United forcibly remove passenger
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 511
Likes: 63
From: down under
United forcibly remove passenger
There's a thread in the flight deck forum "rumors and news" on this incident: United Airlines: Passenger forcibly removed from flight - BBC News in which a passenger was forcibly removed for "failing to volunteer" to leave an overbooked plane. Chosen at random, he was a doctor who needed to get home to see his patients. Excessive force was used so that the passenger had blood running down his face. Even worse, the passengers were being asked to leave to accommodate airline staff! Some posters on rumors and news think the airline behavior is Ok and that it's the passenger's fault. As a passenger I know that airlines exist to serve their paying customers. I've flown over 0.5 million miles with United, but never again. What do passengers, on this forum, think about this?
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 169
Likes: 3
From: Auckland, NZ
Last time I flew domestic in the US, I incurred the wrath of my wife by paying $1000 extra and flying an additional 8 hours in order to avoid United. Whilst the flight with AA was pretty terrible, I still think that it was worth it. Today my wife apologised and told me that she totally understands why I would have done so.
I really do not understand why Air New Zealand cheapens their brand by partnering with an airline quite as terrible as United.
I really do not understand why Air New Zealand cheapens their brand by partnering with an airline quite as terrible as United.
Guest
Posts: n/a
If the mobile phone video represents what actually happened, then UA should be ashamed of themselves. I for one would have encouraged all the PAX around me to exit the aircraft at the same time, then take legal action against United as if that is their corporate ethos I would be concerned for my own safety.
If it is really true, that the flight was only overbooked after 4 UA staff need / wanted to travel then that is doubly reprehensible.
HOWEVER perhaps we should wait for the full story to come out, as often social media's version of the facts can be wildly at variance with the facts. Think back a couple of weeks to the leggins story.
If it is really true, that the flight was only overbooked after 4 UA staff need / wanted to travel then that is doubly reprehensible.
HOWEVER perhaps we should wait for the full story to come out, as often social media's version of the facts can be wildly at variance with the facts. Think back a couple of weeks to the leggins story.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 117
Likes: 2
From: U.K./nigeria
I'm a bit puzzled as to where the captain was in all this, surely as the aircraft commander he should have put a stop to this incident, the people doing the 'removal' don't look much like police either.
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
From: UK
The Captain is not legally in charge of the flight until the doors re shut. On the ground full responsibility lies with the Despatcher/Company Ops Dept.
No doubt we only have part of the story. Lets wait and see if the Doc wasn't perhaps the last person to book a seat - last on first off is a fair principle if no one volunteers to offload but it seems unlikely that on a transcontinental size aircraft they couldn't find people willing to volunteer.
Re the upset about it being to seat positioning company crew as though that was somehow unfair perhaps best to exercise brain for a moment and think why crew need to be positioned, and how many people may not fly at all if they don't...what is more important, 4 people bumped or 300 delayed a whole day or more? Go figure!
Shockingly badly managed no matter what the cause though. But why blame the airline for the heavyhandedness of "security"? They were hardly United employees were they? If the pax refused to walk off the plane then what are security supposed to do? Shake their heads and say let him stay there then? If they are asked to remove someone then that's what they'll do. Why does that come as a surprise to anyone?
There's plenty more to this than has been reported and though far from blameless I suspect United is taking a lot of flak that should be directed elsewhere.
No doubt we only have part of the story. Lets wait and see if the Doc wasn't perhaps the last person to book a seat - last on first off is a fair principle if no one volunteers to offload but it seems unlikely that on a transcontinental size aircraft they couldn't find people willing to volunteer.
Re the upset about it being to seat positioning company crew as though that was somehow unfair perhaps best to exercise brain for a moment and think why crew need to be positioned, and how many people may not fly at all if they don't...what is more important, 4 people bumped or 300 delayed a whole day or more? Go figure!
Shockingly badly managed no matter what the cause though. But why blame the airline for the heavyhandedness of "security"? They were hardly United employees were they? If the pax refused to walk off the plane then what are security supposed to do? Shake their heads and say let him stay there then? If they are asked to remove someone then that's what they'll do. Why does that come as a surprise to anyone?
There's plenty more to this than has been reported and though far from blameless I suspect United is taking a lot of flak that should be directed elsewhere.
Last edited by noflynomore; 11th April 2017 at 09:00.
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 6,726
Likes: 103
From: The Winchester
ATN
Not sure about American rules but for info in the UK this incident could be deemed a passenger "sit in" ( passenger refusing to disembark when asked/told )and if it is not resolved after all reasonable avenues have been explored by the crew the authories, including the police, have to be informed and will get involved......
(For clarity: I'm not defending what happened in the video, just answering your question)
bluesafari
I've been involved in arguing this elsewhere with some who seem to have some interesting views about Commanders powers.
The captain's authority on the ground, doors open, is often far from clear cut....the realpolitik is that in most countries in the world once you get law enforcement involved they consider they have primacy, it is their "show" and anyone preventing them from carrying out their duties will at the very least be threatened with arrest.
Can't understand what place police have in such an incident, unless a crime has been committed
(For clarity: I'm not defending what happened in the video, just answering your question)
bluesafari
surely as the aircraft commander he should have put a stop to this incident,
The captain's authority on the ground, doors open, is often far from clear cut....the realpolitik is that in most countries in the world once you get law enforcement involved they consider they have primacy, it is their "show" and anyone preventing them from carrying out their duties will at the very least be threatened with arrest.
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 17,699
Likes: 2,041
From: Reading, UK
In fact some reports are suggesting that the doctor in question and his wife had initially volunteered, but on being told that they would be rebooked on a flight almost 24 hours later, they explained that he had patient appointments to keep and needed to fly.
Spectacular, and completely unnecessary own-goal by United.
Joined: Jun 2005
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 56
Likes: 28
From: heathrow
All it states with reference to having to obey what the PIC states is:
Authority of pilot in command of an aircraft
244. Every person in an aircraft must obey all lawful commands which the pilot in command of that aircraft may give for the purpose of securing the safety of the aircraft and of persons or property carried in the aircraft, or the safety, efficiency or regularity of air navigation.
244. Every person in an aircraft must obey all lawful commands which the pilot in command of that aircraft may give for the purpose of securing the safety of the aircraft and of persons or property carried in the aircraft, or the safety, efficiency or regularity of air navigation.
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
From: London
Simple issue here.-
Was the order to a lawful passenger to leave, following a VOLUNTARY request to accommodate, lawful.? If not the traveller was entitled not to comply. It will be argued that the passenger should have complied and sought civil redress. Such an argument is unlikely to succeed if the order was unlawful. I think the outcome will be that a commander's decision is not unlimited where a traveller has done no wrong, there is no safety/ health issue and where there were other accessible options not least buying out other passengers. Everyone( probably) in this circumstance has a price. It should never have come to this pass
Was the order to a lawful passenger to leave, following a VOLUNTARY request to accommodate, lawful.? If not the traveller was entitled not to comply. It will be argued that the passenger should have complied and sought civil redress. Such an argument is unlikely to succeed if the order was unlawful. I think the outcome will be that a commander's decision is not unlimited where a traveller has done no wrong, there is no safety/ health issue and where there were other accessible options not least buying out other passengers. Everyone( probably) in this circumstance has a price. It should never have come to this pass
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,540
Likes: 3
From: UK
It beggars belief that the airline hadn't properly blocked the seats required for their positioning crew thereby ensuring that they would be able to travel.
Was this a last minute need to position a crew that caused the problem?
I bet United now wish they had just chartered a Citation or similar and positioned the crew. With all the fall out from this incident it would, in hindsight, have been a lot cheaper for them.
Was this a last minute need to position a crew that caused the problem?
I bet United now wish they had just chartered a Citation or similar and positioned the crew. With all the fall out from this incident it would, in hindsight, have been a lot cheaper for them.
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,856
Likes: 75
From: uk
Everywhere I went yesterday afternoon people were talking about this incident. For a relatively trivial event, compared to what else is going on, I cannot remember anything creating so much interest. One man even thought that it was Continental Airlines involved so any brand damage might spread around a bit.
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
From: London
As it was a United airways flight and was in the USA, I doubt if what the ANO states will have any relevance as this is UK legislation.
It might be covered by ICAO Annex 2:
ICAO Annex 2 - Rules of the Air
But without knowing anything about aviation law in the USA, this is purely a guess on my part.
It might be covered by ICAO Annex 2:
ICAO Annex 2 - Rules of the Air
2.4 Authority of pilot-in-command of an aircraft
The pilot-in-command of an aircraft shall have final authority
as to the disposition of the aircraft while in command.
The pilot-in-command of an aircraft shall have final authority
as to the disposition of the aircraft while in command.
Avoid imitations
Joined: Nov 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 15,110
Likes: 1,083
From: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Seems like Oscar Munoz has had a change of heart wrt the incident. He's stated in an interview that this shouldn't have happened to a passenger already boarded and seated, and that it will never happen again on board a UA aircraft. It's on the BBC News app now.
Joined: Jun 2007
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 1,883
Likes: 500
From: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Cabin
I have witnessed two over booking fracas one in Italy and one in Nigeria. In Italy a bunch of business types had suffered a long delay to their flight to Rome, which was then extended and they stormed an adjacent gate gate and stood and sat around the nose wheel of another DC9 demanding to be flown to Rome on that A/C. This was pre 9/11. After much arm waving and gesturing they were told to move or else action would be taken, they did not and the fire brigade were called, and these passengers were then given final option before hoses would be turned on. They did not move and got drenched.
In Nigeria it was far simpler, it was internal flight on 737 and flight was over booked apparently (I was on adjacent plane and gate) and all the passenger were made to run around the A/C with winners getting seats ! Some old dears looked as though they were going to have a heart attack.
I have witnessed two over booking fracas one in Italy and one in Nigeria. In Italy a bunch of business types had suffered a long delay to their flight to Rome, which was then extended and they stormed an adjacent gate gate and stood and sat around the nose wheel of another DC9 demanding to be flown to Rome on that A/C. This was pre 9/11. After much arm waving and gesturing they were told to move or else action would be taken, they did not and the fire brigade were called, and these passengers were then given final option before hoses would be turned on. They did not move and got drenched.
In Nigeria it was far simpler, it was internal flight on 737 and flight was over booked apparently (I was on adjacent plane and gate) and all the passenger were made to run around the A/C with winners getting seats ! Some old dears looked as though they were going to have a heart attack.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,103
Likes: 5
From: Chabanais, France
Once the captain has signed for the aircraft then they are in command of it and thus anyone actually on that aircraft are required to follow their commands (if legal). There is no mention of the doors needing to be shut.
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
From: Sydney Australia
More bad publicity for UA
Oh Dear - all the bad publicity about Dr Dao, and now a giant rabbit has died while being transported by UA:
Three foot bunny dies after United flight - CNN.com
Three foot bunny dies after United flight - CNN.com
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 547
Likes: 1
From: the City by the Bay
Man kicked off Delta flight for using the bathroom | Daily Mail Online
STuck and can't go to the toilet. Does it have to come to this?
STuck and can't go to the toilet. Does it have to come to this?
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 822
Likes: 0
From: Hampshire
Now United have changed their own rules/guidelines for compensation for passengers who voluntarily give up their seats on overbooked flights. They are now prepared to pay up to $10,000 per passenger:
United Airlines to offer up to $10,000 for forfeiting seat - BBC News
United Airlines to offer up to $10,000 for forfeiting seat - BBC News