Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

USA Today: UA forcibly remove random pax from flight

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

USA Today: UA forcibly remove random pax from flight

Old 10th Apr 2017, 20:49
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Toronto
Posts: 27
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
Chicago Police Department statement:

"At approximately 6:00 p.m., a 69-year-old male Asian airline passenger become irate after he was asked to disembark from a flight that was oversold. The passenger in question began yelling to voice his displeasure at which point Aviation Police were summoned. Aviation Officers arrived on scene attempted to carry the individual off of the flight when he fell. His head subsequently struck an armrest causing injuries to his face. The man was taken to Lutheran General Hospital with non-life threatening injuries. Ongoing investigation."

Presumably written before they became aware that there are several different videos of the incident circulating on the Net ...
I have watched several of the videos, and to me it seems the police statement is accurate. The way the passenger's head hit the armrest was truly shocking, and his behaviour later pacing up and down the rear aisle suggests he was far from himself. His behaviour before being thrown into the aisle also does not suggest a person who was well to begin with. We have no confirmation of his identity and whether his claims were true. Caution is indicated toward this "viral" story.

There is an important principle involved here, namely that passengers and crew on an aircraft or ship must obey orders from the Captain (or his/her delegates), subject to laws, regulations and CRM principles. The passenger clearly did not obey a lawful order consistent with the contract terms of his ticket.

I expect he will be convicted, fined and placed on the no-fly list, otherwise passenger defiance and uncontrolled auctions for over-booking compensation will occur. That said, the airline acted very obtusely, and has created for itself a PR catastrophe. It's time for some re-regulation in favour of passenger and crew rights.
czarnajama is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 20:50
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CYUL
Posts: 830
1- That person seems like someone that is totally confused, probably by the way he was treated.

2- How the he!! did he get back into the aircraft?

3- How come the police statement says he was taken to the hospital to have his injuries looked at?
Jet Jockey A4 is online now  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 20:50
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,502
ST

Why? I don't work for UA if that helps. There's a great deal of misunderstanding on this thread how airlines work, I'm simply trying to help folks along. Point out one thing, just one thing I've said that isn't spot on.
West Coast is online now  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 20:51
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 63
Posts: 0
This 'doctor' doesn't appear to be mentally stable as he races down the aisle after reboarding the plane and chants 'I have to go home, I have to go home':
Do two wrongs make a right? Barking mad, stress or plain bonkers? I sense a slight reduction in compo...
Piltdown Man is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 20:56
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 220
Originally Posted by twb3 View Post
I think it will set a terrible precedent if this passenger is rewarded for his behavior. The lesson learned will be that defiance of flight and ground crew and abusive behavior will get you want you want.
Rewarded for what behavior? Buying a ticket, checking in, boarding when your row is called, and sitting quietly in your seat?

Because that appears to be what this passenger did, before UA started with the abuse.
Gauges and Dials is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 20:56
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,637
It's hit Australia:
Sydney Morning Herald: Man dragged off overbooked United flight by police as fellow passengers look on in horror
Taildragger67 is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 20:57
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Between a Rock and a Hard Spot
Posts: 199
Originally Posted by West Coast View Post
If you're hanging your assumptions on that, I predict you'll be disappointed. I've displaced pax many times as a DH crew member. I've been commuting for 17 of my 19 years in the airlines (not UA) have never once been accommodated over a paying pax when not on company assignment. Not once. The thought of it happening to cover 4 Pax is ludicrious. The contract airline has aircraft that are crewed by 4, so 4 pax being removed is consistent with a DH assignment. If you were airline, you'd know how improbable your conspiracy theory is. First, there's no love lost between gate agents and crews and second, the agent would be the one to have to deal with 4 denied boarding school and have to justify it down line during audits.

You can cling to the idea or accept that your idea isn't a starter.
Leave it to the left coast to raise the "conspiracy theory" flag.

I am a retired air carrier captain, and I understand that the relationship between gate agents and flight crew varies. What still remains is what was communicated to police by the lead F/A in terms of why the police should physically remove a pax.
HEMS driver is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:00
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Between a Rock and a Hard Spot
Posts: 199
Originally Posted by Jet Jockey A4 View Post
1- That person seems like someone that is totally confused, probably by the way he was treated.

2- How the he!! did he get back into the aircraft?

3- How come the police statement says he was taken to the hospital to have his injuries looked at?
Could it be that this was a different flight/airplane?
HEMS driver is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:01
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,502
Then you should know as a retired airline captain that anyone can be removed. If the pax refused to leave, then he would be removed.
West Coast is online now  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:01
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 220
Originally Posted by Bealzebub View Post
If you don't get enough volunteers you have to remove people who don't want to be removed.
How is it possible that you don't get enough volunteers, unless you're lowballing the compensation?
Gauges and Dials is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:04
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 626
West Coast,

Your posts neatly summarize what is so problematic with the concept of "acceptable behavior" in the USA today. For police, and perhaps other agents of government, it means violence is an accepted and even expected response to a citizen exercising his / her rights. This person wasn't simply on the premises of the business, he paid for that very specific right at the specific time and was then provided a specific seat -- in return for the money he paid. To suggest that any action by the carrier to rescind that agreement is lawful simply because it's their property is incorrect. Imagine if you will a World Series baseball game, or perhaps a football championship game, where you are told to get out of your seat and out of the stadium because "we sold too many tickets". According to your reasoning, the people involved should simply say "OK, I'll go." You are wrong to suggest that a business that has charged for a service has unfettered rights to use whatever method or tactic available - including police -- to resolve a problem that is entirely of their own making.

More importantly, for you to suggest that quiet acquiescence is the proper response to unfair action by authorities shows how far the USA has drifted from its core founding principles. I wonder what the Founding Fathers, or the folks in Boston Harbor in 1773, would think. Perhaps you should find a quiet spot and read some Thoreau...
grizzled is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:04
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Between a Rock and a Hard Spot
Posts: 199
Originally Posted by West Coast View Post
Then you should know as a retired airline captain that anyone can be removed. If the pax refused to leave, then he would be removed.
Full disclosure: I didn't say "airline," I said "air carrier," i.e. not 121. The removal has to be lawful. The cabin crew and/or gate agent have to be honest with the police.

Bottom line: just because it is legal, doesn't make it right. UAL doesn't get it.
HEMS driver is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:06
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Isla Grande
Posts: 835
Originally Posted by grizzled View Post
West Coast,

Your posts neatly summarize what is so problematic with the concept of "acceptable behavior" in the USA today. For police, and perhaps other agents of government, it means violence is an accepted and even expected response to a citizen exercising his / her rights. This person wasn't simply on the premises of the business, he paid for that very specific right at the specific time and was then provided a specific seat -- in return for the money he paid. To suggest that any action by the carrier to rescind that agreement is lawful simply because it's their property is incorrect. Imagine if you will a World Series baseball game, or perhaps a football championship game, where you are told to get out of your seat and out of the stadium because "we sold too many tickets". According to your reasoning, the people involved should simply say "OK, I'll go." You are wrong to suggest that a business that has charged for a service has unfettered rights to use whatever method or tactic available - including police -- to resolve a problem that is entirely of their own making.

More importantly, for you to suggest that quiet acquiescence is the proper response to unfair action by authorities shows how far the USA has drifted from its core founding principles. I wonder what the Founding Fathers, or the folks in Boston Harbor in 1773, would think. Perhaps you should find a quiet spot and read some Thoreau...
Spot on
gearlever is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:07
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CYUL
Posts: 830
Originally Posted by HEMS driver View Post
Could it be that this was a different flight/airplane?
No same aircraft but 10 minutes later!

Then they removed him in a stretcher!

Apparently some adults travelling with children were so disgusted they got off the plane saying the children had seen enough abuse for a day.
Jet Jockey A4 is online now  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:11
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,264
Originally Posted by Gauges and Dials View Post
How is it possible that you don't get enough volunteers, unless you're lowballing the compensation?
Because common sense would tell you that there would be a limit to such offers and reaching that limit doesn't necessarily corelate to achieving the required result.
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:12
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,172
When does an airline captain take control of the plane in deciding who stays aboard and who leaves?

Is it when he enters the boarding door ?

When he accepts the manifest?

When the boarding door is closed ?

When he starts his engines?
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:13
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 858
Totally shocked by this. UA are off my list of airlines to use, oh, and so is the one that West Coast works for. I bet there are a fair few who were on that flight that will think again before booking UA (or co-carriers) let alone those globally seeing this thuggery.

A fare paying passenger treated in that manner just because Ops screwed up and his name was selected in a manner more suited to dystopian world selecting who will survive or not.
SATCOS WHIPPING BOY is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:21
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,264
Originally Posted by lomapaseo View Post
When does an airline captain take control of the plane in deciding who stays aboard and who leaves?

Is it when he enters the boarding door ?

When he accepts the manifest?

When the boarding door is closed ?

When he starts his engines?
The captain is rarely called upon to make that decision. If he or she is, it may be be before they even leave the crew room. In specific circumstances it could be in all of your examples and more besides. I have deplaned or refused to accept passengers before boarding (in the case of accompanied deportees) and prior to boarding, prior to taxi, prior to take off, diversion in flight, prior to landing, and after landing. I cannot recall the police ever being called to remove an overbooked passenger. There is always a solution such is the "art of the deal."
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:45
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Between a Rock and a Hard Spot
Posts: 199
This is why pax are told to turn off their electronic devices - so they can't take videos of pax abuse.
HEMS driver is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:47
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 156
Stateside

meanwhile on APC
https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/m...ed-flight.html
neilki is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.