Doctor Dragged From United Plane After Computer "Solves" Overbooking Problem

[McCordRm]

Just now, Jason S. said:

That's airline SOP - apparently they upped the offers to like $800 and free hotel for the night. no one took it.

Yep. I'm aware that standard procedure is to offer something, but just because it's in the employee

handbook doesn't mean the customers are aware of it. It was pointed out to me that they were

made aware, which I hadn't heard being reported.

[papercut2008uk]

Now the media machine is digging up the guys past to justify what happened.

 

Doctor dragged off United flight was felon who traded prescription drugs
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4401980/Dr-dragged-United-swapped-drugs-secret-gay-sex.html

 

What they don't seem to understand is this whole situation isn't about the guy, it's about what could happen to anyone that is faced with this situation. 

[Joni_78]

If it's overbooked it's airlines problem and they have to find another way to get their employees where they need to be not remove customers from the flight, but I guess everything is possible in America. BTW, United already lost 600 million as the stock is falling

[Defcon]

^ Not surprising at all. The entire incident will be forgotten in a few days, I'm surprised Trump hasn't tweeted about it yet, prob too busy planing his next golf trip or getting security advice from Ivanka.

 

What United did is a small part of the real issue - if the cops had politely escorted the guy off the plane there'd be no story, this kind of thing happens all the time. But instead they chose to use deadly force with no attempt at deescalation which is our standard policy now, whether its individuals or nations.

[techbeck]

16 minutes ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

It's sad to see police in the US being used to assault citizens at the behest of corporations looking to renege on contractual obligations.

Cops are not used to assault citizens.  Some cops are just ######.  Not like United, or other companies, hire cops to assault citizens.  What is sad is how people do not know how to act properly and evaluate certain situations they were trained for.

[Defcon]

1 minute ago, techbeck said:

Cops are not used to assault citizens.  Some cops are just ######.  Not like United, or other companies, hire cops to assault citizens.  What is sad is how people do not know how to act properly and evaluate certain situations they were trained for.

You mean like the cops. Or were they trained to beat innocent people presenting no threat?

[techbeck]

1 minute ago, Defcon said:

You mean like the cops. Or were they trained to beat innocent people presenting no threat?

Yes, like the cops.  They are not trained to beat innocent people.  Some just over react or take it to far and they need to be held accountable for their actions.

[patseguin Global Moderator]

1 hour ago, Raze said:

That guess is an opinion.  And you based your guess/opinion on what, since you didn't know the whole story?

 

opinion: a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge

No, an opinion would be something like "He was combative so he deserved to be knocked unconscious.". I was merely speculating that there was more to what happened than shown the video.

[Defcon]

36 minutes ago, techbeck said:

Yes, like the cops.  They are not trained to beat innocent people.  Some just over react or take it to far and they need to be held accountable for their actions.

They are never held accountable. This is nothing - They can and do get away with murder on a regular basis. And the 'good' cops stand by and support them, they do nothing.

[techbeck]

Just now, Defcon said:

They are never held accountable. This is nothing - They can and do get away with murder on a regular basis. And the 'good' cops stand by and support them, they do nothing.

How do you know the good cops support them?  Also, in this case, looks like it was security not cops.  And cops are held accountable all the time for their actions.  Just because they were not in the high profile cases, does not mean they are not held accountable.

[DocM]

18 hours ago, shockz said:

United has really gone downhill the last year. I'm a premier member with lifetime status and have also had issues with overbooking, even though I've booked months in advance via a travel agency with a guaranteed seat, not to mention my member status. On more than one occasion I've been bumped by no fault of my own and receive a lousy free flight voucher for my next trip, that half the time can't be used in the time allotted and am put up in a one star hotel. A red roof in is usually a better experience.  The one time I said thanks, but no thanks and got a refund and instead took a rental car back to my home. It's a truly pain in the ass to be delayed for up to a 36 hours when you were guaranteed a seat, checked in, confirmed seat, only to be told it's overbooked.

>

Similar experience here, United's customer service and attitude has become a frozen manure-cicle, which is why we try to stick to Southwest, Virgin, JetBlue or Delta out of DTX. 

 

Did you her United has thought up a new Economy class?

 

[xendrome]

4 hours ago, Riva said:

Wow this is a new low for United Airlines and United States.

What does the "United States" have to do with anything.

[Emn1ty]

3 hours ago, DevTech said:

Some facts can be determined.

 

"Refusal to follow orders" is 100% a correct statement.

 

Now what you do with that is another thing entirely:

 

-  He was a paying customer of a service and traditionally the service provider is supposed to follow the orders of the person who is paying them.

- The formation of the United Sates of America was due to a "refusal to follow orders"

- Even if he was in the wrong (and that requires some tortuous logic to believe) any sort of Civil Disobedience should be accorded the highest degree of respect and non-violence in a society founded on the ideals of freedom?

First of all, they were offering $800 compensation and nobody took it. So their options were to ground the flight and wait, or remove some people from the flight and make it work. The plane is private property, and the airline has a right to remove you for whatever reason they deem necessary (assuming they compensate you as stipulated in the law). They did that. And apparently this guy after being removed ran back onto the plane. He was so adamant about refusing to leave the plane that even after being physically beaten he thought he should extend the encounter further.

I really don't think it should have come to this at all, and United could have simply upped the payment to $1600 or a $2000 to avoid all the new BS they are going through (including an $800,000,000 drop in stock value). But it seems like people are trying very damn hard to justify this guy's actions because for some reason you think you have a "right" to be on private property and not be forcibly removed.

Try that anywhere else in the US and you'll get the same result, forced removal from the premises. The only reason this is a big story is because it was recorded. In my opinion, this guy was asking for it after hearing he re-entered the flight despite already being removed. Despite being offered $800 and a free hotel stay, he still continued to be uncooperative and stubborn.

Paying customers have rights outlined in the agreement they make when buying those services, and those services clearly outline the policy when overbooking/bumping occurs.

[ATLien_0]

 

[Mockingbird]

On 4/10/2017 at 9:53 AM, Nogib said:

Once the authorities are involved, I don't care how badly you WANT to stay on that flight, it isn't going to happen and you should just accept defeat and fight it later.  This dumb fool got what he deserved.

Don't worry. He'll get a nice big settlement from United.

Edited April 11, 2017 by Mockingbird

[Mockingbird]

On 4/10/2017 at 10:02 AM, Bryan R. said:

That lady in the background is ridiculous. "OH MY GAWD". "Look what you've done to him". You mean look what he did to himself? He had every opportunity to get off knowing he would be required to. Then as the police have to use force, he starts screaming like a child? Get a grip.

Which part is his fault?

 

He paid for the ticket. He showed up on time to board the plane.

[Mockingbird]

On 4/10/2017 at 10:47 AM, nekrosoft13 said:

i hope he sues those ######ers for everything they got.

It don't think it will even go to court.

 

He'll get a nice big settlement.

[Bryan R.]

5 minutes ago, Mockingbird said:

Which part is his fault?

 

He paid for the ticket. He showed up on time to board the plane.

I don't get why everyone thinks paying customers have a right to the product they bought. Especially on an airline where the customer isn't actually the center of the universe. Safety and procedure are everything on an airline. So what if United's procedure irritates the customer. Vote with your wallet. Instead everyone continues to use and support them.

 

Bottom line is, when you are being required to leave an aircraft you better damn well do it or the authorities will escort you off however they need to.

 

It actually seems pretty suspicious to me that the passenger did not want to leave the plane that badly. He could have had ulterior, possibly malicious motives to stay on that flight to the level of requiring removal.

 

[Mockingbird]

21 hours ago, Breach said:

Yes, I agree that paying passengers shouldn't be physically harmed, but what are they supposed to do when they say 'get out' and he says 'I won't' (assuming this is what happened here)? Find a more vulnerable passenger? Stay on the tarmac until someone decides to leave?

Refuse to let the plane take off unless he leaves.

 

I can almost assure you that he's not going to sit there for the next eight hours eating peanuts.

[Bryan R.]

4 minutes ago, Mockingbird said:

Refuse to let the plane take off unless he leaves.

 

I can almost assure you that he's not going to sit there for the next eight hours eating peanuts.

Right, so everyone should wait until he's done protesting? He already refused to get off...

[Mockingbird]

27 minutes ago, Bryan R. said:

Right, so everyone should wait until he's done protesting? He already refused to get off...

He would get hungry/thirty eventually or might need to use the restroom.

 

Also, it wouldn't have been a PR disaster.

[techbeck]

6 hours ago, Riva said:

Wow this is a new low for United Airlines and United States.

huh?  what does this have to do with the US other than it taking part in a US city?

[techbeck]

1 minute ago, Riva said:

 

The law enforcement officers losing it and being violent. Come and see british cops being assertive without being dicks

So the few represent the whole?  The issue lies with United and the company they use for security.   Not a new low for the US

[DevTech]

1 hour ago, Emn1ty said:

First of all, they were offering $800 compensation and nobody took it. So their options were to ground the flight and wait, or remove some people from the flight and make it work. The plane is private property, and the airline has a right to remove you for whatever reason they deem necessary (assuming they compensate you as stipulated in the law). They did that. And apparently this guy after being removed ran back onto the plane. He was so adamant about refusing to leave the plane that even after being physically beaten he thought he should extend the encounter further.

I really don't think it should have come to this at all, and United could have simply upped the payment to $1600 or a $2000 to avoid all the new BS they are going through (including an $800,000,000 drop in stock value). But it seems like people are trying very damn hard to justify this guy's actions because for some reason you think you have a "right" to be on private property and not be forcibly removed.

Try that anywhere else in the US and you'll get the same result, forced removal from the premises. The only reason this is a big story is because it was recorded. In my opinion, this guy was asking for it after hearing he re-entered the flight despite already being removed. Despite being offered $800 and a free hotel stay, he still continued to be uncooperative and stubborn.

Paying customers have rights outlined in the agreement they make when buying those services, and those services clearly outline the policy when overbooking/bumping occurs.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/04/united-video-scandal-law/522552/?utm_source=nextdraft&utm_medium=email

 

"According to its contract of carriage, United can deny boarding on oversold flights if passengers don’t accept compensation. Here is the key part of the contract language, under Rule 25 Denied Boarding Compensation (which, notably, says nothing about forcibly removing passengers after they have boarded the plane to make room for United workers):"

 

"Boarding Priorities - If a flight is Oversold, no one may be denied boarding against his/her will until UA or other carrier personnel first ask for volunteers who will give up their reservations willingly in exchange for compensation as determined by UA. If there are not enough volunteers, other Passengers may be denied boarding involuntarily in accordance with UA’s boarding priority."

 

So you really stretch the idea of private property to cover a large amount of money already paid to be sitting in a seat on that private property and the even if you were the only person this year to actually read the fine print you would have been rewarded with the info that accorting to United's own policies you can't be bumped once your are actually sitting in the plane.

 

So no, they didn't have the "evil sneaky fine print" right to do this, they had no moral right whatsoever to do this and they certainly had no common sense in their management chain to have allowed this to happen.

 

"Paying customers have rights outlined in the agreement they make when buying those services, and those services clearly outline the policy when overbooking/bumping occurs."

 

Yup, that agreement says he gets to stay in his seat!

 

[Mockingbird]

United Airlines says controversial flight was not overbooked; CEO apologizes again

 

Quote

United spokesman Jonathan Guerin said Tuesday that all 70 seats on United Express Flight 3411 were filled, but the plane was not overbooked as the airline previously reported. Instead, United and regional affiliate Republic Airlines, which operated the flight, selected four passengers to be removed to accommodate crew members needed in Louisville the next day. The passengers were selected based on a combination of criteria spelled out in United’s contract of carriage, including frequent-flier status, fare type, check-in time and connecting flight implications, among others, according to United.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/04/11/united-ceo-employees-followed-procedures-flier-belligerent/100317166/