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

USA Today: UA forcibly remove random pax from flight

Wikiposts
Search
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

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11th Apr 2017, 15:49
  #361 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Going to be lots of zeroes on that check
slats11 is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 15:51
  #362 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 79
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Did the relief crew reach their destination in time?
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 15:51
  #363 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Computer generated draw

Hearing this comment I have this vision of a Slot machine style compiter near every boarding gate where the one armed bandit is pulled to randomly spit out seat numbers!!!

Seriously do reservation/gate computers have an option built into them like an app for such a random draw? Suspect the lawyers will have a field day discovering that!
Wannabe Flyer is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 15:54
  #364 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Nearby
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Piltdown Man
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.
You're wrong on many counts. While it's true that on a planned basis, deadheading or positioning crew reduce the number of available seats to be sold, the same does not apply to contingencies. The airline is then obliged to get their crew across to their final destination on their flights on a space available basis, on competitor flights on a commercial basis, or even make private transport arrangements by road or air. Certainly not at the expense of fare-paying passengers and absolutely not with this kind of drama. This is how Asian airlines do it and you will find ass-dragging videos of fare-paying pax hard to come by with Asian airlines.
locblue is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 15:58
  #365 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Seattle
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
I assume that when they state that "the computer" selected candidate passengers to bump, they were looking for people with no checked luggage. So as not to have to dig through the hold and look for their bags.

This is the downside to trying to cram everything into carry-on.
EEngr is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 16:23
  #366 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: FR
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Airline may not have a limit on how much they can offer to convince people to get off; but the individual(s) in charge in this case might perhaps have such a limit, or they may have to explain every $$ spent. I am not sure where we can find what the exact UAL procedure is (was), we are only told that everyone had followed it.
pax2908 is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 16:32
  #367 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 76
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It is OK folks; that great travel guru, Simon Calder has resolved it all. He has told us the Captain issued the order for this bloke to be removed and therefore the passenger was breaking the law by refusing to comply.
Even more reason to ignore Mr Calder!
KelvinD is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 16:34
  #368 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by KelvinD
It is OK folks; that great travel guru, Simon Calder has resolved it all. He has told us the Captain issued the order for this bloke to be removed and therefore the passenger was breaking the law by refusing to comply.
Even more reason to ignore Mr Calder!
Agreed - but whether he was breaking the law or not (and UA are probably within their rights to ask anyone they want to leave one of their planes) it is the manner in which they did it which has generated a quadzillion clicks
birmingham is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 16:53
  #369 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: The North
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If United fail to build up some public confidence up and these scandals continue then I doubt that UA will be around in a couple of years time. You might say that I am going over the top however they will have lost millions of potential (and current) customers over the last few weeks with the previous incident around clothing and now this. Personally I wouldn't fly with them and family have now booked flights with EI rather than UA.

And get rid of the CEO.
CCGE29 is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 17:07
  #370 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Bucks
Posts: 28
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
It looks like things have just got a lot worse for United by picking an international fight they really didn't ought to...


tohttp://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/11/as...hina-reaction/

Last edited by connoisseur; 11th Apr 2017 at 17:09. Reason: url
connoisseur is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 17:25
  #371 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vendee
Posts: 145
Received 28 Likes on 16 Posts
Originally Posted by strix
As a matter of law, I can't see why. There are potentially two matters here: 1) whether UAL breached their contract of service and overreached their authority per their own CoC, in which case no, the pax' criminal history is completely irrelevant; and 2) whether the pax is guilty of any criminal offence in protesting his removal.

In the latter case, supposing he were to be prosecuted, even his past convictions aren't admissible as evidence until after conviction, and then may only be used when considering aggravating factors where relevant during sentencing.
Thank you Strix for the measured reply. I was not being prurient but curious as to what legal direction this might take. I am sure all parties wish they could wind the clock back and relive this sad event.
Uncle Fred is online now  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 17:35
  #372 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by CCGE29
If United fail to build up some public confidence up and these scandals continue then I doubt that UA will be around in a couple of years time. You might say that I am going over the top however they will have lost millions of potential (and current) customers over the last few weeks with the previous incident around clothing and now this. Personally I wouldn't fly with them and family have now booked flights with EI rather than UA.

And get rid of the CEO.


As someone whose local airport is EWR, I'm afraid that United will still be around in the future. We have an oligopoly with a government that believes in emasculating regulatory agencies. They will never act in the public interest. I'd rather not give my $$ to United, but in many cases I have no practical option.
BassoRider is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 17:36
  #373 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
United's PR is at such a low point now that they might as well "dig in", i.e., appear conciliatory but stick to their version of the facts that the pax was belligerent and disruptive while United employees followed industry-standard procedures and practices, including seeking involvement from the Chicago Aviation Police.

It's not going to be popular but any backtracking will probably hurt them more.
peekay4 is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 17:39
  #374 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: usa
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Read most of the 30 pages; Got questions........

The instant that he refused to deplane wasn't he in violation of failing to comply with crew member instructions (FARS)? Screw UA's mumbo jumbo carriage rules.

What law enforcement agency allows blue jeans on duty ? Real cops? Or ORD rent a cops?

Ten minutes after being dragged off the plane he gets back on ?

What real cops practice "Catch and Release"?
bloom is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 17:47
  #375 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They are real cops (i.e., deputized police officers) but work for the City of Chicago Department of Aviation instead of Chicago PD. However, they're not allowed to carry guns. Their duties are similar to transit police officers elsewhere in the country (e.g., Amtrak police, NY Port Authority police, etc.)
peekay4 is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 17:49
  #376 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by GearDown&Locked
Monsieur le Capitan was where during this event?
-"Sheeple issues? not my problem". Ok then...
That's a valid question. The plane had a Republic crew but I'm told the ORD gate agents were United employees.

Was the deadhead crew definitely Republic? Or were they mainline United?

Did an operating crewmember order the passenger to deplane? Or was it a gate agent?
Airbubba is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 17:49
  #377 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 39
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bloom
Read most of the 30 pages; Got questions........

The instant that he refused to deplane wasn't he in violation of failing to comply with crew member instructions (FARS)? Screw UA's mumbo jumbo carriage rules.

What law enforcement agency allows blue jeans on duty ? Real cops? Or ORD rent a cops?

Ten minutes after being dragged off the plane he gets back on ?

What real cops practice "Catch and Release"?
With regards to the blue jeans, I imagine an airport the size of ORD has a fair few "plain clothed" police officers on duty, which would explain the dress code. They are still on duty and can step in if needed, no reason to assume they were not real cops.
edi_local is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 17:54
  #378 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,810
Received 199 Likes on 92 Posts
Originally Posted by connoisseur
It looks like things have just got a lot worse for United by picking an international fight they really didn't ought to...

Man filmed being dragged off United flight causes outrage in China - CNN.com
Leaving aside the Chinese angle, the interview with a fellow passenger on that link appears to corroborate the reports that the doctor initially agreed to be offloaded until he learned that he wouldn't fly until the mid-afternoon flight on Monday (there are two earlier O'Hare-Louisville flights, but both are operated by a different United codeshare partner, and may of course have been full anyway).
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 17:56
  #379 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: usa
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But "Catch and Release"?
bloom is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 18:02
  #380 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bloom
The instant that he refused to deplane wasn't he in violation of failing to comply with crew member instructions (FARS)? Screw UA's mumbo jumbo carriage rules.
No, once passenger is seated crew can ask him to leave only under specific circumstances. Accommodating non-rev dead headers is not one of those.

Originally Posted by bloom
What law enforcement agency allows blue jeans on duty ? Real cops? Or ORD rent a cops?
Several possibilities. Most likely a Chicago PD officer on a part time job.

Originally Posted by bloom
Ten minutes after being dragged off the plane he gets back on ?

What real cops practice "Catch and Release"?
That's where it get real weird and with CPD's history this guy is extremely lucky to be alive. They are known to shoot unarmed people in their back.

Read USDOJ report on CPD.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/13/u...port.html?_r=0
notapilot15 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.