Originally Posted by
AerialPerspective
Sure, let's sit around for half an hour burning fuel in the APU and holding hands to until someone 'folds' - after all, crew hours don't matter, neither does the aeroplane sitting there not being flown or the passengers missing connections and the other flight that is waiting for the crew being cancelled.
The fact is, sometimes this is essential. It's a minute by minute operation where minutes count and cost thousands, they don't have time to dilly dally around making sure everyone's happy. It is a profit making enterprise, not a democracy. Next time you fly have a read of the conditions of carriage, the carrier has conditions that get it out of jail for just about anything. The carrier can also remove anyone it damn-well pleases from it's property in a legal sense. I don't agree with the method or the amount of force that was used but the offloading of commercial pax to accommodate crew in the case where they are 'positioning to effect the operation of an aircraft' is justifiable on pure logic grounds if nothing else. It happens very rarely and while as I said, I take issue with the amount of force, the actual offloading I have no issue with... it doesn't make sense to delay, disrupt and expend thousands inconveniencing 200-300 pax on a flight awaiting crew when the alternative is to inconvenience 1, 2, 3 or 4. I think United needs to look at it's compensation, although it's not obliged to offer any as this was not a case of overbooking which is governed by specific legislation - the law makers only getting involved in the 70s when airlines were selling a product twice - I can't remember the exact wording but the standard IATA Recommended CoC state something like "the carrier reserves the right to alter the method of carriage, the carrier(s) involved, the equipment, route and timing of the carriage for any reason as it sees fit".
Not sure that "greatest good for the greatest number" as a legal principle is superior to contract law.