United Airlines Forces Man off of oversold flight

[MickeyMinnieMom]

So this women's take is to do ANYTHING the flight crew tells her and complain later-so if the flight crew told her to remove her pants she would comply?

How do you think she ended up married to a pilot...

 

[mummabear]

I don't think that question warrants an answer. Too silly.

Why?
If the point several are trying to make is that you should do WHATEVER the flight crew tells you and complain later, convince me this is any different?

Again apparently since he had already boarded they can not claim the "denied boarding" procedures and protections (to the airlines), therefore they had no legal basis to ask him to leave or to force him to do so.
He was not doing anything to warrant removal before they asked and I say asked with sacrasim since it was actually telling him, to leave.

My guess is you are saying if flight crew told you to remove clothing you would say it is unreasonable, illegal and refuse, this man had the same agreement for what they were asking if him.

 

[mummabear]

Who gets to judge what's legal? Someone jokes about a bomb and the captain orders the passenger off the flight. The passenger says it was just a joke. Is that legal? The captain has absolute authority to remove a passenger, and did in the United case.

And certainly there are lots of products or services where the business has a right to deny the product with a refund. It says that on each event ticket - that one can be denied entry with only a refund of the ticket price. That could happen even if the ticket was purchased at a premium through a broker or reseller.

In the case of joking about a bomb, that is illegal, there are signs all over the airport saying as such.

What did this man do, in his own actions to cause his removal-nothing except refusing to leave a seat he was legally entitled to.

How do you think she ended up married to a pilot...

 

[Westcoastwild]

How do you think she ended up married to a pilot...

Ugh. I think that's in poor taste.

 

[design_mom]

I'm talking about the people who think United should offer cash instead of vouchers for voluntary bumping. There's a lot of reasons people WOULD want vouchers too. I'm surprised it got up to 800, anyway. People do snap up vouchers. It usually works.

It might often work, but it didn't on Sunday. They could have switched to cash offers and maybe someone would have accepted, but they didn't.

I wouldn't want a voucher. My vacation plans for this year are completely set (including air travel where needed.) My husband has no more vacation time, and I don't get paid when I don't work, so I don't really want to take additional time either. My vacation time is pretty much planned for next year, too. Airline tickets haven't been purchased yet (because the schedule isn't open yet), but United was not on my radar as being a good option for that trip. If I had vouchers, maybe I'd use them, but I wouldn't say "Hooray! United vouchers!" for that trip.

If we had the vouchers, maybe we'd go somewhere to use them... but it would be an unexpected trip that would incur expenses of its own (lodging, food, activities, boarding our dogs at home, and... as I mentioned no wages for me.) It would be kind of like getting a really good coupon for a store that doesn't have anything I really need. Sure, I am sure I could get something, but it would cost me money to do so. I might enjoy it once I had it, but it's certainly not something I need.

I probably would not consider voluntary bumping for a voucher. Chances that I'd be able to use it within a year are small, or would cause me more hassle than the enjoyment they'd provide. Cash might be a different story. If I could be flexible, for the right amount, I'd do it.

 

[mummabear]

Every form of travel promises point A to point B with caveats. You can argue all about an implied promise, but every airline will note the possibility of overbooking.

A hotel will typically walk a guest in case of overbooking. I've been bumped with a hotel room that I reserved, but they just upgraded me to a suite.

And do you think it is reasonable that those caveats include contracting out of heir own stuff ups?

 

[bcla]

Why?
If the point several are trying to make is that you should do WHATEVER the flight crew tells you and complain later, convince me this is any different?

Well - there are several categories where I would say absolutely. If one is told to leave, yes. If one is told to return to the seat, yes. If it's put your clothes/shoes back ON, absolutely. If it's an order to trade seats with another passenger with a child, yes. If one is told to buckle the seatbelt, yes. The latter was in fact an issue with one crash in San Francisco.

The whole "take your clothes off" hypothetical request is just ridiculous on its face. "The captain has ordered you off the plane" is not, regardless of the reason. We can disagree about "justification", but a flight crew has absolute authority to order someone off a plane. That is something that's better left to be sorted once back in the terminal.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

If a doctor had to cancel an appointment for whatever reason, I'm sure my father would have sense enough to go to a walk-in clinic or emergency room if it was vital to been seen promptly.

It would be nice if it were always that simple, but it's not. Some patients have already been waiting to see the doctor, perhaps having an urgent matter that they need to discuss with that doctor, not one who doesn't know them at all. Maybe they've already been working on a problem for some time. In many cases, an ER visit may only yield a referral back to their own doctor, with much time and money wasted, and problem still looming. Some patients will only see their own doctor and don't want to see anyone else. And of course, depending on the nature of the problem, which could be any number of things, waiting could be detrimental to the patient's well-being. I also think that it's easy for people to say it's no big deal to cancel appointments in a manner like this - unless it's them or their family members; then it's a problem.

 

[kidshop]

Why?
If the point several are trying to make is that you should do WHATEVER the flight crew tells you and complain later, convince me this is any different?

Again apparently since he had already boarded they can not claim the "denied boarding" procedures and protections (to the airlines), therefore they had no legal basis to ask him to leave or to force him to do so.
He was not doing anything to warrant removal before they asked and I say asked with sacrasim since it was actually telling him, to leave.

My guess is you are saying if flight crew told you to remove clothing you would say it is unreasonable, illegal and refuse, this man had the same agreement for what they were asking if him.

I believe that the ceo of United had said as much now; there is no legal right to remove a paying, cleared, non-disruptive boarded passenger because they want your seat for someone else.

 

[RedAngie]

There are tons of protections in place, though. In this case, the protection is that the guy must be reimbursed with cash for involuntary bumping and that United has got to put him on the next available flight. Whether or not that's sufficient protection, that's a different discussion.

If you're refunded your money and no harm came to you in the process, then I don't think you're entitled to anything else. The only thing you can do as a consumer is not go back. I don't buy stuff from a few different stores for the same reason, and if a hotel walks me, I'm not going back to that hotel.

But what's the definition of "next available flight?" It's my understanding that there was another United flight to Louisville later that evening, but they offered a flight for the following afternoon instead. I'm guessing the flight later that evening was already fully booked.

Next available flight with empty seats, even if it may be days later???

 

[bcla]

Why?
If the point several are trying to make is that you should do WHATEVER the flight crew tells you and complain later, convince me this is any different?

If it's WHATEVER without limit, of course not. If it's leave the plane, then yes. The last thing that's needed is a passenger questioning a captain's basic authority regarding aircraft operations.

 

[mummabear]

If it's WHATEVER without limit, of course not. If it's leave the plane, then yes. The last thing that's needed is a passenger questioning a captain's basic authority regarding aircraft operations.

Even when his authority breaks the law?

 

[bcla]

But what's the definition of "next available flight?" It's my understanding that there was another United flight to Louisville later that evening, but they offered a flight for the following afternoon instead. I'm guessing the flight later that evening was already fully booked.

Next available flight with empty seats, even if it may be days later???

Depends on what available means. The next flight might not qualify if it's also overbooked or full.

The real irony of this situation is that it's only a five hour drive to Louisville. I'm frankly wondering why a few passengers didn't just take up the offer of an $800 travel voucher if maybe a one-way car rental to Louisville was thrown in. Maybe even a couple or family. I would have asked for that for my family of 3.

 

[MaryLovesPoohBear]

If one is asked to leave, complying is probably the best course of action. Failure to do so could be considered interfering with a flight crew.

So just lay back and think of England, right.

Sorry, but there is no reason to beat up the guy.

 

[bcla]

Even when his authority breaks the law?

How is anyone supposed to know that? About the only thing that may actually be an issue is breaking a contract. Asking someone to leave a plane is not specifically breaking any law. If a business asks a customer to leave their premises and it's refused, that's trespassing in most places. It doesn't really matter what the justification is for asking one to leave. You can argue about it later or perhaps take it to the press, but at that point when the police show up to remove a now trespasser, they're not worried about the justification for removal.

 

[bcla]

So just lay back and think of England, right.

Sorry, but there is no reason to beat up the guy.

I totally agree there was no reason to beat up the guy. I happen to think he should have simply gotten up and left before they were even brought in, but maybe I'm naive. That they used force wasn't that disturbing to me. I've seen it done before, by the book and nobody got injured. The removal was not by the book, and pretty much the only reason why all the other stuff is getting traction in the news.

 

[jiminyC_fan]

How do you think she ended up married to a pilot...

Absolutely uncalled for. I am in shock you stooped that low. WOW

 

[bcla]

I mentioned rental cars and got curious about how much it would cost.

A one-way rental seems to come in a variety of permutations. I did a one day rental from O'Hare to Louisville Int'l and got total prices from $189 to $300+ for compact to mid-sized cars. Some seem to have the drop-off rolled into the base rate, while others have it as a separate fee. One had a $78 base rate, but a $140+ drop fee, plus both the base rate and drop fee were taxable.

So I suppose a couple taking on an $800 voucher each might agree to that if they pay for a car rental.

 

[RedAngie]

Depends on what available means. The next flight might not qualify if it's also overbooked or full.

The real irony of this situation is that it's only a five hour drive to Louisville. I'm frankly wondering why a few passengers didn't just take up the offer of an $800 travel voucher if maybe a one-way car rental to Louisville was thrown in. Maybe even a couple or family. I would have asked for that for my family of 3.

The offer to drive MYSELF to Louisville would have been a deal breaker, LOL. If they offered a limo ride, I might accept. But I probably would have been persuaded by the $800 voucher and hotel and meals.

Many here have stated that the $800 voucher wouldn't be acceptable for whatever reasons. Adding a rental car doesn't seem like it would sweeten the pot, but who knows. Maybe it would.

 

[jiminyC_fan]

This video just surfaced.