USA Today: UA forcibly remove random pax from flight
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a lot of this debate highlights is just how enured people have become to airline "security" and how institutionalised some insiders are. When all is said and done the only justification for offering violence to a non-violent, perhaps difficult, even belligerent, individual is when the security of the aircraft, or the safety of others is compromised - period.
This was a commercial issue people.
The response of the United CEO is frankly breathtaking!
What was he thinking?
This was a commercial issue people.
The response of the United CEO is frankly breathtaking!
What was he thinking?
Last edited by birmingham; 11th Apr 2017 at 13:02.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Between a Rock and a Hard Spot
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even this email is appears to be written poorly. It clearly states;
' We sought volunteers and then followed our involuntary denial of boarding process (including offering up to $1,000 in compensation) and when we approached one of these passengers to explain apologetically that he was being denied boarding, he raised his voice and refused to comply with crew member instructions'
Was he boarding or boarded?
' We sought volunteers and then followed our involuntary denial of boarding process (including offering up to $1,000 in compensation) and when we approached one of these passengers to explain apologetically that he was being denied boarding, he raised his voice and refused to comply with crew member instructions'
Was he boarding or boarded?
Oh, and the flight wasn't "overbooked." Those four employees weren't paying passengers, and thus weren't "booked" on the flight.
UAL is spinning this, and if the media would do their jobs, they would read the CoC and not take United's word for it.
In all fairness to the Chicago Police Department, these cops work for the Chicago Airport Police Department - a different agency.
N4790P
What a lot of this debate highlights is just how enured people have become to airline "security" and how institutionalised some insiders are. When all is said and done the only justification for offering violence to a non-violent, perhaps difficult, even belligerent, individual is when the security of the aircraft, or the safety of others is compromised - period.
This was a commercial issue people.
The response of the United CEO is frankly breathtaking!
This was a commercial issue people.
The response of the United CEO is frankly breathtaking!
I'm not far behind him in age. Do I need to take up self defense classes before boarding UAL because I can guarantee I also would not blindly accept the same treatment from uniformed morons (wearing jeans!!!) either?
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: PBI
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Several problems for UA and the Police
1. Flight was not oversold. UA need space for 4 crew members to reposition
2. Pax was only belligerent because his seat was being taken away from him
3. Police had no power of arrest for removing a pax to make space
4. Police used excessive force
I would expect UA stock to take a dive when then market opens this morning
1. Flight was not oversold. UA need space for 4 crew members to reposition
2. Pax was only belligerent because his seat was being taken away from him
3. Police had no power of arrest for removing a pax to make space
4. Police used excessive force
I would expect UA stock to take a dive when then market opens this morning
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Between a Rock and a Hard Spot
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a lot of this debate highlights is just how enured people have become to airline "security" and how institutionalised some insiders are. When all is said and done the only justification for offering violence to a non-violent, perhaps difficult, even belligerent, individual is when the security of the aircraft, or the safety of others is compromised - period.
This was a commercial issue people.
The response of the United CEO is frankly breathtaking!
What was he thinking?
This was a commercial issue people.
The response of the United CEO is frankly breathtaking!
What was he thinking?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hadlow
Age: 60
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The response of the United CEO is frankly breathtaking!
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: ZRH
Age: 43
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are a few facts short here.
The over booking/boarding issue is one of them. Are you boarded when you pass the last gate, when you first touch the aircraft, cross its threshold or when your bum hits the seat. An airline might argue its when the aircraft departs with you. Overbooking - the seats available for sale does not equal the number of passengers that can be carried. There are many reasons for this an one of them is carrying crew. Deadheading crew reduce the number of seats available for sale and thus turn a fully booked aircraft into an over booked one.
Deadheading Crew do not pitch up at the gate and demand to fly on a whim. They are told by their Crewing Dept. to go to XYZ and the system has to deal with it.
Regarding who gets select to be offloaded; this is often done by algorithms in a booking system. Those considered to be of a lower commercial value with an airline will be chosen. Very harsh if you are chosen. Deadheading crew have the second highest priority on flights, the highest goes to engineers with tools traveling to fix broken aircraft. They will always be a carried, no matter what argument is put forward.
We don't have a clue what was said by whom and when. We do know this particular passenger has a strange reaction to stress. If this guy is a surgeon I hope he doesn't suffer with episodes such as this with an patient open on the table in front of him.
The customer service game is lost as soon as law enforcement officers show up. The deal with what they see in front of them and act accordingly.
Social media is not always fair. Clips, whilst accurate, may be taken out of context and be lacking the less newsworthy or story undermining build-up. Furthermore, to say a thing is right or wrong does not depend on onlookers shouting and screaming, it depends on the facts. But you can't delete posted social media. It's there forever (United breaks guitars). So even if you are right, your story may not be heard because social media will unfairly shout louder.
What was clear is that UA didn't allow an auction to take place. They relied on their CofC to give them a "legal" right to deny boarding. UA and every other airline might want to review their policies as every now and again a passenger unable to control themselves may be chosen and in return give you a very expensive PR headache.
The over booking/boarding issue is one of them. Are you boarded when you pass the last gate, when you first touch the aircraft, cross its threshold or when your bum hits the seat. An airline might argue its when the aircraft departs with you. Overbooking - the seats available for sale does not equal the number of passengers that can be carried. There are many reasons for this an one of them is carrying crew. Deadheading crew reduce the number of seats available for sale and thus turn a fully booked aircraft into an over booked one.
Deadheading Crew do not pitch up at the gate and demand to fly on a whim. They are told by their Crewing Dept. to go to XYZ and the system has to deal with it.
Regarding who gets select to be offloaded; this is often done by algorithms in a booking system. Those considered to be of a lower commercial value with an airline will be chosen. Very harsh if you are chosen. Deadheading crew have the second highest priority on flights, the highest goes to engineers with tools traveling to fix broken aircraft. They will always be a carried, no matter what argument is put forward.
We don't have a clue what was said by whom and when. We do know this particular passenger has a strange reaction to stress. If this guy is a surgeon I hope he doesn't suffer with episodes such as this with an patient open on the table in front of him.
The customer service game is lost as soon as law enforcement officers show up. The deal with what they see in front of them and act accordingly.
Social media is not always fair. Clips, whilst accurate, may be taken out of context and be lacking the less newsworthy or story undermining build-up. Furthermore, to say a thing is right or wrong does not depend on onlookers shouting and screaming, it depends on the facts. But you can't delete posted social media. It's there forever (United breaks guitars). So even if you are right, your story may not be heard because social media will unfairly shout louder.
What was clear is that UA didn't allow an auction to take place. They relied on their CofC to give them a "legal" right to deny boarding. UA and every other airline might want to review their policies as every now and again a passenger unable to control themselves may be chosen and in return give you a very expensive PR headache.
When you pass the checkpoint at the gate your ticket becomes legally activated/used and you are boarded.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't agree with you Less Hair. Your ticket, if you have one, is just a voucher or receipt that shows you have paid for a service and it remains valid until you have received the service you have paid for, provided all conditions etc. have been met. A reasonable person may consider the gate, but what if there isn't one, or the systems fail, or the flight returns etc.
But as already covered (at length) previously in this thread neither the Title 14 regs nor the UA CoC gave them any rights in this case. Under the Title 14 regs DH crew needs don't qualify as "overselling" unless the seats had been boioked & confirmed in advance (which they hadn't, because the DH crew was only needed to cover delayed flights downroute). The UA CoC gives them no right to deny boarding to Pax that are already boarded.
If you want to try and convince a judge that a passenger who is on plane and buckled into his seat isn't yet "boarded" then go ahead and give it your best shot!
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Between a Rock and a Hard Spot
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Granting that the person involved is the one named in the documents, and they are authentic, he has a restricted license to practice, under specific terms. So he is a "practicing doctor". No doubt, the settlement he will receive will ease the pain of having those sordid details from his past broadcast around the world, along with assessments of his alleged poker (and, uh, -him) abilities.
United just dealt him a strong hand.
Would this be a fair assessment of how we got here?
1. At gate open, there had one more passenger than seats, so one volunteer got compensation for a later flight.
2. During boarding, the DH crew shows up.
3. Four more volunteers are sought from on board the aircraft. Three accept. Our doctor inquires, but when he finds out that he won't make it to the office the next day, he declines.
4. A "Computer" selects him, and he refuses to surrender his seat.
-antics ensue-
Just out of curiosity, for those of you who work in the US, how often are already-boarded passengers invited to deplane and take a voucher?
As I see it, the fumble came when #3 didn't work. They couldn't get volunteers, so they followed the procedure they always follow at the gate. The problem is, denying boarding looks very different from ejecting boarded passengers. It also works a lot better. In this case, several people were effectively "in charge", and they all played according to a rulebook that was not written for this case.
For those claiming that emptying a plane will cause chaos, might I point out that ORD is a major hub with some degree of redundancy, and that nobody refuses to leave a plane that isn't going to fly for mechanical reasons? Eat a 30-minute delay, declare a mechanical problem, deplane, have the equipment towed to another gate, cull your pax, and get on with it.
United just dealt him a strong hand.
Would this be a fair assessment of how we got here?
1. At gate open, there had one more passenger than seats, so one volunteer got compensation for a later flight.
2. During boarding, the DH crew shows up.
3. Four more volunteers are sought from on board the aircraft. Three accept. Our doctor inquires, but when he finds out that he won't make it to the office the next day, he declines.
4. A "Computer" selects him, and he refuses to surrender his seat.
-antics ensue-
Just out of curiosity, for those of you who work in the US, how often are already-boarded passengers invited to deplane and take a voucher?
As I see it, the fumble came when #3 didn't work. They couldn't get volunteers, so they followed the procedure they always follow at the gate. The problem is, denying boarding looks very different from ejecting boarded passengers. It also works a lot better. In this case, several people were effectively "in charge", and they all played according to a rulebook that was not written for this case.
For those claiming that emptying a plane will cause chaos, might I point out that ORD is a major hub with some degree of redundancy, and that nobody refuses to leave a plane that isn't going to fly for mechanical reasons? Eat a 30-minute delay, declare a mechanical problem, deplane, have the equipment towed to another gate, cull your pax, and get on with it.
