[DonH57]

Who knows the whole story. I thought the gentleman made have had some personal issues or other problem by his behavior. The only thing I do know is I was watching a news piece where they talked about reading the fine print on your tickets and boarding passes anytime you purchase a ticket.

[Edjkoz]

I am amazed at how the public has just accepted the overbooking policies of airlines. We say that's the rules; that's the way it is; fares for all you f us would be more expensive. I worked in the airline industry for 35 years and I always believed that when you put your hard earned money out for a ticket, the seat should be confirmed.

[biker1]

There is no spin - only a statement of fact. Your chances of being involuntarily bumped from a flight are extremely small; about 1 in 10,000, averaged across the major carriers. Approximately 8 times as many people volunteer to be bumped than are involuntarily bumped. I have flown several million miles, a good portion internationally, and I have never been involuntarily bumped. I have volunteered my seat in overbooked situations numerous times and have been compensated extremely well. Weather or mechanical issues are much more likely to prevent you from reaching your destination on time. The contractual terms of your airline ticket are available before you buy it. There is no "right" or "wrong" - only the terms you agreed to when you bought the ticket. If you don't like the terms then you are free to pay for a private charter. However, mechanical and weather problems can still impact you.

Originally Posted by CFrance

You can spin it however you want, but in the end there is no guarantee you will get what you paid for. I can attest, as one who has been severely disrupted by this overbooking process. Money isn't everything. You book a flight and pay for it. You book a certain time and destination. It is not guaranteed to be delivered. Overbooking is wrong.

[CFrance]

Originally Posted by biker1

There is no spin - only a statement of fact. Your chances of being involuntarily bumped from a flight are extremely small; about 1 in 10,000, averaged across the major carriers. Approximately 8 times as many people volunteer to be bumped than are involuntarily bumped. I have flown several million miles, a good portion internationally, and I have never been involuntarily bumped. I have volunteered my seat in overbooked situations numerous times and have been compensated extremely well. Weather or mechanical issues are much more likely to prevent you from reaching your destination on time. The contractual terms of your airline ticket are available before you buy it. There is no "right" or "wrong" - only the terms you agreed to when you bought the ticket. If you don't like the terms then you are free to pay for a private charter. However, mechanical and weather problems can still impact you.

I have to disagree on a certain level, from a consumer's point of view. There are recent rules that been made that airlines can no longer sequester people on the runway for more than a certain period because it's more convenient for them. There could surely be rules against overbooking.

I and my husband have also traveled millions of miles and many years international both for business and pleasure. But you and I rarely agree on anything. So there you are. I'm not going to argue over something that is just one person's opinion vs. another's

[Paper1]

Once again Americans are picking their heros poorly, this Dr is no hero. Agreed it was very unfortunate his number came up but his actions and the sensational way the story was presented by media has elevated him to sainthood with attorneys lined up 4 deep to "make him whole" against the airline industry. Kind of like David and Goliath. I think I'll wait for a different hero.

[rubicon]

In any business supposedly it is a good faith transaction of an exchange of money for services/product provided.

The rule to allow an airline the benefit of overbooking with their option to bump a person who in good faith paid for the seat their sitting in is wrong on all levels.

If airlines are concerned about not leaving a tarmac fully loaded then there are other ways to deal with the issue.

In this case the reason was a flight crew needed to be somewhere else/ well then its your problem airline so why don't you have a working plan with others such as a helicopter ride for the crew?

It was predicable that if this passenger had any personal discrepancy it would be well publicized because this airline stands to lose millions here.

In law the rule is you take the plaintiff as you find him. what this guy did or did not do has no bearing on the actions of the airline. People ought to be outraged that any person was treated in manner this man was and for such a ridiculous reason . I mean he wasn't a potential terrorist.

United deserves what it is about to get. Lucky for them I will not be on that jury.

Personal Best Regards:

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by CFrance

I have to disagree on a certain level, from a consumer's point of view. There are recent rules that been made that airlines can no longer sequester people on the runway for more than a certain period because it's more convenient for them. There could surely be rules against overbooking.

I and my husband have also traveled millions of miles and many years international both for business and pleasure. But you and I rarely agree on anything. So there you are. I'm not going to argue over something that is just one person's opinion vs. another's

Another common sense post!

I predict that just like the legislation you mentioned, new laws will be enacted to protect citizens...from this abhorrent action ever being taken again.

I am constantly amazed at the number of people who seem to immediately jump to the defense of big companies....instead of their fellow citizens.

[biker1]

I am not stating an opinion. I am only stating the facts. I leave the pontification to others.

Originally Posted by CFrance

I have to disagree on a certain level, from a consumer's point of view. There are recent rules that been made that airlines can no longer sequester people on the runway for more than a certain period because it's more convenient for them. There could surely be rules against overbooking.

I and my husband have also traveled millions of miles and many years international both for business and pleasure. But you and I rarely agree on anything. So there you are. I'm not going to argue over something that is just one person's opinion vs. another's

[biker1]

The question of whether United Airlines violated the terms of the ticket (a civil case) and/or broke some laws (a criminal case) may very well play out in court. Clearly they behaved badly and there might be some short term financial consequences as the bad PR will probably cost them some ticket sales. This is an isolated event and all of the facts have yet to be uncovered. The sky isn't falling.

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

Another common sense post!

I predict that just like the legislation you mentioned, new laws will be enacted to protect citizens...from this abhorrent action ever being taken again.

I am constantly amazed at the number of people who seem to immediately jump to the defense of big companies....instead of their fellow citizens.

[ajbrown]

No matter if United is in the 'right' based on contract or law, as others have stated they handled this extremely poorly. As the situation presented itself they had the ability to raise the 'offer to give up seat' to $1300.

I would be surprised if they would not get a hit at $1000, $1100, etc.

That said, when this all blows over, my fear is the airlines solution for the good of the customer is to SELL a 'bump free' seat for an extra $50

PS What is the old expression, 'poor planning on your part (United) does not constitute an...'

[Madelaine Amee]

Originally Posted by rubicon

In any business supposedly it is a good faith transaction of an exchange of money for services/product provided.

The rule to allow an airline the benefit of overbooking with their option to bump a person who in good faith paid for the seat their sitting in is wrong on all levels.

If airlines are concerned about not leaving a tarmac fully loaded then there are other ways to deal with the issue.

In this case the reason was a flight crew needed to be somewhere else/ well then its your problem airline so why don't you have a working plan with others such as a helicopter ride for the crew?

It was predicable that if this passenger had any personal discrepancy it would be well publicized because this airline stands to lose millions here.

In law the rule is you take the plaintiff as you find him. what this guy did or did not do has no bearing on the actions of the airline. People ought to be outraged that any person was treated in manner this man was and for such a ridiculous reason . I mean he wasn't a potential terrorist.

United deserves what it is about to get. Lucky for them I will not be on that jury.

Personal Best Regards:

Great post and I thank you for putting it in black and white. I was appalled when I saw the news media and posters on here immediately dragging up his past. IT IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS PEOPLE. It has nothing to do with how he was treated by this airline. In a court of law his past would not be admissible. He was injured and dragged by his feet off a plane - and that is all we should be concerned with!

[Jima64]

People keep stating "overbooking" by the airline. There was no overbooking for the flight and they only needed to move employees to another city.

[graciegirl]

Here is my summary.

There is something wrong with United's PR and policies.

and

There is something real wrong with that guy.

[Madelaine Amee]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Here is my summary.

There is something wrong with United's PR and policies.

and

There is something real wrong with that guy.

And again, I state, that has NOTHING to do with his treatment by United!

[suebu]

Same situation happened to our kids two years ago heading back from here to home. United was going to bump two out of a family of four, and my daughter-in-law came unglued, as she is not a great flyer, and having to be split up from hubby, each taking a kid, it wasn't clear to her why.....agent at desk told her since no one volunteered, they were "chosen" since their tickets were purchased so far in advance, and cheaper than many others....Really? isn't that the goal.....purchase far out, get the best price, etc? Finally, at last minute, someone volunteered, and they were all able to travel together. writing to airlines after the fact only produced a more frustrating response than a comforting one. I know it can happen on any airline, but the way it's handled is the key to customer satisfaction and minimizing the passenger's nervousness and frustration. I think Southwest does it best