PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Crew travel priority over paying pax?
View Single Post
Old 12th Apr 2017, 07:18
  #43 (permalink)  
AerialPerspective
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 344
Received 64 Likes on 28 Posts
Originally Posted by Planemike
Are you kidding?? He was a law abiding passenger sat in his seat minding his own business. So it is acceptable to assault him because United have made a mess?? Let them (United) stew in their own juice.... A situation entirely of their own making...
If someone comes on to your property, even if you invited them originally and you then decide actually, you want them to leave then they don't leave or they are committing trespass. From a purely legal standpoint, United had every right to offload the passenger. The passenger is purchasing passage on a transport service using equipment owned by the operator... as such, it is property and they may remove anyone for any reason they see fit. I vehemently disagree with they way it was done but have had in the past word from both security type people and police that the aircraft is property and even when you offload someone from a flight for intoxication ('unfit for travel') although that's different because it's specifically forbidden under the regulations, you don't have to give any reason from a legal standpoint as it is the companies property and the company has the same legal rights as any property owner. Having been asked to disembark and given the reason(s), then advising them that he needed to travel, they having refused to budge and asking him to disembark, he should have just disembarked. It's not like a house, he doesn't have a right to 'squat' just because he's paid the fare as crappy as it sounds that is how it's treated under common law. While I think the Doctor's past is irrelevant as it likely wasn't known to the officers at the time, from what I'm reading now - and what the video doesn't show which is the initial request, we don't actually know how he reacted at first, he may have been abusive and/or threatening... the video didn't start until he was being dragged. So there may, like many things, be much more to this than meets the eye. WIth journalism being reduced to the level of any moron with a smart phone and the time to type 'epic fail' it is not always possible to navigate through the overuse of exaggerated and sensationalist words to know what the actual truth was/is.

Last edited by AerialPerspective; 12th Apr 2017 at 07:20. Reason: correction
AerialPerspective is offline