Passenger Forcibly Removed From Overbooked UA Flight

[dfcatch]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

I beg your pardon? My political views are irrelevant here. Spicer's statements on Hitler and Syria and the Holocaust were way out of line, regardless of what administration he works for. I see that he's joined the backtrack brigade on this. Competence is the issue here, not political views.

For example, how would Richard Branson have handled this issue if it had occurred through some Virgin stuff-up?

Neither Political Views NOR Spicer's competence are relevant here. And neither are his comments on any other unrelated matter.

The issue is that the matter was brought up at a WH press conference - that is the material fact, and that is what is significant.

The mere fact of it being brought up has weighty consequences for the issue going forward - not the least being the prominence of the matter.

 

[equus]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

The airline was trying to do the greatest good for the greatest number.

This is a corporate entity. As they have amply demonstrated, they don't care about passengers. It is all about the money and profit. That greatest number simply represents more money to them, so they try and take the cheapest way out - and it is cheaper to use inappropriate force against a passenger than encourage them with sufficient compensation.

At some point, the accountants and upper management made a strategic choice and decided it is more profitable to over book, or under plan on the contingency etc., and then pay the compensation when needed for recovery. The problem is, that what is reasonable at the macro level, doesn't work when someone sees the actual compensation having to be paid, and decides tactically that they can shave that cost. Now the cost will likely be huge. The passenger has lawyers who have commenced preliminary action.

Whilst United will no doubt be desperate to settle and keep it out of court, there is so much publicity, and the passenger is in such a strong position, they may not be inclined to settle.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

But there's nothing in my contract with the airline that states my travel is conditional on 'the greater good of others'.

The airline had other options, more expensive, but they chose not to exercise them.

 

[Happy Trails]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

That's bullsh*it. That's a journalist misunderstanding a source, or a source with the wrong notion talking to an ignorant or credulous journalist.

As I understand the situation, the four pax were selected - probably not "at random" - and asked to vacate their seats. Three complied, one didn't, and only after repeated refusals were the cops were called in.

Simply quoting and as I said, hard to credit.

 

[Skyring]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

But there's nothing in my contract with the airline that states my travel is conditional on 'the greater good of others'.

And here we encounter the problem of Utilitarianism. Jeremy Bentham, the founder of utilitarianism, described utility as the sum of all pleasure that results from an action, minus the suffering of anyone involved in the action.

In this case, the suffering and delay of four passengers against the smooth completion of booked and paid for flights of (say) a hundred others on the plane to be flown by the flight crew who replaced these four individuals. One might imagine the feelings of those passengers, turning up at Louisville International for their flight to find there was nobody to fly it, despite their various contracts with the airline.

Four against a hundred. The airline is always going to choose the hundred.

As would most reasonable people.

But the problem here is the suffering of the four. Bentham would argue that their suffering is outweighed by the greater good. But still, they suffer.

One passenger suffered quite a lot. His plight went viral.

Another school of thought might be summed up by the phrase "may all be happy". Unload nobody, find a way to get the replacement crew to Louisville, let them fly their plane with the greater number of passengers.

Once the offers of compensation had been rejected, that should have been it. Let the plane go, fly the replacement flight crew on a later flight, possibly on a different airline, they can fly their plane. Nobody suffers.

Of course, there may well have been other factors, such as duty hours and fatigue rules.

A solution may well have been impossible. The noise of speculation outweighs the signal received from United. We're tossing spitballs in the air now.

 

[Skyring]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

Simply quoting and as I said, hard to credit.

Yup. Thanks for the link. How could a newspaper get something wrong? Especially something to do with aviation; it beggars belief!

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

Another school of thought might be summed up by the phrase "may all be happy". Unload nobody, find a way to get the replacement crew to Louisville, let them fly their plane with the greater number of passengers.

Once the offers of compensation had been rejected, that should have been it. Let the plane go, fly the replacement flight crew on a later flight, possibly on a different airline, they can fly their plane. Nobody suffers.

Exactly this.

'The greater good' could have been achieved via several means. But the airline chose only it's own interests. Its commercial interests, in trying to IDB passengers.

If passengers were presented with two options... (a) off load four passengers or (b) everyone flies but the airline has to take a hit in chartering a plane for the replacement crew... which do you think they would choose?

 

[serfty]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

...
As I understand the situation, the four pax were selected - probably not "at random" - and asked to vacate their seats. Three complied, one didn't, and only after repeated refusals were the cops were called in.

Seems the refusals to disembark may have been calm:
New Video Shows What Really Happened BEFORE Passenger Was Dragged Off United Flight - View from the Wing

...It shows a calm passenger staking out his position, refusing to leave the aircraft because he has to work in the morning. He says he’d “rather go to jail” than get off the aircraft. He certainly does not appear violent or threatening. And though the video is incomplete it’s certainly consistent with believing the police overreacted in their use of force.

New Video: Passenger Was Calm Before Being Dragged off United Flight - Miles to Memories

 

[JohnK]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

Law enforcement officers that behave this way are in the wrong line of work.

 

[Skyring]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

Exactly this.

'The greater good' could have been achieved via several means. But the airline chose only it's own interests. Its commercial interests, in trying to IDB passengers.

If passengers were presented with two options... (a) off load four passengers or (b) everyone flies but the airline has to take a hit in chartering a plane for the replacement crew... which do you think they would choose?

Passengers don't get to have a say in operational matters. It's entirely up to the airline.

In this case I think the airline made a bad call, but they very likely had time pressures affecting their decision. We can argue that they should have done this or that in hindsight, but they did what they did, and that's all there is to it.

 

[Skyring]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

Law enforcement officers that behave this way are in the wrong line of work.

Well, yes, but in my experience cops can do a lot of things and get away with it, because they are above the law.

 

[Happy Trails]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

In the new video it seems he has his seat fully reclined before take off.
That alone is sufficient reason to beat him up and drag him off the plane.

 

[Quickstatus]

The greater good?. I don't think so.
Causing physical injury to a person can never be justified to preserve the needs of an extra x passengers.
We have all sorts of regulations in this country to enhance safety - work site laws road rules etc. A single accident at a worksite or on the road can shut the whole operation down. So what if everyone else is "inconvenienced".

Up to the point of calling for volunteers, the airline was operating reasonably though the practice of routine over bookings is a practice that is not replicated anywhere else and is poor in my opinion. Once they forcibly evicted a passenger and replace him with another they crossed the line and should be reprimanded in the strongest terms.

 

[JohnK]

I don't buy the greater good either.

Trying to say that delaying 4 passengers is not as important as delaying 70 or 200 passengers is wrong. Each of those 70 or 200 passengers is still an individual and their needs are not any more important than the 4 passengers chosen to be sacrificed.

Handled very poorly by United and the CEO immediately went on the attack when the incident came to light. Good to see the total backflip but too little too late. Hopefully United learn something from the incident but I feel the arrogance will continue once this incident blows over.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

Passengers don't get to have a say in operational matters. It's entirely up to the airline.

as the events showed us, this isn't necessarily true. Passengers do have a say in operational matters that aren't related to safety... confirmed by the contracts we have with the airline. The airline had no basis to off load this particular passenger.

 

[moa999]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

Seems the refusals to disembark may have been calm:
New Video Shows What Really Happened BEFORE Passenger Was Dragged Off United Flight - View from the Wing

To law enforcement yes... Calm but still not compliant. (Also he's on the phone to someone as well which probably didn't go down well) but we don't have any video of the previous discussions with the crew.

I also suspect that if you refused on order from an Aussie police officer in public (say a move on order) like that, it would be under 60 secs before it got physical.

 

[moa999]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

What if they ALL refuse to get off the aircraft??

Then the Captain gets off.
They sure aren't going to be flying a plane with a flight full of disobedient passengers.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

To law enforcement yes... Calm but still not compliant. (Also he's on the phone to someone as well which probably didn't go down well) but we don't have any video of the previous discussions with the crew.

I also suspect that if you refused on order from an Aussie police officer in public (say a move on order) like that, it would be under 60 secs before it got physical.

calm but 'not compliant'... the passenger didn't need to be compliant. You've highlighted the distinction between a private, civil matter (a passenger with a contract) vs maintaining law and order in public and following the laws that apply there. Police don't normally get involved in contract issues between two parties.

 

[Denali]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

Footage, before it got ugly

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgieOw2120c&feature=youtu.be

 

[Quickstatus]

Re: Pax forcibly removed from United overbooked flight

If the passenger complied and left the aircraft with the other 4, United and the other airlines would have continued the practice of evicting passengers for non safety reason under threat of arrest