United Airlines Forces Man off of oversold flight

[mi*vida*loca]

Because at that point, it had to be someone. You let someone say "no" to involuntary bumping, everyone will say no. There are only a few times I have been in the situation that I could take the money and not worry about being back. If I was involuntarily bumped, well, at least I can tell my boss/pet sitter/family member that it was not optional. I'll still be mad because it will still be an inconvenience. However, I don't get why this guy had to be carried off the plane. It doesn't sound like he was acting rationally. They had every right to bump someone for this flight crew. The guy had every right to complain and to get compensated under their rules- but he had no right to refuse to deplane.

I'm not defending United. They are as far as I'm concerned the worst of the worst when it comes to customer service. But involuntary bumping is standard with every airline, and the guy caused his own injuries when he refused to deplane- and then tried to reboard. It's weird, entitled behavior.

I wouldn't call it entitled. Not even close in my book. He paid for his seat, he was allowed to board the plane, he had his seat.

 

[mummabear]

You might want to read your favorite airline's "Contract of Carriage" to see what the terms are. There is NO guarantee in airline travel. Period. Not a flight. Not a seat. Nothing. They are within their legal rights to deny you boarding (and if involuntary, you will get a sizable refund that exceeds what you paid for your seat). You don't have to like it, of course, and you are 100% free to choose a different airline, or refuse to fly altogether.

And the real question is should legally they be able to contract out of providing the service consumers are contracting them for? Sure for reasons outside of their control -weather, maintenance but they should be required to act in good faith of providing the service that they are selling.

 

[Westcoastwild]

I put the blame on the airline's shoulders in this one. It doesn't matter if the man who was injured should have been more co-operative and left the plane peacefully.

The airline staff allowed people to board the plane and occupy their seats, knowing full well that some of these people would then have to be ejected from the plane. They should have made their selection before anyone got on the plane.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that a passenger might protest being removed from a seat that they had not only paid for, but had been allowed to place their derriere in (not to mention, having their luggage loaded onto the plane!). The airline created the conditions that led to the violent incident. They're the ones responsible.

I'll be interested to see how this plays out, in the days to come. Ideally, I'd like to see some protocols put in place to prevent this sort of incident from happening again.

They may have not known they had to make a selection. You can't really know if people won't show up until you close boarding. My guess, based on stand by situations that I have seen, is that they were hoping people wouldn't make last call. I think this is pretty standard, actually- any time there has been involuntary bumping, on all the airlines I've flown on, it doesn't usually happen at the gate. It's a pretty good indicator that it might happen if they keep increasing the compensation. There aren't all that many people who can always take the money and accept the delay. It only happens to me maybe a quarter of the time. And wouldn't do it if kids or elderly relatives were involved. Then add into the mix that business travelers are probably not willing to be a day late for work. I think really it's less common that people would be willing to be bumped. If you get rid of the unhealthy/elderly, the families with kids, and the business travelers, that leaves vacationing couples, or solo travelers. That described like 3-4 people on the flight I took from Orlando last time. If those 3-4 people don't volunteer then involuntary bumping it is.

 

[gotomu212]

You know in a customer service business there's a big difference between what you have the right to do and what you should do. The video of this is shocking (right or not, it's hard to watch) and that's going to end up costing United a ton-with or without settling (maybe there's a case, maybe there's not), but the amount of bad PR from this.....it's honestly one of the worst PR nightmares I have seen lately.

 

[Westcoastwild]

I wouldn't call it entitled. Not even close in my book. He paid for his seat, he was allowed to board the plane, he had his seat.

And when he was selected for involuntary bumping, all of that ceased to matter. He still gets the service he paid for. He gets flown on a later flight. It's all within airline rules, which you accept when you buy a ticket. He violated the rules when he refused involuntary bumping. They told him they would remove him by force if he didn't cooperate. He didn't cooperate.

If security anywhere asks me to cooperate, I cooperate. I would complain to management afterwards if I felt I was being unfairly treated. But refusing to cooperate because you feel entitled to whatever it is you think the other party is denying you legally- that's not adult, rational behavior.

 

[Westcoastwild]

You know in a customer service business there's a big difference between what you have the right to do and what you should do. The video of this is shocking (right or not, it's hard to watch) and that's going to end up costing United a ton-with or without settling (maybe there's a case, maybe there's not), but the amount of bad PR from this.....it's honestly one of the worst PR nightmares I have seen lately.

I definitely agree with this. But what else would you have the airline do? They can't let him refuse, because then that makes it look like it's voluntary bumping. What would they do if he next person refused? At some point they're going to be removing someone forcibly from that plane. Bumping an active flight crew is not a viable option.

 

[DisBabe94]

United is within their legal rights but they are a company and as such are beholden to the whims of their customer base. They should have had the foresight to see that although they were operating within their rights to refuse service to this man, the court of public opinion is where they will really pay. They will pay for this heavily - from the impending lawsuit and from a huge loss of their customer base. The way a business (especially a customer-service based business like an airline) treats its customers should not be based on the extent of their legal rights. It should be based on providing a positive customer experience. How it got to this place is honestly beyond me, and you can bet that the other airlines are changing protocol to avoid a situation like this from happening on one of their planes.

 

[Magpie]

They may have not known they had to make a selection. You can't really know if people won't show up until you close boarding. My guess, based on stand by situations that I have seen, is that they were hoping people wouldn't make last call. I think this is pretty standard, actually- any time there has been involuntary bumping, on all the airlines I've flown on, it doesn't usually happen at the gate. It's a pretty good indicator that it might happen if they keep increasing the compensation. There aren't all that many people who can always take the money and accept the delay. It only happens to me maybe a quarter of the time. And wouldn't do it if kids or elderly relatives were involved. Then add into the mix that business travelers are probably not willing to be a day late for work. I think really it's less common that people would be willing to be bumped. If you get rid of the unhealthy/elderly, the families with kids, and the business travelers, that leaves vacationing couples, or solo travelers. That described like 3-4 people on the flight I took from Orlando last time. If those 3-4 people don't volunteer then involuntary bumping it is.

They knew they had four crew members who needed to be on that plane. So they knew that they'd have to remove four people from the plane after boarding. They claimed in an announcement to the seated passengers that they were letting the computer choose "randomly" after no one volunteered.

Every time I've seen people bumped (which does happen a lot, you're right), it's happened at the gate, before boarding. I've never seen anyone be seated and then asked to leave the plane. Although now that I've learned it's possible, I won't relax until I'm actually in the air!

Once, they tried to bump my fifteen year old daughter. My husband made it very clear to the lady at the gate that there would be a BIG issue if they tried to prevent our minor child from flying with us. So, they found someone else to bump, and the four of us flew.

I can't imagine how terrified she would have been if she'd been asked to leave the plane after we'd all been buckled into our seats. (Obviously, we'd have all left with her.)

 

[FlightlessDuck]

And when he was selected for involuntary bumping, all of that ceased to matter. He still gets the service he paid for. He gets flown on a later flight.

But why do people just think this is ok?

People have lives to get to. They have connecting flights. They have meetings. Time matters. You, as a customer, paid for a seat on a specific airplane. Part of the price of your ticket was the fact that you were getting on a specific flight.

You shouldn't get bumped. It shouldn't even be considered part of standard operating procedure. It's ridiculous that an entire industry thinks this is acceptable behavior.

 

[Westcoastwild]

United is within their legal rights but they are a company and as such are beholden to the whims of their customer base. They should have had the foresight to see that although they were operating within their rights to refuse service to this man, the court of public opinion is where they will really pay. They will pay for this heavily - from the impending lawsuit and from a huge loss of their customer base. The way a business (especially a customer-service based business like an airline) treats its customers should not be based on the extent of their legal rights. It should be based on providing a positive customer experience. How it got to this place is honestly beyond me, and you can bet that the other airlines are changing protocol to avoid a situation like this from happening on one of their planes.

The infuriating part is that United probably won't suffer for this. Their customer service is appalling. Maybe they would lose first time customers, but the returnees who are flying with them are probably flying with them out of necessity. Budget or maybe they are the only ones that service their area regularly. I mean, I LOATHE United. But when it's the only affordable or convenient option, which it often is, I'll fly with them anyway. Not everyone lives near a major airport with a lot of routes to where they need to go.

 

[sukhakuli]

The Washington Post has a more detailed article that answers most everyone's questions here.

 

[ronandannette]

I guess I'm cheap. Once I volunteered at the first offer, a $200 voucher with a guaranteed seat on the next flight 2 hours later.

Another time was a $400 voucher, free hotel and meal, and first class seat on a flight the next morning...

Yeah, I'd take that deal any day and there simply HAD to have been some level of compensation that could have been offered that would have gotten 4 people up and going.

You know in a customer service business there's a big difference between what you have the right to do and what you should do. The video of this is shocking (right or not, it's hard to watch) and that's going to end up costing United a ton-with or without settling (maybe there's a case, maybe there's not), but the amount of bad PR from this.....it's honestly one of the worst PR nightmares I have seen lately.

United is within their legal rights but they are a company and as such are beholden to the whims of their customer base. They should have had the foresight to see that although they were operating within their rights to refuse service to this man, the court of public opinion is where they will really pay. They will pay for this heavily - from the impending lawsuit and from a huge loss of their customer base. The way a business (especially a customer-service based business like an airline) treats its customers should not be based on the extent of their legal rights. It should be based on providing a positive customer experience. How it got to this place is honestly beyond me, and you can bet that the other airlines are changing protocol to avoid a situation like this from happening on one of their planes.

One can only hope that the incident will result in some actual reform taking place with the current policies because it could actually happen to any of us at any time. (Not the assulted and dragged off part... )

 

[GrnMtnMan]

 

[Westcoastwild]

They knew they had four crew members who needed to be on that plane. So they knew that they'd have to remove four people from the plane after boarding. They claimed in an announcement to the seated passengers that they were letting the computer choose "randomly" after no one volunteered.

Every time I've seen people bumped (which does happen a lot, you're right), it's happened at the gate, before boarding. I've never seen anyone be seated and then asked to leave the plane. Although now that I've learned it's possible, I won't relax until I'm actually in the air!

Once, they tried to bump my fifteen year old daughter. My husband made it very clear to the lady at the gate that there would be a BIG issue if they tried to prevent our minor child from flying with us. So, they found someone else to bump, and the four of us flew.

I can't imagine how terrified she would have been if she'd been asked to leave the plane after we'd all been buckled into our seats. (Obviously, we'd have all left with her.)

Yep, but there, you had a valid reason. A minor child. Or another situation I've seen- the system selected the elederly sick person but not the caretaker. The caretaker said no; the flight crew backed down. So they can be reasonable. The guy didn't have a valid reason for refusal, except that he wanted to go home. Everyone on that plane wanted to go home!

Again though- they didn't know how many people would be boarding. They knew how many people had tickets. But you don't know about no shows until everyone actually boards. (I also don't really understand why it got that far. Hoping for one or two no shows, maybe, but they should have been bumping at the gate with 4).

 

[DisBabe94]

The infuriating part is that United probably won't suffer for this. Their customer service is appalling. Maybe they would lose first time customers, but the returnees who are flying with them are probably flying with them out of necessity. Budget or maybe they are the only ones that service their area regularly. I mean, I LOATHE United. But when it's the only affordable or convenient option, which it often is, I'll fly with them anyway. Not everyone lives near a major airport with a lot of routes to where they need to go.

Yeah you are right, not everybody has the ability to "boycott" every Tom, Dick, and Stanley that has poor business practices!! Maybe at the least we can hope for A) other airlines to adjust their policies for involuntary bumping or B) United themselves will take a hard look at their customer service and attempt to repair this PR nightmare by making some positive changes

 

[Miskey]

The Washington Post has a more detailed article that answers most everyone's questions here.

link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...off-battered-and-limp/?utm_term=.0fd756afc976

I think the fact that one of the officers has been placed on leave speaks volumes

 

[cjbcam]

I'm glad he did what he did. It will make airlines look at the way they treat people. If he would have just quietly got off the plane no one would be talking about the poor ways airlines treat people. Lots of people are saying that the airlines have the right they weren't breaking a law. Maybe this will help place laws on airlines. From what I read the flight crew was needed the next day at noon. Plenty of time for the airline to find a way to get them there on time. Unless people stand up and say no to being treated like this, nothing will change.

 

[BrianL]

But why do people just think this is ok?

People have lives to get to. They have connecting flights. They have meetings. Time matters. You, as a customer, paid for a seat on a specific airplane. Part of the price of your ticket was the fact that you were getting on a specific flight.

You shouldn't get bumped. It shouldn't even be considered part of standard operating procedure. It's ridiculous that an entire industry thinks this is acceptable behavior.

I will say that I don't think it's okay at all and do think things should change in the industry. That said, I would not be willing to confront airport police over it and risk the potential consequences of that. One can say they won't fly United, but all the airlines do this kind of thing, so, you know, enjoy the drive I guess.

 

[gotomu212]

I definitely agree with this. But what else would you have the airline do? They can't let him refuse, because then that makes it look like it's voluntary bumping. What would they do if he next person refused? At some point they're going to be removing someone forcibly from that plane. Bumping an active flight crew is not a viable option.

They could have increased the incentive amount.

This is the top trending story on twitter, huffingtonpost has it as their banner article (for the past 3 hours), CNN and NBC had it as a top,story until the school shooting knocked it down the list, their Facebook page had over 35k comments. The PR on this is going to cost them millions.

 

[Pacolovestacos]

Bottomline is that he was told multiple times that he had to exit the airplane. You can argue and voice your objections for a little while, but when 3 security guards come for you, it's time to get off. If the person still refuses to get off, the only thing left is to physically escort him off the plane. The injuries were sustained because the passenger put up a fight, that's on him.