USA Today: UA forcibly remove random pax from flight
And that raises another point, some video footage seems to suggest that he was travelling with a female companion. See female running down aisle in hot pursuit.
Can we presume in such a case, if it is the case, that the offer to re-accommodate was for both him and his companion? After all, they only needed ONE more seat, or so it has been reported.
Can we presume in such a case, if it is the case, that the offer to re-accommodate was for both him and his companion? After all, they only needed ONE more seat, or so it has been reported.
So I assume that the woman seen running down the aisle after him is indeed his wife.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good to see UA being held responsible by the use of Social media and phone video footage.
No way their PR spin doctors could get away with denying everything and blame the passenger.
No way their PR spin doctors could get away with denying everything and blame the passenger.
That is a good question. Everyone seems to be fine with the crew taking a 5 hour van ride. Lets say you are on the Monday morning flight from SDF-ORD connecting to say HKG. You have a confirmed ticket. Now your flight to Chicago is delayed 5 hours meaning you will miss your connection to Hong Kong. You have to stay in a hotel one night. The Tuesday flight to HKG is full, you know you are now on standby for that flight, not confirmed.
How many days are you happy to be delayed in Chicago because one passenger refuses to comply with a valid instruction to deplane, thus allowing you crew to get to the hotel in SDF to get their required rest so you can get out on time?
How many days are you happy to be delayed in Chicago because one passenger refuses to comply with a valid instruction to deplane, thus allowing you crew to get to the hotel in SDF to get their required rest so you can get out on time?
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can someone tell me what happened after all the scuffle?
Did an airline employee take the now vacated seat?
Did the flight leave "normally"?
There are some reports that the said evicted passenger then returned - if true and it seems unlikely this is the most bizarre aspect of the case - did they just let him go outside the plane and then he simply walked back on and if so where did he sit or was it just to retrieve his hand luggage.
Frankly if anyone offered me $800 to leave I'd regard it as a joke, given the consequential knockon losses to me and other costs including loss of opportunity I'd likely incur as a result of not being on the flight.
Add a zero on the end and I'd go.
Did an airline employee take the now vacated seat?
Did the flight leave "normally"?
There are some reports that the said evicted passenger then returned - if true and it seems unlikely this is the most bizarre aspect of the case - did they just let him go outside the plane and then he simply walked back on and if so where did he sit or was it just to retrieve his hand luggage.
Frankly if anyone offered me $800 to leave I'd regard it as a joke, given the consequential knockon losses to me and other costs including loss of opportunity I'd likely incur as a result of not being on the flight.
Add a zero on the end and I'd go.
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: The North
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The passengers were de-boarded so that the aircraft could be sanitised. When the UA crew did arrive at the aircraft they were 'booed' by the passengers and the flight finally arrived in SDF nearly 3 hours late.
Most reports suggest that the flight finally left after a delay of a couple of hours with the DH crew on board (and being given a hard time by some of the passengers, which seems a tad unfair as it wasn't the crew's fault).
Read the fine print it is all in the contract of carriage. Wow, with cheering on Booing the crew who were instructed by their Crew Scheduling department to DH on a certain flight, who would face certain discipline up to and including being sacked for refusal. I'm done with this thread. I thought this was a professional pilots forum.
UA had a phalanx of options available to them for getting that crew in place, in time; they chose what they thought was the cheapest and the path of least resistance.
And lets dispense with the 'valid instruction' BS; the instruction was neither valid nor legal. It was an ill-advised attempt at saving a few bucks by screwing over paying customers, nothing more or less.
Airlines typically forget to mention this and trade on passengers' ignorance of the rules.
Why can they throw people out before the maximum permissible compensation has been offered?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UA have the eyes of the world on them right now.
The quibbling about T&Cs, captain's discretion etc. is, for them, like arguing what piece the band should play whilst the ship goes down.
If, whilst at the top of the news cycle, they were to publicly and unconditionally offer this guy $1,000,000 by way of apology/compensation it would *pragmatically* be money very well spent. They'd likely get it back in stock value before they had time to sit down.
(BTW, please no blah about setting 'precedent' unless you are a lawyer: the worst precedent to set is avoiding doing something smart for fear that someone might demand you do something stupid later on on the basis of bad analogy).
The quibbling about T&Cs, captain's discretion etc. is, for them, like arguing what piece the band should play whilst the ship goes down.
If, whilst at the top of the news cycle, they were to publicly and unconditionally offer this guy $1,000,000 by way of apology/compensation it would *pragmatically* be money very well spent. They'd likely get it back in stock value before they had time to sit down.
(BTW, please no blah about setting 'precedent' unless you are a lawyer: the worst precedent to set is avoiding doing something smart for fear that someone might demand you do something stupid later on on the basis of bad analogy).
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been watching the various issues of this story slowly leach out and the whole cause incident seems to come down to the inability of those who have screwed up to admit it.
Meaning, why was the attempt to get volunteers not fully explained, as NOT a simple case of overbooking, it was an operational issue to move crew around the network to operate another flight.
Had the full ramifications of the over book/DH need, been made public maybe, just maybe, the required offloads would have put their hands up.
However, the events that panned out were appalling, truly appalling. Complete overreaction by the security staff and a total nightmare that could have been avoided, had common sense been used.
Were there no seats blocked in the computer for the DH crew?
Were the gate staff not doing a manual count?
Meaning, why was the attempt to get volunteers not fully explained, as NOT a simple case of overbooking, it was an operational issue to move crew around the network to operate another flight.
Had the full ramifications of the over book/DH need, been made public maybe, just maybe, the required offloads would have put their hands up.
However, the events that panned out were appalling, truly appalling. Complete overreaction by the security staff and a total nightmare that could have been avoided, had common sense been used.
Were there no seats blocked in the computer for the DH crew?
Were the gate staff not doing a manual count?
At the end of the day there were most likely several people onboard who would have gladly got off the aircraft for a $300 cash and a night in a hotel. Seems pretty inexpensive now doesn't it. Go the accountants!
And, more relevantly, there is the level of compensation that is necessary and sufficient to induce the required number of passengers to willingly give up their seats. That number always exists, United were simply too cheapskate to pay it.
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: The queue at Security
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read the fine print it is all in the contract of carriage. Wow, with cheering on Booing the crew who were instructed by their Crew Scheduling department to DH on a certain flight, who would face certain discipline up to and including being sacked for refusal. I'm done with this thread. I thought this was a professional pilots forum.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,094
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
an aggressive Police Officer batter the customer and drag him unconscious down the aisle, bleeding, is NOT part of their job.....
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whether he was dressed as a central-casting cop or in clown shoes and a rainbow wig really doesn't have all that much bearing on the liabilities in this incident.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,094
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whether he was dressed as a central-casting cop or in clown shoes and a rainbow wig really doesn't have all that much bearing on the liabilities in this incident.