[biker1]

There is no difference, there are not enough seats, and somebody is getting bumped, either voluntarily or involuntarily.

Originally Posted by 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.

[golfing eagles]

Not that it is at all relevant to the case, but I'd like to know what kind of "doctor" this 60+ man who threw a 2 year old's temper tantrum is.

My other concern was the involvement of a branch of the Chicago police getting involved. If I were this passenger and LEO's showed up, I would ask them what CRIME I committed, what LAW I was breaking. Since I would be a ticketed passenger in my seat minding my own business, the answer is NONE. The "fine print" and "rules" on the ticket is a contractual arrangement and therefore a CIVIL matter. The police should have informed both parties that they should work it out in civil court and left. Then , if UAL EMPLOYEES forcibly removed me, we could add another zero to the settlement check.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Madelaine Amee

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

You are right. My husband dislikes United for all kinds of reasons. We had this discussion and he was very adamant about the situation but he admitted that he might be furious, feel terribly wronged, voice his disapproval, ask for two thousand bucks. etc. etc. but he did say, what I knew; that he would have got up and walked off when the police came.

Most of us would have walked off when confronted with the police, even if they were wrong. Most of us would be furious, fuming, vowing to get even, get revenge, get money, get attention, get a bucket of blood...but we would have walked off.

Just like most of us wouldn't wear furry hats at a women's march.

[biker1]

If spending a good portion of my career sitting on airplanes has taught me anything, it is that you don't, under any circumstance, argue with airline personnel when you are on a plane. When you are on a plane, you do as you are told. While you have certain rights, you have no leverage at that time. If they tell you to vacate your seat, you gather your belongings and you leave, period. Once off the plane, you can then negotiate with the gate personnel or other representatives as to how they will get you to your final destination and what compensation you will receive. Remembering that you "catch more flies with honey than vinegar" often goes a long ways in getting better treatment once you are off the plane. I wish I had a nickle for every time I have seen an irate passenger giving a gate agent a hard time, to what will probably be their detriment. If you are unhappy, you can consult with a lawyer afterwards. You also don't argue with TSA personnel. Remember, airline and TSA personnel can cause you to have a bad day and the onus will be on you to seek remedy.

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:

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by biker1

If spending a good portion of my career sitting on airplanes has taught me anything, it is that you don't, under any circumstance, argue with airline personnel when you are on a plane. When you are on a plane, you do as you are told. If they tell you to vacate your seat, you gather your belongings and you leave, period. Once off the plane, you can then negotiate with the gate personnel or other representatives as to how they will get you to your final destination and what compensation you will receive. If you are unhappy, you can consult with a lawyer. You also don't argue with TSA personnel. These people can cause you to have a bad day.

That is great common sense advice. But to play devil's advocate, what makes airline personnel any different than the manager of McDonald's or the gate attendant at Belvedere Blvd??? Why are they "above" a discussion/argument??? What LEGAL, not civil authority do they have??? The captain has 100% total authority on that plane, ONCE IT LEAVES THE TERMINAL. Is that true while it is attached to the terminal via the jetway??? Why are the Chicago police involved in a civil matter? A lot of questions remain.

UAL has some responsibility here as well---bumping seated passengers for a flight crew for the next day??? This was the ONLY crew they could get there??? There was no other way to get them there??? Other flights, other airlines???? Sounds like bad management decisions. I once sat on a plane for over an hour, 200 feet from the terminal at O'Hare , watching my connecting flight take off. This was because "our" gate was occupied, even though there were 11 empty gates that remained empty for the whole time we sat there. Didn't any one think to call the airport manager to change the gate??? I suspect that the average airline employee couldn't care less---travelers, especially at an airport connecting to another flight, are a population of hostages.

[Steve9930]

You are not supposed to board if your going to be bumped. United terms of carriage state exactly that fact. So United did not even follow their own policy. Second the drive from Chicago to Louisville is 5 1/2 hours. United should have chartered a shuttle for their crew since they were not scheduled to fly until the next day. United lost $1 Billion in value because of this incident. Pays for a lot of shuttles. United could have offered more then $800. There was a number where you would have convinced 4 people to get off the plane. The police officer has already been suspended for his action. Excessive force was used. Just from this man's screams I could tel there was a possible mental problem here. United is the big looser here and this man will be getting a very nice check from the suit. The last thing I will say on this matter is this man's past has nothing to do with how he was treated and to bring that into the picture is not a negative on him but a negative on the person who even thinks this is a mitigating circumstance. What is wrong with you people? Stick to the facts of what happened.

[biker1]

The big difference between United Airlines and McDonalds is you are trying to get to your destination and you have already paid for the ticket. Airline personnel can remove you from the plane at the gate for a number of reasons. Whether it is justified or not is irrelevant - you are off the plane and you may very well experience a delay in getting to your final destination. Your other questions will undoubtedly be answered in the week/months ahead but honestly I don't really care.

The person in question made a big mistake by not doing what he was told. Unless, of course, his goal was to get a big settlement from United, which he may very well get. United, of course, made some serious mistakes also. You cannot win those battles and negotiate while sitting on the plane. Rational people get off the plane and resolve the issue with other airline representatives. Knowing the compensation rules and the airline's responsibilities is always a good idea. By the way, I have missed more connections than I care to think about for various reasons. I have also not even bothered to take the first leg of several trips when it became apparent that I would miss the connection. Weather, mechanical problems, air traffic control issues, lack of a crew, etc. can cause delays that cause you to miss connections. It is what it is.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

That is great common sense advice. But to play devil's advocate, what makes airline personnel any different than the manager of McDonald's or the gate attendant at Belvedere Blvd??? Why are they "above" a discussion/argument??? What LEGAL, not civil authority do they have??? The captain has 100% total authority on that plane, ONCE IT LEAVES THE TERMINAL. Is that true while it is attached to the terminal via the jetway??? Why are the Chicago police involved in a civil matter? A lot of questions remain.

UAL has some responsibility here as well---bumping seated passengers for a flight crew for the next day??? This was the ONLY crew they could get there??? There was no other way to get them there??? Other flights, other airlines???? Sounds like bad management decisions. I once sat on a plane for over an hour, 200 feet from the terminal at O'Hare , watching my connecting flight take off. This was because "our" gate was occupied, even though there were 11 empty gates that remained empty for the whole time we sat there. Didn't any one think to call the airport manager to change the gate??? I suspect that the average airline employee couldn't care less---travelers, especially at an airport connecting to another flight, are a population of hostages.

[rivaridger1]

Here is a quote yesterday from Oscar Munos who is United Airlines Chief operating Officer. " 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 ". I'd say he might actually be a smart man, since he was " counseled " on this matter by several members of United's Board of Directors, who I would suspect, are also very smart men and women. There is no longer any attempt to justify the actions of United by citing the term of the contract of carriage in these words. In my opinion this kind of says it all. For those that have done so on this thread, you can not be stupid when enforcing the terms of any contract and cause personal injury to people. You can also not be stupid when exercising police authority and unnecessarily cause injury to people. Our society and civil justice system does not permit that.

[biker1]

The stock is already rebounding and this whole sorry incident will be forgotten. Until you sell the stock, it is just bits on a computer.

Originally Posted by Steve9930

You are not supposed to board if your going to be bumped. United terms of carriage state exactly that fact. So United did not even follow their own policy. Second the drive from Chicago to Louisville is 5 1/2 hours. United should have chartered a shuttle for their crew since they were not scheduled to fly until the next day. United lost $1 Billion in value because of this incident. Pays for a lot of shuttles. United could have offered more then $800. There was a number where you would have convinced 4 people to get off the plane. The police officer has already been suspended for his action. Excessive force was used. Just from this man's screams I could tel there was a possible mental problem here. United is the big looser here and this man will be getting a very nice check from the suit. The last thing I will say on this matter is this man's past has nothing to do with how he was treated and to bring that into the picture is not a negative on him but a negative on the person who even thinks this is a mitigating circumstance. What is wrong with you people? Stick to the facts of what happened.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by biker1

The big difference between United Airlines and McDonalds is you are trying to get to your destination and you have already paid for the ticket. Airline personnel can remove you from the plane at the gate for a number of reasons. Whether it is justified or not is irrelevant - you are off the plane and you may very well experience a delay in getting to your final destination. Your other questions will undoubtedly be answered in the week/months ahead but honestly I don't really care.

The person in question made a big mistake by not doing what he was told. Unless, of course, his goal was to get a big settlement from United, which he may very well get. United, of course, made some serious mistakes also. You cannot win those battles and negotiate while sitting on the plane. Rational people get off the plane and resolve the issue with other airline representatives. Knowing the compensation rules and the airline's responsibilities is always a good idea. By the way, I have missed more connections than I care to think about for various reasons. I have also not even bothered to take the first leg of several trips when it became apparent that I would miss the connection. Weather, mechanical problems, air traffic control issues, lack of a crew, etc. can cause delays that cause you to miss connections. It is what it is.

I agree with everything you posted---but I have one question---do airline employees have the LEGAL AUTHORITY to remove a passenger from his seat for no other reason than they want to put another airline employee in that seat?????

[Steve9930]

Originally Posted by biker1

The stock is already rebounding and this whole sorry incident will be forgotten. Until you sell the stock, it is just bits on a computer.

Yes, the stock will rebound but the lost revenue will not.

[Madelaine Amee]

[QUOTE=rivaridger1;1385464]Here is a quote yesterday from Oscar Munos who is United Airlines Chief operating Officer. " 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 ". I'd say he might actually be a smart man, since he was " counseled " on this matter by several members of United's Board of Directors, who I would suspect, are also very smart men and women. There is no longer any attempt to justify the actions of United by citing the term of the contract of carriage in these words. In my opinion this kind of says it all. For those that have done so on this thread, you can not be stupid when enforcing the terms of any contract and cause personal injury to people. You can also not be stupid when exercising police authority and unnecessarily cause injury to people. Our society and civil justice system does not permit that.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for the "breath of fresh air", if we accept this type of treatment from the very people that we PAY to protect us and keep us safe, we are living in a George Orwellian paradise and not the "land of the free and the brave".

[biker1]

I don't know but I am sure that question will be explored in the legal proceedings that are certain to follow. My guess is their contract boilerplate covers any contingency you can imagine. However, at the time you are being told to vacate, it doesn't really matter. You really don't have any choice and your only option is to seek remedy after the fact. If it was me, I would get off the plane immediately and work the best deal I can, including being put on another airline, if that would get me to my destination sooner. The compensation will depend on how much of a delay you experience.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

I agree with everything you posted---but I have one question---do airline employees have the LEGAL AUTHORITY to remove a passenger from his seat for no other reason than they want to put another airline employee in that seat?????

[biker1]

Yes, they will experience a short term financial impact from reduced ticket sales. In short order, however, people will go back to their normal buying habits of choosing United if they are the low cost carrier and/or they have lots of frequent flyer miles with United.

What I find most amazing is how long it took United to adopt the standard crisis management position: admit fault, apologize, and promise to put safeguards in place so this never happens again. You would think they would have learned from other corporations.

Originally Posted by Steve9930

Yes, the stock will rebound but the lost revenue will not.

[Steve9930]

Originally Posted by biker1

Yes, they will experience a short term financial impact from reduced ticket sales. In short order, however, people will go back to their normal buying habits of choosing United if they are the low cost carrier and/or they have lots of frequent flyer miles with United.

What I find most amazing is how long it took United to adopt the standard crisis management position: admit fault, apologize, and promise to put safeguards in place so this never happens again. You would think they would have learned from other corporations.

I could not agree more with your last post. When you look at the video you just are dumb founded. Really, they actually thought they were doing the correct thing? Then the CEO with his nonsense? I know the first thing that went through his mined, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.$$. The gentleman that was dragged off was definitely in a no win situation. You could also tell his response was not normal. When asked to leave the prudent thing is to get up, as you said and start the negotiations. He was entitled to 400% of the ticket cost since he would have been delayed more then 4 hours. You also can request Cash and not a voucher and they still have to get you to your destination. I've been in these situations before and you just have to one, know the regulations, and two stand your ground. But you do this after you get off the plane. This reminds me of Forest Gump: "Stupid is as Stupid Does." There was more then enough stupid that day by all involved.