United Airlines initiates self-immolation

[Fly320s]

That image has been reseated to my Facebook page.

[MechAg94]

On the legal issue, if United had bumped the guy from the flight before boarding, I guess that happens all the time.  Once they allow him to board, I don't see it.  I am sure there is some fine print in the agreement that they can bump you at any time.  Aside from legalities, United could have offered incentives a good bit higher than $800 cash and been in the black compared to what this will cost them.  

1.  I am curious what was so important about this United employee that they had to forcibly eject paying customers.  Was their no other way to get that employee to the destination?  A chartered flight might be cheaper by the time this is all over.  I would have thought they could put him on a cargo flight or work a deal with a competing airline.  I am sure they have negotiated rates for just this thing.

2.  I am curious how they chose this doctor to be the one who had to go.  Was he already flying standby?  Was he flying with free airline miles?  Surely they could find a nun or pregnant mother to physically manhandle off the plan.  

[Fly320s]

On the legal issue, if United had bumped the guy from the flight before boarding, I guess that happens all the time.  Once they allow him to board, I don't see it.  I am sure there is some fine print in the agreement that they can bump you at any time.  Aside from legalities, United could have offered incentives a good bit higher than $800 cash and been in the black compared to what this will cost them. 

Pax can be bumped at any time.  It sure is easier and cheaper to do it without force though.  As to the compensation, I am guessing that the local agent is only authorized to offer a certain amount of compensation and no more. 

1.  I am curious what was so important about this United employee that they had to forcibly eject paying customers.  Was their no other way to get that employee to the destination?  A chartered flight might be cheaper by the time this is all over.  I would have thought they could put him on a cargo flight or work a deal with a competing airline.  I am sure they have negotiated rates for just this thing.

He was probably a must-ride crew member.  May have been four of them, according to other articles.  Most likely, they were being positioned to operate another flight or to get back to base.  It happens fairly often.  We do have agreements with other airlines, but those are usually for customers, not crew, and typically only used when a flight is canceled or has a long delay.

2.  I am curious how they chose this doctor to be the one who had to go.  Was he already flying standby?  Was he flying with free airline miles?  Surely they could find a nun or pregnant mother to physically manhandle off the plan.

The rules are spelled out in UAL's Contract of Carriage, but typically the last person to check-in for the flight is the first one to get bumped.

[BobR]

The rules are spelled out in UAL's Contract of Carriage, but typically the last person to check-in for the flight is the first one to get bumped.

Well that isn't right, why don't they use the last on first off rule all the time.

Personally I have only flown 2 times since 1992 and that was because they haven't built that damn road to Hawaii yet. :(

bob

[Brad Johnson]

Chicago Aviation Security officer on leave pending an investigation.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2017/04/10/chicago-aviation-officer-placed-on-leave-after-dragging-man-off-plane/

Key quote... "The incident on United flight 3411 was not in accordance with our standard operating procedure and the actions of the aviation security officer are obviously not condoned by the Department."

Brad

[Ben]

Chicago Aviation Security officer on leave pending an investigation.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2017/04/10/chicago-aviation-officer-placed-on-leave-after-dragging-man-off-plane/

Key quote... "The incident on United flight 3411 was not in accordance with our standard operating procedure and the actions of the aviation security officer are obviously not condoned by the Department."

Brad

Well, it'll be interesting to see if he actually did act outside of the scope of his authority and the historical way the ORD cops handle stuff like this, or if he's just the guy the bus ran over as it pulled out of PR central.

[makattak]

Additional details that I had not yet read:

http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/2017/04/10/video-shows-man-forcibly-removed-united-flight-chicago-louisville/100274374/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin=

The man was able to get back on the plane after initially being taken off – his face was bloody and he seemed disoriented, Bridges said, and he ran to the back of the plane. Passengers asked to get off the plane as a medical crew came on to deal with the passenger, she said, and passengers were then told to go back to the gate so that officials could "tidy up" the plane before taking off.

I knew that he had gotten back on the flight, because I'm pretty sure the employees realized JUST HOW BAD THIS WAS GOING TO BE, when the bloodied man was dragged through the aisles and hoped to just sweep this under the rug.

I didn't know EVERYONE had to get off the flight, but it makes sense because they can't be taking chances with blood.

WOW, was this poorly thought through. Let's make EVERYONE on the flight angry in order to get four employees on board and ensure worldwide coverage of our lack of foresight. 

A whole lot of people should be seeking new employment posthaste.

[Jocassee]

Additional details that I had not yet read:

http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/2017/04/10/video-shows-man-forcibly-removed-united-flight-chicago-louisville/100274374/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin=

I knew that he had gotten back on the flight, because I'm pretty sure the employees realized JUST HOW BAD THIS WAS GOING TO BE, when the bloodied man was dragged through the aisles and hoped to just sweep this under the rug.

I didn't know EVERYONE had to get off the flight, but it makes sense because they can't be taking chances with blood.

WOW, was this poorly thought through. Let's make EVERYONE on the flight angry in order to get four employees on board and ensure worldwide coverage of our lack of foresight. 

A whole lot of people should be seeking new employment posthaste.

I was coming over to post this exact thing. The guy is going to have a field day in court or more likely mediation, when a giant settlement check is written.

United f*cked up not once, but twice.

[Jamisjockey]

"The same right a business has to kick you out of their store.  If you don't leave voluntarily, you will be forced out by those authorized to use force."

No.

MAJOR difference.

The passenger has already paid to be sitting in that seat. He's entered into a service contract with the airline (something you don't do just by walking into a brick and mortar store location).

Where's the due justification and cause for the police to be called into what is not a police matter?

It cannot be considered an trespassing issue, because A) the financial contract that exists between the passenger and the airline and B) because quietly sitting in your seat refusing a general cash offer to vacate the seat is NOT grounds to involve police.

I will bet dollars to donuts that the right to refuse service or bump you from a flight at random is buried in the terms and conditions when you buy a ticket. 

[MechAg94]

I was coming over to post this exact thing. The guy is going to have a field day in court or more likely mediation, when a giant settlement check is written.

United f*cked up not once, but twice.

Not to worry.  Doctor's are poor and unable to hire the best lawyers.   

[TechMan]

I will bet dollars to donuts that the right to refuse service or bump you from a flight at random is buried in the terms and conditions when you buy a ticket. 

https://www.united.com/web/en-us/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx#sec5
At their discretion:

RULE 25 DENIED BOARDING COMPENSATION
Denied Boarding (U.S.A./Canadian Flight Origin) - When there is an Oversold UA flight that originates in the U.S.A. or Canada, the following provisions apply:
Request for Volunteers
UA will request Passengers who are willing to relinquish their confirmed reserved space in exchange for compensation in an amount determined by UA (including but not limited to check or an electronic travel certificate). The travel certificate will be valid only for travel on UA or designated Codeshare partners for one year from the date of issue and will have no refund value. If a Passenger is asked to volunteer, UA will not later deny boarding to that Passenger involuntarily unless that Passenger was informed at the time he was asked to volunteer that there was a possibility of being denied boarding involuntarily and of the amount of compensation to which he/she would have been entitled in that event. The request for volunteers and the selection of such person to be denied space will be in a manner determined solely by UA.
Boarding Priorities - If a flight is Oversold, no one may be denied boarding against his/her will until UA or other carrier personnel first ask for volunteers who will give up their reservations willingly in exchange for compensation as determined by UA. If there are not enough volunteers, other Passengers may be denied boarding involuntarily in accordance with UA’s boarding priority:
Passengers who are Qualified Individuals with Disabilities, unaccompanied minors under the age of 18 years, or minors between the ages of 5 to 15 years who use the unaccompanied minor service, will be the last to be involuntarily denied boarding if it is determined by UA that such denial would constitute a hardship.
The priority of all other confirmed passengers may be determined based on a passenger’s fare class, itinerary, status of frequent flyer program membership, and the time in which the passenger presents him/herself for check-in without advanced seat assignment.

[birdman]

https://www.united.com/web/en-us/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx#sec5
At their discretion:

That seems centered around denying boarding...he had already boarded, so how does that apply?

[TechMan]

That seems centered around denying boarding...he had already boarded, so how does that apply?

They were still in the process of boarding, since the doors were not closed.  Once the doors close the aircraft is considered in flight and the rules change.

[Brad Johnson]

A quick scan of their Contract of Carriage indicates nothing which applies to removal of passengers in good standing after they've boarded. There are a bunch of conditions dealing with removal of boarded passengers because of violence, drugs, not going through security, use of illicit substances, etc., but nothing which talks about removing boarded passengers simply because the airline feels they need the seat for someone else. It does address refusal of boarding privileges for any number of reasons but does so in the implied context of "before you set foot on the plane". It addresses voluntary deplaning in various ways but doesn't mention that "voluntary" may also include having your face smashed in and being dragged down the aisle by uniformed officers.

Brad

[Jocassee]

I will bet dollars to donuts that the right to refuse service or bump you from a flight at random is buried in the terms and conditions when you buy a ticket. 

I think you are correct on this point. But if they were going to make that play, they should have stuck with it. Letting him back on shows they didn't actually need to do it--or at least that's why the check will be so huge.

[Brad Johnson]

Seems United's attention has been gotten'd

https://www.facebook.com/United/photos/a.218041034900113.48865.199504650087085/1327123630658509/?type=3&theater

Comments range from brutally direct to outright hostility. Up less than ten minutes and already over 500 responses.

Brad

Comments fast approaching 25k. Not a single positive one on the several pages I scrolled through.

Brad

[Ben]

United has been saved further immolation! It is Trump's fault (freakin' all the Sulus are whack, yo)!

http://twitchy.com/sd-3133/2017/04/10/brace-yourselves-guess-who-star-trek-star-john-cho-blames-for-united-mess/

[Angel Eyes]

United has been saved further immolation! It is Trump's fault (freakin' all the Sulus are whack, yo)!

http://twitchy.com/sd-3133/2017/04/10/brace-yourselves-guess-who-star-trek-star-john-cho-blames-for-united-mess/

TDS has reached epidemic proportions.

[RoadKingLarry]

At least he didn't have a guitar.

[Angel Eyes]

[Hawkmoon]

The same right a business has to kick you out of their store.  If you don't leave voluntarily, you will be forced out by those authorized to use force.

Just because a person has a ticket for a flight, that does not mean that person has a right to be on that flight.  If United decides to remove a passenger for any legal reason, then United may do so and may request the police assist.

Yes, but was the reason legal?

Maybe United should think about revamping their crew scheduling so they don't have to beat down paying passengers to get a 4-person crew where they need to be for their next flight.

Or maybe not overbook every flight?

[Fly320s]

They were still in the process of boarding, since the doors were not closed.  Once the doors close the aircraft is considered in flight and the rules change.

This is correct.  The boarding process was still occurring, and it really doesn't matter when the "deny boarding" process begins.  We can return to the gate to add/remove customers as necessary.

[Fly320s]

Yes, but was the reason legal?

Maybe United should think about revamping their crew scheduling so they don't have to beat down paying passengers to get a 4-person crew where they need to be for their next flight.

Or maybe not overbook every flight?

Odds are it was a last minute change or cancellation that required the crew to deadhead.  The flight was probably sold out weeks ago.

[Hawkmoon]

They were still in the process of boarding, since the doors were not closed.  Once the doors close the aircraft is considered in flight and the rules change.

But the passenger who was beaten up had already boarded and was in his assigned seat. Further, the article doesn't say where he fell in their stated order of priorities. In fact, the earlier article I read indicated that he was selected by a random lottery -- which is NOT in accordance with the written priority system in the contract.

If they needed four seats for a crew, they should have not boarded four paying passengers.

[Hawkmoon]

Circling the wagons:

http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/2017/04/10/uniteds-fiasco-prompts-apology-suspension/100295216/

NBC News said the Chicago Police Department issued a statement Monday that said the passenger who was removed from the flight was 69 years old and was taken to a hospital with non-life-threatening injuries after Sunday's altercation. The police said aviation officers tried to carry the man, who had become irate, off the plane "when he fell," and his "head subsequently struck an armrest causing injuries to his face," according to NBC News.

Probably only a Chicago cop could be dumb enough to falsify a report regarding how the subject was injured when he knows full well that the incident was witnessed by an entire plane load of people. Other passengers have alreay reported that the third officer "threw" the doctor against the armrest -- so he filed a report saying the guy "fell"?

Not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

I hope I never have to fly again.