@ newfoundglory
The (aviation) lawyer talking on the live broadcast, if you didn't see, did make a clear firm statement about how the captain was the one in charge.
Maybe he got that idea from reading some of the comments here! Since the PIC was joined in this action, there seem to have been notably fewer posts about "I am in charge" and "Nothing happens without my consent."
@ BusAirDriver
Also unfortunately there are sometimes overzealous ground agents and cabin crew, who feel extremely empowered with their position.
Yep. There is a pervasive attitude of "We treat you this way because we can, and you can't do anything about it." There is a substantial power imbalance in the airline / airport industry, and a few employees seem to take maximum advantage of this. Every frequent pax has experienced this. Every journalist has. And that is a problem for a defendant trying to find a sympathetic jury.
@ MrOptimistic
The people are available to ask, should it be deemed relevant and in any conversation there are at least two witnesses. I could understand the industry feelings against the relevance of the CVR.
The problem is that people's recollections are sometimes inaccurate or incomplete. Lots of reasons why memories are not infallible - there may be a long delay before you are asked what happened, and stress or fear make for imperfect memory formation.
Final one, chosen by algorithm, pushes back. Argues, won't budge. So CC walk back annoyed that their rightful request has been ignored.Think how can I make this guy realise I am within my rights and he must stand, walk and go. OK, I'll find someone in uniform with 'security' on their vest to make the point. That will convince him. Never think the security guys anticipate they will only be called upon when muscle power is needed and with that mindset they board the aircraft. Everything is still OK until they lay hands on a 69 year old professional. That's when the jobs are lost, careers terminated and the millions leave United's bank account.
Very possible it unfolded along these lines.
Very likely airlines are now giving their CC some memos and information sessions about "rightful requests" and "lawful directions."
@SalNichols
The absolute disdain that the industry feels for it's clients is displayed right here
It is very odd that an industry has such contempt for its customers. No other industry would survive with this attitude. Maybe it is an unintended consequence of all the security measures and constantly seeing every pax as a potential threat. Maybe that is part of the explanation. Happened in Vietnam - VC hid out among civilian population and some soldiers started seeing all civilians as potential enemy combatants.
@PaxBritannica
As someone who married into a family of aviation professionals, I'm not so surprised at the attitudes of some posters here. Aviation is a peculiar industry in that it can only provide a safe service if its employees adhere absolutely to rules and SOPs, and obey others without question. However, the industry exists for the sole purpose of servicing human beings who are NOT trained in that strict obedience. Moreover, airlines are hugely keen to sell themselves on the basis of providing a comfortable and effortless service - the last thing they want is pax feeling intimidated by quasi-military authoritarianism. I can see why those who must conform to strict rules and discipline resent those who don't - but the resentment is unfair and irrational. Airlines can't exist without passengers, and passengers are simply people paying money to get from one place to another, not volunteers enlisting in the marines.
An interesting observation.
@rob_ginger
I went to Hawaii with my wife for a holiday in the early 1980's, and I was shocked at the aggressive attitude of the immigration officials.
I think thats a bit over the top. Every country (Aust included) has its share of over-bearing and officious security / immigration personnel. Unfortunately these PITA individuals are everywhere.
The best experience I ever had was many years ago (shortly after 9/11) at....Hawaii. Someone who absolutely did their job, but did so with flexibility and goodwill.
@SalNichols
The UA pilots union has weighed in and they place the blame on the Chicago Airport authority.
Here we go. The lawyers always love this bit when the defendants start falling out.
But who decided it was morally right to deplane pax in favour of company personnel? Who believed the request to deplane pax was a lawful directive when it probably wasn't? Who decided / authorised LEO involvement?
You can't say all the blame rests with the very last slice of cheese. Reason's model doesn't work that way. All these upstream decisions contributed.
Anyway, it will all be decided elsewhere than pprune.
@TowerDog
The Captain is not involved in the boarding process, nor responsible for how the boarding goes.
Maybe. Maybe not. That too will be decided elsewhere. A few purported PIC here have stated it is their decision and an airplane is not a democracy and they call the shots.....