USA Today: UA forcibly remove random pax from flight
As a general point for that those shocked/appalled/mystified/spitting feathers over the fact that Deadheading Crew might just have an contractural entitlement to "proper" seats it is worth bearing in mind a few points: that in many airlines deadheading happens on Long Haul and Ultra Long haul services....12-14 hours on a jumpseat, minimum rest downroute, then operate back.....nope, not going to work. ..As far Shorthaul goes(and even on occasions Longhaul) at times and on some types there might be no spare cabin jumpseats, they are occupied by the "working crew" and as far as the flight deck seat(s) goes if "checking" is going one flight deck is occupied ( and on some types there is only one flight deck jumpseat). In short without "blocking" or prebooking or in some way reserving passenger seats for deadheading crew the whole operation starts to become fragile. Whether the use of a jumpseat was a last ditch option in this case TBH we don't know.
So whilst perhaps not relevant in this case but as a general point if some are now expecting an announcement that all dead heading crew are to be sat on jumpseats just to satisfy public relations you are probably going to be disappointed.
So whilst perhaps not relevant in this case but as a general point if some are now expecting an announcement that all dead heading crew are to be sat on jumpseats just to satisfy public relations you are probably going to be disappointed.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since there appears to be significant confusion amongst the posters here, some of which are/should be in the know, here is United's contract of carriage, all 37,000 words including explanations in lawyer speak.
https://www.united.com/web/en-US/con...-carriage.aspx
https://www.united.com/web/en-US/con...-carriage.aspx
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 76
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UAL stock largely recovered intraday.
This time, they threatened a first class passenger with handcuffs if he didn't get off to make way for someone "more important".
United passenger threatened with handcuffs to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler - LA Times
Actually, no.
Day 1 - We are very concerned and will investigate.
Day 2 - The passenger was belligerent and I support what our employees did.
Day 3 - Mea culpa, mea culpa, we were wrong...
Day 1 - We are very concerned and will investigate.
Day 2 - The passenger was belligerent and I support what our employees did.
Day 3 - Mea culpa, mea culpa, we were wrong...
The point is he has got to this point fairly quickly (couple of days), and he may (or may not) have initially been led astray by someone fearful this had all got out of hand.
7 days is generally considered a very rapid turnaround time for an urgent customer service complaint. Yes this incident was very high profile and hence very urgent. But it still takes time to get all the facts. Especially if there has been some CYA early on.
As a general point for that those shocked/appalled/mystified/spitting feathers over the fact that Deadheading Crew might just have an contractural entitlement to "proper" seats it is worth bearing in mind a few points: that in many airlines deadheading happens on Long Haul and Ultra Long haul services....12-14 hours on a jumpseat, minimum rest downroute, then operate back.....nope, not going to work. ..As far Shorthaul goes(and even on occasions Longhaul) at times and on some types there might be no spare cabin jumpseats, they are occupied by the "working crew" and as far as the flight deck seat(s) goes if "checking" is going one flight deck is occupied ( and on some types there is only one flight deck jumpseat). In short without "blocking" or prebooking or in some way reserving passenger seats for deadheading crew the whole operation starts to become fragile. Whether the use of a jumpseat was a last ditch option in this case TBH we don't know.
So whilst perhaps not relevant in this case but as a general point if some are now expecting an announcement that all dead heading crew are to be sat on jumpseats just to satisfy public relations you are probably going to be disappointed.
So whilst perhaps not relevant in this case but as a general point if some are now expecting an announcement that all dead heading crew are to be sat on jumpseats just to satisfy public relations you are probably going to be disappointed.
Seats needed to transport crews must and can be planned ahead and reserved. Not just cleared whenever needed kicking off paying customers.
OK. 48 hours rather than 24. I obviously lost track of total elapsed time after seeing countless replays from different news services of an event in a very different timezone - some replays themselves were probably a day old.
The point is he has got to this point fairly quickly (couple of days), and he may (or may not) have initially been led astray by someone fearful this had all got out of hand.
7 days is generally considered a very rapid turnaround time for an urgent customer service complaint. Yes this incident was very high profile and hence very urgent. But it still takes time to get all the facts. Especially if there has been some CYA early on.
The point is he has got to this point fairly quickly (couple of days), and he may (or may not) have initially been led astray by someone fearful this had all got out of hand.
7 days is generally considered a very rapid turnaround time for an urgent customer service complaint. Yes this incident was very high profile and hence very urgent. But it still takes time to get all the facts. Especially if there has been some CYA early on.
It should have been better written and certainly not include anything about the passenger being at fault. Yes you can back your employees but be careful about how you go about it especially when the same day you say a full investigation of the event is under way.
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: EU
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's taken 29 pages, result:
"Mr Munoz was asked if Mr Dao was at fault.
He said: "No. He can't be. He was a paying passenger sitting on our seat in our aircraft and no one should be treated that way. Period.""
Some of us saw this after Page 1, others, well enough said, I am sure they will be writing the same drivel after it has reached 60 or 100 pages, that is the scary bit, that there so many who feel entitled!
It's a privilege to have this job, it's not your little personal toy do as you please, without the passengers there will be no jobs. There are some people who clearly have misunderstood the concept of SERVICE industry.
And as for the Captain, I would have given the same statement as Munoz now finally has done:
"He was a paying passenger sitting on our seat in our aircraft and no one should be treated that way. Period, he stays!"
Captain offers the Jumpseats to the DH crew, if they decline than that is OPS problem, simple.
The CoC is clear, there is nothing that covers the disembarkation of an already seated passenger. Either company offers more money to tempt passengers, or they need to find alternative ways, and the Jumpseat should be an option offered by the Captain to the crew.
If I declined sitting on the JS for positioning if this was only option, I would definitely be called in for Tea and biscuits when back at home base. This was not a LH to JS, I can understand for longer flights, not an issue. But these was extreme circumstances, and based on this you can also understand the reactions of the passengers towards the crew who came onboard. Not their fault, unless they was given the whole story and what options was available for them.
"Mr Munoz was asked if Mr Dao was at fault.
He said: "No. He can't be. He was a paying passenger sitting on our seat in our aircraft and no one should be treated that way. Period.""
Some of us saw this after Page 1, others, well enough said, I am sure they will be writing the same drivel after it has reached 60 or 100 pages, that is the scary bit, that there so many who feel entitled!
It's a privilege to have this job, it's not your little personal toy do as you please, without the passengers there will be no jobs. There are some people who clearly have misunderstood the concept of SERVICE industry.
And as for the Captain, I would have given the same statement as Munoz now finally has done:
"He was a paying passenger sitting on our seat in our aircraft and no one should be treated that way. Period, he stays!"
Captain offers the Jumpseats to the DH crew, if they decline than that is OPS problem, simple.
The CoC is clear, there is nothing that covers the disembarkation of an already seated passenger. Either company offers more money to tempt passengers, or they need to find alternative ways, and the Jumpseat should be an option offered by the Captain to the crew.
If I declined sitting on the JS for positioning if this was only option, I would definitely be called in for Tea and biscuits when back at home base. This was not a LH to JS, I can understand for longer flights, not an issue. But these was extreme circumstances, and based on this you can also understand the reactions of the passengers towards the crew who came onboard. Not their fault, unless they was given the whole story and what options was available for them.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Less Hair:
Indeed they are for pre-scheduled deadhead. But, there are other times where it all happens quite quickly. For example, a flight experiences a serious mechanical condition at the gate or perhaps on taxi out. The flight is cancelled. But, the crew of the canceled flight now needs to be deadheaded with little notice to protect a downstream flight the same day. Some crew members might end up on the jump seat in such circumstances. But, some need to be placed somewhere in the cabin. It becomes an issue when the deadheading flight is full. But, in my experience it was always handled prior to boarding passengers.
Seats needed to transport crews must and can be planned ahead and reserved. Not just cleared whenever needed kicking off paying customers.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
United's website boasts they carried 146 million passengers last year.
And yet their CEO's immediate response to his customers could not be more tone deaf!
Need I go on?
And yet their CEO's immediate response to his customers could not be more tone deaf!
Need I go on?
I can somewhat agree with your position except for his email to the employees of United.
Agree always dangerous to only get one side or part of the story before declaring your position - and when you can't be sure what the investigation will reveal.
But the 24/7 news cycle and social media puts a lot of pressure to respond quickly. You simply have to trust you are being well informed. It can be a case of damned whatever you do. Imagine if he had criticised the crew and then found pax was at fault.
In politics you usually don't survive if you have led the boss astray - I think you guys recently had a senior government figure (NSA) resign over this.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 43
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and if he had just walked off the aircraft as he was unfairly asked to do, he would have been a day late to work and UAL would have comped him a few hundred $$ and carried on treating their customers as freight. The Dr has done us all a service and airline policy will change for the better and we can all stop being treated as mugs.
He should be highly regarded that he stood his ground against the intimidation of the corporate bully and the croonies who don't have the slightest IQ to figure out that this case has nothing to do with their B/S CoC or their "operational crap".
It doesn't matter wether he is doctor, gambler, unemployed or "belligerent".
I am a doctor and if I was in his shoes, I would have felt the unfair treatment but I would have sucked it because my social status doesn't allow me to go low (that's what I would have convinced myself but actually it is just cowardness to face injustice).
If the law wasn't clear enough, So it must be so in the future.
If we love aviation and respect its value, we should do everything to help and guide other people to appreciate it, not despise it.
Don't be the bully, you will lose. Whoever justified these actions, please reconsider.
For the year, United registered $2.3 billion in profit against $36.6 billion in total revenue. In addition, the airline returned $628 million to employees in the form of profit sharing.
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/u...17-1?r=US&IR=T
There's motive ...
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/u...17-1?r=US&IR=T
There's motive ...
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boarding Pax
I had always thought the real problem was younger cabin crew and ground staff - dizzy with their new found responsibility and authority and self-importance.
I had assumed the PIC were generally sufficiently mature and sensible (and recognised they had far too much at stake) to get into petty power games. That is certainly the case with the pilots I know. A lot of time, blood, sweat, tears and $ to get those wings, so respect the authority granted and don't overstep the mark.
However the attitudes of a few "pilots" here has been a disconcerting revelation. Maybe it really is an industry wide thing.
I had assumed the PIC were generally sufficiently mature and sensible (and recognised they had far too much at stake) to get into petty power games. That is certainly the case with the pilots I know. A lot of time, blood, sweat, tears and $ to get those wings, so respect the authority granted and don't overstep the mark.
However the attitudes of a few "pilots" here has been a disconcerting revelation. Maybe it really is an industry wide thing.
However, sitting up front on US flights i see how this escalated. Deadheading Flight Crew can take the jumpseat, however, they have to leave the aircraft and clear the Cockpit Access security protocols and will loose their protected 'must ride' status. ON RJ's the jumpseaters are not part of the BOW, so could conceivably have to leave later based on W&B; and then are really in trouble. That's a missed trip.
A belligerent pax presents a very difficult situation for all concerned; and in the US my advice to anyone, no matter how strongly felt, is to comply with law enforcement. They work in an environment where their lives are on the line everyday, and sadly can treat people in a way thats indicative of the fear and anger in society at large. While they often see people having terrible days and it can shape their responses, they are generally very good indeed at handling tense situations.
Why someone with some degree of authority and tact wasn't brought on board is the biggest hole in the swiss cheese.
Sadly, calling law enforcement to deal with perceived disruptive pax is far from unheard of...
As an aside, United pax flying yesterday told me how hard the cabin crews worked to make people feel comfortable. The folks at the coal face are mortified by what happened.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: 60 north
Age: 59
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh Dear
I cant wait for the next Stag or Hen Party heading for Spain when asked to please settle down.
" You cant touch us, dude"
Thanks United, looking forward to full flights this summer.
I just printed out the Senate Committee letter and nailed it over my desk.
Good to see there is some common sense in US.
Or Airmanship, to use our term.
I cant wait for the next Stag or Hen Party heading for Spain when asked to please settle down.
" You cant touch us, dude"
Thanks United, looking forward to full flights this summer.
I just printed out the Senate Committee letter and nailed it over my desk.
Good to see there is some common sense in US.
Or Airmanship, to use our term.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Village of Santo Poco
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of you forget what business you're in. That business is transporting people who have purchased tickets.
The good news for you is that people will continue to fly to get from A to B as soon as possible.
The bad news is that your attitude has already infected the traveling public, and most travelers choose based on price instead of satisfaction.
So when another company undercuts United, your alienated customers will flock there.
Serves you right.
Furthermore, to follow your logic, what happens when United later undercuts that competitor to whom everyone flocked? Will they flock back? I've seen it happen. I can't tell you how many times I've heard a customer say something to the effect "I swore never again to fly on X but they were $17.41 cheaper than Y, so..."
I'm exaggerating but you get the point.
Just food for thought.
What cannot happen is the quiet customer, minding their own business, suddenly getting "selected at random" to be ejected just so the company can resolve its own manning-planning cock-up.
