid if they go to this "bidding" method, and they only need one volunteer, I'll be stuck at $150. Of course, if I'm not in a hurry, maybe $150 would be OK in some cases. I don't have any problem spending vouchers. I like to travel!

WillCAD

My opinion has always been that VDB compensation should start at a cash amount equal to whatever the volunteer paid for the seat they're giving up (and of course include a seat on another flight within 12 hours of the original), and go up from there.

I'm not a business traveler, just a casual leisure traveler, so if I've paid $400 out of pocket for a r/t flight, and I'm offered $800 plus a seat on a later flight, I'd probably take it. Unless the delay caused me a significant financial burden, in which case I wouldn't accept anything less than whatever the flight cost me PLUS whatever the delay cost me.

$3k compensation for a 12-hour delay on a leisure trip, to me, is a small fortune, and I'd take it without hesitation. But of course $3k to someone who is on a work trip has an obligation to their employer to get there on time, particularly where the delay might cost their employer hundreds or even thousands of dollars.

Oh, HECK no!

Video doesn't take sides, nor does it lie. It may not show the entirety of an incident, but what it does show is far more accurate and dependable than eyewitness testimony, which is so often skewed by emotion, ignorance, and misinterpretation that it's virtually useless.

I'd be fine with having a security cam at the front and back of every cabin. The expectation of privacy aboard an aircraft where you are surrounded by people who can see everything you do and hear everything you say is far lower than in many other venues, and cabin cams could easily settle many incidents by showing who actually did what, and when.

FlyngSvyr

IMHO a total non issue. They will & should be removed if they do not sit in "their" assigned seat. Maybe not by force, but if they will not comply with the crew orders, they are not flying on that plane.

If the entire plane has to deplane, is delayed, or cancelled because of the malcontent, I would think UA might have the grounds to sue the seat poacher for any and all costs incurred to UA.

To think any seat poacher would get sympathy in the court of public opinion or a court of law is ludicrous.

Lurker1999

I note they chose to ignore the Chinese media rumblings about discrimination in their response. I'm sure they're hoping that just goes away by itself.

rickg523

These kind of "what ifs" have been festooned throughout these UA threads by those who believe flexibility instead of rigid insistence on following the letter of the law, while they may reduce delay and conflict, will lead to anarchy (and though they themselves would never do any of the things they hypothesize, other people absolutely will).
Each hypothetical scenario is easily dealt with using simple logic.
So, in this case, Basic Economy poaching a First seat is arrested and criminally charged with grand theft upon arrival (the cost difference between the ticket he bought and the service he stole - a walkup ticket in First Class - will no doubt be more than a petty theft charge). Displaced First passenger is given best seat available, refunded the entire cost of his ticket and given an upgrade coupon from whichever class of travel he is forced to endure to the class of travel which he purchased but was denied on any route of similar length.
Poacher is also charged in civil court for these direct costs, caused by their illegal actions.
The poacher is simply informed of the consequences of his action and told once the doors close, his decision about his future beyond this flight is irrevocable.

EWR764

Probably because that nonsense shouldn't be legitimized with a response.

jsloan

Video is extremely prejudicial, precisely because people believe the second part of what you've written here -- that it's accurate and dependable -- without fully internalizing the first part -- that it's frequently incomplete. This is the reason that video recordings are frequently excluded from trials in the US -- one of the first things a competent defense attorney will do is argue that the probative value of the video is outweighed by its prejudicial impact.

UA would have been less skewered in the court of public opinion if the more complete video, showing Dr. Dao acting like Dr. DYKWIA, had surfaced first.

Of course, UA would look extremely foolish if they tried to add a video ban in the immediate aftermath of this incident.

Except "never remove a passenger from his seat" isn't any more flexible than "remove a passenger from his seat when the situation calls for it." I don't think most people would have a concern about a policy stating that UA will make all reasonable efforts to avoid removing a passenger from his seat, including higher VDB authorization, better ability to find alternative routings, etc. The problem crops up when all reasonable efforts have failed and the passenger is still seated.

BBSHOPSINGER

I don't disagree with your statement, but remember that in the now infamous incident, the passenger refused to comply with crew orders. That's why he was forcibly removed in the first place. So I hope people don't feel emboldened to do whatever they want and think there can be no repercussions other than possibly getting famous and winning a lawsuit against the airline.

restlessinRNO

Yes, I imagine this will be the case. It has been years since I was actually needed as a volunteer. One can only dream of receiving $10K!

HoustonConsultant

I get that it is fun to hate United, and I get that there are some bad employees running around, but Dao was a once in my lifetime event, and United made policy changes to address that.

Lesser Dao events happen every day without much of a peep and are generally handled well enough.

United makes these generally good changes, and we are busily poking holes with extreme, hypothetical situations that have managed to not happen in the past 30 years of my flying, and they have allowed for a bit more flexibility for the folks on the ground and one the plane to handle those things.

When you folks find the perfect airline that flies frequently from Houston, is meeting all your idiosyncratic needs, and has preplanned to jump through all these hypothetical hoops, please share this with us in Houston so we can jump ship to this mythical airline as well.

United generally gets me where I need to go when I need to be there, and generally does it as well or better than other domestic carriers.

seanp7

I think it's a good announcement/video and set of policies to restore confidence. As always, it will be about execution...

Strongly disagree with this. It is not the solution.

WillCAD

Video is prejudicial? Seriously? MOre prejudicial than similarly incomplete, yet also wildly inaccurate and sometimes deliberately false witness statements? Gimme a break.

Incomplete video of an incident is no more prejudicial than incomplete witness testimony, and is far, far more accurate and reliable.

Just because it doesn't show everything, doesn't mean that what it does show is false. If taken out of context, either video or testimony can be misleading, but it's up to those involved to provide context to either video or testimony.

Video is more accurate than testimony, always. It may be less complete, but in the Dao incident, so was the testimony of pax at the front of the cabin who didn't witness the entire incident but only saw Dao being dragged off the plan by his wrists.

bocastephen

Why is it really so much of your concern that they should ban video and photos? Aside from the fact there is absolutely zero chance any such rule would ever be enforced.

halls120

So do I. But there are some real bad apples out there, and they cause damage to the brand far greater than their numbers would suggest.

mduell

How about applying those creative solutions to crew instead of just passengers. Crew can ride ground, OAL, or to the wrong airport too.