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 11th Apr 2017, 00:57
  #161 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 63
Posts: 8,949
tonyhap
Why did their training not kick in and give them second thoughts on using strong arm tactics?
Looking at this from across the Eastern side of the Pond, American Police training does not seem to include 'second thoughts' or 'shall we just step back a moment' thoughts.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:01
  #162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CYUL
Posts: 833
Originally Posted by HEMS driver View Post
Based on UAL's Contract of Carriage, they violated their own rules. This flight wasn't "OVERSOLD," because the four employees were NON-REV. They didn't buy a ticket, thus they weren't "sold" anything!

Oh, those pesky little rules.

Plus, as I mentioned above, the removed pax had already boarded, so by definition his boarding couldn't be denied, as it already took place.

I was thinking exactly the same thing.

Also do we know if any of the deadheading crews were pilots or were they just flight attendants?

On another forum a United pilot said that in their clause they do have the right to bump a passenger if they need to get somewhere to work but he wasn’t so sure flight attendants had the same clause.
Jet Jockey A4 is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:11
  #163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,503
Hems

They weren't non reving, thats when you hope there's open seats to Hawaii for you and your family. They were DH'ing on business. There are differences.
West Coast is online now  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:12
  #164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PNW
Posts: 76
Originally Posted by tonyhap View Post
Is it really UA's fault? Is it not the fault of the police persons who got excessively rough and physical? Why did their training not kick in and give them second thoughts on using strong arm tactics? Why did those police persons not suggest to the CC that they were not prepared to use physical force of that degree? And suggest to the CC that a more civilised solution should be found?
It was UA's fault for failing to raise the financial incentive for "volunteering to deboard" enough to manage the situation peaceably, and indeed voluntarily by the pax.

They allowed it to progress past that point, to forcible removal of a passenger selected at random who didn't want to volunteer, presumably because the compensation wasn't high enough to offset his personal/professional needs for taking that flight. This led to what anyone outside the airline industry will see as unprovoked physical assault on a paying passenger. The fact that nobody else was taking the $800 offer didn't give the airlines permission to start forcibly removing people by means of proxy (the airport police).

Whatever you think of that logic, or the various regs involved, it's how the entire world outside the airline industry is seeing this right now.

I do think it would be helpful to see exactly how the conflict escalated, but at this point it's irrelevant. One or more people at UA made some very bad decisions here.
Photonic is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:13
  #165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Village of Santo Poco
Posts: 794
Originally Posted by grizzled View Post
United will suffer in so many ways from this. Including, I'm sure, at the hands of the late night comedy shows in the USA tonight. Perhaps they'll inherit Air Canada's slogan from a few years back: "We're not happy 'til you're not happy!"
In the age of the 24-hour news cycle, I doubt UA will "suffer" much at all. This will be forgotten by tomorrow night at the latest replaced by Ms Kardashian's ass or something similarly extraordinarily important, and no, I don't work for UA (although, in the interest of full disclosure, I did use to fly for the "regional partner" in question).

Airlines have done much worse things...
Amadis of Gaul is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:14
  #166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,503
Absolutely correct
West Coast is online now  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:18
  #167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Richmond, Ca
Posts: 27
Originally Posted by JumpJumpJump View Post
United didn't physically manhandle the customer and most likely did not instruct the officers to use violence...... or do you think they were like the M in the James Bond films.... "Make it look like an accident 007"?
Clearly you're not denying that violence occurred?
1) UA wanted his seat, he attempted to force them to honor their contract to fly him home.
2) UA called the CPD to extricate him from the plane against his will.
3) The passenger was beaten and injured in the process.
Any time you call the police, the odds are that someone is going to get f-ed up. It is what they do, because cops are hammers and non cops are nails. Therefore every situation is treated as a "problem/nail"...in the US at least. Once the CPD was called, the outcome was predictable. If the passenger had been a young black man, the outcome would have been much worse. This situation should have been resolved before anyone was boarded.
SalNichols is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:20
  #168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 627
West Coast

With respect... United's own collective agreements refer to "deadheading" as "non revenue, positive space". So Hems terminology is correct.
grizzled is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:25
  #169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,503
Griz

Positive space and must ride are terms Hems should be familiar with. He claims to be retired airline, in a debate such as this, an airline pilot, a Captain at that would be aware of nuances. His post was absent any, on par with what would be expected from someone familiar with the term but not what it meant to an airline pilot.

Given his claim, I hold him to a higher level of understanding.
West Coast is online now  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:26
  #170 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 63
Posts: 8,949
Certainly
Airlines have done much worse things...
Amadis of Gaul
In the age of the 24-hour news cycle, I doubt UA will "suffer" much at all.
However, in the previous referred to 2008 affair: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Breaks_Guitars it is reported (and cited):
It was widely reported that within 4 weeks of the video being posted online, United Airlines' stock price fell 10%, costing stockholders about $180 million in value.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:28
  #171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,503
Yah, nothing else happened in 2008 did it?

Among others, the mistaken belief UA was going back into bankruptcy based on an old article. Stocks plunged.
West Coast is online now  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:28
  #172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Village of Santo Poco
Posts: 794
Originally Posted by PAXboy View Post
Certainly Amadis of Gaul
However, in the previous referred to 2008 affair: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Breaks_Guitars it is reported (and cited):
Correlation = causation? Maybe, maybe not, I'm not a stock market expert...
Amadis of Gaul is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:28
  #173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Richmond, Ca
Posts: 27
Originally Posted by Amadis of Gaul View Post
In the age of the 24-hour news cycle, I doubt UA will "suffer" much at all. This will be forgotten by tomorrow night at the latest replaced by Ms Kardashian's ass or something similarly extraordinarily important, and no, I don't work for UA (although, in the interest of full disclosure, I did use to fly for the "regional partner" in question).

Airlines have done much worse things...
Nope. UA is being called in front the Transportation Committee, as are the CPD cops. Congress didn't like those visuals.
SalNichols is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:35
  #174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Village of Santo Poco
Posts: 794
Originally Posted by SalNichols View Post
Nope. UA is being called in front the Transportation Committee, as are the CPD cops. Congress didn't like those visuals.
That's not entirely true, is it? Nobody is being called in front of anyone yet, so far only one member of said committee has requested a hearing. Guess we'll see if and when said hearing happens.
Amadis of Gaul is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:35
  #175 (permalink)  
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,632
You shouldn't be in a service industry if you don't understand the power of negative publicity. Hopefully some of the GAs and uniformed thugs involved will be exploring new career opportunities soon.
Two's in is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:35
  #176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 394
Originally Posted by West Coast View Post
Yah, nothing else happened in 2008 did it?

Among others, the mistaken belief UA was going back into bankruptcy based on an old article. Stocks plunged.
And a month ago refusing to board two females because they were wearing leggings? Even Delta tweeted that they were welcome on any their flights.

450K miles on UAL since the 1950s and I'll never fly them again. There if fundamental flaw in UAL's culture since the merger with Continental. Even their coffee is now undrinkable.
b1lanc is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:38
  #177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
We seem to have already forgotten that this was a Republic Airlines flight, and the incident could have happened as easily on one of Republic's other codeshares with American or Delta.
peekay4 is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:39
  #178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,503
Thanks B1. I work for another carrier where I enjoy a pretty decent upper middle income lifestyle. Haven't had to screw over any pax today, but the day is young.
West Coast is online now  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:43
  #179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,503
B1

If you're mentioning it, then you clearly know those pax were flying on pass privledges (flying for free or deeply discounted ) and as such were Subject to a dress code.

This is why UA likely won't do much , they get hammered by people who don't understand the situation and opine ignorantly, so why bother.
West Coast is online now  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 01:48
  #180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Oz
Age: 57
Posts: 3
What west coast said, when flying on a buddy pass you abide by the dress code or you don't fly...
RadarContactLost 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.