🔷 Open Thread

[JumboBuc]

There was no injustice here. The passenger was among the last to check-in, and the passenger is bound by the Contract of Carriage when they purchased the ticket. The guy only has himself to blame for his personal conduct.

Nope, still injustice. Just because a contract specifies that one can be removed from a plane, that doesn't make this the right way to do it. This is what United is missing with all of their 100% tone-deaf statements, and this is why they will likely suffer many millions of dollars in damage over this.

 

[LH421]

Nope, still injustice. Just because a contract specifies that one can be removed from a plane, that doesn't make this the right way to do it. This is what United is missing with all of their 100% tone-deaf statements, and this is why they will likely suffer many millions of dollars in damage over this.

On what basis?

 

[Jouhou]

Yeah, if anything this just serves to inform the public exactly how badly airlines are screwing us over and the only reason they can get away with this is through their lobbyists. Just because airlines are legally allowed to abuse people doesn't make it ok.

Also united is just a bad airline.

 

[FenwayResident]

On what basis?

Brand damage (good will), legal costs, lost revenue, lower employee morale.

Even if they don't pay anything for the inevitable lawsuit (they will) the brand damage alone is enough to cost them millions of dollars.

edit: Also about $800M worth of shareholder value vanished today.

 

[dwash59]

According to Boston Magazine, this list of architecture events in Boston launched today:

http://architecturediary.org/boston

 

[mass88]

United should have continued to up their offer until 4 people agreed to get off the plane. Check that - they never should have boarded the plane if they knew they had 4 crew members that needed to get on without 4 volunteers.

How many people actually read all of the fine print before they buy things?

 

[kmp1284]

Brand damage (good will), legal costs, lost revenue, lower employee morale.

Even if they don't pay anything for the inevitable lawsuit (they will) the brand damage alone is enough to cost them millions of dollars.

edit: Also about $800M worth of shareholder value vanished today.

It's steadily coming back. As put off as I am by the behavior of the police, if this had happened with any of the airlines I fly regularly - BA, Cathay, American, EasyJet - my travel habits would not change at all.

The more that the victim's name is published, the less people will see him as the sympathetic character he seemed to be yesterday.

 

[KentXie]

Brand damage (good will), legal costs, lost revenue, lower employee morale.

Even if they don't pay anything for the inevitable lawsuit (they will) the brand damage alone is enough to cost them millions of dollars.

edit: Also about $800M worth of shareholder value vanished today.

You can probably include higher compensation payout to bumped passengers. Because of this, more people are now aware of the contract of carriage and thus more aware that bumped passengers have the right to up to 400% of ticket value or $1300, meaning passengers are less likely to volunteer now when given a low-ball offer.

 

[Justin7]

It's steadily coming back. As put off as I am by the behavior of the police, if this had happened with any of the airlines I fly regularly - BA, Cathay, American, EasyJet - my travel habits would not change at all.

The more that the victim's name is published, the less people will see him as the sympathetic character he seemed to be yesterday.

You keep pointing out how you personally would have acted and how you will personally respond. I'm not sure why this matters. You are of course aware that not everyone views everything the same way you do. How many people are more likely to fly United after this incident? How many people are less likely to? Seems pretty simple.

 

[TheRifleman]

The question concerning the contract that any passenger can be bumped at anytime.
Does that state before you actually occupied the seat you paid for.
Does the contract state even if you have the seat you can also be removed before the flight?

This customer occupied his seat before getting a beat down. HAHAHA

 

[Archibald "Harry" Tuttle]

Looking past United, the larger issue is how the federal government has allowed the consolidation and deregulation of airlines. The airlines don't care how they treat their customers when customers don't have a choice of airline to fly. Republican and Democratic administrations are both complicit in this.

Now we have a FTC that pursues ridiculous anti-trust litigation against little professional organizations while letting large corporations merge and monopolize to their hearts content.

 

[Lrfox]

Rosa Parks and Ghandi were fucking idiots too, then. Unfair rules get changed only when people protest them.

I was going to rip this for being a woefully unfair comparison to two individuals who were pivotal in shaping lasting societal change and a passenger who was pissed off (rightfully so) on a plane. And if we're just talking about the airline's policy on overbooked flights, it IS a ridiculous comparison. While the circumstances here were different than a typical denied boarding (United's Contract of Carriage covers denied boarding, but this guy was seated in his seat and the CofC actually doesn't say anything about removing an otherwise compliant passenger from their seat on the plane), a comparison between to champions of human rights and a guy who may have grounds for taking a stand based on a quirk in the language of the Contract of Carriage is absurd.

However, when you look at some of the trends of police brutality and you take into account that this guy was abused (no other word for it) by three law enforcement officers because he was pissed about having to give up his seat (he's right for being annoyed- anyone would be- and he may actually be in the right about his rights re: the contract), it's not such a ridiculous stance to take (although I still think it's a reach). This is a man who was unarmed and not violent, and he had the snot (literally) kicked out of him. I still feel like it's smarter to just work with the cops at the time and work on rectifying wrongdoing later (because all too often, shit like this happens when you protest). However, this is another example of law enforcement being inept in their handling of a situation and this guy is sparking conversation around the country (and world). That takes him out of the realm of non-compliant passenger and into the realm of activist- though he's no Rosa Parks.

My stance on this whole thing has shifted a bit in the past 24 hours. I think United would have been within their rights (though not off the hook) if they simply denied boarding. But they kicked the guy off the plane in order to accommodate crew which isn't, as far as I can see, written into the contract and that's a big problem. They also should have continued to raise the offer (which they didn't) until volunteers came forward. Especially if accommodating this crew was so important for continued operations. While I still think he should have gotten off the plane and dealt with the handling of the situation at the airport, he certainly didn't deserve to be treated the way he was. He's a victim, and United dropped the ball. But more importantly, it's another instance of police just being out of control.

 

[FenwayResident]

I was going to rip this for being a woefully unfair comparison to two individuals who were pivotal in shaping lasting societal change and a passenger who was pissed off (rightfully so) on a plane. And in the confines of the airline's policy on overbooked flights, it IS a ridiculous comparison. While the circumstances here were different than a typical denied boarding (United's Contract of Carriage covers denied boarding, but this guy was seated in his seat and the CofC actually doesn't say anything about removing an otherwise compliant passenger from their seat on the plane), a comparison between to champions of human rights and a guy who may have grounds for taking a stand based on a quirk in the language of the Contract of Carriage is absurd.

However, when you look at some of the trends of police brutality and you take into account that this guy was abused (no other word for it) by three law enforcement officers because he was pissed about having to give up his seat (and he may actually be in the right about that), it's not such a ridiculous stance to take (although I still think it's a reach). This is a man who was unarmed and not violent, and he had the snot (literally) kicked out of him. I still feel like it's smarter to just work with the cops at the time and work on rectifying wrongdoing later (because all too often, shit like this happens when you protest). However, this is another example of law enforcement being inept in their handling of a situation and this guy is sparking conversation around the country (and world). That takes him out of the realm of non-compliant passenger and into the realm of activist- though he's no Rosa Parks.

My stance on this whole thing has shifted a bit in the past 24 hours. I think United would have been within their rights (though not off the hook) if they simply denied boarding. But they kicked the guy off the plane in order to accommodate crew which isn't, as far as I can see, written into the contract and that's a big problem. They also should have continued to raise the offer (which they didn't) until volunteers came forward. Especially if accommodating this crew was so important for continued operations. While I still think he should have gotten off the plane and dealt with the handling of the situation at the airport, he certainly didn't deserve to be treated the way he was. He's a victim, and United dropped the ball. But more importantly, it's another instance of police just being out of control.

I don't see how it's a flawed or ridiculous comparison. Yes, clearly the scope and significance of someone getting kicked off a plane is nothing compared to civil rights or the independence of a nation.

But at the heart of the matter they're the same thing: someone standing up to authority to protest an unfair situation. If the doctor had left his seat as instructed, none of us (on this board and millions across the world) would be talking about how bad it is to kick someone off a plane for no fault of their own. Politicians are making statements that what UA did is reprehensible and should be changed. It's all over every news outlet. That was only achieved by him resisting authority like a "fucking idiot."

 

[Roxxma]

There was no injustice here. The passenger was among the last to check-in, and the passenger is bound by the Contract of Carriage when they purchased the ticket. The guy only has himself to blame for his personal conduct.

Jeez. That is just as stupidly tone deaf as the airline's inept response. Do you do PR for them or something?

 

[FenwayResident]

Jeez. That is just as stupidly tone deaf as the airline's inept response. Do you do PR for them or something?

He/she works for an (unspecified) airline. In my experience both in person and online, many airline employees take an "us vs them" attitude to dealing with customers. You see it all over airliners.net as well - people defending an airline's egregious actions because "it would have caused operational issues" or "they followed procedure."

Of course there are many amazing airline employees. I'd wager the vast majority, in fact, are great. But what I described above is something I've noticed fairly often in my travels and frequenting various travel/airline boards.

 

[kmp1284]

Jeez. That is just as stupidly tone deaf as the airline's inept response. Do you do PR for them or something?

More likely serves drinks or loads bags. I think anybody beyond the base level is smart enough to not admit to working for an airline right now.

 

[Lrfox]

I don't see how it's a flawed or ridiculous comparison. Yes, clearly the scope and significance of someone getting kicked off a plane is nothing compared to civil rights or the independence of a nation.

But at the heart of the matter they're the same thing: someone standing up to authority to protest an unfair situation. If the doctor had left his seat as instructed, none of us (on this board and millions across the world) would be talking about how bad it is to kick someone off a plane for no fault of their own. Politicians are making statements that what UA did is reprehensible and should be changed. It's all over every news outlet. That was only achieved by him resisting authority like a "fucking idiot."

I still see the police action as a separate, far more serious, violation than UA's violation.

I don't think what UA did was reprehensible. It wasn't good, but it wasn't reprehensible. I think they violated their own Contract of Carriage and owed the guy significant compensation (even before the police arrived) for the inconvenience and horrible treatment. I think this situation- the actual removal of an otherwise compliant passenger from the plane- is out of the ordinary (it's not the same as "bumping" a passenger before prior to boarding which is more common and within the carrier's rights) and unfair. It deserves attention and the practice of intentionally overbooking flights should be modified (there will always be bumping depending on crew needs and equipment changes). But this guy didn't need to get the shit kicked out of him for people to see that or for change to come about (there's already pressure on airlines to change this practice).

I DO agree with you about the police actions. People saw an unarmed, relatively peaceful man get his face smashed and then dragged from the plane. The discussion about that is good, and hopefully productive. It's a wide reaching problem.

 

[mass88]

He/she works for an (unspecified) airline. In my experience both in person and online, many airline employees take an "us vs them" attitude to dealing with customers. You see it all over airliners.net as well - people defending an airline's egregious actions because "it would have caused operational issues" or "they followed procedure."

Of course there are many amazing airline employees. I'd wager the vast majority, in fact, are great. But what I described above is something I've noticed fairly often in my travels and frequenting various travel/airline boards.

Ugh - people on airliners.net will complain when a news agency talks about an A320 in an article and then puts an A319 in the picture as if the news agency should be ashamed of themselves. Not to mention many on there will blindly support an airline no matter what they do.

 

[KentXie]

According to CNN, the doctor initially agreed to leave until he found out that the next flight wasn't until the next day.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/travel/united-customer-dragged-off-overbooked-flight/index.html

Btw, the CEO's third statement sounds incredibly disingenuous. He wasn't outraged, angered, disappointed, or disturbed....until he saw the company's stock fall today.

Statement from United Airlines CEO Oscar Munoz on United Express Flight 3411

The truly horrific event that occurred on this flight has elicited many responses from all of us: outrage, anger, disappointment. I share all of those sentiments, and one above all: my deepest apologies for what happened. Like you, I continue to be disturbed by what happened on this flight and I deeply apologize to the customer forcibly removed and to all the customers aboard. No one should ever be mistreated this way.

I want you to know that we take full responsibility and we will work to make it right.

It’s never too late to do the right thing. I have committed to our customers and our employees that we are going to fix what’s broken so this never happens again. This will include a thorough review of crew movement, our policies for incentivizing volunteers in these situations, how we handle oversold situations and an examination of how we partner with airport authorities and local law enforcement. We’ll communicate the results of our review by April 30th.

I promise you we will do better.

Sincerely,

Oscar

 

[TheRifleman]

Starting today United will start to taser customers that need to be removed from over-bookings.

It will be a much quieter process.