but this is all predicated on their attitude that the passengers are just cargo they can move around as they please. the process was void of any sense of human decency. why? because the airlines have been allowed to act like this for years.
United- all it had to do was continue to increase the compensation...econ 101
- Thread starter ritaith
- Start date
but this is all predicated on their attitude that the passengers are just cargo they can move around as they please. the process was void of any sense of human decency. why? because the airlines have been allowed to act like this for years.
I still don't think the whole Dr. scenario is relevant. but agree with the rest of your post.
+1 I guess they didn't know that Honey attracts better than vinegar. My guess is them being cheapskates is going to cost them big time. I am thinking that doctors know lawyers...
We are all missing key bits of information that United had. What was the impact if their crew didn't get on this flight? What time was the crew needed in Louisville? Where there any other flights, even on other airlines, that could have accommodated United's crew? Etc.
What if United didn't allow the crew on this flight, there were no other travel option to get them to Louisville in time, and that resulted in cancellation of a flight? Then United just knowingly screwed hundreds of passengers instead of 4 people. Rebooking hundreds of people is far more difficult as well, so the disruption to those passengers might then exceed that of the 4 from this flight. In my opinion that's a very valid excuse to allow their crew on a full flight. But as has been said, in such a case it would have been far better for them to keep raising the volunteer offer until getting 4 takers. Then all of this would have been avoided and the 4 impacted folks would be slightly happier since they'd have $1000+ in vouchers or cash right now. I suspect they didn't do this because of some company P&P that puts a cap on the offered volunteer amounts.
If as people have said, why could not United have gotten a luxury taxi for their 4 employees and had them driven down to Louisville? The drive as others have pointed out is ~ 300 miles (5 hours).
I'm sure that would have cost them less than the $800 * 4 they were offering to kick paying passengers off their own plane. It's amazing how un common common sense is at times...
Now United will be the lightning rod of the social media crowd, and their CEO will likely be $hit-canned and they will end up losing untold millions in the pending lawsuit and lost customers / revenue for years to come.
I'm sure that would have cost them less than the $800 * 4 they were offering to kick paying passengers off their own plane. It's amazing how un common common sense is at times...
Now United will be the lightning rod of the social media crowd, and their CEO will likely be $hit-canned and they will end up losing untold millions in the pending lawsuit and lost customers / revenue for years to come.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
Not only that, but watch what people do now when flights are overbooked and/or they are asked to de-plane. Bust out the phones, hit up twitter, grab popcorn....
Your last comment is the point. This was all about getting that flight crew to Louisville in the least costly way. I very much believe in capitalism. But I also believe in taking care of your customers. There is absolutely no excuse or rationale that would allow a company to do this to a customer, let alone another human being, that would be cost justifiable. That is the only bit of key information that was needed. This is an extreme example, but even if this policy does not get the bad publicity it has, airlines should not be able to dis accommodate a customer unless totally voluntary. Make that a policy and there is no conflict for the point of contact employee and the company will find a way to meet their business needs.
They did it all out of order. I think they should have picked one passenger, beat the living crap out of him/her in front of the entire plane load of people, then said...I need 3 more volunteers to get off right now or I will start picking you at random.
as I have stated before, airlines deadhead all the time. they can even deadhead on "booked" flights. this gets taken care of ahead of time, at the gate. not after the passengers have been boarded.
all the corporate fascist defender media is now obsessing over the personal history of the doctor, to somehow justify his abuse retroactively with information the officers clearly did not have at the time.
but what they are avoiding is the fact that United screwed this up in the first place. "bigly". and their "solution" was to treat a paying customer with a heavy hand. and double down by ignoring their screw up, and patting the employees on the back.
Agree with a lot of what you said.
Not to mention the Domino effect it would have on other flights and passengers.
Its the Spock quote from Wrath of Khan, "The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few".
I guess, INMO, the rule is ok but the implementation was an epic failure.
True but their CEO should be shit-canned for being an idiot and sending out that "employees" only email.
I'm guessing that United will not be buying advertising on the Jimmy Kimmel show at any time soon. Wow, did he go off on United and its CEO last night.
Nah, I was just kidding. "They" definitely handled it wrong, whether it was the rent a cops or the airline. I agree with most above who say United should have continued to up the ante within reason. In the end though, I usually side with the business in general, in that they own the stinkin' plane. They should be able to do whatever they want with it, again within reason. Afterall, they will suffer the wrath of the flying public now that they've handled it wrong.So I'm guessing you really like Negan?
Last edited:
Me too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The legal question is being answered today. There is an article on philly.com. Airlines have the right to refuse boarding. But once a passenger has legitimately boarded, apparently they do not have legal right to remove him except for cause -- i.e. he behaves badly. This guy was actually legally in the right, once he had boarded, United did not have the right to take his seat.
Basically the airline screwed up in about 10 different ways. The crews are low paid and often low-quality employees, they don't get much training these days, but they think they have unlimited legal power to do to passengers whatever they want. As it turns out, it's not quite unlimited.
Basically the airline screwed up in about 10 different ways. The crews are low paid and often low-quality employees, they don't get much training these days, but they think they have unlimited legal power to do to passengers whatever they want. As it turns out, it's not quite unlimited.
If that's true then the good doctor's payday just got a lot bigger. I'd imagine he'll go after the security guard's company for unreasonable force and after United for illegally attempting to remove him from the plane. Also United should face fines for breaking the law.
He didn't know any except his old defense lawyers.....but I'll bet hundreds are trying to get his attention now.
We are all missing key bits of information that United had. What was the impact if their crew didn't get on this flight? What time was the crew needed in Louisville? Where there any other flights, even on other airlines, that could have accommodated United's crew? Etc.
What's the impact of beating a paying customer up, dragging him off the plane screaming and having everyone else on the plane record videos of it on their cell phones?
Actually millions of US citizens have lost money on this incident as owners of United Continental Holdings stock through direct ownership and having holdings in employer 401k plans.
So why couldn't the four of them drive? Or take another flight? Or why couldn't United find four employees from Indianapolis Lexington Cincinnati St Lous Detroit Cleveland or a host of other cities? Why these four on this particular flight?
I am sure United has more resources and personnel than this particular flight and these specific personnel.
Then you hired the wrong f'ing gate agent. United took that risk day one.
I'm not so sure about that. Flights often get delayed so he had no business traveling in the first place if his being away for an extra few hours could have cost lives.
I am also curious as to why no one seems to question the 4 United crew members and their 'expectation' to be deadheaded at the expense of an already boarded and ready to go flight. I think more attention needs to be focused on this. Is there a clause in their contract that they will be given priority over paying passengers? Is this a union thing?
As others have said, grab your popcorn, sit back and watch, this is going to be interesting...
As others have said, grab your popcorn, sit back and watch, this is going to be interesting...
Those 4 United Crew members were scheduled to work the 6:55 AM flight the next morning from Louisville to Newark.
They weren't truly dead-heading (that would really be outrageous if they were going to Louisville "off the job") as much as they were "positioning" to do their job (the next AM).
