Protocols? Oh, it's OK to over sell tickets and then bump customers so you can position crew?

Sorry I should have been clearer. Why does there ever need to be an involuntary removal when you're overbooked?

There must be more to the story, that video was started well in to the event, but it certainly doesn't look good for UA at all.


I once had to reduce weight by 10 people in an unusual tailwind situation and the cash offer exceeded US$1,500 plus food, hotel, transportation, and the next flight confirmed, etc. People jumped at it. I feel bad for the first 2 people who accepted $500.


I would have rather cancelled the flight then let it get to the point of dragging people around - but - the good news is that, if this played out as published, this guy will probably be getting enough money to charter his own jet in the future.;)

Yes, sometimes it happens, but it doesn't usually take too much ingenuity to avoid getting into this awful situation.
Because the airlines policy was to overbook. It appears here that the seats were needed for operational reasons. If you don't get enough volunteers you have to remove people who don't want to be removed. There are varying degrees of that, and in the worst case it might be necessary to deplane everybody and start again. Far better (and likely quicker in the circumstances) than ending up in this mess.

Cha ching. I will take that blank check now.

I stopped flying on UAL twenty years ago, along with AA, because of their pizz poor service and attitudes.

We don't know what the airport police officers were told by UAL staff. They could have been asked to remove an unruly passenger.

Yeah, this is what I don't understand. You just keep raising the price until you get volunteers. I don't understand why it ever needs to be involuntary if you're overbooked.

CGB

Yes, it is appropriate to overbook. Welcome to the airline world.

Bub

Don't equate the man being pulled off the plane as a failure of protocol. 3 of the 4 people to be removed did so, the fourth didn't comply with lawful order from the police officer and you saw the result. The aircraft isn't a public place, if those responsible and with the authority to remove the pax did so properly, then it's incumbent upon the pax to leave. The good Dr needs to remember he also has responsibilities as well.

Hems

Why would he get anything besides a refund? He didn't comply with a requirement to leave the aircraft from airline officials , and did the same to police. I have no idea if UA or the police have bigger plans for him, but covering his 3rd point of contact should be his concern, he's the only one who did anything wrong.

Again, I don't understand, you just keep raising the price until you get volunteers. It doesn't take more than 30 seconds. Ring your call button if I have any takers at $2000, $3000, etc.?

The only reason I can think of is United it too tight to do that.

Never let the facts get in the way of customer perception.

It has to be - REASONABLE and LAWFUL. The cops can't be agents for the airlines for civil matters. This pax was not disruptive, not drunk, not a threat to security.

Ironically, the Chicago Airport LEOs aren't even trusted with firearms.

Bottom line

Maybe Chicago was so disappointing that everyone wanted to leave, no matter what.:E

Here's an article published yesterday bragging about how the author made $11,000 by getting bumped off Delta flights a few days ago:

The article is here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurabe.../#7534167a4de1

You're kidding right?

It's their aircraft so it'ts ok to assault the customers?

Certainly very bad publicity for UA and deservedly so. No way to offload legit passengers.
Has hit the news in Germany as well.

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."

Presumably written before they became aware that there are several different videos of the incident circulating on the Net ...

Yes, all businesses are. There is a limit to the compensation they will offer at this stage of contract failure. Generally this action takes place at the gate before boarding.

No indeed. However it does raise the question why the police were called?

From reports they got to $800 and a hotel.

CFR 250.5 fixes compensation for denied bording at 400% of the fare, with a maximum of $1350. (Can be less if they get rerouted to arrive within an hour or two)

Perhaps if they fixed it at $10,000, (not a percentage of the fare) there would never be another denied boarding.

FWIW - passengers are saying they offered $800, and when no takers, said an algorithm had determined 4 passengers.

In other words they were cheap gits.

So it's important to the police what part of the world a person looks as if they come from?

Being in aviation claims of all sorts including pax liability, UA(well, their insurance company)is going to get crushed on this one. Attorneys are probably camping in front of his house now since the video is viral, and they see an innocent physician being man-handled like a sack of rice, blood on his face. Oh an American jury would tee-off on United if it ever made it to court, multiple of eye witnesses to take the stand for the plaintiff, so UA will throw big money at this one to make it go away.

What has race got to do with it? He is a paying passenger. And he was NOT wearing leggings!

All I can say, after 40 years in the professional aviation business, is that I'm appalled by these UA thugs.
The man bought a ticket, paid for up front. As far as I can see, it's a legally binding contract. He saw his need to be on that particular flight as greater than that of the airline staff, who could have used other means. For him to be assaulted in that way was totally uncalled for.

United Airlines? They can stuff it.

It was a short flight. For the amount of money they were going to have to offer to the offloaded PAX why wouldn't the airline just charter a small jet and move the crew that way?

What's the significance of him being Asian, 69 and male?

If he was white, female and 25 would that make a difference?

'How was work, honey?'

'Same old same old: just beat the crap out of some old foreign guy who wanted to go to work.'

Looking at what we know at the moment, the jury is still out on a number of assumptions you have made. For instance the Department of Transport rules say:



Equally:

What marks this case out is that the pax was already on the plane and had a seat. So he was being forceably removed to accommodate someone else.
UA is going to have to provide some really strong reasons, in accordance with the policy, the DoT mandatorily requires, to justify their action.


We all wait with baited breath to hear their justification.

Yup, let's be clear what happened. United made a simple financial trade off that they could do under the law, rather than raise the price to a point where there would be takers.

The police were called because the passenger refused to leave. The pax doesn't have some absolute right to remain on private property. Thisis UA's property, if you're booted out of someone's business and refuse, do you honestly think management is just going to say, ok, you can stay.

It's not as salacious as you make it out to be, a DH crew needed to be on the plane. Moving crews, causing pax to be bumped is a daily occurrence. You may not like it, but that's business.

But they invited him onto their 'property' in the first place.

It would be interesting to see if airline such as UA were regularly off-loading passengers.

West Coast - clearly it is business. Wiki Gerald Ratner. :)

Waiting for proof from UAL that a crew was being re-positioned, and not just a commuting crew that were being accommodated by their co-workers.

Yes. I can envisage a sensible solution where you do just that and look for another solution. Sometimes the "red mist" or " I must show you who is the boss" is provoked to the forefront and the result deteriorates into something like this. There are times when you lose the battle to win the war. In a customer focused business this often happens.

That has zero to do with this situation. The company made a business decision, sucks for the pax, sucks from a PR perspective, but it isn't a matter that what happened was wrong. The only one in the wrong was the pax.

Name one thing from a legality perspective UA did wrong.

That would be the total melt-down for UA PR.

Well, lets see. For an airline to have any business at all pax must be willing to pay fares.
If an airline send a message that us fare paying passengers are just scum to be beaten up for their corporate convenience then that makes our fare buying decisions easy when considering where to spend our money.

You're mixing elements. This is about legality. UA will take its lumps from a PR pov, what they did from outward appearance isn't a legality one. The pax is the one who should be worrying about that, not UA.

West Coast, please be so kind as mention which airline you work for.

Hitchens has it spot on. But PR boo-boos are UA's standard fare. This organisation are probably run by gifted people who know the price of everything, but the value of nothing. Here is another classic. They fail to realise that it is cheaper to cough up what appears large sums of cash on the day rather than exorbitant amounts later on. This will only cost a few million. If the powers that be took their hands out of their trousers and considered real life they might save themselves millions in the long run. Serves them right.

This 'doctor' doesn't appear to be mentally stable as he races down the aisle after reboarding the plane and chants 'I have to go home, I have to go home':

https://twitter.com/Tyler_Bridges/st...28695360663552

Well, I'm ex Army, RAF and airline captain with a couple of police officers in my extended family and, if as reported, this was a disgraceful assault on a legitimate passenger who had legally boarded the aircraft and was not behaving in a disruptive manner.
I do wish I was in his legal shoes in the USA right now :E

Airbubba, I would imagine that being smacked in the mouth and dragged off an aircraft by thugs would upset many people.