USA Today: UA forcibly remove random pax from flight
Chesty
Can't for sure, neither can you. Crews arent shuttled around for a lack of something to do. They were on the plane to fly something at the other end or position themselves for a later flight. SDF isn't a crew base for the contracting airline, so they weren't simply going home.
As to why a charter isn't set up, you'd have to ask the upper echelons of management, which I'm not. I'm concerned if the front line folks did their job, not why management doesn't have Lears plying the skies with DH'ing crew members.
Can't for sure, neither can you. Crews arent shuttled around for a lack of something to do. They were on the plane to fly something at the other end or position themselves for a later flight. SDF isn't a crew base for the contracting airline, so they weren't simply going home.
As to why a charter isn't set up, you'd have to ask the upper echelons of management, which I'm not. I'm concerned if the front line folks did their job, not why management doesn't have Lears plying the skies with DH'ing crew members.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have not read all this thread (got half way through), so probably this point has already been made.
The concept of an algorithm choosing who to deny travel to is absurd.
Different passengers will have more and less compelling reasons for needing to be at the destination.
The obvious one is what if a passenger was on their way to a dying close relatives bedside.
The concept of an algorithm choosing who to deny travel to is absurd.
Different passengers will have more and less compelling reasons for needing to be at the destination.
The obvious one is what if a passenger was on their way to a dying close relatives bedside.
Gender Faculty Specialist
Chesty
Can't for sure, neither can you. Crews arent shuttled around for a lack of something to do. They were on the plane to fly something at the other end or position themselves for a later flight. SDF isn't a crew base for the contracting airline, so they weren't simply going home.
Can't for sure, neither can you. Crews arent shuttled around for a lack of something to do. They were on the plane to fly something at the other end or position themselves for a later flight. SDF isn't a crew base for the contracting airline, so they weren't simply going home.
Of course I can't say but I haven't been using that excuse to justify the actions of the "front line folks" which, quite frankly are farcical and very police state. Land of the free hey?
As to why a charter isn't set up, you'd have to ask the upper echelons of management, which I'm not. I'm concerned if the front line folks did their job, not why management doesn't have Lears plying the skies with DH'ing crew members.
:Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The land of the Rising Sun
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
West Coast
"I as a worker bee however concern myself as to whether the process given to the employees was followed. Given what I can see at this point, highlighted by Oscar's letter indicate to me they were."
Following the process is of course important up to a point but then blindly following it no matter what the outcome creates incidents like this one. What is important in this sort of situation is the perception not the actuality. A passenger being dragged off a plane in this manner will be seen as a company far exceeding its rights (even though the opposite might be the case). Once the situation got violent, perception and sympathy in this case would rest with the passenger and never with the airline. If the passenger had been violent then of course the sympathy would rest with the airline staff.
In a 'moral society' it is seen as wrong to drag a 69 year old man out of a seat and off an aircraft so that aircraft crew can fly. It is more the sort of thing that is perceived as happening in police states and other less liberal nations. To then argue as Munoz does that processes were followed then adds may we say 'insult to injury'. It also sends the message that customers are not valued and that a sense of perspective is lacking among United staff and management. Note that I am not arguing that this is the case but that this is how it will be seen. The company cannot win and needs to 'stop digging'. This situation is a fairly standard over-application of the rules and as I mentioned needs an abject apology from the airline to the passenger.
"I as a worker bee however concern myself as to whether the process given to the employees was followed. Given what I can see at this point, highlighted by Oscar's letter indicate to me they were."
Following the process is of course important up to a point but then blindly following it no matter what the outcome creates incidents like this one. What is important in this sort of situation is the perception not the actuality. A passenger being dragged off a plane in this manner will be seen as a company far exceeding its rights (even though the opposite might be the case). Once the situation got violent, perception and sympathy in this case would rest with the passenger and never with the airline. If the passenger had been violent then of course the sympathy would rest with the airline staff.
In a 'moral society' it is seen as wrong to drag a 69 year old man out of a seat and off an aircraft so that aircraft crew can fly. It is more the sort of thing that is perceived as happening in police states and other less liberal nations. To then argue as Munoz does that processes were followed then adds may we say 'insult to injury'. It also sends the message that customers are not valued and that a sense of perspective is lacking among United staff and management. Note that I am not arguing that this is the case but that this is how it will be seen. The company cannot win and needs to 'stop digging'. This situation is a fairly standard over-application of the rules and as I mentioned needs an abject apology from the airline to the passenger.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew for a large Australian international airline from 22 until retirement including regular flights to and from the USA. I thought that I'd seen the lot until this. The event is on every news forum in Australia complete with video.
This week I'm making me choices for my next international holiday and for those asking, it wont be on airline staff travel/standby.
Two years ago I did 14 sectors from Australia and around the US, then home. My wife and I experienced some of the rudest treatment that I've ever had from your TSA agents. Also some of the best. Can anyone from the USA explain to me why your agents have to stand in front of a person and scream. Do you suffer from the well known syndrome of screaming louder if you don't think that the person that you are talking to has a different language? Why with a B737 load of pax were only non US citizens treated this way?
Earlier, while working, I was subject to an immigration visa "audit" in LAX due to a disagreement between the US Consulate in my home port and LAX immigration, so I know what I'm saying in the next part of this.
There are many optimists on this thread who say for United this will blow over but early this year a well known Australian author was also subject to a LAX visa review and she wrote a very accurate ( from my above experience) account of it which was a huge main story here. From that, I know of a large amount of Australians who now wont go to the US on holidays.
So this is my point and I don't think it will blow over for United or your whole tourist industry. I have a choice to travel to anywhere in the world. Can any US citizen or resident explain to me why with all these possibilities I would go to the USA for my next holiday? This event will for many people looking at the USA ,the last straw. I really fear for your International tourist industry.
This week I'm making me choices for my next international holiday and for those asking, it wont be on airline staff travel/standby.
Two years ago I did 14 sectors from Australia and around the US, then home. My wife and I experienced some of the rudest treatment that I've ever had from your TSA agents. Also some of the best. Can anyone from the USA explain to me why your agents have to stand in front of a person and scream. Do you suffer from the well known syndrome of screaming louder if you don't think that the person that you are talking to has a different language? Why with a B737 load of pax were only non US citizens treated this way?
Earlier, while working, I was subject to an immigration visa "audit" in LAX due to a disagreement between the US Consulate in my home port and LAX immigration, so I know what I'm saying in the next part of this.
There are many optimists on this thread who say for United this will blow over but early this year a well known Australian author was also subject to a LAX visa review and she wrote a very accurate ( from my above experience) account of it which was a huge main story here. From that, I know of a large amount of Australians who now wont go to the US on holidays.
So this is my point and I don't think it will blow over for United or your whole tourist industry. I have a choice to travel to anywhere in the world. Can any US citizen or resident explain to me why with all these possibilities I would go to the USA for my next holiday? This event will for many people looking at the USA ,the last straw. I really fear for your International tourist industry.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 76
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone know exactly what became of this passenger? From what I am hearing in the news, it appears he not only re-boarded the aircraft but flew on this flight. Really?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
West Coast
"I as a worker bee however concern myself as to whether the process given to the employees was followed. Given what I can see at this point, highlighted by Oscar's letter indicate to me they were."
Following the process is of course important up to a point but then blindly following it no matter what the outcome creates incidents like this one. What is important in this sort of situation is the perception not the actuality. A passenger being dragged off a plane in this manner will be seen as a company far exceeding its rights (even though the opposite might be the case). Once the situation got violent, perception and sympathy in this case would rest with the passenger and never with the airline. If the passenger had been violent then of course the sympathy would rest with the airline staff.
In a 'moral society' it is seen as wrong to drag a 69 year old man out of a seat and off an aircraft so that aircraft crew can fly. It is more the sort of thing that is perceived as happening in police states and other less liberal nations. To then argue as Munoz does that processes were followed then adds may we say 'insult to injury'. It also sends the message that customers are not valued and that a sense of perspective is lacking among United staff and management. Note that I am not arguing that this is the case but that this is how it will be seen. The company cannot win and needs to 'stop digging'. This situation is a fairly standard over-application of the rules and as I mentioned needs an abject apology from the airline to the passenger.
"I as a worker bee however concern myself as to whether the process given to the employees was followed. Given what I can see at this point, highlighted by Oscar's letter indicate to me they were."
Following the process is of course important up to a point but then blindly following it no matter what the outcome creates incidents like this one. What is important in this sort of situation is the perception not the actuality. A passenger being dragged off a plane in this manner will be seen as a company far exceeding its rights (even though the opposite might be the case). Once the situation got violent, perception and sympathy in this case would rest with the passenger and never with the airline. If the passenger had been violent then of course the sympathy would rest with the airline staff.
In a 'moral society' it is seen as wrong to drag a 69 year old man out of a seat and off an aircraft so that aircraft crew can fly. It is more the sort of thing that is perceived as happening in police states and other less liberal nations. To then argue as Munoz does that processes were followed then adds may we say 'insult to injury'. It also sends the message that customers are not valued and that a sense of perspective is lacking among United staff and management. Note that I am not arguing that this is the case but that this is how it will be seen. The company cannot win and needs to 'stop digging'. This situation is a fairly standard over-application of the rules and as I mentioned needs an abject apology from the airline to the passenger.
And add me to the lengthening list of folks who genuinely, sincerely doesn't wish to ever have a seat anywhere in an aircraft that has West Coast upfront.
Can someone expand on how 'the computer' selects someone 'at random'?
The Pax owned a contract for a service, (travel), which he bought from the contractor,, the contractor wished to void the contract,, the pax declined,, the contractor offered to buy out the contract, again the pax declined, contractor decided not to increase their offer for the pax contract and preferred other dispute resolution methods , result a 69 year old gets a flogging from pseudo coppers acting in a contractual dispute, a civil matter, and therefore none of their business. Moral don't be an ethnic in the states.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The breakdown appears to have been with the four crew showing up at the gate, unannounced after boarding had started. They should have been told, and UA's internal policies established as, they were "too late" for a flight where denied boarding must be implemented as a result.
Passengers must show up at the gate on time. Yes, I know that "stuff happens" and it probably was outside the crew's control, but having a deadline set out in the manual would have avoided the situation.
West Coast, airlines are not limited in what they can offer a volunteer. The compensation for a denied boarding victim is capped, but only company policy can limit an offer to a volunteer.
Passengers must show up at the gate on time. Yes, I know that "stuff happens" and it probably was outside the crew's control, but having a deadline set out in the manual would have avoided the situation.
West Coast, airlines are not limited in what they can offer a volunteer. The compensation for a denied boarding victim is capped, but only company policy can limit an offer to a volunteer.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 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."
"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."
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for your education in the UK you are wrong. When you are on private property even if you are there uninvited as a trespasser you do indeed have absolute rights.
pseudo coppers acting in a contractual dispute, a civil matter, and therefore none of their business.
Were they police or not? Jacket said police but I notice one had jeans on.
Interesting that I've laid out my arguments about the topic, yet I've been disinvited to the UK, told someone wouldn't want to fly on an aircraft I was piloting along with other assorted off topic snarky comments.
All because you simply disagree with a position I hold.
All because you simply disagree with a position I hold.
Them Freight Dogs got the right idea yesirreee
True, but completely irrelevant.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It states in his email 'the involuntary denial of boarding process was initiated' and the passengers was 'denied boarding'.....he looked pretty damned 'boarded' sat in his seat when they tried to physically remove him! Catastrophic PR disaster for UA and they are ultimately responsible for overbooking. The good Dr's seat is going to cost UA an awful lot of money in lost bookings, I'll bet money that Dr's seat is going to be the most expensive seat UA has ever sold!
