Jan 3, 2018, 12:29 am
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
Previous thread -
Voluntary Denied Boarding - VDB/Bump on UA [2017]
Voluntary Denied Boarding - VDB/Bump on UA [2016]
Voluntary Denied Boarding - VDB/Bump on UA [2015]
Related thread - Is this IDB? Am I entitled to IDB compensation? [Consolidated]
VDB -- Voluntary Denied Boarding -- is when the flight is overbooked and the airline is looking for volunteers to change their travel plans. It is voluntary and you do not need to participate. The compensation is 100% negotiable. It could be $100's in future travel vouchers, it might be food vouchers, a different routing (perhaps more direct or for MR's more indirect
), perhaps lodging if overnight and sometimes a bump in cabin. It all depends on how desperate the airline is and how flexible you are.
The standard UA policy is after you have agreed to a voucher amount and additional VDBs are still needed, if those passengers get a higher amount, you will also get the higher amount.
The are no DoT requirement for VDB compensation, it is whatever you and the airline agree to. The DoT does require the airline to try VDB before moving to IDB.
Voluntary Denied Boarding - VDB/Bump on UA [2017]
Voluntary Denied Boarding - VDB/Bump on UA [2016]
Voluntary Denied Boarding - VDB/Bump on UA [2015]
Related thread - Is this IDB? Am I entitled to IDB compensation? [Consolidated]
VDB -- Voluntary Denied Boarding -- is when the flight is overbooked and the airline is looking for volunteers to change their travel plans. It is voluntary and you do not need to participate. The compensation is 100% negotiable. It could be $100's in future travel vouchers, it might be food vouchers, a different routing (perhaps more direct or for MR's more indirect
), perhaps lodging if overnight and sometimes a bump in cabin. It all depends on how desperate the airline is and how flexible you are.The standard UA policy is after you have agreed to a voucher amount and additional VDBs are still needed, if those passengers get a higher amount, you will also get the higher amount.
The are no DoT requirement for VDB compensation, it is whatever you and the airline agree to. The DoT does require the airline to try VDB before moving to IDB.
The changing story of IDB on UA since the merge and post-Dao
source: BTS Data
source: BTS Data
Code:
IDB/VDB data for UA (w/o UX) 1st Qtr Year VDB IDB 2018 8,214 27 2017 15,917 900 2016 14,380 929 2015 17,373 1,817 2014 21,469 4,395 2013 14,095 2,592 IDB/VDB data for UA (w/ UX) 1st Qtr Year VDB IDB 2018 16,973 51
Voluntary Denied Boarding - VDB/Bump Experiences on UA [2018]
Jun 7, 2018, 11:21 am
#271
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Somewhere in EWR
Programs: UA GS, HH Diamond
Posts: 858
It's a lot easier for me to believe B & C coming up to the podium separately combined with the language barrier misled the GA into thinking B & C weren't travelling together, and by the time the GA realized what had happened, the system wasn't going to allow a new $1000 ETC to be generated for a third unnecessary VDB, the pilot was pushing to board, so they just persuaded B & C to take what already happened as the way it is and started boarding.
Jun 7, 2018, 11:23 am
#272
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Miami, Florida
Programs: AA ExPlat, Hyatt Globalist, IHG Spire, Hilton Gold
Posts: 4,009
I know some here will disagree, but if B and C truly were insisting on flying together, there was really no need to compensate either of them, especially if the free change for C wasn't part of B's original deal with the GA.
Jun 7, 2018, 11:28 am
#273
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,354
I disagree. One of their seats was still needed. Without the compensation, they wouldn't have moved their flights to the next day, and you'd still be looking for a volunteer. Now, to be clear, I don't think they should have both been given $1000 vouchers; you either give B $1000 and C $0, or you give them each $500 while still giving A $1000. But, if the GA didn't like plan α or plan β, plan ɣ was to tell B, "I'm sorry, you either have to split up or I can't offer you compensation to move," and when B presumably declined that (non-)offer, proceed to solicit another volunteer. End of story.
Jun 7, 2018, 11:45 am
#274
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Miami, Florida
Programs: AA ExPlat, Hyatt Globalist, IHG Spire, Hilton Gold
Posts: 4,009
Unless the OP missed some subsequent theatrics, it doesn't sound like B and C objected very strenuously (if at all) when the original flight started boarding without them despite neither of them being compensated. This suggests they were okay with spending an extra day in CVG, and were simply trying to hit a home run by getting $1,000 (or $2,000) on top of it.
Jun 7, 2018, 11:48 am
#275
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Somewhere in EWR
Programs: UA GS, HH Diamond
Posts: 858
They looked very befuddled at that point, that's when the pilot came up for the second time and the GA said B had to make a call on whether he wanted to stay on the flight or VDB for free with C.
Jun 7, 2018, 2:29 pm
#276
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Programs: UA 1K 1MMer & LT UC (when flying UA); Hyatt Credit Cardist; HHonors Diamond; Marriott Gold via UA 1K
Posts: 6,956
Clearly if the choices had been:
1) B & C stay on original flight, or
2) B & C fly the next day with no compensation for either, or
3) Fly separately (with or without B getting compensated)
...the choice likely would have been #1 . If B & C were only given Choices #2 & #3 , that is clearly a problem.
Jun 7, 2018, 2:31 pm
#277
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Somewhere in EWR
Programs: UA GS, HH Diamond
Posts: 858
A Hobson's Choice at that point.
Clearly if the choices had been:
1) B & C stay on original flight, or
2) B & C fly the next day with no compensation for either, or
3) Fly separately (with or without B getting compensated)
...the choice likely would have been #1 . If B & C were only given Choices #2 & #3 , that is clearly a problem.
Clearly if the choices had been:
1) B & C stay on original flight, or
2) B & C fly the next day with no compensation for either, or
3) Fly separately (with or without B getting compensated)
...the choice likely would have been #1 . If B & C were only given Choices #2 & #3 , that is clearly a problem.
Jun 7, 2018, 5:01 pm
#278
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Miami, Florida
Programs: AA ExPlat, Hyatt Globalist, IHG Spire, Hilton Gold
Posts: 4,009
A Hobson's Choice at that point.
Clearly if the choices had been:
1) B & C stay on original flight, or
2) B & C fly the next day with no compensation for either, or
3) Fly separately (with or without B getting compensated)
...the choice likely would have been #1 . If B & C were only given Choices #2 & #3 , that is clearly a problem.
Clearly if the choices had been:
1) B & C stay on original flight, or
2) B & C fly the next day with no compensation for either, or
3) Fly separately (with or without B getting compensated)
...the choice likely would have been #1 . If B & C were only given Choices #2 & #3 , that is clearly a problem.
Jun 7, 2018, 5:48 pm
#279
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
There's simply no excusing the GAs' (and supervisor's) behavior here. They essentially defrauded one of their customers out of a $1000 voucher. The fact that they may have taken advantage of a language barrier to do so puts it further beyond the pale. From the bottom of my heart, I hope that this was a misunderstanding and not a deliberate attempt to take advantage of the passengers, but still, there were only two reasonable options: VDB B with comp and allow C to change for free, or refuse VDB comp to B and solicit another volunteer.
Jun 7, 2018, 6:19 pm
#280
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: PWM
Programs: AA Plat
Posts: 1,335
Sorry if my description may have been unclear but the both approached the podium together, they both had their laptops open and were checking something (schedules I'm assuming) and were going back and forth in another language with each other when B then opted to take the voucher.
They were not given choice #2. They were given the standard boilerplate: "We need one seat…" C effectively chose #2 when they agreed to a voluntary change bc they mistakenly thought B was already rebooked. Prior to C sealing their fate, they could have stuck to #1.
So my apportionment of blame is as follows:
B 70% (no teamwork)
C 20% (bad assumption)
GA 10% (no situational awareness)
Jun 7, 2018, 6:32 pm
#281
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Somewhere in EWR
Programs: UA GS, HH Diamond
Posts: 858
Jun 7, 2018, 6:35 pm
#282
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Miami, Florida
Programs: AA ExPlat, Hyatt Globalist, IHG Spire, Hilton Gold
Posts: 4,009
What possible reason would a GA or even the supervisor have to be deceptive here - unless that gets them personally excited? That's what I don't understand about some of the posts - it isn't like the supervisor or GA share some windfall if comp isn't given. They could care less - probably even happy for you.
It's certainly possible the GAs were unethical, but it seems more likely there was some sort of miscommunication with, or game-playing by, Pax B and C.
Jun 7, 2018, 6:44 pm
#283
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,354
What possible reason would a GA or even the supervisor have to be deceptive here - unless that gets them personally excited? That's what I don't understand about some of the posts - it isn't like the supervisor or GA share some windfall if comp isn't given. They could care less - probably even happy for you.
Presumably there is some incentive to the GAs regarding oversale compensation, though, since otherwise they could just start at the maximum.
Even if it's nothing more than a comment from somebody at HQ, that may have been an incentive here. I don't know. It's definitely not coming out of their pocket, and I sincerely doubt that there's a comp P&L on a station-by-station basis.
Jun 8, 2018, 12:36 am
#285
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: TX
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 728
I disagree. One of their seats was still needed. Without the compensation, they wouldn't have moved their flights to the next day, and you'd still be looking for a volunteer. Now, to be clear, I don't think they should have both been given $1000 vouchers; you either give B $1000 and C $0, or you give them each $500 while still giving A $1000. But, if the GA didn't like plan α or plan β, plan ɣ was to tell B, "I'm sorry, you either have to split up or I can't offer you compensation to move," and when B presumably declined that (non-)offer, proceed to solicit another volunteer. End of story.
It’s clear, in fact obvious, that either the language barrier or the fact that these were inexperienced travelers (or both) was a major factor here.
Not a single poster to this thread would have walked away without compensation. This is not a knock on the GAs, in fact, I do believe that, at the very least, the original GA didn’t understand what was happening. The posters faulting the travelers are out of line.
I love this story so much. Not because I want there to be a winner or a loser, but because I love hearing - especially from the one who witnesses it first hand- about people’s reactions under stress. UA failed these guys, doesn’t mean UA was wrong or even deceitful, but no compensation in this situation is clearly a mistake.
The only other option, besides a mistake, is a super deceitful GA, which, like others, I just don’t believe. However it’s less implausible than some of the other theories bouncing around here.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Jun 8, 2018 at 3:43 pm Reason: merging consecutive posts by same member; Discuss the issues, not the poster(s)
