RRROOO

There ya go! Let's all find something to nitpick and complain about and sue, march...That'll show them!

buckeyefanflyer

Flight is showing operating early ?

malgudi

What does this mean? Refuse an aircraft to fly

It doesn't even read correctly as-is

WineCountryUA

Refusing an aircraft is a PIC's way of stating the PIC does not feel that aircraft "safe" or otherwise ready to fly. It is not an uncommon term used by pilots. Not a term the flying public is probably familiar with.

fumje

Technical explanation above.

Grammar explanation is 'aircraft to fly' is an object in the sentence, a la 'refuse an invitation for dinner' or 'refuse a new order of supplies'.

halls120

I have no faith in what UA chooses to post as the reason for a flight delay. Last August I was flying EWR-RDU, and as the time for boarding approached with no aircraft at the empty gate, the GA advised that our aircraft was late being towed to the gate from a remote stand. Once the aircraft arrived, we boarded. Once every passenger had boarded, as we sat at the gate, the Captain came on the PA to tell us that we were being further delayed due to problems loading cargo. Throughout the delay, what did UA.com say about our delay? They blamed it on “ATC delay.”

cmhua777

It’s clear from earlier posts that this delay was not caused by pilots refusing to fly to a quasi-war zone. However, what would be the big deal if that was the reason?

Many people on this thread got upset at the misplaced belief that the reason for the delay was - gasp - pilots refusing to fly an aircraft and to stay overnight in a country which is in low-scale conflict. That doesn’t sound - at all - unreasonable to me. It’s not political, it’s simply rational.

bmwe92fan

Honestly surprised this thread has gone on this long -- the facts show that the inbound plane was very late -- and then there was a maintenance issue -- making crew time outs a very real possibility - and we all know what that means.... This whole thread exists because a misinformed EWR GA (gasp) blamed the pilots with zero basis for doing so -- and created a tempest in a teapot.... For me the real issue is simpler -- UA messed up and didn't want to compensate passengers because of mechanical issues -- so they chose a delay reason that doesn't require it -- that's what we should be talking about....

Honestly -- UA should be held accountable after they denied all these passengers compensation -- it was their fault clearly -- how they continue to deny compensation - and people here justify - is amazing....

UAFAM

https://www.timesofisrael.com/flight...situation/amp/

Lux Flyer

That's a nice theory, would be good if it was actually the case, but it's not. 1) Unless people were GS/1K on that flight, they wouldn't have gotten any response to a request for compensation at this point since it takes customer care more than 24 hours to get to new cases and respond regarding requests for compensation. 2) UA has this delay classified as a United Caused delay in their system which means passengers can get compensation if they write in and reimbursement for expenses if they include receipts.

Again, as has been mentioned multiple times in this thread - the delay reason displayed on the app/flight status page is only the most current reason the departure time was changed and not necessarily what UA is using to decide controllability or not.

HNLbasedFlyer

Granted - I'm only skimming some of the posts and the Israeli Times article - where did they say UA wasn't providing compensation?

Lux Flyer

Presumably from the delay reason that was posted under flight status citing a curfew (which although many think that would be uncontrollable, it is actually typically considered a controllable cause unless it is a temporary/newly announced curfew) and news outlets such as this one (https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-714098) stating
But again, that was less than 24 hours after the flight issues took place, so compensation wouldn't have even been responded to at that point. And the fact that they were given meal vouchers further supports that UA is treating this as controllable. If they were really trying to dump this as out of their control, they wouldn't have been issuing meal vouchers.

HNLbasedFlyer

Thanks - with an emphasis on Thus far - Thus far, passengers have been denied any accommodations by the airline or compensation,

EWR764

So, what's the outrage here? That travelers were given confusing/conflicting information by an airline about a delay? That gate agents weren't fully informed of a situation? That passengers were stuck with a forced overnight without instantaneous compensation? Welcome to airline travel since... I dunno... the last 100 years?

As it relates to United in particular, sure, EWR staff absolutely could have handled things better, but what exactly are we expecting here?

I feel for the pax, but don't find this to be any sort of special, or more unusual circumstance than the dozens of TATL flights that have been delayed overnight this summer. It's been a brutal year for reliability, especially at EWR.

EWR764

And as to the notion that United, collectively, has some implicit predisposition against TLV, that’s pretty nonsensical, as one certainly can argue no airline has shown a greater commitment to the USA-Israel market than United over the past few years.