United Airlines

Ndaccountant

Old Hoss
Messages
8,370
Reaction score
5,771
Yes....I said this. It protects the company not the customers. Regulations are always a result of a company not doing something right that hurts an employee or customer. LOL at "readability".



I love this attitude.... it is quite funny. I said earlier that if everyone acted according to their conscious while reading fine print that commerce would come to a halt. Becasue consumers use a product doesnt mean the tacitly accept the entirety of a companies overriding business principles. We all make sacrifices for work (especially) and family in order to live in this modern technologically driven world. Its a sort of social contract if you get my drift, however it seems that consumers lose out to both the government and corporations when things come whose rights matter more.

Owners, not consumers, are the ones who took on risk. United, for example, procured the planes, secured airport space, etc. They didn't do it because of some innate social contract. They did it so they can make an acceptable amount of return on their investment / deployed capital. I fail to see an issue with them dictating t&c's for which you voluntarily pay to use their assets. If it was compulsory, I would be inclined to agree with you.
 
C

Cackalacky

Guest
Owners, not consumers, are the ones who took on risk. United, for example, procured the planes, secured airport space, etc. They didn't do it because of some innate social contract. They did it so they can make an acceptable amount of return on their investment / deployed capital. I fail to see an issue with them dictating t&c's for which you voluntarily pay to use their assets. If it was compulsory, I would be inclined to agree with you.
The airline industry and airports, airport authority etc is one of the most government subsidized sectors in the world. Their risk is the public's risk. It absolutely is part of the social contract. Further private and government business travel accounts for up to 40% of all air travel so if you are an employee of the federal government, state government or private business, your boss can demand you ravel on a plane trip as part of your required duties (of course denying this can cause you to lose your job and choosing a slower form of transportation causes other issues in our current world),....which you are not free to choose which airline you fly depending on your place of embarkation and your place of debarkation.

So in essence you are dictated to who flies you and where your plane travels simply by logistics and business (monied interest) deals made with local, state, and federal governments on behalf of the public.
 

Polish Leppy 22

Well-known member
Messages
6,594
Reaction score
2,009
Going back to the start of the situation. They are required to provide him paperwork which they never did. Everything after that shouldn't have happened and is on them. Calling the authorities after ignoring your own protocol to clean up the situation you created by fucking up from the beginning is a bitch move. And they pulled it.

Way off base. This dude is responsible for his actions, not United. Second, if it were illegal the police would NOT have intervened and removed him from the plane.
 

NDFAN420

Well-known member
Messages
789
Reaction score
356
You're completely ignoring the guy's poor decision making (and he has a clear history of it) and painting him as a victim for refusing to obey law enforcement orders.

The first thing I said here was the situation is shitty and anyone would be upset, but any level headed adult would've handled it much better than this guy.

What if Law Enforcement doesn't follow the rules? I am then obliged to obey? It seems that there is a divide between the civil liberties people and the authoritarians. However in this particular case, neither the airline nor law enforcement followed the rules. The passengers was not explicitly made aware of his rights beforehand as required by law. Must he comply with orders just because a badge is yelling them?

You also wrote:
Second, if it were illegal the police would NOT have intervened and removed him from the plane.

My reply:
Are you serious???
 

Polish Leppy 22

Well-known member
Messages
6,594
Reaction score
2,009
What if Law Enforcement doesn't follow the rules? I am then obliged to obey? It seems that there is a divide between the civil liberties people and the authoritarians. However in this particular case, neither the airline nor law enforcement followed the rules. The passengers was not explicitly made aware of his rights beforehand as required by law. Must he comply with orders just because a badge is yelling them?

You also wrote:
Second, if it were illegal the police would NOT have intervened and removed him from the plane.

My reply:
Are you serious???

Yes, I'm serious. The police don't detain and arrest people for the fun of it. They do it when they need to, and this guy's actions called for it.

Which civil liberties were violated here? Absolutely none.
 

woolybug25

#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
Messages
17,677
Reaction score
3,018
Yes, I'm serious. The police don't detain and arrest people for the fun of it. They do it when they need to, and this guy's actions called for it.

Which civil liberties were violated here? Absolutely none.

Weren't these TSA or security? I don't believe they were police. But that's beside the point. There is a stark difference between getting detained and being assaulted. Did his protesting their decision merit removal? Sure. But it sure as hell didn't merit getting his face smashed into a seat and getting knocked unconscious. He wasn't "asking for" an assault. Police can't just assault you either.
 

Circa

Conspire to keep It real
Messages
8,000
Reaction score
818
What happened to the old saying "the Customer is always right"?







NO, Really where did that go and why?
 

NDFAN420

Well-known member
Messages
789
Reaction score
356
Yes, I'm serious. The police don't detain and arrest people for the fun of it. They do it when they need to, and this guy's actions called for it.

Which civil liberties were violated here? Absolutely none.

Well, in this case they did, right in front of your eyes and you refuse to see it. According to everyone and denied by none, he was not immediately given written instructions nor informed about his compensation rights as required by law. I'll let that sit there... As required by law...
So, then already afoul of the law, the officers grabbed him and in the process injured the passenger.

In your world, does law enforcement not to follow the law? As far as what the police do or don't do, I'll just ask you to try to walk into the Chicago Homan Sq police facility.
 
Last edited:
C

Cackalacky

Guest
Well, in this case they did, right in front of your eyes and you refuse to see it. According to everyone and denied by none, he was not immediately given written instructions nor informed about his compensation rights as required by law. I'll let that sit there... As required by law...
So, then already afoul of the law, the officers grabbed him and in the process injured the passenger.

In your world, does law enforcement not to follow the law? As far as what the police do or don't do, I'll just ask you to try to walk into the Chicago Homan Sq police facility.

Dont you get it man? Corporations are people and their rights matter more than John Q Public's rights.
 

Irish Insanity

Well-known member
Messages
9,885
Reaction score
584
Way off base. This dude is responsible for his actions, not United. Second, if it were illegal the police would NOT have intervened and removed him from the plane.
What the airline did was about as legit as being arrested without being read your rights.
 

dshans

They call me The Dribbler
Messages
9,624
Reaction score
1,181
Quick question – have each and every one of you read the entirety of the Terms of Service from Microsoft? Apple? Adobe?

Have each and every one of you read the entirety of warnings from Bristol Meyers? Serle? Pfizer? Abbot?
 

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,600
Reaction score
20,066
So apathy and ignorance is a viable excuse if you have a problem with the t&c's?

It's never as cut and dry as you assume it is.


True story. In '78, I bought a new Pontiac Firebird. The guy sold me an extended warranty. He said, you don't need to do anything unless you have a problem, then pull out the envelope and follow the directions. A couple of weeks later, we got the warranty in the mail. On the outside it said, "place in glove box immediately", which I did. 48,000 miles later the engine siezes. The dealer calls and said it will require a new short block. He then says he can get started as soon as I come in and pay for the block. I asked about the extended warranty. He informs me it's invalid because I didn't come in for service at 24,000 and 36,000 miles. They refused to fix it, so I took them to court. Even though I didn't get the service at those intervals, the judge ruled in my favor even though I was ignorant of the requirements.
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
Well, in this case they did, right in front of your eyes and you refuse to see it. According to everyone and denied by none, he was not immediately given written instructions nor informed about his compensation rights as required by law. I'll let that sit there... As required by law...
So, then already afoul of the law, the officers grabbed him and in the process injured the passenger.

In your world, does law enforcement not to follow the law? As far as what the police do or don't do, I'll just ask you to try to walk into the Chicago Homan Sq police facility.

In return, United Airlines will point out that passengers are required, by law, to follow the instructions of all flight crew.... required, by law.......... let that sit there. They ask him to leave the plane, he's required to do so. And they will probably tell you that he was informed of his compensation rights, in writing, on the back of his ticket. Fine print or not, the airline's requirement is to provide him the information, not read it aloud to him. If he chooses not to read it (which I don't consider an unreasonable response), the airline has still fulfilled their obligation.
 

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,600
Reaction score
20,066
Owners, not consumers, are the ones who took on risk. United, for example, procured the planes, secured airport space, etc. They didn't do it because of some innate social contract. They did it so they can make an acceptable amount of return on their investment / deployed capital. I fail to see an issue with them dictating t&c's for which you voluntarily pay to use their assets. If it was compulsory, I would be inclined to agree with you.

United may have bought the planes, secured airport space, etc., but they did it with the intention of offering this service. It's not like they did this for personal enjoyment and some guy came up and said, "I'll pay you $250 to fly me to....." and they decided to.
 

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,600
Reaction score
20,066
Way off base. This dude is responsible for his actions, not United. Second, if it were illegal the police would NOT have intervened and removed him from the plane.

United is responsible for creating the situation.
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
United is responsible for creating the situation.

I'm really not trying to defend United on the "charge" of overbooking. There are a NUMBER of ways that United could have handled this differently, but I think it is pertinent to note:

This is a situation that is created, by United and all of the other airlines, every single day in multiple airports around the country. Yet this is the only case that I can remember where someone got roughed up over it. So which is more likely the cause of the violence; the airline overbooking/deadheading crew, or the passenger's reaction to it?
 

Polish Leppy 22

Well-known member
Messages
6,594
Reaction score
2,009
Well, in this case they did, right in front of your eyes and you refuse to see it. According to everyone and denied by none, he was not immediately given written instructions nor informed about his compensation rights as required by law. I'll let that sit there... As required by law...
So, then already afoul of the law, the officers grabbed him and in the process injured the passenger.

In your world, does law enforcement not to follow the law? As far as what the police do or don't do, I'll just ask you to try to walk into the Chicago Homan Sq police facility.

"My world" is in compliance with the law and obeying commands of law enforcement if the situation arises. What did this nutjob think would happen? He keeps refusing, the airlines and cops say, "Ahhh, ok, this guy is mad. We'll move on to the next one."???

Show us all, please, where this guy's civil liberties were violated. As others have noted, the customer is flying at the discretion of the airline. He has no right to that seat and after being booted from the flight (which sucks and rarely happens), he will be compensated for it.
 

Polish Leppy 22

Well-known member
Messages
6,594
Reaction score
2,009
Weren't these TSA or security? I don't believe they were police. But that's beside the point. There is a stark difference between getting detained and being assaulted. Did his protesting their decision merit removal? Sure. But it sure as hell didn't merit getting his face smashed into a seat and getting knocked unconscious. He wasn't "asking for" an assault. Police can't just assault you either.

Doesn't matter who they were, and no one is justifying assult. The legal authorities in charge told him to leave the plane. He didn't. They had to remove him with force.

You're painting the picture of a scenario where security got on the plane, circled the guy, and beat him senseless. He's no Asian Rosa Parks here, guys.

Again, the entire situation is FUBAR, but his response to the situation escalated to all this. Any one of us with half a brain would have gotten off the plane, been paid whatever, and took up beef with United afterwards.
 

pkt77242

IPA Man
Messages
10,805
Reaction score
719
I'm really not trying to defend United on the "charge" of overbooking. There are a NUMBER of ways that United could have handled this differently, but I think it is pertinent to note:

This is a situation that is created, by United and all of the other airlines, every single day in multiple airports around the country. Yet this is the only case that I can remember where someone got roughed up over it. So which is more likely the cause of the violence; the airline overbooking/deadheading crew, or the passenger's reaction to it?

Apples to oranges.

How often do they attempt to bump someone after they are on a plane? It is extremely rare that they would do it.

Also United could have offered more money to get a volunteer to give up their seat. There is no reason for them to only go as high as $800.
 

Polish Leppy 22

Well-known member
Messages
6,594
Reaction score
2,009
What the airline did was about as legit as being arrested without being read your rights.

Then act as this guy's counsel, go to court, and take that one to the judge. Let me know how it pans out. I'll send you both a big box of tissues when it's over. The judge will point to the fine print on the terms and agreements, the customer will pound sand, and that will be that.

NOTE: he was not the only passenger taken off this flight. Three others were asked to leave. Guess what they did? They got off the plane, got bumped to another flight a few hours later, were compensated by United for the trouble, and probably grabbed a bite to eat or a cocktail during their wait.

Crazy right?
 
Last edited:

woolybug25

#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
Messages
17,677
Reaction score
3,018
I'm really not trying to defend United on the "charge" of overbooking. There are a NUMBER of ways that United could have handled this differently, but I think it is pertinent to note:

This is a situation that is created, by United and all of the other airlines, every single day in multiple airports around the country. Yet this is the only case that I can remember where someone got roughed up over it. So which is more likely the cause of the violence; the airline overbooking/deadheading crew, or the passenger's reaction to it?

By "reaction" do you mean him getting knocked the fuq out? Cuz it's not like he got up and created an altercation.
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
Apples to oranges.

How often do they attempt to bump someone after they are on a plane? It is extremely rare that they would do it.


I've had it happen to me.......

I'm not aware of anyone/anyplace that keeps such statistics, so I really don't know what the total numbers are.
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
A point of view from a United Airlines Flight Attendant friend of mine:

I just watched the video. Unfortunately, displacing passengers is a sometimes inevitable and always unpleasant measure that is taken by ALL airlines. Shortage of seats can be caused by more than just overselling a flight. Weather delays and cancellations routinely cause this same problem. As a matter of fact Delta just took almost a week to fully recover from passenger displacement caused by storms that affected their flights in the Atlanta area. Other reasons for shortage of seats include weight restrictions for weight and balance issues when there is a lot of cargo on board, as well as cancellations caused by aircraft maintenance and crew illegalities. Basically, this happens more often than anyone would like but it's part of air travel. It's why as passengers people should always pack overnight essentials in their carry-on bags.

Now to address this particular incident. This was a United Express flight operated by Republic Airlines. It was a small plane with a maximum passenger capacity of 70, making seat availability all the more of a problem. Unfortunately for whatever reason United Airlines ended up with four last minute crew members that needed to get to Louisville on that flight. Given that Louisville is not a major hub of United Airlines, there are not flight attendants readily available there. The fact that this crew of four was being deadheaded to Louisville most likely meant they needed them there to work a flight out of that city. Not getting the crew there would most likely mean canceling a flight out of Louisville. A flight that would have affected 70 or more people, many of whom most likely had connections spreading out all over the country. So it became necessary for seats to be made available for the crew to get on that flight. Again, it's never a comfortable situation to tell a passenger that they are being taken off an aircraft. No one likes when that happens. Not the customer service agent having to deliver the bad news, not the flight crew, and certainly not the passenger. BUT I have seen it happen many times and ever so reluctantly and begrudgingly the passenger gathers their belongings and gets off the aircraft.

Now, the gentleman in this particular instance obviously decided not to comply with the airline's request that he step off the airplane. I believe there has to be more to this story. United Airlines...any airline...does not go from zero to physically removing a passenger off a flight. After watching the video, I personally think the passenger was a bit off and probably behaving irrationally. Again, NO ONE likes to be taken off a flight, but there is civilized behavior and then there is this. Should he have literally been physically removed? I can't say without knowing all the details....but I will say this...with all the other passengers onboard and filming with their phones...I didn't see anyone else volunteering to get off the plane. Lots of critics in the peanut gallery. It is certainly arguable that the airline could have handled the situation better, but they couldn't hold the flight forever and sweet talking obviously didn't get them anywhere. It's a terrible situation, but even as I write this there is more coming to light about the passenger involved in this incident. Personally I don't think a rational person would have had to have been removed in this manner.
 

NDFAN420

Well-known member
Messages
789
Reaction score
356
"My world" is in compliance with the law and obeying commands of law enforcement if the situation arises. What did this nutjob think would happen? He keeps refusing, the airlines and cops say, "Ahhh, ok, this guy is mad. We'll move on to the next one."???

Show us all, please, where this guy's civil liberties were violated. As others have noted, the customer is flying at the discretion of the airline. He has no right to that seat and after being booted from the flight (which sucks and rarely happens), he will be compensated for it.

For such a law and order guy, you seem to have no problem with whether or not your authorities follow the law as well. I do know one thing though, Wilhelm Voigt would eat your lunch.
 
Last edited:

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,600
Reaction score
20,066
Just heard on the news, United is going to give everyone on that flight a refund. In addition, two of the officers are being placed on administrative leave. While that's not an admission of guilt............
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
Just heard on the news, United is going to give everyone on that flight a refund. In addition, two of the officers are being placed on administrative leave. While that's not an admission of guilt............

Two of what officers? The guys who dragged the dude off are not United employees, so United cannot place them on administrative leave.
 
Top