United removes passenger from flight

[ExtraSlow]

Originally posted by rage2
Core of the issue is overbooking being allowed in the first place. It's done by every airline.

I believe WestJet doesn't overbook, or at least they used to advertise that.

[suntan]

Originally posted by rage2
I've always seen pissed off people bumped from flights at a gate, never boarded and asked to leave.

I guess this is why you don't buy the cheapest ticket available haha.

You've never been on a flight where a FA tells everybody that the flight is overbooked and they ask someone to volunteer to leave?

[Manhattan]

Originally posted by ExtraSlow
I believe WestJet doesn't overbook, or at least they used to advertise that.

Westjet still doesn't overbook but they reserve the right to change the size of a plane for economic reasons meaning you could get bumped because there are less seats. Same thing.

How did no one on the flight accept $800 if that was the case. Worst case scenario you take a rental car to Louisville and get paid $160/hr for the 5 hour drive.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Brings new meaning to fight or flight

Seriously though, WTF was the airline thinking. Just raise the comp to $1000 or $1500 or something to sweeten the pot and someone would have got off. You could have rented a car, drove, and arrived only a little bit later along with a bunch of cash. I don't even want to imagine what this will cost them now in PR, legal, etc. with the damage that has already been done. Who was in the wrong is irrelevant at this point, it's already cost them orders of magnitude more than raising the voucher value. Also, in the USA at least, I believe you can request a cheque instead of a voucher - not sure about Canada.

The only time I've ever been bumped off a flight was United, and I was flying on Airmiles with 3 connections haha, so I probably had the cheapest ticket (it definitely wasn't random). I wasn't happy but they put us up in a nice hotel and gave me a $600 voucher, which I later found out I couldn't use unless starting from a USA origin, so they got me good (didn't know about the cheque thing back then).

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
orders of magnetite

» Click image for larger version

How much magnetite? A ton?

Just bustin your balls :p

[revelations]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
Brings new meaning to fight or flight

Seriously though, WTF was the airline thinking. Just raise the comp to $1000 or $1500 or something to sweeten the pot and someone would have got off. You could have rented a car, drove, and arrived only a little bit later along with a bunch of cash. I don't even want to imagine what this will cost them now in PR, legal, etc. with the damage that has already been done. Who was in the wrong is irrelevant at this point, it's already cost them orders of magnetite more than raising the voucher value. Also, in the USA at least, I believe you can request a cheque instead of a voucher - not sure about Canada.

Yea, a 200-500$ increase (from 800) for a pax to volunteer to standby is nothing to United, but the social media backlash is something that will last for weeks. Someone is getting fired for that decision to pull off a pax like that (and not the security member, who was just doing his job.

[revelations]

Oh btw to avoid this one can do all the preboarding ahead of schedule for most airlines. They are highly unlikely to bump someone already checked in.

[rage2]

Originally posted by sexualbanana
At the heart of it, I think, is that overbooking occurs because, according to the airlines, they have to hedge against the cost of no-shows. But if the no-shows don't get their money back and the seat is already paid for (presumably), there is no lost revenue, right?

Nope. Changes are considered no-shows as well so a seat becomes empty with no revenue attached.

Originally posted by ZenOps
I dunno. Already seated and pre-paid means you got that seat in my book.

Time to read the fine print when you buy a ticket haha.

Originally posted by Manhattan
People are really ticked about this on facebook. I don't understand all the fuss. The way he was removed was pretty aggressive and ugly but it was airport police that took him off the flight not United staff. And lots of people don't seem to understand that overbooking is just part of the airline's business model. If you want a big American carrier not to overbook flights then be prepared to pay more for your flight. People are shocked that overbooking is a thing.

Typical backlash without facts or understanding. Nothing new, just entertaining to watch haha.

Originally posted by suntan
You've never been on a flight where a FA tells everybody that the flight is overbooked and they ask someone to volunteer to leave?

Of course I have. I've also seen people blow the fuck up at the gates because they got bumped and security had to be called. I'm just saying I've never been bumped myself by following simple rules.

Originally posted by revelations
Oh btw to avoid this one can do all the preboarding ahead of schedule for most airlines. They are highly unlikely to bump someone already checked in.

The key is to check in early and you can do it online 24h before your flight in Canada and US. Coming out of India is a little different, you have to check-in in person so I have to actually arrive early. When they need to bump passengers, the last check-in's are always the first ones to go.

[Seth1968]

I giggled through that whole video.

Yep, going to hell for sure

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


How much magnetite? A ton?

Just bustin your balls :p

Good catch, I didn't see that typo

Originally posted by revelations


Yea, a 200-500$ increase (from 800) for a pax to volunteer to standby is nothing to United, but the social media backlash is something that will last for weeks. Someone is getting fired for that decision to pull off a pax like that (and not the security member, who was just doing his job.

Yeah the security people aren't really to blame, maybe some excessive force, but we don't have the whole picture either. How United thought for one second that 50 people wouldn't be video taping this entire event though is mind boggling. I bet at $1000 someone would have got off, that's probably a magical number for a lot of people.

And how did he get back onto the plane, into an empty seat, after being removed? That is rather concerning.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by rage2

Typical backlash without facts or understanding. Nothing new, just entertaining to watch haha.

The funny part is, and this goes for ALL current "social media uproars" is that most companies should not care because people are still going to buy their product

People aren't not going to fly United if its the cheapest airline, regardless of anything they've done. People with no jobs *cough* sorry, I mean "activists" can easily boycott Pepsi or items that they don't use, but inexpensive air travel is important for tons of people.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak


This should have been the policy from the start, just continue to increase the price until somebody bites.

Bumping a paid customer who is already on the plane and then forcefully removing them is beyond ridiculous.

Not to mention they already know for sure that everyone is going to film something like that and post it everywhere online, so when is that PR nightmare and possible law suit EVER preferable to an extra few hundred dollars? Idiots.

I do think there should be better procedures in place for overbooked flights though. There should never be a situation short of an emergency that you remove a paid customer from their assigned seat on a plane just so someone else can take it.

Obviously this won't do any actual long term damage to United, but even if a small group of people don't book with them as a result, they are further behind than they could have been. Especially in an industry where penny pinching is so extreme.

[rage2]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1
The funny part is, and this goes for ALL current "social media uproars" is that most companies should not care because people are still going to buy their product

People aren't not going to fly United if its the cheapest airline, regardless of anything they've done. People with no jobs *cough* sorry, I mean "activists" can easily boycott Pepsi or items that they don't use, but inexpensive air travel is important for tons of people.

The stock price says otherwise. Who knows if people will actually boycott United or not.

I do feel bad for United though, they're not even the worst offenders for overbooking in the grand scheme of things, the 4 airline staff that needed to get on a flight weren't United employees (they're from a partner airline), and the violent removal of the passenger was done by Chicago Airport security.

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
Not to mention they already know for sure that everyone is going to film something like that and post it everywhere online, so when is that PR nightmare and possible law suit EVER preferable to an extra few hundred dollars? Idiots.

All United staff did was call security because the passenger refused to leave, so you can't really blame United for this one. I doubt they would've predicted what Chicago Airport security did here.

At the end of the day, everyone's so entitled these days it's depressing. Nobody reads the fine print, nobody understands you get what you pay for, and if you're going to cheap out on airfare, you don't have the same rights as others that paid more.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by rage2


All United staff did was call security because the passenger refused to leave, so you can't really blame United for this one. I doubt they would've predicted what Chicago Airport security did here.

Certainly not, but just to avoid the possibility of a scene and ensuing PR disaster...why not just keep raising the pot until someone accepts? The security staff isn't to blame, but if the option is to pay a bit more or forcibly remove someone (regardless if he fights or not), I don't see how the latter is preferable when they know in advance it's going to be broadcast everywhere in a negative light.

All I was saying is it doesn't even matter who is right/wrong, it is going to be put online and displayed in a negative light (excessive force, racism, blah blah). United knew that in advance before they made the call to remove the passenger, and instead of paying a few extra hundred, they went through with it and that was dumb.

[mazdavirgin]

I'm amazed that dude was stupid enough to pull a I'm going to go limp and resist being removed from the plane. He's lucky he didn't get shot at seeing the current climate in the USA around airlines and security. Epic stupid on his part.

Apparently now it's being labeled as racism in China?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/asia/u...hina-reaction/

Really wonder how the Chinese state airlines would handle someone who refused to get off their plane. My guess you would vanish for a bit and get the shit beaten out of you along with some re-education.

[bigboom]

The physical violence was done by the enforcement agency so I don't blame United for that. What lies squarely on United is the way they dealt with the situation, offer a little more cash incentive and someone would accept, no need to randomly pick someone.

Yes, they have the right to do it but does that mean they should have exercised it? That and the CEO's response is a classic way of how not to deal with a PR nightmare...

[LilDrunkenSmurf]

Originally posted by rage2

I dunno what more can be done. Guy was asked to leave because the airline had a right to kick him off, refused to and security was called and dealt with it. If he got away with staying by refusing to leave, then everyone would just refuse.

Core of the issue is overbooking being allowed in the first place. It's done by every airline.

How can he they have the right to kick him off? They have the right to deny him boarding, but once he's boarded, they're now kicking him off the place.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.2a

250.2a Policy regarding denied boarding.
In the event of an oversold flight, every carrier shall ensure that the smallest practicable number of persons holding confirmed reserved space on that flight are denied boarding involuntarily.

If you look at the contract of carriage, rule 21
https://www.united.com/web/en-US/con...age.aspx#sec21

This situation doesn't apply to anything outlined in rule 21.

Look at Rule 4. Once a ticket is issued with a seat, the seat is confirmed.

Rule 24 talks about shortage of labour, but that's in connection with cancelling a flight.

Rule 25 states that if a flight is oversold, they can deny boarding, but again, once boarded, they can't be removed and considered "denied".

[D'z Nutz]

Man if he really was offered $800 credit, I would have been all over that if my schedule was flexible enough.

Hell, one time I was waiting for a flight to AZ and they offered $350 for someone to take a later flight in the evening and I almost jumped on that hahaha! The only thing that kept me from taking it was I thought I had to get my rental car the time I said I'd be there. Had I known the rental company was flexible with when I pick up my car, I'd be $350 credits richer

[jwslam]

Originally posted by ZenOps
I mean if the Concorde was still around, book me a flight on it for $10,000.

I didn't know what that was until I did a presentation on it recently