United Airlines Kicks Elderly Professor Couple Off Late-Night Flight
Sep 13, 2019, 11:23 am
#46
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: PWM
Programs: AA Plat
Posts: 1,335
People aren't upset the author disclosed his stock holding. The outrage stems from his ownership of the fictional SouthwestERN Airlines! If he can't be bothered to learn the name of the fourth largest US airline...
Sep 13, 2019, 11:25 am
#47
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,417
Maybe he studied journalism at Northwestern University.
Sep 13, 2019, 11:40 am
#48
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: Ice Cream Club, AC SE MM, Bonvoy Life Plat
Posts: 2,803
If it were me, I'd be rather concerned about the fact Forbes included an underacted copy of the boarding pass - with details including like their Frequent Flyer number (it's masked in the text, but not in the barcode).
It's amazing sometimes what sort of information you can get out of United with nothing more than a name and an FF number...
It's amazing sometimes what sort of information you can get out of United with nothing more than a name and an FF number...
Sep 13, 2019, 11:40 am
#49
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Colorado
Programs: UA Gold (.85 MM), HH Diamond, SPG Platinum (LT Gold), Hertz PC, National EE
Posts: 5,656
No idea what sensitivity people have, but I tap people all the time, for stupid stuff like your kid's shoe fell off, you dropped your wallet, let me help you with that. Never once have people overreacted, ever. Instead they are thankful I took the time to care. UA has self created a toxic environment for everyone, passengers and employees. Most employees are fine, and it's the few that create the toxic environment, just as a few bad passengers do so as well. However status passengers with no previous issues lead to me to believe this is the FA on a power trip, not the couple.
Sep 13, 2019, 11:44 am
#50
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,417
FAs sometimes touch passengers, for example to wake someone for breakfast. Can the FA then be fired for assaulting the customer?
Sep 13, 2019, 11:51 am
#51
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,413
I imagine that UA management would use approximately the same standards in assessing a claim that a prosecutor would if someone brought them a case. Waking someone up doesn't rise the level of a fireable offense, just as no prosecutor would file charges against the FA for it.
Sep 13, 2019, 11:56 am
#52
Join Date: May 2010
Location: AVP & PEK
Programs: UA 1K 1.9MM
Posts: 6,357
They were in their correct seats, and the plane was about to leave: there was no real urgency in getting the flight attendant's immediate attention.
I have yet to physically touch a FA to get their attention, as I normally can make verbal or non-verbal gestures to do so (and if I can't I wait until I can).
The couple's urgency in getting the FA's immediate attention stems from their anger/rage over what had transpired; this is exactly the reason why I believe they weren't particularly gentle in their approach. Adrenaline has that effect.
If he or she touches the passenger in an angry, rage filled state: yes, potentially.
Sep 13, 2019, 11:58 am
#53
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 17,456
I find that excessively legalistic and challenge that FA to demand charges be pressed against grandma for criminal assault based on her tapping his/her elbow. It's utterly laughable.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Sep 13, 2019 at 2:00 pm Reason: discuss the issue; not the poster(s)
Sep 13, 2019, 12:02 pm
#54
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: Ice Cream Club, AC SE MM, Bonvoy Life Plat
Posts: 2,803
I'd also point out 21 A2 boarded with BG5. This does not mean the pax was merely entitled to BG5. I doubt either of the complainants ascertained 21 A2 was actually designated BG5, and that this was even mentioned highlights their tendency towards pettiness. I lean towards the assumption that the complainants were being ignored because the crew were trying to tend to legitimate issues onboard.
If civil suit soon I hope they hire smart lawyers.
If civil suit soon I hope they hire smart lawyers.
Sep 13, 2019, 12:17 pm
#55
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Hawai'i Nei
Programs: Au: UA, Marriott, Hilton; GE
Posts: 7,145
Hopefully, UA not only has a "Passenger Incident Review Committee," but also an "Employee Incident Review Committee." Overreacting/hysterical employees reflect badly on a company and they should be subject to review and appropriate counseling, training, and discipline. It is hoped that HR/Corporate Security has reviewed this FA's record and had a conversation with the FA about how the FA could have de-escalated the situation without affecting the entire plane.
Sep 13, 2019, 12:57 pm
#56
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,413
The attitude that "the customer is always right" is one of the biggest problems that we have as a culture, because it leads to service employees being treated like dirt.
Is it possible that the couple was entirely in the right? Sure, but it doesn't seem likely. It sounds like both sides are at fault -- the FA, for insisting that the couple was lying about the boarding pass (why would they lie?), and then the couple, for escalating the situation after they were already seated in their seats.
If they'd simply dropped the matter, they would have flown and had a story to tell about the ridiculous FA. Instead, it seems that they were determined to get the last word, and look where it's gotten them.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Sep 13, 2019 at 2:02 pm Reason: removed response to deleted content
Sep 13, 2019, 1:14 pm
#57
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 599
Based on what I see here, I agree that is a bit of an overreaction, but again to me the elbow is a weird place to tap someone to get their attention.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Sep 13, 2019 at 2:03 pm Reason: Updated quote of deleted content
Sep 13, 2019, 1:20 pm
#58
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,413
That's completely wrong. By that logic bumping to someone on a crowded subway on accident would be consider assault based on your strict definition. Are you really going to call it assault if a passenger hits you while walking down a narrowbody aisle? Trivializing assault like this only hurts those who experience real trauma.
Sorry, the law does include the word "Intentional," which I left out. But I'm not wrong, and I'm not trivializing anything.
Sep 13, 2019, 1:23 pm
#59
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: NYC/Northern NJ
Programs: 1K - UAL, Platinum DL, Marriott, Hilton, SPG
Posts: 1,815
Ambulance chasers. 66 and 68 - cry me a river? These two need to recognize the POTUS of the USA is 73 and his two biggest competitors in 2020 are 76 & 78 yo old. So, they lost me at elderly as unless they require a walking stick or wheelchair they are able bodied individuals.
I hope airline bans them permanently since they will have to defend a lawsuit anyway.
I hope airline bans them permanently since they will have to defend a lawsuit anyway.
Sep 13, 2019, 1:23 pm
#60
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 17,456
That's my belief as well.
I was intentionally trying not to suggest that. As I said, not all assaults are prosecuted, nor should they be. It doesn't change the fact that it's assault.
I mean, you can assume anything that you like, but I take umbrage to your assumption. I cast down on the veracity of the report because it's ridiculously hyperbolic, not because I fly United. The attitude that "the customer is always right" is one of the biggest problems that we have as a culture, because it leads to service employees being treated like dirt.
Is it possible that the couple was entirely in the right? Sure, but it doesn't seem likely. It sounds like both sides are at fault -- the FA, for insisting that the couple was lying about the boarding pass (why would they lie?), and then the couple, for escalating the situation after they were already seated in their seats.
If they'd simply dropped the matter, they would have flown and had a story to tell about the ridiculous FA. Instead, it seems that they were determined to get the last word, and look where it's gotten them.
I was intentionally trying not to suggest that. As I said, not all assaults are prosecuted, nor should they be. It doesn't change the fact that it's assault.
I mean, you can assume anything that you like, but I take umbrage to your assumption. I cast down on the veracity of the report because it's ridiculously hyperbolic, not because I fly United. The attitude that "the customer is always right" is one of the biggest problems that we have as a culture, because it leads to service employees being treated like dirt.
Is it possible that the couple was entirely in the right? Sure, but it doesn't seem likely. It sounds like both sides are at fault -- the FA, for insisting that the couple was lying about the boarding pass (why would they lie?), and then the couple, for escalating the situation after they were already seated in their seats.
If they'd simply dropped the matter, they would have flown and had a story to tell about the ridiculous FA. Instead, it seems that they were determined to get the last word, and look where it's gotten them.
Were they responsible for duplicate BPs?
Were they the ones who lost one of 4 BPs?
Did they accuse themselves of not having a BP (a ridiculous assertion since they were onboard, implying incompetence of the Gate Crew)?
And were they at fault, once being accused of lying, for trying to show their accuser that, yes, they actually had a BP for that seat on this flight, once it was found?
And for this they got booted? And I'm sorry, maybe your experiences have been different than mine, but I've found a much higher than average number of entitled pissants wearing the UA uniform.
So I really don't think much of this sad tale has been spun. We'll just have to disagree, since neither of us were there.