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

[Mockingbird]

9 minutes ago, Riva said:

I dont even have to say he is full of BS since his letter praising staff for the incident this morning leaked.

The first two things he should have done are to offer an apology and some compensations. It would have done a lot to contain the damage.

 

"I want to apologize on the behalf of United Airlines. This is not what you should expect of UA.

 

As a token of this apology, United Airlines offers to let Mr. Whatever fly on first class free of charge for the next year."

[DevTech]

10 minutes ago, Mockingbird said:

The first two things he should have done are to offer an apology and some compensations. It would have done a lot to contain the damage.

 

"I want to apologize on the behalf of United Airlines. This is not what you should expect of UA.

 

As a token of this apology, United Airlines offers to let Mr. Whatever fly on first class free of charge for the next year."

 

That is a good start, although you need a TARDIS to make it work at this point.

 

If the executive had interrupted his golf game for a minute, he would have realized that his company committed violent assault on it's own customer and every single potential customer would have to wonder just a bit if they were next. Cue in mass exodus of customers...

 

Lifetime First Class and immediate announcement of employee training (including himself) for zero-tolerance on physical assault of customers are starting minimums.

 

That's probably not going to be enough at this point and a campaign something like "our pizza sucks" which Dominos used to rescue their company is probably needed here.

 

https://hbr.org/2016/11/how-dominos-pizza-reinvented-itself

http://www.cpbgroup.com/work/dominos/dominos-pizza-turnaround

 

[Bryan R.]

31 minutes ago, Riva said:

This airline incidentally has a high fatality rate for pets in transit.

That is correct. We've had our own bad experience with a puppy we had transferred using UA. They basically didn't feed our tiny puppy the whole flight and we suspect that his crate was dropped.

 

With that said, and my previous statements, I still don't like how this passenger acted. He simply needed to get off when force going to be the only option left. Yes, UA are crap. Their policies are apparently crap. The CEO is apparently crap. People should vote with their wallet, not protest and make a scene on a flight full of people.

[trag3dy]

On 4/10/2017 at 3:26 PM, Jim K said:

There is absolutely no reason for this gentleman to have been forcibly dragged out, bloodied up and ultimately taken to the hospital...all because (really) United overbooked their flight.  They could have handled this so much better ... I do not blame the victim at all in this.

 

Major PR hit for United and hopefully they will change their practice ... though I doubt it as in a few days this will be "yesterday's" news and be forgotten.  

 

This should never happen to a passenger ... simply because the plane is overbooked.

 

 

Saw this on Twitter ...

 

 

Fitting.

He actually got back on the flight. Not sure what happened to him afterwards but there is footage of him running back to his seat so I don't know if he actually went to the hospital.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

5 minutes ago, trag3dy said:

He actually got back on the flight. Not sure what happened to him afterwards but there is footage of him running back to his seat so I don't know if he actually went to the hospital.

 

 

Quote

On Tuesday afternoon, Dao's lawyers said he was being treated at a Chicago hospital.

CNN

[The Evil Overlord]

5 hours ago, patseguin said:

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.

Actually, no, that's modification of an opinion, the opinion part of that statement was 'he deserved to be knocked unconscious'.

I have no opinion on the matter as I don't know the whole story, but feel sympathetic towards the victim at this point, something that can be changed if the victim is indeed a perpetrator.

[Emn1ty]

3 hours ago, DevTech said:

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!

 

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/airlines/news/a26010/united-airlines-bump-passenger-rights/
 

https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx
 

Quote

Seat assignments, regardless of class of service, are not guaranteed and are subject to change without notice. UA reserves the right to reseat a Passenger for any reason, including from an Economy Plus seat for which the applicable fee has been paid (fees range from 9 USD/CAD to 299 USD/CAD per flight segment per person), and if a Passenger is improperly or erroneously upgraded to a different class of service. If a Passenger is removed from an Economy Plus seat for which a fee has been paid, and the Passenger is not re-accommodated in an Economy Plus seat or a seat of equal or greater value, or if a Passenger is downgraded from a class of service and is not re-accommodated in a seat in an equal or greater class of service for which a fee has been paid, the Passenger will be eligible for a refund in accordance with Rule 27. UA also prohibits Passengers from selling their seat assignments at any time and/or exchanging them at the time of boarding without first advising a member of the crew.

Quote

Schedules are Subject To Change Without Notice - Times shown on tickets, timetables, published schedules or elsewhere, and aircraft type and similar details reflected on tickets or UA’s schedule are not guaranteed and form no part of this contract. UA may substitute alternate carriers or aircraft, delay or cancel flights, and alter or omit stopping places or connections shown on the ticket at any time. UA will promptly provide Passengers the best available information regarding known delays, cancellations, misconnections and diversions, but UA is not liable for any misstatements or other errors or omissions in connection with providing such information. No employee, agent or representative of UA can bind UA legally by reason of any statements relating to flight status or other information. Except to the extent provided in this Rule, UA shall not be liable for failing to operate any flight according to schedule, or for any change in flight schedule, with or without notice to the passenger.

Quote

Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to:

• Passengers whose conduct is disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent;
• Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;

Seems like they have their bases covered in the Contract of Carriage.

[The Evil Overlord]

8 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/airlines/news/a26010/united-airlines-bump-passenger-rights/
 

https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx
 

Seems like they have their bases covered in the Contract of Carriage.

Same could be said about all company contracts, they're there with addendums and loopholes designed specifically to bail the 'company' out if ###### goes south unfortunately, very few realise that those loopholes can be reversed depending on the situation.

[Emn1ty]

1 hour ago, The Evil Overlord said:

Same could be said about all company contracts, they're there with addendums and loopholes designed specifically to bail the 'company' out if ###### goes south unfortunately, very few realise that those loopholes can be reversed depending on the situation.

Yes they can, however this guy seems to have made a few of his own mistakes during this encounter.

[+Fulcrum Subscriber¹]

On 4/10/2017 at 11:53 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.

I would say that is cowardly advice ignoring all the civil rights accomplishments in the last 1000years. If you think surrendering your rights works, tell that to the JEWS in NAZI GERMANY...

 

Wow you called him a "dumb fool" too... just wow.

 

If you had any sense of decency and were on such a plane, you should walk off in protest.

[The Evil Overlord]

39 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

Yes they can, however this guy seems to have made a few of his own mistakes during this encounter.

True, I keep thinking about the 'Hold your Ground' (rule) not sure if it's an actual rule as I'm not versed in U.S. laws or bylaws, but a lot of people do take that to some ridiculous heights

[FloatingFatMan]

9 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

So their options were to ground the flight and wait, or remove some people from the flight and make it work.

OR the staff that were supposed to replace the paying customers could have gone on a different flight, even another airline.

 

Stop trying to justify what UA did.  They had NO legal recourse for removing that passenger by force.  He'd paid for his seat, they'd accepted that by allowing him to TAKE the seat. Later choosing to remove him is THEM breaking the contract, not the passenger.

[FloatingFatMan]

8 hours ago, Riva said:

 

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

AFAIK, they weren't proper cops, they were airport security, private cops.

 

[mudslag]

5 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/airlines/news/a26010/united-airlines-bump-passenger-rights/
 

https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx
 

Seems like they have their bases covered in the Contract of Carriage.

 

 

A few things, first and foremost the CEO has all but essentially accepted culpability for UA being at fault. 

 

As per the quotes you posted....

"Seat assignments, regardless of class of service, are not guaranteed and are subject to change without notice. UA reserves the right to reseat a Passenger for any reason"

 

That's "reseat" and is not the same as kick off, they were not trying to reseat him. This that first one is moot. 

 

And "Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew"

 

That's going to be hard to prove he interfered or failed to comply with the duties of the crew members. Being kicked out of his seat to make room for a UA employee is not going to go over well as being seen as interfering or not complying. Not that any of this actually matters, UA's back is in a corner with little if any wiggle room to get free.

 

[FloatingFatMan]

Personally, I hope he refuses a settlement and takes them to a court.  A settlement means other companies will keep on treating their customers like garbage. A court ruling, on the other hand, will force them to reevaluate their policies and stop treating customers badly.

 

Customers are the only reason a company exists.  Without customers, there's no income and without income, no company.

 

[Brys]

3 hours ago, Fulcrum said:

I would say that is cowardly advice ignoring all the civil rights accomplishments in the last 1000years. If you think surrendering your rights works, tell that to the JEWS in NAZI GERMANY...

Hahaha, took us 6 pages to finally apply Godwin's law...

[Mockingbird]

14 hours ago, papercut2008uk said:

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. 

Isn't this what DailyMail always do?

 

If someone get hit by a car, DM would run a story about how he/she stole candy from a store when he/she was 12-years old.

[mudslag]

https://streamable.com/xh1q1

 

[patseguin Global Moderator]

11 hours ago, The Evil Overlord said:

Actually, no, that's modification of an opinion, the opinion part of that statement was 'he deserved to be knocked unconscious'.

I have no opinion on the matter as I don't know the whole story, but feel sympathetic towards the victim at this point, something that can be changed if the victim is indeed a perpetrator.

OK you win. ;-)

[Danielx64]

Just dropping this here:

 

 

[Nick H. Supervisor]

Quote

United Airlines boss Oscar Munoz will not resign

 

United Airlines' chief executive has said he will not quit amid an explosive backlash to video of a screaming man being dragged off a plane.

Oscar Munoz said he felt "shame and embarrassment" and vowed it would never happen again to a seated passenger on one of United's overbooked aircraft.

Source and more

 

Can't say that I'm surprised.

[FloatingFatMan]

1 hour ago, Nick H. said:

Source and more

 

Can't say that I'm surprised.

To be fair, it wasn't his fault. The ones that asked security to drag him off the plane though, THEY should be fired immediately.

 

[Nick H. Supervisor]

22 minutes ago, FloatingFatMan said:

To be fair, it wasn't his fault. The ones that asked security to drag him off the plane though, THEY should be fired immediately.

Oh, I completely agree. He made his own mistakes with the way he communicated internally, but even that isn't a reason for him to resign.

[oldtimefighter]

13 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/airlines/news/a26010/united-airlines-bump-passenger-rights/
 

https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx
 

Seems like they have their bases covered in the Contract of Carriage.

 

What was the point of your comment? It's irrelevant whether United had the right to have the passenger removed or not. Talk about missing the whole point...

 

8 hours ago, FloatingFatMan said:

AFAIK, they weren't proper cops, they were airport security, private cops.

 

They were not proper cops but I believe they were city of Chicago employees and not private security.

 

United is getting a lot of flack for this and they should but it doesn't seem many people are talking about the actual organization that beat this man and dragged him off the plane (then let him get back on the plane somehow)  which was the Chicago Aviation officers.

 

I guess they been asking to carry guns. Thank God they weren't already and looks like won't any time in the near future...

 

http://chicago.suntimes.com/news/viral-video-kills-chance-aviation-security-officers-will-be-armed/

[Brys]

10 minutes ago, Nick H. said:

Oh, I completely agree. He made his own mistakes with the way he communicated internally, but even that isn't a reason for him to resign.

As a customer I would rather they'd try to fix things for the potential next time than just fire someone / push someone to resign and forget about it.