Sounds like United Airlines muffed it

[Frederick Skelly]

I get that the airport security dragged that man off. But still, it seems like it's United's problem to get an aircrew to their next departure point. So they should have offered more compensation instead of using their removal policy.

And, I'm the lone wolf here, but the Doctor really should have gotten off when they asked. You can't argue with an airline crew on a loaded jet - security won't ever allow that and in some cases you can even go to jail.

Just seems like UA could have handled their end better. I never did like flying them or Continental. But they didn't do themselves any favors.

Fred

[Ken Fitzgerald]

A couple things to consider. It's my understanding it's a violation of regulations to defy airline employees directions. It violates the laws to ignore or defy police when they ask you to do something. It was airport authority police who drug the guy off not United Airlines employees.

[Frederick Skelly]

A couple things to consider. It's my understanding it's a violation of regulations to defy airline employees directions. It violates the laws to ignore or defy police when they ask you to do something. It was airport authority police who drug the guy off not United Airlines employees.

I definitely agree Ken. Never ever defy a cop, or an aircrew.

[Mike Henderson]

However, United was dumb to let things escalate to the point where the guy was dragged off the plane. People would have volunteered if they had kept increasing the payment. It's like an auction, eventually you'll hit someone's price and they'll volunteer. They know that if they wait for a higher price someone else will beat them to it.

The story I heard was that the doctor and his wife were considering taking the money (volunteering) but when he learned that the next plane was the following day he said he couldn't do it because of his commitments at the hospital.

It would have been MUCH less expensive for United to pay someone $1,500 or even $2,000 to volunteer. In his case, the doctor's wife might have volunteered to get the money while he had to get back to the hospital.

Just a question - How much would it take for you to volunteer to wait until the next day to get home? For everyone who doesn't have a situation where they HAVE to be home, there's a price where they'll volunteer.

Mike

[I don't know what my minimum price is but I know that for $5,000 I'd volunteer unless there was some reason I just had to be home that evening. If pushed, I'd probably take less, but not $800.]

[Once the passengers were seated on the plane, the compensation had to be greater than it would have been if they had dealt with the problem before loading.]

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Mike....has it been confirmed the guy was really a doctor?

How long do you delay a flight while "auctioning off" seats? According to an article I read today one of the criteria for a traveler to give up their seats is the price of the ticket. The cheapest seats are selected first.

Once, while traveling on business, they asked for volunteers and I took them up on their offer. Then on the replacement flight, I was asked if I would trade my seat so a mother and child could sit next to each other. I said yes. My new seat was in the 1st class section. I enjoyed the additional comforts.

[Keith Westfall]

So a paying guest, ticket bought and boarded, can just be asked to leave WITHOUT doing anything wrong?? Just because of a random selection thing? And shouldn't resist or be passive?

They blew it, should have just kept increasing the temptation $. What they saved in the $ "carrot", will be quickly lost in the aftermath of lost revenue, possible law suits and bad PR.

Someone should loose their job over this. And UA should make that public to try and save some face.

[Mike Henderson]

Mike....has it been confirmed the guy was really a doctor?

Yes, it has been confirmed and they also gave his name and the name of the hospital. I don't remember what they were right now.

United is going to wind up paying him a lot more than it would have cost to get someone else to volunteer.

Mike

[My gut feeling is that they would have gotten four volunteers by the time they offered $2,000. Maybe before. How much would it take for you to volunteer?]

[Keith Westfall]

Mike....has it been confirmed the guy was really a doctor?

Why is that even an issue? Is being a doctor the only thing that is more important than UA poor scheduling?

A lot of things in peoples lives are just as, or more important than their schedules and poor planning.

UA should have just kept raising the ante...

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Whether or not the guy was a doctor isn't important to me but if someone just claiming to be a doctor excused them from being deplaned, wouldn't everyone do it after the word got out.

What United did was legal and United employees didn't remove the guy. The Airport police removed the guy. If he had just left the plane, he wouldn't have been injured. No. I have no sympathy for him, a doctor or not.

[Mike Henderson]

It isn't important that he was a doctor. Many people have reasons that they have to get home. Maybe a child or close relative is getting married the next day.

And, no, you can't believe any excuse that someone offers. If you listen to excuses everyone will have one.

The only fair solution is to offer compensation until you get volunteers. Those who HAVE to get home will not take the compensation. Those who can will do it for the right price.

Mike

[Suppose your mother was dying and you got the call to come quickly. How would you react if they tried to take you off the flight? Would you just get up without protest?]

[Another example: Suppose a basketball team was traveling to an away game and the star was chosen to be bumped?]

[George Werner]

Whether or not the guy was a doctor isn't important to me but if someone just claiming to be a doctor excused them from being deplaned, wouldn't everyone do it after the word got out.

What United did was legal and United employees didn't remove the guy. The Airport police removed the guy. If he had just left the plane, he wouldn't have been injured. No. I have no sympathy for him, a doctor or not.

I agree completely with Ken is saying here. In addition to his first point about wouldn't everyone claim to be a doctor if it worked, what would stop future flights from becoming bidding wars if the other suggestions of just increasing the offer until someone agreed to get off had happened?

Besides all of that, I think something stinks in this whole thing. I fly a lot, and have over the last 10 years. At least 3 trips a month so a minimum of 6+ flights every month over the last 10 years. I have never seen any airline call for volunteers to deplane after boarding because of an oversell. Not even once, something just seems fishy here.

[Frederick Skelly]

I dont think his being a doctor has anything to do with it (except maybe to himself). His job is no more important than others we could think of. My feeling is they should have worked harder to avoid escalating. They got to feeling schedule pressured, or heavy handed, or whatever - and muffed it.

[Mike Henderson]

I agree completely with Ken is saying here. In addition to his first point about wouldn't everyone claim to be a doctor if it worked, what would stop future flights from becoming bidding wars if the other suggestions of just increasing the offer until someone agreed to get off had happened?

Besides all of that, I think something stinks in this whole thing. I fly a lot, and have over the last 10 years. At least 3 trips a month so a minimum of 6+ flights every month over the last 10 years. I have never seen any airline call for volunteers to deplane after boarding because of an oversell. Not even once, something just seems fishy here.

This one was different because the passengers were already boarded and seated. The whole problem with United's approach is that it ignores that some people HAVE to get home. Others, not so much.

Compensation will sort that out. Suppose the situation was what I described - where someone was trying to get home to a dying mother. Should the airline take that into account? If so, how do they know the story is true? There's no way to to know in advance but if they refuse, and it's true, the story will get out and explode in social media and the press.

No, it's easier and cheaper to do it with money and let the passengers choose. Each passenger who absolutely doesn't have to get home has a price. You'll get the four cheapest ones.

Mike

[And if it costs the airlines more money, they'll do a better job of not overbooking flights.]

[Alex Snyder]

Besides all of that, I think something stinks in this whole thing. I fly a lot, and have over the last 10 years. At least 3 trips a month so a minimum of 6+ flights every month over the last 10 years. I have never seen any airline call for volunteers to deplane after boarding because of an oversell. Not even once, something just seems fishy here.

Fortunately, I landed a new role and now only fly for my personal trips. Like you, I was in the air a lot. And I have tons of coworkers who fly constantly: 800 person sales staff flying to customers plus the rest of us who travel between all our various offices around the world (55,000 employee company).

I have been on a few flights where passengers were asked to volunteer to give up their seats after boarding. Reasoning has been "weight," and it was always on the tiny puddle jumpers. But I have never even heard of randomly selecting passengers to be removed from a flight. Nor have any of my coworkers as we're having shocked conversations about United now.

What's blowing my mind is the CEO of United's piss poor responses. A smart man would have waited a few days for the facts to be present; while, making an immediate step through an internal communication asking employees to be patient and compliant with the thorough investigation United was launching.

[Jerome Stanek]

It is the airline responsibility to see that there other crew is where they should be and not use that as an excuse to put a paying customer out without plenty of compensation not just a voucher. That was what they offered not cash. Vouchers can be voided for all kinds of things and they don;t have to accept them like cash. They can restrict what they are good for. This has been discussed on other forums with pilots chiming in and verifying that. Also once you are boarded they have giving you the right to sit there unless they can prove you are a threat which he wasn't until they threatened him. I am sure that United could have used another flight for their crew either another airline or a charter that would have been cheaper how much would a small charter cost to get 4 people 300 miles when they offered $800 plus hotels to 4 people that would be well over $4000

[Jerome Stanek]

Once, while traveling on business, they asked for volunteers and I took them up on their offer. Then on the replacement flight, I was asked if I would trade my seat so a mother and child could sit next to each other. I said yes. My new seat was in the 1st class section. I enjoyed the additional comforts.

You just happened to be lucky. What if they overbooked the replacement flight that you were on and you had to spend another day at your own expense. Do they offer another voucher for the next available flight or just say to bad you don't have a valid ticket

[Greg Parrish]

Wouldnt it be nice if you could sell 6 items knowingly to 10 people, take all 10 people's money with a promise to deliver, and then legally stiff 4 of those people via random selection and a "I'll get you the item eventually" comment.

Nothing about the overbook practice seems right to me, regardless if it's legal or not, unless it's purely and 100% voluntary by the customers due to some incentive offered. And it shouldn't be legal in my opinion either. And once you are in your legally ticketed, purchased seat they shouldn't be able to force you off unless you break the law, not get randomly selected.

My 2 cents.

[Larry Frank]

There is very little about flying that us enjoyable anymore except maybe a good destination. In my mind, the flight was not overbooked but United had to get some of their people to the destination.

Nothing about this was right and was badly mis-handled. Even the CEO statements were awful. When I fly my first choice is Southwest and United last.

[Alex Snyder]

Wouldnt it be nice if you could sell 6 items knowingly to 10 people, take all 10 people's money with a promise to deliver, and then legally stiff 4 of those people via random selection and a "I'll get you the item eventually" comment.

Nothing about the overbook practice seems right to me, regardless if it's legal or not, unless it's purely and 100% voluntary by the customers due to some incentive offered. And it shouldn't be legal in my opinion either. And once you are in your legally ticketed, purchased seat they shouldn't be able to force you off unless you break the law, not get randomly selected.

My 2 cents.

Good point. Up to 4 cents.

[roger wiegand]

What United did was legal and United employees didn't remove the guy. The Airport police removed the guy. If he had just left the plane, he wouldn't have been injured. No. I have no sympathy for him, a doctor or not.

I don't think they were police. It sounded like it was private airport security personnel working for United or the Airport.

Just because what you do is legal doesn't excuse being stupid and brutal. United planned poorly by not making accommodation for their employees prior to boarding passengers on the plane and then, to save a few hundred dollars, resorted to violence to free up a seat. There's a big psychological difference in being bumped before and after you're in your seat. If they'd offered $1000 or $1500 cash rather than vouchers that many passengers find to be worthless they would have had no problem getting a seat.

[Malcolm McLeod]

Wouldnt it be nice if you could sell 6 items knowingly to 10 people, take all 10 people's money with a promise to deliver, and then legally stiff 4 of those people via random selection and a "I'll get you the item eventually" comment.

Nothing about the overbook practice seems right to me, regardless if it's legal or not, unless it's purely and 100% voluntary by the customers due to some incentive offered. And it shouldn't be legal in my opinion either. And once you are in your legally ticketed, purchased seat they shouldn't be able to force you off unless you break the law, not get randomly selected.

My 2 cents.

Two sides to every story... What if you sold 1 item to 10 people, then carefully packed and delivered the item to the appointed place at the agreed time - and no one showed up. Will you be happy offering the expected full refund?

United did nothing wrong (they own the seat), but they will still pay dearly for it. And yes, they should have raised the offer for the volunteers.

I have my own bone to pick with United, so I'll just sit and watch and giggle gleefully. My 2 cents.

[Greg Parrish]

Two sides to every story... What if you sold 1 item to 10 people, then carefully packed and delivered the item to the appointed place at the agreed time - and no one showed up. Will you be happy offering the expected full refund?

United did nothing wrong (they own the seat), but they will still pay dearly for it. And yes, they should have raised the offer for the volunteers.

I have my own bone to pick with United, so I'll just sit and watch and giggle gleefully. My 2 cents.

easy. The seat is sold and paid for. Simply put you don't show up or make prior arrangements you bought it. Hotels manage to do this. Why can't airlines. If money collected who cares if plane flies half full.

[James Cheever]

As someone who has flown and continues to fly United a lot for work, they messed up big time.

I have seen this happen many times (over booking) and never has it resorted to violence. Also, I've never seen it happen after the plane was boarded. Clearly there was a major screw up in United Air Ops if these four employees had to fly at the ninth hour and the gate people were told after the plane was loaded. As many others are saying, they should have kept moving up the offer. If they got high enough, four people would have easily agreed; even though this was the last flight of the day.

Now they have a major black eye and will pay much, much more.

[Chuck Wintle]

it was shocking to see how a paying customer was treated. But what was more shocking was the attempt of the media to besmirtch this customers reputation especially when he refused to give up his seat. They were relying too much on the good will of the customer.

[Malcolm McLeod]

.... Will you be happy offering the expected full refund?...


easy. The seat is sold and paid for. Simply put you don't show up or make prior arrangements you bought it. Hotels manage to do this. Why can't airlines. If money collected who cares if plane flies half full.

Not quite an answer to what I asked, but we all bring a different perspective.

Competitive environment makes airlines do most of what they do (as with us all). Studies were quoted ad nauseum on the news last night that the public will book a flight with anyone who's fares are $1 cheaper. Apparently our collective indignation won't stand up to economics for long. And not that it will change any minds, but they rent the seat - they don't transfer ownership.

teehee teehee teeheee (....I told you I would giggle while United twists in the wind.)

[Chuck Wintle]

Wouldnt it be nice if you could sell 6 items knowingly to 10 people, take all 10 people's money with a promise to deliver, and then legally stiff 4 of those people via random selection and a "I'll get you the item eventually" comment.

Nothing about the overbook practice seems right to me, regardless if it's legal or not, unless it's purely and 100% voluntary by the customers due to some incentive offered. And it shouldn't be legal in my opinion either. And once you are in your legally ticketed, purchased seat they shouldn't be able to force you off unless you break the law, not get randomly selected.

My 2 cents.

United goofed big time...these 4 "employees" should have taken a later flight end of story. It's very costly to earn back the goodwill of the public once it is lost. I imagine many travellers will have this story in mind when flying united.

[Pat Barry]

I find it incredible that anyone would be taking the airlines side in this particular situation. What happened to that guy was uncalled for, lousy customer relations, bad local and top level management and extremely poor decision making. What really bothers me is that this type of incident has likely happened in the past and no one really heard about it. Thanks to the power of facebook or what ever site had the content posted, United airlines and maybe all airlines have been exposed. Now maybe, things will change for the better and the customers will be treated with slightly more respect.

[Wade Lippman]

I get that the airport security dragged that man off. But still, it seems like it's United's problem to get an aircrew to their next departure point. So they should have offered more compensation instead of using their removal policy.

And, I'm the lone wolf here, but the Doctor really should have gotten off when they asked. You can't argue with an airline crew on a loaded jet - security won't ever allow that and in some cases you can even go to jail.

I agree with you on both points.
United should have upped the offer until 4 people were willing to get off.
The passenger should have gotten off it became obvious that protesting woudn't help. He was a nut case.

Obviously a better system is necessary.

Years ago I went to Hawaii with a friend, and I made the reservations. He was pretty angry I made it for Mr. rather than Dr. and actually had his ticket rebooked. In Hawaii a man had a heart attack and people were screaming for a doctor. I nudged him, but he assured me the guy didn't want a pediatrician. Go figure.

[Dan Friedrichs]

At one point, yesterday, their market cap was down a BILLION dollars, so I think offering $2500 in compensation (or just hiring a limo to drive some people the 4 hour trip) probably would have made a lot more sense.

On the plus side, they won't have too much problems with overbooking in the future! I willingly pay a premium to fly Southwest (and won't fly Frontier or Spirit at any price) - now I can avoid United, when possible, too.

[Mike Henderson]

Two sides to every story... What if you sold 1 item to 10 people, then carefully packed and delivered the item to the appointed place at the agreed time - and no one showed up. Will you be happy offering the expected full refund?

United did nothing wrong (they own the seat), but they will still pay dearly for it. And yes, they should have raised the offer for the volunteers.

I have my own bone to pick with United, so I'll just sit and watch and giggle gleefully. My 2 cents.

Almost all tickets are non-refundable today. So if you don't show up, you still paid for it.

If you bought a refundable ticket, you paid more which is essentially insurance for the airline. Some refundable ticket people will not show up but most will.

Mike

[Stan Calow]

The public has a short memory and will forget about this in a few months. The doctor made a foolish mistake in defying the orders of the Captain and security. Once he did that they had to get him off, by any means necessary, not turn around and pick someone less confrontational. He chose the level of violence and as an educated person, he should have known that the people that own the plane get to make the rules. As I understand it he is facing criminal charges for interfering with a flight crew, so that this will likely end up in an unsatisfying simultaneous dropping of charges and lawsuits in order to make it go away.

[Pat Barry]

The public has a short memory and will forget about this in a few months. The doctor made a foolish mistake in defying the orders of the Captain and security. Once he did that they had to get him off, by any means necessary, not turn around and pick someone less confrontational. He chose the level of violence and as an educated person, he should have known that the people that own the plane get to make the rules. As I understand it he is facing criminal charges for interfering with a flight crew, so that this will likely end up in an unsatisfying simultaneous dropping of charges and lawsuits in order to make it go away.
I doubt that you would feel the same way if it was you that was 'selected' to deplane. I hope if they do, that you can shoot a video of yourself cooperating in the manner that you think is right and post it in social media as a proper example of passenger conduct. No one will watch it of course.

[Von Bickley]

United should have offered 4 people $25,000 each. They would have had plenty of volunteers and saved money.

[Chuck Wintle]

I doubt that you would feel the same way if it was you that was 'selected' to deplane. I hope if they do, that you can shoot a video of yourself cooperating in the manner that you think is right and post it in social media as a proper example of passenger conduct. No one will watch it of course.
reminds me of a short story i once read.....

[Chuck Wintle]

United should have offered 4 people $25,000 each. They would have had plenty of volunteers and saved money.

in hind sight it should have been the way to approach the problem.

[Mike Henderson]

The public has a short memory and will forget about this in a few months. The doctor made a foolish mistake in defying the orders of the Captain and security. Once he did that they had to get him off, by any means necessary, not turn around and pick someone less confrontational. He chose the level of violence and as an educated person, he should have known that the people that own the plane get to make the rules. As I understand it he is facing criminal charges for interfering with a flight crew, so that this will likely end up in an unsatisfying simultaneous dropping of charges and lawsuits in order to make it go away.
I would say that United made a foolish mistake by taking the approach they did. They could have avoided this by the simple use of a bit of money.

Mike

[Malcolm McLeod]

I would say that United made a foolish mistake by taking the approach they did. They could have avoided this by the simple use of a bit of money.

Mike

Just in case someone thinks it's me who's 'taking the airlines side', I'll clarify that I agree completely that United made a huge and ultimately costly mistake. However, under current rules (at least as I understand them), United did nothing wrong. The good Dr. Passenger also made a mistake. I'll leave it to individuals to decide who was more despicable.

Maybe it's just me, but I keep mentally equating United to The Dixie Chicks --
I will defend with my life the Chicks right to stand on a stage and verbally commit commercial suicide. I hope they will defend my right to pass judgement on their words, by purchasing their records -- or not!

United Airlines can allocate their seats in any way they wish - with or without my blessings, and I trust they will be equally understanding when I pass judgement sitting in a Southwest seat. Dollars make a wonderful 'vote', and I've voted for anyone but United for several years. I hope everyone will remember their current outrage when United drops their fares by 10% across the board. I'll bet we don't.

As for the good Dr. Passenger's actions, if a police officer pulls you over and orders you out of your car (where you DO actually OWN the seat), telling the officer you just want to remain seated and go home will probably not 'fly'. When the police or TSA get involved, it is probably too late for vouchers and negotiations...?

[Dan Friedrichs]

United Airlines can allocate their seats in any way they wish

I think there are legal subtleties that no one understands, yet. While I agree with you in principle, when the passenger bought the ticket and was seated on the plane, there are certain rights he obtains through the contract of carriage. I imagine lawyers will be spending quite a bit of time trying to understand if United had the right to remove him after he had boarded.

An imperfect analogy would be if you hired a moving company to haul your stuff across the country. They might own the truck, but they can't just stop in the middle of nowhere and toss your furniture on the side of the road and leave you stranded while they pick up furniture belonging to a "more valuable" customer.

[Malcolm Schweizer]

THIS HAPPENED TO ME!!! Well- I mean getting bumped- not getting carted off screaming!

First, let me just give you a little background. I have flown 836,948 miles with American Airlines to date, although had I not waited to join the rewards program, that would be well over a million. I fly 100,000 miles per year, mostly with American, but you name it, I have likely flown it.

I have been asked to get off a plane when I had already been seated. I simply said, "Okay, no worries," got up, and went to the counter to be rebooked. I had purchased my ticket last-minute because of a last-minute meeting. I really needed to be at that meeting, and it really screwed up my day to not make the flight, but life is too short to waste time worrying about uncontrollables. I won't mention the airline, but it was NOT American. I did buy my ticket last-minute, and I realize that airlines have to overbook because people simply don't show up for the flight. They took the last purchased ticket and booted him- that was me on that day.

I have chartered aircraft before, and I know the cost- it's about $10,000 per flight hour to fly a large jet. That's cost, not retail, although fuel prices have changed and that will change with fuel. That's also for a cargo flight, so a passenger flight would be much higher. When people no-show for flights, it's a big hit to the airline. It may be uncontrollable- missed connections- or it may be controllable- just didn't get there on time. Either way, the airline is trying to fill seats. Don't like it? Okay- they can start charging more per seat. It's a catch 22. They overbook flights that typically go underutilized. THAT SAID- I researched this story, and apparently this flight was NOT overbooked, but it was a crew staging issue.


When I fly 100,000 miles in one year, I get Executive Platinum for a year. That allows me perks, one of which is I can book a flight 24 hours in advance, and am guaranteed a seat, even if the flight is fully booked. Yes, that's a risk for the airline, but in turn they get all of my business unless I just can't avoid it. I can't sometimes, and that's when I was flying another airline where I have no premiums and I was booted off the plane after being sat down. I simply made the cut. No worries- no screaming, no entitlement- I just got up, and enjoyed the unexpected layover. I even laughed, thinking maybe someone high up in their rewards program used the same perk I used! Perhaps it was karma.

Apparently United had a crew on overtime due to unexpected weather delays, and by FAA rules, that means they can't fly. They were probably flying in another crew to replace them. They had a choice to make- piss off 200 passengers downline because the flight has to layover a whole day while the crew gets their FAA required crew rest, or send another crew. They sent another crew, which, if all went well, would have inconvenienced only a few people, and usually people take the voucher. I have taken vouchers as small as $500 and as large as $900 when I didn't just HAVE to be somewhere, although usually I do need to make a meeting. Their decision was logical. They should have gone higher with the voucher offer, so I will discredit them for that. That said- when you buy a ticket, it clearly states that you are not guaranteed a seat and things may change. Sorry, but that's how it goes. What caused this incident was actually rules by the FAA that are put in place for your safety. Pilots can only fly a limited number of hours in a row. If they are on "illegal overtime," They have to layover, and another crew must be flown in. So, the airline was flying in another crew so that unsuspecting passengers aren't buzzing around at 30,000 feet with a sleepy crew at the helm.

The internet is quick to judge based on a 30 second video that doesn't show the whole thing. It did appear obvious that there was some rough-handling by the security or authorities or whoever they were that took the guy off the plane. Apparently they were suspended pending investigation, and certainly it warrants an investigation. That said, what was the initial cause of this incident? The guy felt entitled and didn't want to get off the plane, even after the airport authorities told him he had to get off the plane. He resisted, although the video wasn't clear to what extent. If he got physical, then he deserved what he got. If not, then perhaps he has a case- I'll let the court decide that. Someone here said he was removed by United Airlines security people- I don't buy that. They looked like US Air Marshalls to me. I have seen them arrest someone when the flight landed because the guy refused to turn his phone off. He was a real jerk about it, so the flight attendant gave him a last warning- "Turn it off, or I will have the authorities alerted." He thought he was above the law. When we landed, they announced to wait in our seats while the US Marshalls boarded the aircraft. The walked up to him, and said, "Come with us," and it was priceless to see the look on his face- I think he was about to cry. At least he got to be the first one off the plane.

So- someone on this thread made a comment "Let me see you politely get off the plane." Well, I didn't get a video, but I did just that- more than once, actually. The other times I was on a standby ticket, so I had less of a reason to complain. At least once it was a full-fare ticket- in fact, I paid MORE because of the last-minute booking, and I politely followed instructions and got off the plane.

[Dan Friedrichs]

They had a choice to make- piss off 200 passengers downline because the flight has to layover a whole day while the crew gets their FAA required crew rest, or send another crew..

Or they could have hired a limo and driven 4 passengers (or the crew) the 4-5 hours it would have taken.

[Mike Henderson]

THIS HAPPENED TO ME!!! Well- I mean getting bumped- not getting carted off screaming!

First, let me just give you a little background. I have flown 836,948 miles with American Airlines to date, although had I not waited to join the rewards program, that would be well over a million. I fly 100,000 miles per year, mostly with American, but you name it, I have likely flown it.

I have been asked to get off a plane when I had already been seated. I simply said, "Okay, no worries," got up, and went to the counter to be rebooked. I had purchased my ticket last-minute because of a last-minute meeting. I really needed to be at that meeting, and it really screwed up my day to not make the flight, but life is too short to waste time worrying about uncontrollables. I won't mention the airline, but it was NOT American. I did buy my ticket last-minute, and I realize that airlines have to overbook because people simply don't show up for the flight. They took the last purchased ticket and booted him- that was me on that day.

I have chartered aircraft before, and I know the cost- it's about $10,000 per flight hour to fly a large jet. That's cost, not retail, although fuel prices have changed and that will change with fuel. That's also for a cargo flight, so a passenger flight would be much higher. When people no-show for flights, it's a big hit to the airline. It may be uncontrollable- missed connections- or it may be controllable- just didn't get there on time. Either way, the airline is trying to fill seats. Don't like it? Okay- they can start charging more per seat. It's a catch 22. They overbook flights that typically go underutilized. THAT SAID- I researched this story, and apparently this flight was NOT overbooked, but it was a crew staging issue.


When I fly 100,000 miles in one year, I get Executive Platinum for a year. That allows me perks, one of which is I can book a flight 24 hours in advance, and am guaranteed a seat, even if the flight is fully booked. Yes, that's a risk for the airline, but in turn they get all of my business unless I just can't avoid it. I can't sometimes, and that's when I was flying another airline where I have no premiums and I was booted off the plane after being sat down. I simply made the cut. No worries- no screaming, no entitlement- I just got up, and enjoyed the unexpected layover. I even laughed, thinking maybe someone high up in their rewards program used the same perk I used! Perhaps it was karma.

Apparently United had a crew on overtime due to unexpected weather delays, and by FAA rules, that means they can't fly. They were probably flying in another crew to replace them. They had a choice to make- piss off 200 passengers downline because the flight has to layover a whole day while the crew gets their FAA required crew rest, or send another crew. They sent another crew, which, if all went well, would have inconvenienced only a few people, and usually people take the voucher. I have taken vouchers as small as $500 and as large as $900 when I didn't just HAVE to be somewhere, although usually I do need to make a meeting. Their decision was logical. They should have gone higher with the voucher offer, so I will discredit them for that. That said- when you buy a ticket, it clearly states that you are not guaranteed a seat and things may change. Sorry, but that's how it goes. What caused this incident was actually rules by the FAA that are put in place for your safety. Pilots can only fly a limited number of hours in a row. If they are on "illegal overtime," They have to layover, and another crew must be flown in. So, the airline was flying in another crew so that unsuspecting passengers aren't buzzing around at 30,000 feet with a sleepy crew at the helm.

The internet is quick to judge based on a 30 second video that doesn't show the whole thing. It did appear obvious that there was some rough-handling by the security or authorities or whoever they were that took the guy off the plane. Apparently they were suspended pending investigation, and certainly it warrants an investigation. That said, what was the initial cause of this incident? The guy felt entitled and didn't want to get off the plane, even after the airport authorities told him he had to get off the plane. He resisted, although the video wasn't clear to what extent. If he got physical, then he deserved what he got. If not, then perhaps he has a case- I'll let the court decide that. Someone here said he was removed by United Airlines security people- I don't buy that. They looked like US Air Marshalls to me. I have seen them arrest someone when the flight landed because the guy refused to turn his phone off. He was a real jerk about it, so the flight attendant gave him a last warning- "Turn it off, or I will have the authorities alerted." He thought he was above the law. When we landed, they announced to wait in our seats while the US Marshalls boarded the aircraft. The walked up to him, and said, "Come with us," and it was priceless to see the look on his face- I think he was about to cry. At least he got to be the first one off the plane.

So- someone on this thread made a comment "Let me see you politely get off the plane." Well, I didn't get a video, but I did just that- more than once, actually. The other times I was on a standby ticket, so I had less of a reason to complain. At least once it was a full-fare ticket- in fact, I paid MORE because of the last-minute booking, and I politely followed instructions and got off the plane.
I will repeat what I said earlier. There are people on any plane that have to get to the destination for whatever reason: personal, business, family, etc. There are other people who have the luxury of not having to get to the destination on that specific day.

Airline policies have to account for that. If they increased their offer - in dollars not vouchers - they would have found four volunteers. Instead they used a policy that happened to select someone who had to get to the destination.

If they had increased their offer in dollars until they got volunteers they would have had a bunch of satisfied people. The people who had to get to the destination would get there and the people who took the compensation would be happy they were able to get the money.

Instead they upset everyone and caused a public relations nightmare. It was dumb, dumb, dumb on United's part.

Mike

[Kelly Cleveland]

For your own safety this is good advice. But I believe they were in the wrong, as it is against their terms of service to deny you travel after you have boarded.
Even if they had the right to remove him, it was uncalled for to handle him they way they did considering the extent of his resistance was just remaining seated.
Just because something is legal doesn't mean they were right for doing it. This man wasn't threatening anyone's safety, yet he was aggressively assaulted.
I am sure his fellow passengers would have rather given their seats than see this happen to him, they took it too far too quickly.

[Malcolm Schweizer]

I will repeat what I said earlier. There are people on any plane that have to get to the destination for whatever reason: personal, business, family, etc. There are other people who have the luxury of not having to get to the destination on that specific day.

Airline policies have to account for that. If they increased their offer - in dollars not vouchers - they would have found four volunteers. Instead they used a policy that happened to select someone who had to get to the destination.

If they had increased their offer in dollars until they got volunteers they would have had a bunch of satisfied people. The people who had to get to the destination would get there and the people who took the compensation would be happy they were able to get the money.

Instead they upset everyone and caused a public relations nightmare. It was dumb, dumb, dumb on United's part.

Mike

I don't disagree that they should have raised the offer. I know I took an offer at $900 once, and I have seen $1000. Someone usually buys in at that rate. It's a lot of money for one day's layover. I once agreed at $700 to reroute to Philly, layover, and catch a flight in the morning. My original flight got in at midnight, and instead I got in at 10 AM. Not much useful time lost, so I took the $700 plus meal vouchers.

[Kelly Cleveland]

If you invite someone over to dinner, set the table and prepare a meal, then treat them like an intruder at the last minute, is that OK because you own the house and payed for the food?
He didn't choose violence, they put their hands on him first.

[Keith Westfall]

The passenger should have gotten off it became obvious that protesting woudn't help. He was a nut case.

WHAT??? you have paid for your seat, sitting in your assigned seat, and for no reason you understand, you are asked to leave the plane? And when you don't, please explain the rule you are breaking. Because a pilot said so? Because a flight attendant said so? because some dimwit with a uniform said so?

How is Home-Land Security going to spin this as a terrorist plot????

How exactly would you be considered in interfering with a flight when you are a "random pick"? Did he threaten anyone? Did he start screaming at everyone before they so brutally evicted him from the plane?

United blew it, did a sloppy cover-up and should end up paying through the nose for it. For no reason, they treat him in a way that required a visit to the hospital?

Oh, they blew it - big time...

[Jerome Stanek]

WHAT??? you have paid for your seat, sitting in your assigned seat, and for no reason you understand, you are asked to leave the plane? And when you don't, please explain the rule you are breaking. Because a pilot said so? Because a flight attendant said so? because some dimwit with a uniform said so?

How is Home-Land Security going to spin this as a terrorist plot????

How exactly would you be considered in interfering with a flight when you are a "random pick"? Did he threaten anyone? Did he start screaming at everyone before they so brutally evicted him from the plane?

United blew it, did a sloppy cover-up and should end up paying through the nose for it. For no reason, they treat him in a way that required a visit to the hospital?

Oh, they blew it - big time...

And United is trying everything to spin it to down grade the fact that they were wrong and it is going to cost them not only to the victim but prospective customers.

[Malcolm McLeod]

If you invite someone over to dinner, set the table and prepare a meal, then treat them like an intruder at the last minute, is that OK because you own the house and payed for the food?
He didn't choose violence, they put their hands on him first.

Again not defending United, but the analogies leave a great deal of room for problems: So your dinner guest sits down at the table, you now have absolutely no right to ask them to leave your home??

He didn't choose violence, but he chose to refuse to comply with law enforcement authorities. Try it at your next traffic stop. I wish you the very best outcome.

As with so many confrontations in life, there are dozens of ways this could have been averted - - by either party.

[Wade Lippman]

WHAT??? you have paid for your seat, sitting in your assigned seat, and for no reason you understand, you are asked to leave the plane? And when you don't, please explain the rule you are breaking. Because a pilot said so? Because a flight attendant said so? because some dimwit with a uniform said so?

I'd be really angry, but I would be sane enough to realize that the plane wasn't leaving until I got off, and they would drag me off if they had to; and I would probably be subject to criminal charges. Anyone who can't understand that is out of touch with reality.

Yeah, United handed it poorly; very poorly. As so many have said, they should have offered enough to get volunteers. But the violence was entirely the passenger's fault.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

.....and another view https://thepilotwifelife.wordpress.com/2017/04/11/i-know-youre-mad-at-united-but-thoughts-from-a-pilot-wife-about-flight-3411/

[Mike Henderson]

.....and another view https://thepilotwifelife.wordpress.com/2017/04/11/i-know-youre-mad-at-united-but-thoughts-from-a-pilot-wife-about-flight-3411/
She argues that the airline had the right to drag him off the plane and for safety reasons they needed to do it.

They certainly had the right to drag him off the plane but there was no safety issue. He was simply protesting his removal. He was no threat to the plane, the other passengers, or the crew.

IF they were not going to do it correctly by offering a larger incentive until they got volunteers, the way they should have handled it is to tell him that they're not going to drag him off, but when they get to the destination the police will meet the plane and he will be arrested for interfering with a flight crew.

Then announce the same thing to the rest of the passengers and tell them that because of Dr. Dao's position they will have to select someone else to be removed.

The only way they should resort to dragging someone off is if there was no other choice - where no one would get off the plane.

Mike

[Remember that those who were forced to exit the plane get compensation - about $1,300 and their ticket is free (federal law). Someone would have likely agreed to be involuntarily bounced for that.]

[Update here (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/david-dao-doctor-dragged-plane-files-court-papers-demanding-united-n745721): And so it begins.]

[Jerome Stanek]

.....and another view https://thepilotwifelife.wordpress.com/2017/04/11/i-know-youre-mad-at-united-but-thoughts-from-a-pilot-wife-about-flight-3411/


That was not a federal officer as she says and he did not escalate anything he did not strike out at anyone

[Jerome Stanek]

She argues that the airline had the right to drag him off the plane and for safety reasons they needed to do it.

They certainly had the right to drag him off the plane but there was no safety issue. He was simply protesting his removal. He was no threat to the plane, the other passengers, or the crew.

IF they were not going to do it correctly by offering a larger incentive until they got volunteers, the way they should have handled it is to tell him that they're not going to drag him off, but when they get to the destination the police will meet the plane and he will be arrested for interfering with a flight crew.

Then announce the same thing to the rest of the passengers and tell them that because of Dr. Dao's position they will have to select someone else to be removed.

The only way they should resort to dragging someone off is if there was no other choice - where no one would get off the plane.

Mike

[Remember that those who were forced to exit the plane get compensation - about $1,300 and their ticket is free (federal law). Someone would have likely agreed to be involuntarily bounced for that.]


They were offered $800 voucher and a day late what if the flight the next day was overbooked does he get first seating or standby. People say that airlines need to overbook to make sure that all the seats are full but all the tickets that I get are non refundable so if I don't show that seat is still paid for.

[Stan Calow]

​Of course United screwed up - no apologies for them. But if a police officer tells me to get off, I get off. Yes I would be angry, but I am not going to get physically violent. The police officers I know do not appreciate non-cooperation in any form. I won't make a video of it. Apparently neither did the other three people who were involuntarily bumped and won't be famous for it.

[Bruce Wrenn]

My SIL is a pilot, daughter was a flight atendent till she got injured in the job, and son is a baggage handler for airlines. First, crew can remove ANYBODY from plane at any location. As for random selection, hardly. Cheapest seat goes first, with loyalty members being last chosen. Seldom if ever does anyone in first class get bumped. As for crew, unfortunately they have to be in Louisville for next morning's flight. They couldn't be taxied down either as they would not have the REQUIRED ten hours of rest. Ferrying doesn't count as rest. However the passengers who got bumped could be taxied down to Louisville. Best solution, in hind sight, was to ask for volunteers, and bus / taxi them to Louisville, a five hour trip. All would have been home that night, just a little late. What really frosted me was passengers cheering as Dr was dragged off plane. Because we fly as non rev, we sit in a lot of airports and watch them service planes, plus wave good bye to ours as it leaves without us. Sometimes the stars line up perfectly. Once we went to New Orleans to pick up wife's dad. Pushed away from the gate at Raleigh Durham at 6:00 AM, connected thru Atlanta to NO, and then back thru Atlanta to RDU by 3:00 PM same day. Four flights, two connections, RDU to MSY and back to RDU via Atl in NINE HOURS!!

[Bill Gugel]

I can't believe anyone is sticking up for the airline. The only business where the paying customer is treated like a criminal from the get go and your rights seen to go away when you buy the ticket.

[Jim Falsetti]

UAL has a Contract of Carriage with a ticketed passenger. The rules that apply once you have been told to board, and are in your seat, are different than those that apply before you have boarded. United committed an enormous PR disaster, but it seems they may be learning they should follow their own contract of carriage rules.

United would be foolish in the extreme to let this drag on for any period of time.

The benefit to the rest of us is that all airlines will be examining this situation, to make sure it never happens again. It'll be interesting to see what solutions will be offered - hopefully not one that changes the Contract of Carriage such that this action is considered OK!

Jim

[Ronald Blue]

What really frosted me was passengers cheering as Dr was dragged off plane.

Bruce you must have saw a different video then I saw. Their were upset passengers voicing their displeasure in the one I saw. Also I doubt the crew met their goal anyway as the flight was delayed almost 3 hours. If they did then obviously United had other options still available. That and a good number of the original passengers deplaned and didn't re-board. I am not saying the Dr was right but United couldn't have mucked this up any worse. Also they were not air marshalls they were Chicago Airport Police. I don't know if any of these were armed or not. They behaved like thugs themselves and many witness accounts said the Dr was fine right up to moments before they mugged him. He put no one at risk.

[Michael Dye]

United will be bankrupt in less than a year over this one. Deregulation has put the airlines in a position of power not usually seen in any form of commerce. I'll tell you this......once that plane was boarded, United's options became limited. They could have easily purchased first class tickets on any other airline and gotten their people to Louisville in plenty of time. I'm sure NetJets or one of a dozen Part 135 operators could have moved that crew. Instead, they chose to pull the "Untouchable" card and look where it has gotten them. Let UAL die a slow death. They deserve it. Oh, the doc will be a billionaire before this is done. My two cents.

[Dick Latshaw]

Oh, the doc will be a billionaire before this is done.

Possibly the doc, for sure his lawyers.:)

[Mel Fulks]

Guys at the top will deny all knowledge of forced deplanings. They are too important to get involved in what the "soldiers" do. Even in woodwork there are things you get blamed for if you don't keep a copy of the paperwork. Yes, they get mad when they find out you have it. THAT makes it all worthwhile !

[Ole Anderson]

It seems to me the issue is allowing overbooking in the first place. As long as the seat is bought and paid for, why allow them to sell it again? I don't get it. Let it go empty. As far as the crew being a last minute add-on, they should have contingency plans other than bumping seated passengers. They didn't know this before they were all boarded? While United has the egg on their face, the "good" Dr. is the one that ultimately caused the issue. I believe his "entitlement" attitude escalated the situation.

Last year my wife and I volunteered to get bumped prior to boarding, we agreed to $500 each, by the time the plane boarded, we ended up with $600 each. Our alternate flight landed 2 hours later than the original flight without the ATL layover the original flight had. We had to use the voucher within a year. No trips planned in that time frame so we took a week's trip to Cancun and snorkeled and ended up with a cheap vacation we never would have had otherwise. Ah, the advantages of retirement!

[Malcolm Schweizer]

It seems to me the issue is allowing overbooking in the first place. As long as the seat is bought and paid for, why allow them to sell it again? I don't get it. Let it go empty. As far as the crew being a last minute add-on, they should have contingency plans other than bumping seated passengers. They didn't know this before they were all boarded? While United has the egg on their face, the "good" Dr. is the one that ultimately caused the issue. I believe his "entitlement" attitude escalated the situation.

Last year my wife and I volunteered to get bumped prior to boarding, we agreed to $500 each, by the time the plane boarded, we ended up with $600 each. Our alternate flight landed 2 hours later than the original flight without the ATL layover the original flight had. We had to use the voucher within a year. No trips planned in that time frame so we took a week's trip to Cancun and snorkeled and ended up with a cheap vacation we never would have had otherwise. Ah, the advantages of retirement!


The seat may not be bought and paid for. People change flights with minimum change fees, or miss connections and have to take a different flight. It's not always a no-show, no refund. I change flights all the time due to business changes. Sometimes I pay a fee, other times I had paid for refundable tickets. By the way, the cost is not much different either between the two- sometimes refundable is even cheaper than non-refundable, go figure.

If you made a law that they can't overbook, expect rates to go up. Living on an island, that would suck for me.

I will say, however, that I am changing my stance somewhat as more details come out. Certainly the authorities used excessive force and United could have offered more $ before booting a passenger. I had already said they could have offered more money, but not sure about whether this guy put up a fight or not, and now it looks more and more like he did not. Now it is alleged he lost two teeth and suffered a broken nose. Three big guys couldn't get him off a plane without busting him up?

[Jim Koepke]

I have been reading about this but haven't commented. I do not like to fly if I do not have to. On another forum someone posted this article:

It gets down to some of the nuts and bolts of the story that haven't been reported accurately.

The flight was not overbooked. It was full and United had a different problem that required them to move crew members to Louisville.

I think someone may have mentioned FAA regulation 14 CFR 250.2a earlier:


First of all, it’s airline spin to call this an overbooking. The statutory provision granting them the ability to deny boarding is about “OVERSALES”, specifically defines as booking more reserved confirmed seats than there are available. This is not what happened. They did not overbook the flight; they had a fully booked flight, and not only did everyone already have a reserved confirmed seat, they were all sitting in them. The law allowing them to denying boarding in the event of an oversale does not apply.

Even if it did apply, the law is unambiguously clear that airlines have to give preference to everyone with reserved confirmed seats when choosing to involuntarily deny boarding. They have to always choose the solution that will affect the least amount of reserved confirmed seats. This rule is straightforward, and United makes very clear in their own contract of carriage that employees of their own or of other carriers may be denied boarding without compensation because they do not have reserved confirmed seats. On its face, it’s clear that what they did was illegal– they gave preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, in violation of 14 CFR 250.2a.

This article also brings into question some of the factors involved in the personnel employed in the Chicago Airport.

jtk

[Bruce Wrenn]

I can't believe anyone is sticking up for the airline. The only business where the paying customer is treated like a criminal from the get go and your rights seen to go away when you buy the ticket. Passenger wasn't remove from plane by a United employee, but by CITY OF CHICAGO employees. Read the fine print on your ticket contract. Airlines can bump, or deny boarding to anyone, at anytime. As for denying boarding, it's usually the captain's call. You need to walk a mile in air crews shoes before criticizing them. You won't believe the horror stories of unruley passengers. Again, United should have offered them passage to Louisville via ground transportation and $$ for their troubles. They would have gotten home about five hours later than expected. Because crew had to have TEN HOURS OF REST (it's the law) before next day, they couldn't be bused to Louisville. Chicago (O'Hare) doesn't have private planes, if memory serves me correct, so anybody would have to be bused across town. By then, the clock for crew would have run out. On a lighter note, once on a flight the captain gave baggage handler heck. Then told first officer that "She had showed that guy who was in charge!" After departure, crew scheduling contacted plane and informed captain that some how her bags didn't get put on the plane. Hope she had some clean undies in her brief case.

[Keith Westfall]

You won't believe the horror stories of unruley passengers.

I'm sure we don't know the 'whole story', but are any thinking this was an unruly passenger? Willing to bet that he was just sitting there minding his own business, until someone (with maybe no reason) came and said he had to get off. Did they make an announcement about crews having to get to the next stop?

Somehow, I'm not sure that if it was most of us, our response would be, "Look, I didn't take the 'but-out, and because I have to get there as well, I'm not 'volunteering' to get off."

"Oh really?" "Then we're going to drag you off, possibly hurting you, and in the end, we'll show you what we can do!"

United started it, and United will pay for it.

Why? Because I would bet that nowhere does it say: "We will offer a maximum of $800 and then passenger beware..."

[Mike Henderson]

Passenger wasn't remove from plane by a United employee, but by CITY OF CHICAGO employees. Read the fine print on your ticket contract. Airlines can bump, or deny boarding to anyone, at anytime. As for denying boarding, it's usually the captain's call. You need to walk a mile in air crews shoes before criticizing them. You won't believe the horror stories of unruly passengers. Again, United should have offered them passage to Louisville via ground transportation and $$ for their troubles. They would have gotten home about five hours later than expected. Because crew had to have TEN HOURS OF REST (it's the law) before next day, they couldn't be bused to Louisville. Chicago (O'Hare) doesn't have private planes, if memory serves me correct, so anybody would have to be bused across town. By then, the clock for crew would have run out. On a lighter note, once on a flight the captain gave baggage handler heck. Then told first officer that "She had showed that guy who was in charge!" After departure, crew scheduling contacted plane and informed captain that some how her bags didn't get put on the plane. Hope she had some clean undies in her brief case.

The problem is that Dr Dao was not unruly. He was simply sitting in his seat. And it doesn't matter who actually pulled him from his seat, United called them.

The proper way to deal with a situation like that - if you're not going to do it the correct way and buy volunteers - is to tell Dr Dao, "We're not going to drag you from the flight but when we get to our destination you're going to be arrested and charged with interference with a flight crew."

Then tell the passengers that because of Dr. Dao's position they're going to have to deplane someone else. That way, there would not be an embarrassing video. At the destination, Dr. Dao can either disembark with everyone else, and he will be arrested when he gets to the terminal, or if he refuses to leave his seat, everyone else will get off and there won't be a video of them dragging him off the plane.

Of course, the absolute best way to handle the situation is to not have the situation arise - Offer money instead of vouchers (that most people don't want) and offer enough that you get volunteers.

And to Bill Gugel's point: They don't treat us as criminals - they treat us as cattle.

Mike

[Frederick Skelly]

Because crew had to have TEN HOURS OF REST (it's the law) before next day, they couldn't be bused to Louisville. Chicago (O'Hare) doesn't have private planes, if memory serves me correct, so anybody would have to be bused across town. By then, the clock for crew would have run out.

I'm sorry Bruce, but that's not my problem. It's theirs. I'm a paying customer. You don't shaft me to solve your problem. (Even if your terms of service let you.)

[Mel Fulks]

It's not easy to move someone who does not cooperate, especially with the seat space smaller. Wasn't easy to move 1960s protesters who were using "passive resistance". And it took a long time. I don't think we will see any more removals like the one being discussed. Before 911 there were some really crazy things happening on planes frequently. One involved a drunk using a food cart as a urinal ...and a toilet. But what was getting the most attention from passengers? Lost luggage. It was a really big deal every day in the news. Congress was gonna hold hearings about it. I remember saying that when some planes "fell out of the sky " the attention would turn to violence and outrageous behavior.

[Bert Kemp]

Bruce read what you just wrote, deny boarding , this guy was already boarded and seated.
Passenger wasn't remove from plane by a United employee, but by CITY OF CHICAGO employees. Read the fine print on your ticket contract. Airlines can bump, or deny boarding to anyone, at anytime. As for denying boarding, it's usually the captain's call. You need to walk a mile in air crews shoes before criticizing them. You won't believe the horror stories of unruley passengers. Again, United should have offered them passage to Louisville via ground transportation and $$ for their troubles. They would have gotten home about five hours later than expected. Because crew had to have TEN HOURS OF REST (it's the law) before next day, they couldn't be bused to Louisville. Chicago (O'Hare) doesn't have private planes, if memory serves me correct, so anybody would have to be bused across town. By then, the clock for crew would have run out. On a lighter note, once on a flight the captain gave baggage handler heck. Then told first officer that "She had showed that guy who was in charge!" After departure, crew scheduling contacted plane and informed captain that some how her bags didn't get put on the plane. Hope she had some clean undies in her brief case.

[John Helles]

When you buy a plane ticket your paying a bunch of money for a specific service. In the normal world, that would be a contract which, if the service provider reneged on, they would be liable for damages. But in the airline world, as a result of lobbying, etc, the rules give the airlines an out - a cheap out at that - something totally unfair to the consumer. Its a rigged game. Shame on the rule makers and the people who are supposed to be protecting consumers.

Hopefully the whole mess will lead to a change in the rules to make it more fair to the consumer. As so many people have stated above, it seems a no-brainer that the airline should just up the ante until someone volunteers to skip the flight. I doubt it would take that much ..... and if it did then they have the option of decreasing the amount of overbooking they do so the situation doesn't happen so often.

So Kudos to the doctor and the people with their videos ...... sometimes the system is rigged and the only way to change is to ignore the rules and stand up for what is fair.

[Alex Snyder]

Its a rigged game.

Only further compounded by all the mergers and acquisitions making for less competition. Kudos to videos and social media for giving us cattle a voice against the larger corporations who forget they actually have customers.

Now we just need another Teddy Roosevelt.

[Jerome Stanek]

, if memory serves me correct, so anybody would have to be bused across town. By then, the clock for crew would have run out. On a lighter note, once on a flight the captain gave baggage handler heck. Then told first officer that "She had showed that guy who was in charge!" After departure, crew scheduling contacted plane and informed captain that some how her bags didn't get put on the plane. Hope she had some clean undies in her brief case.

The ride across town was less time then the delay to clean the plane

[Chuck Ellis]

Passenger wasn't remove from plane by a United employee, but by CITY OF CHICAGO employees. Read the fine print on your ticket contract. Airlines can bump, or deny boarding to anyone, at anytime. As for denying boarding, it's usually the captain's call. You need to walk a mile in air crews shoes before criticizing them. You won't believe the horror stories of unruley passengers. Again, United should have offered them passage to Louisville via ground transportation and $$ for their troubles. They would have gotten home about five hours later than expected. Because crew had to have TEN HOURS OF REST (it's the law) before next day, they couldn't be bused to Louisville. Chicago (O'Hare) doesn't have private planes, if memory serves me correct, so anybody would have to be bused across town. By then, the clock for crew would have run out. On a lighter note, once on a flight the captain gave baggage handler heck. Then told first officer that "She had showed that guy who was in charge!" After departure, crew scheduling contacted plane and informed captain that some how her bags didn't get put on the plane. Hope she had some clean undies in her brief case.

New member here... It's been over 30 years since I worked for an airlines that is now defunct, I worked as ramp person loading planes and later in cargo as agent and supervisor.... but rules for the crews when I left were that they had to live within 4 hours driving time from their domicile.... this came about after a plane crash and a flight crew that was living in the Caribbean was killed enroute to their domicile in San Francisco.

It seems to me and in my opinions only, that in today's market with the level of computer usage and levels of programming that all business are capable of, the airlines know how many seats are available on a given aircraft, that should become a base number and when that number is reached, all seats sold after that should be designated as standby... and if they regularly transfer crew from one station to another, maybe hold a number of seats in reserve as possible "dead head" seats for the crew... then if and when the flight is boarded and no crew has reported for transport, then those seats can be filled with the standby tickets... also back in the day when I did work for an airline, all planes had a number of jump seats for the onboard crew... if those seats still exist and all were not in use.... at any rate, the situation could have been avoided by a little judicial prudence in handling... as has been said, a better compensation package would have saved a lot of grief for both the passenger and the carrier.

[Jim Koepke]

Howdy Chuck and welcome to the Creek.

jtk

[Mike Henderson]

When you buy a plane ticket your paying a bunch of money for a specific service. In the normal world, that would be a contract which, if the service provider reneged on, they would be liable for damages. But in the airline world, as a result of lobbying, etc, the rules give the airlines an out - a cheap out at that - something totally unfair to the consumer. Its a rigged game. Shame on the rule makers and the people who are supposed to be protecting consumers.

Hopefully the whole mess will lead to a change in the rules to make it more fair to the consumer. As so many people have stated above, it seems a no-brainer that the airline should just up the ante until someone volunteers to skip the flight. I doubt it would take that much ..... and if it did then they have the option of decreasing the amount of overbooking they do so the situation doesn't happen so often.

So Kudos to the doctor and the people with their videos ...... sometimes the system is rigged and the only way to change is to ignore the rules and stand up for what is fair.

I know the situation is very different, but as I learned more about this situation, I began to think about Rosa Parks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks) and her refusal to give up her seat - and of the changes that happened after that.

Mike

[Larry Frank]

As I have been reading this, a couple of things come to mind.

This was not a refusal to board.
The flight was not overbooked.
This was a case of Refusal to Transport and covered under the United Contract of Carriage.
I just read the United section under United's Refusal to Transport and none of the stated reasons for such a refusal are applicable.


It will be interesting to watch this play out as it appears that United failed to follow its own rules. Based upon the lawyers news conference, they are going to really go after United in general for how they treat passengers.

[Kev Williams]

Airlines don't guarantee schedules. This means getting home on time is a big fat maybe. Ask the rest of the people on that plane ;)

Airlines are allowed to overbook. United did.
If someone must be bumped, they must seek out volunteers and offer them compensation. United did.
If no one volunteers, then the Airlines are allowed to involuntarily bump passengers. United did...

If you're involuntarily bumped and the airline finds you a way home within an hour of your original time, they owe you nothing..
if they get you home from 1 to 2 hours of your original time, they owe you 2x the price of your one way ticket up to a max of $675
If they can't get you home sooner than 2 hours past your original time, or don't make any other arrangements at all, they owe you 4x your ticket up to a max of $1350.

read all this here>> https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/fly-rights

so- IF the airlines have these rights, and tell you sorry, you're not flying today, here's your 2-4x refund---If you're PO'd or not, get off the plane. Which by the way isn't some Lake Tahoe paddlewheel cruise boat, it's 200,000 pounds of wood and aluminum and jet fuel defying gravity at 500 mph with 200 people aboard not wanting to end up as crash statistics. Talk about your safety issues...

I understand the doctor's frustration, but he acted like a 3 year old, plain and simple. Ask anyone in law enforcement, when a grown man start acting like that, you never know what else he's capable of.

Yeah, United could've handled it better. Offering the $1350 after no one took the $800 would've been a good start. But I got no sympathy for the Doctor.

[Jim Koepke]

(edited for brevity}

Airlines are allowed to overbook. United did.

But I got no sympathy for the Doctor.


The flight wasn't overbooked. There was a need to move a crew into position for a later flight.

It looks like another airline is taking steps to avoid this kind of mess:


Delta Air Lines is making a dramatic change in the wake of United’s PR disaster, in which a man was violently dragged off a plane after refusing to accept approximately $800 in exchange for his seat.

HuffPost has obtained a company memo from Delta (who declined to comment) that has raised the maximum dollar amount its employees can offer to passengers who voluntarily surrender their seats on oversold flights.

Under Delta’s former caps, customer service agents could offer up to $800 in compensation to passengers who volunteered to switch planes, and employees with higher titles could offer up to $1,350. Today, those limits were upped to $2,000 and $9,950 respectively.

I have sympathy or is it empathy for anyone who is treated so inhumanly because of someone else's inability to think things through before they turn to force.

jtk

[John Helles]

Airlines don't guarantee schedules. This means getting home on time is a big fat maybe. Ask the rest of the people on that plane ;)
so- IF the airlines have these rights, and tell you sorry, you're not flying today, here's your 2-4x refund---If you're PO'd or not, get off the plane.

But why should the airlines have the right just to arbitrarily say "sorry, you're not flying today". They took your money on the understanding that they would fly you today. You don't have the choice of saying "I don't feel like flying today, give me my money back". 2,4 or even 10X compensation may mean nothing to people in certain circumstances. Why do the regs give the airlines such an easy out? Unless there is an Act of God or something totally beyond their control, then they should be duty bound to provide the service they promised.

Fairness and decency are more important than rules written by lobbyists and approved by politicians corrupted by money.

[Curt Harms]

The problem is that Dr Dao was not unruly. He was simply sitting in his seat. And it doesn't matter who actually pulled him from his seat, United called them.

The proper way to deal with a situation like that - if you're not going to do it the correct way and buy volunteers - is to tell Dr Dao, "We're not going to drag you from the flight but when we get to our destination you're going to be arrested and charged with interference with a flight crew."

Then tell the passengers that because of Dr. Dao's position they're going to have to deplane someone else. That way, there would not be an embarrassing video. At the destination, Dr. Dao can either disembark with everyone else, and he will be arrested when he gets to the terminal, or if he refuses to leave his seat, everyone else will get off and there won't be a video of them dragging him off the plane.

Of course, the absolute best way to handle the situation is to not have the situation arise - Offer money instead of vouchers (that most people don't want) and offer enough that you get volunteers.

And to Bill Gugel's point: They don't treat us as criminals - they treat us as cattle.

Mike

There was another solution to this that apparently has been used in the past. United simply cancels the flight and deplanes everyone. Once everyone has deplaned, announce a new flight with a new number and rebook everyone that there is room for. Remember, they can deny carriage prior to boarding for nearly any reason. If passengers complain, tell them why the airline had to resort to this. But there would have been no video and no national news story. Offering more $$$ would have probably been the easiest and cheapest but we don't know how much latitude the local management had.

[Paul McGaha]

Just my $.02 but I think there were a lot of things that were done wrong and could be learned from from this:

1) I think the United Airlines person making the offers to the passengers to take another flight could have done much better job of
making an offer good enough to get some people to go along with it.

2) I think the passenger, once told to leave the plane, should have left the plane. I think this was a gigantic step towards what ultimately happened.

3) I'm not sure what to think of the police. I think by the time they got on board the plane the discussions were over and they were there to remove the guy from the plane, voluntarily or not. I'm not convinced the police did anything wrong.

It will be interesting to see who wins the lawsuits. It might be United.

PHM

[Keith Westfall]

2) I think the passenger, once told to leave the plane, should have left the plane.

If you were sitting quietly in your seat, minding your own business, and someone walked up and said, "Sorry, you have to get off the plane." would you really just get up and leave without any questions???

We probably don't the full extent of the question or direction, but it is unbelievable that they would just tell you to leave, and then call in the police. And then DRAG you out????

And some say the doctor is an idiot...

What was it worth to United to get their crews to the next place? Probably a lot more than $800 - $1350 they didn't want to pay.

United = cheap and stupid.

[Mike Henderson]

2) I think the passenger, once told to leave the plane, should have left the plane. I think this was a gigantic step towards what ultimately happened.

It will be interesting to see who wins the lawsuits. It might be United.

PHM

In most cases I agree that you should obey the officers. But sometimes, when a person feels that the rule or law is wrong, they feel compelled to take a stand (or in this case, a seat:)). Non-violent protest has a long history.

I highly doubt if United is going to let this go to trial - they'll settle with a non-disclosure clause in the settlement. A trial will just drag this event through the press all over again. And do you really think a jury of people who fly on airlines today will find for United? No, I'd bet that they'd give a big settlement to Dr. Dao.

One legal analyst was making a joke and he said that United should bring Dr. Dao and his lawyer into a conference room, lay a check in front of him and say, "There's a signed check made out to you. All you have to do is fill in the amount." United wants this to go away. Fast.

Mike

[Bert Kemp]

You have to read all the stories and all the rules.
1. United did not! overbook the flight . They were tying to remove passengers to make room for employees.
2. They can deny boarding, BUT! These people were already boarded and seated. United really had no right to force them to vacate their seats.
Thats it in a nutshell United was wrong they didn't play by there own rules and this Dr did nothing wrong.

[Ronald Blue]

The flight was not overbooked and everyone was already on board. This will be costly to United but they own it.

[Paul McGaha]

If you were sitting quietly in your seat, minding your own business, and someone walked up and said, "Sorry, you have to get off the plane." would you really just get up and leave without any questions???

We probably don't the full extent of the question or direction, but it is unbelievable that they would just tell you to leave, and then call in the police. And then DRAG you out????

And some say the doctor is an idiot...

What was it worth to United to get their crews to the next place? Probably a lot more than $800 - $1350 they didn't want to pay.

United = cheap and stupid.

Keith,

If they would have put it to me to either get off the plane or I was going to be removed from the plane by the police, then yes I would have gotten off. I'm not saying it was fair, or I would have liked it, but it is their airplane. The passenger most certainly did have a large role in the situation escalating to what it became.

PHM

[Paul McGaha]

In most cases I agree that you should obey the officers. But sometimes, when a person feels that the rule or law is wrong, they feel compelled to take a stand (or in this case, a seat:)). Non-violent protest has a long history.

I highly doubt if United is going to let this go to trial - they'll settle with a non-disclosure clause in the settlement. A trial will just drag this event through the press all over again. And do you really think a jury of people who fly on airlines today will find for United? No, I'd bet that they'd give a big settlement to Dr. Dao.

One legal analyst was making a joke and he said that United should bring Dr. Dao and his lawyer into a conference room, lay a check in front of him and say, "There's a signed check made out to you. All you have to do is fill in the amount." United wants this to go away. Fast.

Mike

No Mike, I don't see this as a good instance of not obeying the police. As a matter of fact the doctor's decision to not obey United or the police led directly to him being forcibly removed from the plane. It wasn't United that made that decision, it was the passenger.

I'm sure United's lawyers will be quick to point this out.

PHM

[Keith Westfall]

The passenger most certainly did have a large role in the situation escalating to what it became.


So the doctor got what he deserved because he didn't just get up and leave the plane?

[Paul McGaha]

So the doctor got what he deserved because he didn't just get up and leave the plane?

In my opinion what he deserved was an uneventful flight home.

I would say though that he was forcibly removed from the plane because he wouldn't follow the instructions of United or the police.

It's not my view that United is fault free in this. They most certainly are not. It started out as a problem of theirs that needed to be solved. More generous offers from United to have people give up their seats voluntarily would have resolved the situation with no one feeling they were treated unfairly. It is too bad this didn't occur and I'm sure United is regretting that.

But the escalation came from the passenger.

[Jim Koepke]

But the escalation came from the passenger.

It seems many including United Airlines do not agree with this statement.

Sitting passively and refusing to move is not escalation. It could be considered maintaining the status quo.

Bringing in the storm troopers is escalation.

jtk

[Jerome Stanek]

It seems many including United Airlines do not agree with this statement.

Sitting passively and refusing to move is not escalation. It could be considered maintaining the status quo.
Bringing in the storm troopers is escalation.

jtk

And United said they handled it wrong as admitting guilt

[Mel Fulks]

This is what happens when the guy at the top just makes it known he wants somebody to handle the problem. There was another organization that worked that way.

[Bert Kemp]

Did you hear that a passenger on another united flight out of Texas was bitten by a scorpion in the flight cabin. :eek:

[Paul McGaha]

It seems many including United Airlines do not agree with this statement.

Sitting passively and refusing to move is not escalation. It could be considered maintaining the status quo.

Bringing in the storm troopers is escalation.

jtk
Jim,

So it's your point of view that the passenger did nothing wrong? Refusing to leave the plane when United and the police told him too wasn't wrong?

Not that I'm trying to change your mind (and I'm sure you're not trying to change mine) but I can't say that I agree with you.

We'll see what happens I guess.

PHM

[Dave Zellers]

I haven't read this entire thread but Paul's points have a lot of history to back them up. Once the police get involved, problems get solved by following their direction. If people are unwilling to follow authority, you don't have much of a working society. If he feels he was wronged, the court system is the next step.

[Frederick Skelly]

Plenty of blame to go around here. I agree with that Dr. Dao should have gotten up and left when instructed by Police. And it sure appears that the Police used excessive force, but time will tell. With all that said, UAL still caused this. They were heavy handed in involuntarily bumping paying passengers for their own crew. They appear to have done it because they could - it was easiest for the gate team. The airline rules and their company culture allowed this - eg., the foolish CEO endorsed their behavior.

Personally, I don't care about the aircrew timing out or the downstream flight they needed to be on. Not the Consumer's problem. That's UAL flight operations' problem - and they share some of that blame too.

The airlines have been abusing Consumers worse and worse the last few years. This incident may bring the pustule to a head. I hope so.

[Mike Henderson]

Jim,

So it's your point of view that the passenger did nothing wrong? Refusing to leave the plane when United and the police told him too wasn't wrong?

Not that I'm trying to change your mind (and I'm sure you're not trying to change mine) but I can't say that I agree with you.

We'll see what happens I guess.

PHM

There's a long history of non-violent civil disobedience in the world. Gandhi made salt when the people of India were prohibited from making salt because British companies had a legal monopoly on making salt.

Martin Luther King lead non-violent marches to demand civil rights.

During the Vietnam war, protestors occupied school facilities in protest of the war.

All of these were against the law but were done to protest against what the people involved felt were wrong.

I submit that Dr. Dao's non-violent protest against being removed from the airplane falls into this same category - a simple refusal to submit to something that he felt was wrong.

Of course, the people who do these protest have to be prepared to suffer the consequences of their actions. But without those actions nothing would change. I'm sure that Dr. Dao did not expect that he would be dragged off the plane, and did not seek to become the poster boy for the high handed actions of airline companies, but his actions did bring the airlines' policies to people's attention and caused them to be changed.

If he had simply gotten off the plane he would not have been injured but nothing would have changed.

Although he was not trying to make a statement for all of us, I'm glad he did stand up for what he felt was wrong. We're all going to benefit from his action and suffering. (It's ironic that this is happening during the Easter season.)

Mike

[Pat Barry]

Jim,

Refusing to leave the plane when United and the police told him too wasn't wrong?
PHM
Sad to say but there are COUNTLESS examples of heavy handed police being wrong with their methods and decision making and this is another high profile example. Police just arrested the wrong people in this case - should have been the airline personnel.

[Jay Mullins]

[Once the passengers were seated on the plane, the compensation had to be greater than it would have been if they had dealt with the problem before loading.]
Last edited by Mike Henderson; 04-11-2017 at 11:13 PM.

I'm with you Mike, they should have seated the crew first, then load the passengers. When the seats were full, close the door and everyone in line is bumped. No nasty scene, no bad pubicity.

Jay

[Mike Henderson]

[Once the passengers were seated on the plane, the compensation had to be greater than it would have been if they had dealt with the problem before loading.]
Last edited by Mike Henderson; 04-11-2017 at 11:13 PM.

I'm with you Mike, they should have seated the crew first, then load the passengers. When the seats were full, close the door and everyone in line is bumped. No nasty scene, no bad publicity.

Jay


I wouldn't think that would be a good way to handle it. If you're going to bump before the people get on the plane, you can make your selection of who you plan to bump, then call them up to the desk and tell them that they're bumped and how you're going to re-accommodate them. Closing the door on the last four people who happened to be in line would not be very good public relations. Suppose a family was split by that "close the door" approach?

The problem here is that they let everyone get on the plane and then tried to bump.

Mike

[Jim Koepke]

Jim,

So it's your point of view that the passenger did nothing wrong? Refusing to leave the plane when United and the police told him too wasn't wrong?

Not that I'm trying to change your mind (and I'm sure you're not trying to change mine) but I can't say that I agree with you.

We'll see what happens I guess.

PHM

And a quote from an earlier post:


But the escalation came from the passenger.

The point isn't about whether or not the passenger did something wrong.

The point is the passenger was not the one to escalate the situation. From all I have seen, he sat quietly until they started to drag him off the plane. Most people being arrested for a criminal act are treated better than that.

If it were for me to be on a jury to find who was at fault in this case, it wouldn't likely be the passenger.

How much advance notice did United's operations people have in knowing they needed to move a crew to Louisville?

This sounds like very poor planning by those who are responsible for getting crews to where they are needed.

jtk

[Paul McGaha]

And a quote from an earlier post:



The point isn't about whether or not the passenger did something wrong.

The point is the passenger was not the one to escalate the situation. From all I have seen, he sat quietly until they started to drag him off the plane. Most people being arrested for a criminal act are treated better than that.

If it were for me to be on a jury to find who was at fault in this case, it wouldn't likely be the passenger.

How much advance notice did United's operations people have in knowing they needed to move a crew to Louisville?

This sounds like very poor planning by those who are responsible for getting crews to where they are needed.

jtk

Jim,

I see the doctors actions different from you.

That United planned poorly and then negotiated poorly are clearly true. Poor planning and then poor negotiating on United's part don't give the doctor the right to not follow the orders of United and especially the police.

In my opinion the doctors decision to not follow the instructions of United and the police led to the escalation of the event. This was the doctors decision and action, not United.

If you're on a jury and you want to hang United go ahead, just hang them for what they actually did, which was poor planning and then poor negotiating to get the problem resolved.

PHM

[Chris Hachet]

A couple things to consider. It's my understanding it's a violation of regulations to defy airline employees directions. It violates the laws to ignore or defy police when they ask you to do something. It was airport authority police who drug the guy off not United Airlines employees.


Getting bumped is sadly part of flying. I always allow extra time when I fly somewhere.

I dearly wish we had a rail system like Europe does, or like we once did.

[Chuck Wintle]

Getting bumped is sadly part of flying. I always allow extra time when I fly somewhere.

I dearly wish we had a rail system like Europe does, or like we once did.

Mybe the rail system would be better if the US had not developed such a good system of roads like the interstate.

[Jim Koepke]

If you're on a jury and you want to hang United go ahead, just hang them for what they actually did, which was poor planning and then poor negotiating to get the problem resolved.

Do not forget the excessive use of force that seems to have put some of the officers on leave and has gotten United to change their policy about deplaning passengers who have already boarded.


United Staff Will Not Take Boarded Passengers’ Seats
By JONAH ENGEL BROMWICH
The airline said its policy change was intended to prevent further episodes like the one last week in which a man was violently removed from a flight.

I do not see sitting quietly as escalation. I do see bringing "legal authority" to bear on someone who doesn't want to play the lame voucher game with a large corporation as escalation.

It is not my belief that corporations should have more rights than the public they serve.

jtk

[Frederick Skelly]

It is not my belief that corporations should have more rights than the public they serve.

jtk[/QUOTE]

Sadly friend, Corporations don't serve the public. They serve their shareholders.

The only way to make them behave as the public would like, is to vote with our wallets.

[Malcolm McLeod]

...

The only way to make them behave as the public would like, is to vote with our wallets.

Well said. Hate to be repetitive, but let's see if the universal public outrage is still on full-rolling-boil for this summer's travel season - - and UA has fares for $5 cheaper than their competitor.

[Mike Henderson]

Well said. Hate to be repetitive, but let's see if the universal public outrage is still on full-rolling-boil for this summer's travel season - - and UA has fares for $5 cheaper than their competitor.
I generally agree. There probably isn't an airline that I simply won't ride on. But I shun SouthWest because when I was traveling a lot on business you couldn't get a seat assignment. I would arrive at the airport in time, but I had things to do at the office and didn't go to the airport early. In that case, I would generally be one of the last to board because they boarded (back then) based on when you arrived at the airport. So all the vacation travelers got there early and got first boarding and got the aisle and window seats. I would be stuck in a middle seat.

I always thought that was a strange way to do business because the business traveler was a frequent traveler while the vacation traveler was a once a year customer. And the business traveler couldn't get to the airport hours ahead of time and just wait around just to get a better seat.

I understand that SW has changed some of their policies but my distaste for them remains.

United might run into the same thing. People will ride on them, but they will be the last choice.

Mike

[Someone once told me that SouthWest was successful because they managed your expectations - you expected to be treated as cattle by them so people were not offended.]

[Malcolm McLeod]

...

I understand that SW has changed some of their policies but my distaste for them remains.

...

I've flown SW for much of my biz travels and love it (...maybe I AM cattle-esque:confused:). Get me on, throw me a bag of peanuts, and get me off.

Not sure how long ago they switched, or your last ride with them, but you can now check-in 24hrs before scheduled departure - which determines your spot in line. Also, the (cattle?) stalls they put at the gate give people a place to stand. It beats everyone crowding the door, while the people who've been called try to climb over.

SW is faster too. I've watched SW and AA arrive at adjacent gates simultaneously and in 30 minutes SW was loaded & pushing back from the gate, while AA was still trying to clean the cabin. SW seems more democratic than American/USAir: I was near the front with a 'general boarding pass' (or something like that). Then they (AA) board their members in order - Diamond, Platinum, Gold, Silver, Semi-silver, Elite, Demi-elite, Quasi-elite, Nearly-elite, Friends-of-the-elite, service members, families, and oh, yeah you can board too. ...I finally sat down just as the plane arrived. Aaarrggghhh!!

To each their own.

Edit: I'll offer a good air travel story, just to counter a bit of the general bashing: Flying SWA out of OKC to Dallas Love in the heat of the summer; flight originated out of Denver and was late; nobody was happy and everybody was hot. Cabin crew was classic Texas friendly, but no-nonsense, as they got everybody seated - explaining the rush repeatedly. At push-back, the Captain announced that there was "no fuel related speed restriction" for the flight (a small cheer went up). We were still climbing when they started serving free drinks. Not positive but we stopped climbing at about 12-15 thousand feet and the pilot nosed over to begin descent and loooonggg final into LUV. He never pulled back on the throttles; the engines were on climb power until about 30 seconds before the flaps came out. Want to see a cabin crew hustle? They finished serving and cleanup in, if memory serves, about 26 minutes of flight time. Everybody on board wanted to buy THEM a drink!

[Ronald Blue]

I've flown SW for much of my biz travels and love it (...maybe I AM cattle-esque:confused:). Get me on, throw me a bag of peanuts, and get me off.

Not sure how long ago they switched, or your last ride with them, but you can now check-in 24hrs before scheduled departure - which determines your spot in line. Also, the (cattle?) stalls they put at the gate give people a place to stand. It beats everyone crowding the door, while the people who've been called try to climb over.

SW is faster too. I've watched SW and AA arrive at adjacent gates simultaneously and in 30 minutes SW was loaded & pushing back from the gate, while AA was still trying to clean the cabin. SW seems more democratic than American/USAir: I was near the front with a 'general boarding pass' (or something like that). Then they (AA) board their members in order - Diamond, Platinum, Gold, Silver, Semi-silver, Elite, Demi-elite, Quasi-elite, Nearly-elite, Friends-of-the-elite, service members, families, and oh, yeah you can board too. ...I finally sat down just as the plane arrived. Aaarrggghhh!!

To each their own.

Edit: I'll offer a good air travel story, just to counter a bit of the general bashing: Flying SWA out of OKC to Dallas Love in the heat of the summer; flight originated out of Denver and was late; nobody was happy and everybody was hot. Cabin crew was classic Texas friendly, but no-nonsense, as they got everybody seated - explaining the rush repeatedly. At push-back, the Captain announced that there was "no fuel related speed restriction" for the flight (a small cheer went up). We were still climbing when they started serving free drinks. Not positive but we stopped climbing at about 12-15 thousand feet and the pilot nosed over to begin descent and loooonggg final into LUV. He never pulled back on the throttles; the engines were on climb power until about 30 seconds before the flaps came out. Want to see a cabin crew hustle? They finished serving and cleanup in, if memory serves, about 26 minutes of flight time. Everybody on board wanted to buy THEM a drink!

You haven't flown AA recently then just as I haven't flown SW recently. Everyone is a boarding number now. 1-8. Seems like it works smoother. As for a flight in and out faster that's so loaded with variables I don't know how you can even make the statement. Fuel load for instance, destination weather, when the next flight was even scheduled to depart. When I flew a couple weeks ago the cleaning crew was already working first class while deplaning was occurring. I really could care less because our corporation goes totally by fares unless the scheduling won't work. But almost always AA is less in the locations I fly out of. They have their aggravations certainly but I am mostly satisfied with their service.

[Malcolm McLeod]

You haven't flown AA recently then ....

Granted. It has been about 16-18 months since I flew AA.

As for gate times, AA generally has 1 hour at a gate because that is their required turn-around time (according to friends who are AA pilots); SW has 30 minute gate times because that is their turn-around time (according to my SW pilot neighbor). Both times are based on their respective primary short-haul aircraft (MD-80 and 737). My understanding of the economics is that neither makes any revenue sitting at the gate, so turn-around time is key operating parameter. - - YMMV

I hear AA is switching to the 737 as well. Maybe gate times will equalize??

[Len Mullin]

Yes, the passenger wasn't removed by United employees, but, he were removed by people who had United's blessings. They were acting on United's behalf, therefore United is the company to blame. They could and should have handled this differently, personally, I hope it cost them dearly. Just because something is legal, doesn't make it right.
Len

[Ronald Blue]

Granted. It has been about 16-18 months since I flew AA.

As for gate times, AA generally has 1 hour at a gate because that is their required turn-around time (according to friends who are AA pilots); SW has 30 minute gate times because that is their turn-around time (according to my SW pilot neighbor). Both times are based on their respective primary short-haul aircraft (MD-80 and 737). My understanding of the economics is that neither makes any revenue sitting at the gate, so turn-around time is key operating parameter. - - YMMV

I hear AA is switching to the 737 as well. Maybe gate times will equalize??

Sorry but I still dispute that. 30 minutes at the gate? So they are using the emergency chutes so they can start boarding immediately after it mates up to the sky bridge? Boarding start to finish allows 30 minutes. Granted usually it finishes in 20 minutes but then there are all the preflight instructions. I would say 15 minutes on the inbound to deplane everyone. Even if the cleaning is done by the time everyone deplanes you are talking 45 minutes. I realize sometimes planes are pushed back ahead of schedule sometimes but that often isn't the case. I did fly on a 737-800 a few weeks ago. It was larger but not roomier than a Super MD 80. It simply had two rows of 3 seats.

[Edwin Santos]

Ah, Airlines and Health Care. Two massive industries that (in the US at least) leave most recipients of the services thoroughly disillusioned. We simultaneously need them and hate them. Probably also two of the industries with the most powerful lobbying presence in DC.

Regardless, whether it's "legal" or not, I'd love to see a resolution that would be more civilized than busting out the teeth, brutalizing, and dragging off an unarmed person like that. Aren't we better than that?

[Malcolm McLeod]

Sorry but I still dispute that. 30 minutes at the gate?

OK.

I've watched them do it sitting in adjacent departure area. I've also been onboard, connecting into LUV thru OKC (thanks to Wright amendment), when from cracking the door on arrival to push-back took 23 minutes. Feel free to dispute that too.

[Dan Friedrichs]

That was quick. United settled with Dr. Dao for an undisclosed amount.

And Southwest announced a new policy of not overbooking, period.

Nice.

[Mike Henderson]

That was quick. United settled with Dr. Dao for an undisclosed amount.

And Southwest announced a new policy of not overbooking, period.

Nice.

Yep, United didn't want this issue hanging over them.

I know some people didn't think Dr. Dao did the right thing, but he made one part of travel a bit better for all of us. I thank him for that, even though that was not his intention.

Mike

[Frederick Skelly]

That was quick. United settled with Dr. Dao for an undisclosed amount.

And Southwest announced a new policy of not overbooking, period.

Nice.

Good news!

[Bruce Wrenn]

And did you see South West's ad? "We only beat our competitors, not our customers." Again, United could had made arrangements for limo for displaced passengers. Lets see $800 each and get to Louisville a couple hours late. "Get in the limo honey, NOW!

[Mike Henderson]

I think one of the problems was that the $800 was in the form of a voucher, not cash. To a lot of people, a voucher is not of much value. You have to be planning to take another trip fairly soon and on the same airline. If it was $800 cash you could go buy some special tools - now that would get some volunteers.:)

Mike

[Bill ThompsonNM]

I think one of the problems was that the $800 was in the form of a voucher, not cash. To a lot of people, a voucher is not of much value. You have to be planning to take another trip fairly soon and on the same airline. If it was $800 cash you could go buy some special tools - now that would get some volunteers.:) Mike
Right! I've received the vouchers before, they always expire quickly, are NON transferable and who can take a second vacation if they just took one?

Course now their max is $10000. Hmm

[Matt Meiser]

The last time my wife and I took vouchers will be the last time I take a voucher. $600 each, basically not good on advertised fares, numerous blackout dates, entire destinations off limits. None of that disclosed until you actually try to use it. They were essentially worthless to us.

[Keith Outten]

And did you see South West's ad? "We only beat our competitors, not our customers."

That's funny......

[Matt Meiser]

Funny, but fake.

I try to fly Southwest whenever I can. I feel like I am treated better there than Delta which is the dominant carrier in Detroit. In general I'd rather connect than fly Delta. And I feel bad saying that because 2 of my daughter's classmates have mom's that work for Delta.

One enjoyable thing about Southwest--the crews tend to have a sense of humor. I've been on several flights where the safety announcement was met with applause. And you know what--it made people actually listen!

[Uma Duffy]

The public has a short memory and will forget about this in a few months. The doctor made a foolish mistake in defying the orders of the Captain and security. Once he did that they had to get him off, by any means necessary, not turn around and pick someone less confrontational. He chose the level of violence and as an educated person, he should have known that the people that own the plane get to make the rules. As I understand it he is facing criminal charges for interfering with a flight crew, so that this will likely end up in an unsatisfying simultaneous dropping of charges and lawsuits in order to make it go away. A shocking number of respondents here seem to be all about blind obedience to "authority'. (I can hear Eric Cartmann's voice here) Those Chicago rent a cops should have been charged with assault since they were clearly out of their jurisdiction and operating as agents of the airline and not their own hierarchy. And to those who have suggested that the doctor needed to somehow 'prove' his credentials...that is outrageous. In what world do the capitalists get to sell you an item and then, as you take possession of the item you bought (in this case a seat on a plane),they decide they are entitled to physically drag you away from the item they sold you? Unless of course, you are somebody special, like a doctor? The sheeple mentality that thinks I'm going along with that treatment with no objections.... I just can't even fathom that. Let's see all of us try that with our customers. The airlines are no more special than any other industry. They are not entitled to commit the fraud of selling a service and then refusing to provide it followed by a beating when I object. At least not yet.

[Jim C Martin]

Thanks for posting this Matt. I had no idea they were so limited.


The last time my wife and I took vouchers will be the last time I take a voucher. $600 each, basically not good on advertised fares, numerous blackout dates, entire destinations off limits. None of that disclosed until you actually try to use it. They were essentially worthless to us.

[Frederick Skelly]

A shocking number of respondents here seem to be all about blind obedience to "authority'. (I can hear Eric Cartmann's voice here) Those Chicago rent a cops should have been charged with assault since they were clearly out of their jurisdiction and operating as agents of the airline and not their own hierarchy. And to those who have suggested that the doctor needed to somehow 'prove' his credentials...that is outrageous. In what world do the capitalists get to sell you an item and then, as you take possession of the item you bought (in this case a seat on a plane),they decide they are entitled to physically drag you away from the item they sold you? Unless of course, you are somebody special, like a doctor? The sheeple mentality that thinks I'm going along with that treatment with no objections.... I just can't even fathom that. Let's see all of us try that with our customers. The airlines are no more special than any other industry. They are not entitled to commit the fraud of selling a service and then refusing to provide it followed by a beating when I object. At least not yet.

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree on all the groovy rebellious stuff. I found the overall tone of your post political and offensive, particularly the manner in which you used the term "capitalists" and your term "sheeple". I can do without a rehash of the 1960's protest movement, thank you.

United goofed. The police goofed. Dr. Dao goofed. This shouldn't have happened.

Fred Skelly

[Mike Henderson]

United goofed. The police goofed. Dr. Dao goofed. This shouldn't have happened.

Fred Skelly

While I generally agree with you, Fred, I'm thankful to Dr Dao. I'm sure he didn't mean to become the poster boy for the way airline companies treat their passengers but it's clear that the airline companies are going to make changes because of what happened to him.

And that's good for all of us who travel.

Mike

[Frederick Skelly]

While I generally agree with you, Fred, I'm thankful to Dr Dao. I'm sure he didn't mean to become the poster boy for the way airline companies treat their passengers but it's clear that the airline companies are going to make changes because of what happened to him.

And that's good for all of us who travel.

Mike

Yes it is Mike. I agree with you. :)

[Matt Meiser]

I'm pretty conservative but I don't think refusing to give up the seat on a plane that you were promised and payed for to be rebellious. Its roughly equivalent to buying your groceries and being stopped at the door, having them seized and being offered an equivalent amount of rice cakes and prunes as "compensation."

[Edwin Santos]

United goofed. The police goofed. Dr. Dao goofed. This shouldn't have happened.

Fred Skelly

There is a distinction in my mind in that United had a professional responsibility, the police/security had a professional responsibility, Dr. Dao was just a customer (unarmed), he had the lowest burden.

Even if he was wrong, it didn't warrant being physically beaten up and dragged away. There are more civil ways to exact consequences. They could have separated his refusal to give up his seat from the need to locate a seat by finding it elsewhere (or not) and dealing with him later. He could have been arrested upon arrival, read his rights and charged or fined. I'm not certain he committed a crime, but if he did, what I'm saying is the punishment should fit the crime.

How would you feel if you jaywalked across a street and two cops approached you and beat you into submission for it? Yes you were wrong, you goofed, but should you be brutalized for it? Yes, we can agree to disagree.

[Malcolm McLeod]

... it didn't warrant being physically beaten up...
...but should you be brutalized for it?

I know better than to pursue this since it has dragged on and on, but we must have seen different videos?

The TV news I saw played the video in agonizingly slow-motion, frame, by frame, by frame. The good Dr. passenger wasn't beaten (in the video I saw). The police threw no punches, swung no batons, slammed no body parts into the floor, and did not even kneel on his good Dr. head (in the video I saw).

In the frame-by-frame video replay and analysis I saw, the police pulled the good Dr. passenger out of his seat and then lost their grip on him about half way to standing. The good Dr. passenger, having gone limp, thus fell face-first into the armrest of the seat across the aisle.

Blame United. Blame the Dr. ....Not so sure about the police. I would suggest the police used the force necessary to remove the good Dr. passenger - as they were asked to do by the aircraft owner's agents.

Play a game if you will: You offer a guy walking down the street a $5 ride to the big game, because you have a spare seat (your teenager is mad at you and won't go). He gives you $5 for gas. But then your teenager has that magical realization that you'll actually go without them, and comes running out of the house to get in the car seat now occupied by your newfound stranger/passenger. You try to give him his $5 back, even offer him $10, but he refuses to surrender the seat. As the vehicle owner, what will you do? Call him a cab? Call the police? What force will you deem appropriate to remove him? ...quickly, or you'll miss the game.

One other thing to perhaps keep in mind - much of the authority and power granted to the flight crew (and Captain) are based on centuries of maritime history. And it is intended to ensure the safety of ALL, even those not on board. (Call me a supporter of the thin-blue line.)

[Mel Fulks]

The doctor won ,the air line lost. CEO (coach) of airline needs to be replaced with someone who has executive skills beyond "make dis problem go away"

[Pat Barry]

It pains me to see that, even in this apparently clear cut case of right and wrong, that people cannot agree. This in itself shows an eminent demise for our entire system of justice. Get one or two folks who support the other side, and even after due consideration of the facts, cannot agree on a simple matter of right and wrong - its pure and simple chaos. Even the airline has admitted wrong doing on their part (no doubt due to the financial and social repercussions). At least this played out in the court of public opinion and not in some real court where the airline would easily have won or forced a hung jury and no one would have ever heard of it.

[Malcolm McLeod]

Play a game if you will: You offer a guy walking down the street a $5 ride to the big game, because you have a spare seat (your teenager is mad at you and won't go). He gives you $5 for gas. But then your teenager has that magical realization that you'll actually go without them, and comes running out of the house to get in the car seat now occupied by your newfound stranger/passenger. You try to give him his $5 back, even offer him $10, but he refuses to surrender the seat. As the vehicle owner, what will you do? Call him a cab? Call the police? What force will you deem appropriate to remove him? ...quickly, or you'll miss the game.


...its pure and simple chaos.
...

I agree about the chaos, but with all due respect, what would you do if faced with my little 'game'?

[Edwin Santos]

I agree about the chaos, but with all due respect, what would you do if faced with my little 'game'?

I would honor the commitment I made to give the guy a ride to the big game for the $5 I took from him. To me, offering to give the $5 back and even offering to increase it to $10 is basically a new deal that he declined. My teenager's change of heart is a separate problem that in my case would have to go down as a life lesson for him/her.

This is only my take of course, but just because I own the car doesn't afford me a special right to unilaterally change my mind, renege on the deal I made (and solicited), and I definitely don't have the right to use force to get my way in the scenario you've described. By the same token, if I were a landlord, just because I own the property, doesn't give me the right to renege on the lease deal I made and throw my tenants out because of some reason for my own convenience.

Also, with regard to the centuries of maritime history that are intended to protect the safety of ALL passengers, have you seen any evidence that the doctor was a threat to the safety of the other passengers? I don't believe passenger safety was an issue here at all.

[Malcolm McLeod]

I would honor the commitment I made to give the guy a ride to the big game for the $5 I took from him. To me, offering to give the $5 back and even offering to increase it to $10 is basically a new deal that he declined. My teenager's change of heart is a separate problem that in my case would have to go down as a life lesson.

This is just my take of course, but just because I own the car doesn't afford me a special right to unilaterally change my mind, renege on the deal I made (and solicited), and I definitely don't have the right to use force to get my way in the scenario you've described.

By the way, with regard to the centuries of maritime history that are intended to protect the safety of ALL passengers, have you seen any evidence that the doctor was a threat to the safety of the other passengers? I don't believe passenger safety was an issue here at all.

Fair enough. Thank you.

[Paul McGaha]

I know better than to pursue this since it has dragged on and on, but we must have seen different videos?

The TV news I saw played the video in agonizingly slow-motion, frame, by frame, by frame. The good Dr. passenger wasn't beaten (in the video I saw). The police threw no punches, swung no batons, slammed no body parts into the floor, and did not even kneel on his good Dr. head (in the video I saw).

In the frame-by-frame video replay and analysis I saw, the police pulled the good Dr. passenger out of his seat and then lost their grip on him about half way to standing. The good Dr. passenger, having gone limp, thus fell face-first into the armrest of the seat across the aisle.

Blame United. Blame the Dr. ....Not so sure about the police. I would suggest the police used the force necessary to remove the good Dr. passenger - as they were asked to do by the aircraft owner's agents.

Play a game if you will: You offer a guy walking down the street a $5 ride to the big game, because you have a spare seat (your teenager is mad at you and won't go). He gives you $5 for gas. But then your teenager has that magical realization that you'll actually go without them, and comes running out of the house to get in the car seat now occupied by your newfound stranger/passenger. You try to give him his $5 back, even offer him $10, but he refuses to surrender the seat. As the vehicle owner, what will you do? Call him a cab? Call the police? What force will you deem appropriate to remove him? ...quickly, or you'll miss the game.

One other thing to perhaps keep in mind - much of the authority and power granted to the flight crew (and Captain) are based on centuries of maritime history. And it is intended to ensure the safety of ALL, even those not on board. (Call me a supporter of the thin-blue line.)

Malcolm, I appreciate your post and I think I see this a lot like you do.

As for your game, once an agreement was made I'd honor it.

PHM

[Pat Barry]

I agree about the chaos, but with all due respect, what would you do if faced with my little 'game'?
Squeeze the kid in somewhere. No big deal

[Malcolm McLeod]

Squeeze the kid in somewhere. No big deal

Again, fair enough. Thanks.

My teenagers must be bigger than yours, there ain't no 'squeeze' in them.:o

[Pat Barry]

Again, fair enough. Thanks.

My teenagers must be bigger than yours, there ain't no 'squeeze' in them.:o
We used to put a few teenagers into the trunk of a car to get into the drive-in movies. Teenagers are very flexible.

[Chris Padilla]

Teenagers are very flexible.

...and typically come with limited funds....

[David Dalzell]

We seem to be forgetting our constitutional rights. There is too much deference to "authorities". We have allowed, and continue to allow, the "authorities" to define our rights and privileges. We need to take back our country! The politicians and their law enforcement entities need to learn that "we the people" must determine our rights.

[Mike Henderson]

We seem to be forgetting our constitutional rights. There is too much deference to "authorities". We have allowed, and continue to allow, the "authorities" to define our rights and privileges. We need to take back our country! The politicians and their law enforcement entities need to learn that "we the people" must determine our rights.

With freedom comes responsibility. If everyone could decide what constituted their "rights" we'd have anarchy. We have laws that define what our rights are under the constitution.

Sometimes a person believes that a law is wrong and should be changed. They can advocate for its change and they can do "civil disobedience" to bring attention to the law. If enough people agree that the law is wrong, it may get changed. But the person (or persons) who engages in civil disobedience has to be prepared to suffer the consequences of their disobedience, especially if other people do not support their views.

We have laws and "authorities" in order to have a civil society.

Mike

[Frederick Skelly]

With freedom comes responsibility. If everyone could decide what constituted their "rights" we'd have anarchy. We have laws that define what our rights are under the constitution.

Sometimes a person believes that a law is wrong and should be changed. They can advocate for its change and they can do "civil disobedience" to bring attention to the law. If enough people agree that the law is wrong, it may get changed. But the person (or persons) who engages in civil disobedience has to be prepared to suffer the consequences of their disobedience, especially if other people do not support their views.

We have laws and "authorities" in order to have a civil society.

Mike

+1 Well said.

[Malcolm McLeod]

... "we the people" must determine our rights.

Please keep in mind this doesn't say "me the person". All freedoms have a cost.

[Frank Drew]

I don't believe passenger safety was an issue here at all.

I completely agree; this wasn't at all about safety or airline security, it was about convenience for the airline.

When most people make plans to fly somewhere, they're committing to a major allocation of their time; this isn't like driving to the movie theater or grocery store. What other retail businesses routinely sell the same object twice? Or take the bought and paid for object or service away from one customer in order to sell it to another (better?) customer?

[Jeff Straper]

A couple things to consider. It's my understanding it's a violation of regulations to defy airline employees directions. It violates the laws to ignore or defy police when they ask you to do something. It was airport authority police who drug the guy off not United Airlines employees.
You nailed it Ken. While it could have been handled better (and I think a higher compensation would make multiple people stand up), it's their right to do what they did. By buying the ticket you're instantly agreeing to it.

[Edwin Santos]

You nailed it Ken. While it could have been handled better (and I think a higher compensation would make multiple people stand up), it's their right to do what they did. By buying the ticket you're instantly agreeing to it.

Following that logic, the United States would still be a British colony. After all, the founding fathers violated the law when they defied the British monarchy.

Too broad an example? Okay, how about this -

On June 7th 1893 in South Africa, a young lawyer named Mohandas K. Gandhi boarded a train. Despite his first class ticket, the rules and regulations of the time did not permit a non-white person to be seated in the first class carriage. He politely refused to move holding up his ticket as justification, at which point he was physically thrown off the car onto the platform, his luggage thrown off behind him. This incident is cited as the catalyst that altered the path of his extraordinary life and brought about the eventual independence of India. Gandhi's influence in the cause of non-violent civil rights around the world, including the American Civil Rights movement, cannot be overstated. Interestingly, in 1997 Gandhi was posthumously bestowed an award at a ceremony held at the very train station where he was assaulted. The ceremony was presided over by none other than Nelson Mandela who himself spent 27 years in prison for defying the apartheid government.

My point is that just because it is a law or rule or regulation doesn't automatically make it just.

I share the story about Gandhi because someone in the thread mentioned how the UA incident reminded them of Rosa Parks and her refusal to give up her seat, and I thought there was some element of similarity in Gandhi's story also.

Sorry if this response is too political. I'm just trying to put forth an alternate point of view. I respect that others see it differently.

[Jim Koepke]

Sorry if this response is too political. I'm just trying to put forth an alternate point of view. I respect that others see it differently.

I hope the powers that be let it stand.

Sometimes people have to stay seated to make a stand.

jtk

[Malcolm McLeod]

I hope the powers that be let it stand.

Sometimes people have to stay seated to make a stand.

jtk

I would think everybody standing would make an even bolder statement. Stand up and walk off the plane. Fly another carrier. Or drive. Paddle? Walk?

United Airlines can't abuse anybody after bankruptcy liquidation.

Why is this issue even remotely 'political'? Want to change UA behavior? Give your money to someone else.:D
Society is :mad:UTRAGED over the good doctors treatment?! How many people deplaned rather than patronize the evil oppressor?:confused:

[Bruce Wrenn]

You nailed it Ken. While it could have been handled better (and I think a higher compensation would make multiple people stand up), it's their right to do what they did. By buying the ticket you're instantly agreeing to it.


You only have to obey LAWFUL commands. Flight attendant's actions were illegal according to written policy, and laws. After being seated, rules change, but before boarding, that's another story. Just don't video tape them.

[Eric Keller]

I
Society is :mad:UTRAGED over the good doctors treatment?! How many people deplaned rather than patronize the evil oppressor?:confused:
that's great to say, but everyone on that plane just wanted to go home. Including the victim of this whole fiasco. Not like you can get your money back.

[Mel Fulks]

A recurring problem this serious needs to be addressed by clear law and specific remedy.Before we start seeing security guys carrying chainsaws and handing out complimentary smocks and rain hats !

[Malcolm McLeod]

that's great to say, but everyone on that plane just wanted to go home. Including the victim of this whole fiasco. Not like you can get your money back.

And clearly they were desperate to get home, apparently enough to stifle their indignation and outrage. The doctor (and other social heroes above) was willing to go to jail. What's a $300 plane ticket when balanced against blatant systemic social injustice?

I'm betting UA won't even have to discount tickets $5 for the summer travel season (everyone on the plane will just want to have fun).

And the dirt simple remedy lives in our pockets, and requires absolutely NO government or legal action.... buy a ticket on another airline!

[Mike Henderson]

People often do not speak out when they are not directly affected. It takes an unusual person to do so.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Martin Niemoller

Mike

[Jim Koepke]

Many say the airline should have offered a higher compensation. In my case it would have had to been cash and not a voucher. I do not like flying and I would be happy to give up my seat for cash, but not some voucher that would likely sit in a drawer unused.

Future travel may have me needing to go to California. A train ride or driving may be more to my liking as there would be a need to drive a rented truck back to Washington.

jtk

[Bert Kemp]

The Latest and greatest from United Airlines
Woman allegedly forced to pee in a cup on United Airlines flight

you can google the story

[Frederick Skelly]

The Latest and greatest from United Airlines
Woman allegedly forced to pee in a cup on United Airlines flight

you can google the story

Well, it's only "alleged" for now. Let's see whether any witnesses come forward. They have passenger lists and should still have seating assignments. It should be easy for UA or the woman's attorneys to get affidavits on what happened. (Please God, no video!)