Sunday’s incident where a man was dragged off a United Express plane and bloodied was terrible. It’s excruciating to watch the video of the incident unfolding, and later of the disoriented man mumbling “just kill me.”
#flythefriendlyskies @united no words. This poor man!! pic.twitter.com/rn0rbeckwT
— Kaylyn Davis (@kaylyn_davis) April 10, 2017
United is taking the bulk of the blame here, and that’s probably their own fault. Their PR response has been disastrous, with United CEO Oscar Munoz apologizing for having to re-accommodate passengers. As Jimmy Kimmel said last night,
“It’s like how we ‘re-accommodated’ El Chapo out of Mexico,” Kimmel said. “That is such sanitized, say-nothing, take-no-responsibility, corporate B.S. speak. I don’t know how the guy who sent that tweet didn’t vomit when he typed it out.”
This was a tough situation all-around for which there were no good solutions. And things turned from bad to worse when a passenger refused to get off the plane when told to do so by the airline and by police. And it became the source of worldwide outrage when the police overreacted, dragged him off, and bloodied him.
There are a lot of myths about the situation, and it’s leading people to some bad conclusions.
- This didn’t happen because United sold too many tickets. United Express (Republic Airlines) had to send four crew members to work a flight the next morning. The weekend was operationally challenging, this was a replacement crew, if the employees didn’t get to Louisville a whole plane load of passengers were going to be ‘bumped’ when that flight was cancelled, and likely other passengers on other flights using that aircraft would have their own important travel plans screwed up as well.
- United couldn’t have just sent another plane to take their crew even if they had such a plane it’s not clear they had the crew to operate it legally, or that they could have gotten the plane back to Chicago in time legally so prevent ‘bumping’ via cancellation the whole plane load of passengers it was supposed to carry next.
- If the passenger could have just taken Uber, why not the crew? because United doesn’t get to transport its crew any way it wishes whenever it wishes, they’re bound by union contracts and in any case they were following standard established procedures. We can debate those procedures, that’s productive, but United didn’t do anything out of the ordinary.
- United should have just kept increasing the denied boarding offer passengers didn’t willingly get off at $800, they should have gone to $1000 (would that have made a difference?) or $5000 or $100,000 — it’s not the passengers’ fault United didn’t have enough seats. Though the time this would have taken might have lost a takeoff window or taken time where the crew went illegal (and the whole flight had to cancel) or the replacement crew wouldn’t get the legally required rest.
More importantly, United didn’t do it because Department of Transportation regulations set maximum required compensation for involuntary denied boarding (in this case 4 times the passenger’s fare paid up to a maximum of $1350). So they’re not going to offer more than that for voluntary denied boardings, especially since the violent outcome here wasn’t expected and the United Express gate agent had no authority to do more.
I’m being called very terrible things in the comments that I won’t reprint here in this post. What happened to the man was terrible but it was a difficult situation all around, he should have complied when ordered off the plan by United and then by Chicago Aviation Police. It was a terrible situation for him, but one that at that point could foreseeably have gotten worse. I’m just glad he wasn’t accused of disrupting the flight as part of a terrorist plot that sort of thing can happen in confrontations like this.
The Chicago Aviation Police overreacted and appear to have used way too much force. One officer is already on leave because of the incident, the Aviation Police recognize some fault is likely there — and that’s a pretty high hurdle to climb considering the Chicago Police Department immediately stood up for an officer by claiming horribly that he had simply ‘fallen on his face’.
Is it possible that if circumstances were different — if different things had been done before Sunday — then the outcome would have been different? Sure. Although what those things are, what the consequences of those things would be, are debatable — and most people doing the debating don’t have much or even any information on which to base their judgments.
Fault here lies with:
- United for not having as many seats as they sold, although it wasn’t because they sold more seats than the plane held, it was because their operation became a mess and they needed to salvage that to inconvenience the fewest passengers overall. It wasn’t “to maximize their profits” although they certainly wanted to limit their losses by limiting passenger inconvenience.
- The passenger who should have gotten off the plane when ordered to do so. It sucked for him and wasn’t his fault, but refusing airline and police instructions unless designed to provoke a violent response for media attention to promote a civil rights cause is a bad idea.
- The Chicago Aviation Police shouldn’t have responded with the force they did. They’re the most to blame. If they hadn’t used as much force this whole thing would never even have been a story.
United’s statements backing their employee, refusing to name the victim, or acknowledge that the police really did hurt him are deplorable.
But the situation itself lands mostly at the feet of the police, who appear to recognize this based on actions thus far.
So what do we do to prevent this in the future? The truth is there’s not very much. Running an airline is hard. Weather and mechanical problems and back luck and IT problems cancel and delay flights, so they work hard to recover.
Maybe the maximum denied board compensation should be even higher, though that’s not clearly an issue. When the Department of Transportation began regulating denied boarding in the 1970s, there were about 150,000 involuntary denied boardings in the U.S. per year — and now with many more passengers the number there are in the 40,000s. As flights have gotten more full, the percentage of passengers denied boarding has gone down.
The real solution here is to change the culture of law enforcement in aviation. As soon as there’s even a misunderstanding between passengers and crew, that can trigger law enforcement. The assumption is that the passenger is always wrong, the airline backs its crew, and there’s tremendous risk to the public. Not every customer service situation is a crime.
This is in no way limited to being a United issue, it’s endemic to American society and aviation as a whole. It’s a function of the growth of the security state in response to 9/11. We’ve come to accept it, and indeed we get it from the TSA day in and day out. Until that changes, incidents like these are likely to repeat themselves.
Yea, stocks still haven’t recovered and quite a bit of talk leans towards the unsure about them truly recovering anytime soon… maybe research before making statements. Or writing whole articles.
@Anna
You must be kidding. Are you a real person?
United did nothing wrong? Wow, you missed the entire point – there are federal laws that United failed to follow – first ones being, written explanation that outlines (i) how the person was picked to be involuntarily disboarded and (ii) the compensation they are legally permitted to receive. None of this happened.
So please, enough with this “united did nothing wrong”. Did you not see the LA times article where they kicked a first-class passenger off, also after he was seated? United, like many greedy companies (Wall street banks anyone), has gone too far in the name of corporate profits – and it’s paying for it (sound familiar? 2008 anyone?).
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.usatoday.com/story/100368196/
Google, man. Seriously.
Too many people convert the passenger’s after the fact behavior (bad as it was) to an excuse for what transpired before his bad behavior. Oh yeah, defend UA and claim they are harmless because their illegal bumping was somehow made legal by the passenger acting badly. The CEO admitted that the plane was not overbooked, it was fully booked. If you don’t know the FAR language for this, you are at a disadvantage to justify removal of a seated passenger with a boarding pass in order to seat someone who has no paid reservation and no status as an overbooked passenger. The CEO clearly admitted the plane was NOT overbooked (a legal term with a legal definition). Every argument that starts with the assumption they gate crew acted correctly for overbooking is a fake argument when the overbooking status was not factual.
How did united fail to meet their contract? Its written in the fine print of all airlines that his is possible.
I used to work in theater management and ticketing for a very popular annual film festival in Los Angeles. As is common with this type of event, we had to overbook because the structure of the ticketing system: general seating, large numbers of complimentary tickets/special admissions, etc. Especially in the early years of the festival, we were sometimes left with more people than seats. Managing the seats was stressful, and we sometimes but rarely had to kick people out of the theater, even some who had legitimate reservations. I get where the airlines are coming from. When you are managing an operation with lots of people and complicated schedules, you may have to make a decision that severely inconveniences a few people in order for everything else to work. Sometimes you have to do it to fix your own mistake, and that’s just the unfortunate truth. The people who get inconvenienced are the ones lowest on the pecking order of importance for your organization. Although it is unfortunate that the man was injured, he was responsible for his injuries because he resisted the orders of law enforcement personnel. The other passengers who followed orders were not injured, incidentally. An airplane is not a democracy. It is not a place for passive political protest. If he was legally required to leave the plane, then the police were legally justified in using force to remove him because of his insubordination. That was not excessive force, it was excessive stubbornness on his part. Was the plane just supposed to sit there until the police and crew intimidated him into leaving? What about someone who is disruptive in some other way, such as by being drunk or abusive to other passengers? Just wait until they leave on their own? It can’t work that way just because we think that we should never have to be compelled to do anything we don’t agree to do. The real question here is whether they had the legal right to eject him or not. If they had the legal right, then should the laws be changed so that airlines can’t overbook thus leading to this situation? If, on the other hand, they didn’t have the legal right to eject him, and only then, should he get damages for refusing to obey the orders of law enforcement.
I will never side with Corporate America. Ever. This is why. If someone is this upset about being removed from a plane (and he has a right to be) ask someone else. But no: we picked this guy. He’s it. And we’ll break his head if we have to.
The law sets the maximum required compensation for IDB at $1350 *in cash*. United offered no more than $800 *in vouchers* (which are worth 1/2 to 1/3 as much as cash). Why didn’t they offer more?
@Gary Leff, since “boarding” is not defined in United’s Contract of Carriage, it retains its ordinary English meaning. Once I’ve already boarded, they can’t “deny me boarding”. That would be like a restaurant denying you a meal after you’ve already eaten it.
In any even, United’s Contract of Carriage was violated in multiple ways in this incident. I suspect federal law was as well, but the stories aren’t clear on that. (Were the passengers given a written statement of their rights for Involuntary Denied Boarding as required by law? No report that I’ve seen says they were.)
GARY: you’re clearly reading the comments here, yet I haven’t seen you weigh in on the actual rules United needs to follow: it’s Contract of Carriage with the passenger. Contract “Rule 25” which discusses bumping (“denial of boarding”) is the only rule that might apply here. Yet they didn’t follow it. They weren’t oversold (which triggers the rule), and they didn’t deny boarding (part of the mandated contractual remedy). They sought to “deny transport” by de-planing a boarded customer. That falls under Contract Rule 21. Read Rule 21, and you’ll see that the passenger had committed none of the transgressions listed at the time United began the denial of transport effort . United is clearly at fault here, and the doctor – however flawed he may be. Is 100% a victim here. GARY – care to weigh in on the Contract of Carriage?
just a view from a ‘deplorable’ – if my wife and i were on that plane and we were told to deplane we would – there is no way that we would refuse to get off an aircraft and especially after being asked by a law enforcement officer – WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE TODAY?
OK, here is the thing no one has addressed. What about his patients?
I don’t know for sure if this guy was telling the truth that he’s a doctor and had patients that needed to see him in the hospital in the morning – but let’s assume he was. What about them? It’s easy to say “He should have just gotten off and it sucks to be him.” Oh yeah? Well, what if you were one of his patients waiting for a consult? Or you had to wait for the doctor to get there the following morning so you could go home and the next flight out to Louisville wasn’t until the next afternoon? Who compensates the patient who gets an extra day tacked onto their bill because their doctor was yanked off a plane so some wankers in United uniforms could get to Louisville? What about those people?
I would have protested, too, if I were a doctor and had patients depending on me. Of course, I am already seeing a smear campaign starting that this doctor had had legal trouble in the past and blah, blah, blah. United’s legal staff already at work to discredit the victim here… whatever. Sorry about the folks in Louisville who would have had to get a new plane when their’s was canceled, but that’s still cheaper than most medical bills, hospital stays, rebooked tests and appointments.
What recourse would those people have had? None.
Worst case, couldn’t the airline hire a charter jet for the four crew? They don’t want to spend the money. As for the FAA rules about the maximum payout, you can bet the airline lobby was around to write that into the rules. Industries don’t want to be beholden to a fair market auction situation when it might be against them. If the costs of paying out for overbooking starts to cost too much, they can make the assessment to lower the percentage of overbooking. They like making their profits at the expense of customers, but they’ll be damned if they’re going lose money just to treat people properly.
The folks writing this article seem to have a different opinion: http://boingboing.net/2017/04/12/concussed-and-blamed.html
Granted United handled the situation terribly! However, there is no reason whatsoever to behave like you have lost your damn mind! Our two year old behaves better than that. Also, you are telling me that there wasn’t one person on that plane that was willing to forfeit their seat to allow all to be well? If I had been on that flight I would have volunteered to get off the plane. Clearly this man is not right in the head or it was for another purpose. The whole situation is a ridiculous display of all of humanity.
1- United should have a better policy for these situations
2- people need to get over themselves, everyone on that flight is a jackass. One for not volunteering and two for video taping an obvious low point in that man’s mental stability
3 – I agree that the safety of the other passengers was at stake and they where so busy video taping that they didn’t even realize how vulnerable they all were at that moment. Terrorist thrive in chaotic situations!
4 – If I saw my doctor or any medical professional acting in that manner I would have dropped them immediately!
For those of you that said United only did it for the money. Really? Do you honestly think any of the people involved where ok with this situation? This man made it a security situation the minute he caused a chaotic situation that allowed for a security breakdown!
Im sure all involved were shocked that this situation was even happening and this gentleman should be charged with a terrorist act!
@Amanda Pfan I actually have it’s just buried in a lot of comments. This is an involuntary denied boarding situation under DOT rules and United’s CoC, they WERE oversold (more passengers with confirmed seats than they had seats available for passengers) as it’s commonly understood in the industry.
The passenger definitely got the short end of the stick EVEN BEFORE police arrived, though the beating he suffered made this so much worse.
None of which means United didn’t follow its own rules. It’s the question of what the rules ought to be, how they should change given all the tradeoffs, that’s hard and needs thought.
@Matt R – yesterday UAL ended where it began, today it was down 1%, Jetblue’s shares were down more and Delta was down half a percent. What are you saying?
The simplest option for United would have been to pay their staff to fly on another airline. Multiple airlines fly similar routes. How easy would it have been to purchase tickets from a competitor and get them to there destination without inconveniencing paying customers??
@Gary, I’m baffled how this is an “involuntary denied boarding” when the gate agent had already *voluntarily*: 1) allowed him walk down the gangplank, 2) pass though the door to the plane, and 3) sit in the seat assigned to him. In other words, when the gate agent had under any reasonably person’s definition: “permitted him to board”.
The only ones they could have denied “boarding” to were the United/Republic employees who were waiting somewhere *outside* the plane. They hadn’t boarded yet. Semantics, yes, but if I’m sitting on a civil or criminal jury, you’d better show me with a straight face a United Contract of Carriage or Federal CFR that defines a “seated” passenger as not having really “boarded” yet. Can you? And if you offended me with that obnoxious definition, I’d probably still rule in the passenger’s favor.
One additional comment: Reasonable people can disagree here. I appreciate your willingness to dialog in the comments.
Gary: I am not going to call you names, but I will state as a factual matter that in some respects you don’t know what you are talking about. First, this was NOT an overbooking under United’s own Contract of Carriage. Section 25, read it. They do NOT have the right under either Federal Regulations or THEIR OWN CONTRACT to even deny boarding to a single paying passenger in order to deadhead their employees on the flight. So it was NOT an involuntary denial of boarding. And even if it were, the $1350 is the maximum they can be MADE to pay for an involuntary booking under federal law (400% of the price of the ticket or $1,350, whichever is lower); if they are looking for VOLUNTEERS to get off, which they were required to do here since they could not FORCE anyone off, they can offer whatever they want; the sky is the limit. Second, once they had allowed a fare-paying customer onto the plane and into his seat it becomes a denial of transport situation, covered by other regulations and Section 21 of the Contract of Carriage. Again, READ IT. There are no reasons listed for which transport can be denied that apply to the gentleman that was assaulted. Third, the Chicago Department of Aviation does not have a Police department; their officers are security guards with authority ONLY on O’Hare and Midway Airport grounds to act with the same authority as a Chicago Police officer, but they can only hold arrestees for pickup by CPD. Fourth, federal law does not apply to airplanes in a manner that would give the crew any authority over the passengers until the plane is “in flight”, which is defined as a plane with its doors closed and ready for departure. Clearly if people were getting on and off the plane, it was not “in flight” within the meaning of federal aviation law. Thus, United had no more right to call for Chicago Aviation security to enforce some commercial beef it has with a passenger than I have to call the police because I don’t like my landscaping job. In other words, you are way too easy on United. The gentleman who was abused was TOTALLY within his rights, and United was TOTALLY WRONG!
Not to pile on but “the United Express gate agent had no authority to do more.”
OK what do we mean by “authority”? Not DOT rules of course, or contract law.
Presumably the management told this gate agent not to offer more, even though $1350 in cash should have been offered if nobody took the $800 voucher (or $1000 voucher there are different accounts). It was a discretionary management decision to lo-ball the customers below the clearlt stated amount of $1350 and when they held out for a higher offer (as they were 100% entitled to) do they were forced off the plane.
And it wasn’t “random” in the normal sense of that word, that was smoke to persuade the passengers that they were being unreasonable if they didn’t obey orders to get off.
It’s simple – don’t sell more seats than you have and leave a few available for contingencies, so if there’s a situation where other airline staff requires the seats they’re available. If those extra seats aren’t available then sell them to people who may want a last minute ticket. It’s only common sense.
Most people flying are doing it because they need to be somewhere, it’s not just for a lark.
So as far as I’m concerned, United is responsible – morally, if not legally.
Oh good!
This article confirms that even though he paid for a ticket and was within his rights to stay in his purchased seat. Blame is still assigned to him because he did not comply with authorities. Which means that he is a threat to society. This is why people are outraged when a man who expected to get what he paid for instead gets assaulted and then smeared in the news with all his “past deeds” (like the past is relevant here).
He’s only being demonized, since anyone with a soul can see that this man was treated wrongfully, and that most people agree with the man.
Again comes the posion to society, obey authority figures, comply with authority orders, follow orders like a good little drone. We are expendable to these people.
What I’d like to know about are the other 3 people removed from the flight. Who are they? And how do they feel about it?
The airline should already have designated employee seating, for 4 passengers they could add extra seats where their flight attendants sit so they cn accommodate their own employees.
23 billion dollar company and they don’t have employee seating? Wtf are they doing with their money.
https://thepilotwifelife.wordpress.com/2017/04/11/i-know-youre-mad-at-united-but-thoughts-from-a-pilot-wife-about-flight-3411/
This passenger is in no way responsible for this. He purchased a ticket and had a contract with United. The airline failed to honor that contract. If United failed to get their flight crew to their flight then that is United’s problem. You cannot put a possibly delayed or cancelled flight on the passenger. He was a doctor that needed to see patients. Of course money was not more of an incentive than his patients. United should have gotten him on another flight on a different airline that would get him to his destination on time and then asked if he would accept that. United showed that they do not care about their passengers and I, for one, will never use them again.
I wonder what the backlash would’ve been if this happened to a black person? Will the Chicago steeets be full of riots again? Asians will not naturally go out to do that but will “riot” with their wallet.
Lena West
What were you watching you must be the only person i the world who would say that was a terrorist
And he wasnt breaking any laws on that plane as it was not over booked
So the puts the airlinr and police at fault
What I really learned is that at best Gary Leff is an apologist and corporate profits are his religion. Fuck you.
Every single person who works for United Airlines should be murdered. Every single one
nonsense… the guy should have behaved like an adult and complied… the police did not use too much force, there is no magic way to make some leave if they are going to fight, which is what this guy did, stop encouraging childish behavior
Once the situation became Federal the man had no right to disobey the cops. He should have walked off the plane then taken up his grievance somewhere else.
This guy got what he deserved, he should have left the plane when asked. He had an alterior motive knowing if he refused and caused a scene he could sue. Look at his past! What an asshole!! He’s no fuckin doctor.
According to the contract of carriage denied boarding takes place when the
flight is overbooked. First the passenger was allowed to board and claim
his seat. The aircraft was not overbooked and it was a last minute
situation for the four employees. Since the passenger was allowed to board
and claimed his seat he had followed the rules of the contract of carriage.
This is no longer a denied boarding situation but now becomes he denied
transport situation. In this the airline can ask for volunteers, but in no
place under the denied transport rules can a passenger be forcibly taken
off an aircraft because of the booking situation. He can be denied
transport for other reasons, such as security and safety but not because of
booking. At this point since he was legally on the aircraft, the Chicago
Transportation Police (not federal law enforcement as stated) had no just
authority to remove the passenger forcibly from the aircraft as there was
no violation of any rules or laws in this situation. The passenger had the
legal right at that time to complete his journey since he was allowed to
board the aircraft.
Sorry mate, but you are wrong. Unless you can show where United has the right to unboard a passenger due to overbooking. I’ve read their rules and policies which only cover denial of boarding. Since he was already admitted on board those rules no longer apply, he had every right to refuse.
The fault lies with United and its employees for poor planning in having four crew members show up at the last minute and displacing regular passengers.
“After passengers had already boarded the plane, United said it needed to clear some seats for four members of another flight crew who needed to get to Louisville.”
I will never fly with them ever again
Here is the problem with your idea that it is the Chicago Aviation Police’s fault mostly, more than United Airlines. Look, as a customer, I don’t deal with CAP and hope never to– although these videos show that United Airlines might call them to come beat me up on their airplane!
This is really an interesting situation. Most articles that I make comments on, well I have an opinion, but it doesn’t really matter to the story (ie. was OJ innocent or guilty? should the Supreme Court have voted this way or that way?). This article, though, my opinion DOES matter. As does everyone else’s opinion. We vote with our dollars. And we might be choosing this year or next year, or both, or several times in a year, where to spend that money. This week, I expect to spend $1500 on 2 plane tickets. Literally overnight, United went from being one of my preferred airlines (because I was never that picky before and had no beef with them before), to one that I will avoid, even if it costs extra $$, esp while this CEO is still in place. The CEO who says that if I protest to being removed from a flight by staying in my seat, because I’m already seated, my stuff is in the overhead bin, my luggage is on the plane, I’ve already paid for my seat– and now they want to move me for something that sounds like a trivial reason or unreasonable request, the CAP can come drag me down the aisle unconscious, bash my head in till blood drips from my face– and the CEO says this is all following their procedure… no thanks!
Are you looking at the situation from a paying customer’s point of view? I don’t know who the CAP is, never dealt with them, and don’t really care about them. United Airlines is the one who called them to come to do the deed– CAP wouldn’t be there if United Airlines didn’t ask them to be there. So when I’m making a choice to fly, I’m going to fear United Airlines from now on. I’m not choosing CAP, I’m choosing an airline to fly with.
I’m paying hundreds if not a thousand dollars + for someone to safely transport me through the air, thousands of miles above the ground from one place to another. If that doesn’t scream ‘trust’ to you, I don’t know what does! Choosing an airline is all about TRUST and they are in the business of trust. In a way, it doesn’t matter who is wrong and who isn’t wrong– even if you think it’s wrong, the general public sides w/the passenger– if not for the simple reason that they would fear something like this ever happening to themselves or their loved ones.
The videos showed a number of surprising/shocking things: I have flown many flights for many decades. I have seen many flights overbooked, people not allowed to board, frustrated people at the counters, etc. I have NEVER seen people being involuntarily chosen to leave a flight once everyone has sat down. This is eye opener #1. That also causes people like me to side w/the passenger, I would have been puzzled and have lots of questions, that procedure doesn’t seem right to me, at best, it is unfamiliar. Eye opener #2 of course, is that a passenger can be knocked unconscious and dragged down the aisle if they insist on staying in their seat. Please show me other videos of other airlines doing this– I have never seen it before. I didn’t even know this COULD happen!!
So literally overnight, I’ve made the decision to not fly United for now. For those who want to keep flying United, please continue to do so, so that there is room on other airlines for me! Flying with United now means that if you don’t leave your seat when they want you to, you could get knocked unconscious, dragged down the aisle, and bloody nose/mouth. And at best, you risk being involuntarily chosen to leave a flight you are seated on, for whatever reason they choose. No thanks…. I could avoid both those potential problems by just flying with a different airline.
This male knew what he was doing! What rational person refuses an officer. If he had just gotten off the plane he could have handled it then. He knew if he caused a disturbance he could get more money. When you cause a disturbance you will be removed. The airlines had every right to get a flight crew down to Louisville in time for the flight they were needed on. Also this “Dr” who had to see patients. Works one day a wk for another Dr! His past record stands by itself. If he were my Dr I would drop him faster than the stock is falling
“…is a function of the growth of the security state in response to 9/11. ”
Huh? How did 9/11 influence UA’s overbooking practices? Involuntary bumps occurred before 9/11 as well. Bringing 9/11 into the discussion is well, let’s just say, less than honest, as most of these “other side of the story” blog posts are.
Spare us the “airlines mist have a plan for this moving forward” stuff as though UA’s awful response was their solution to a problem they had never seen before. A protocol is already in place and on this day UA and security choose to ignore it.
Actions, like United’s , have consequences. A passenger’s INACTION in this situation should not.
Amen and good commentary. I have been a hotel company executive for many years. It is actually illegal to evict a hotel guest for similar reasons. And although the legality does not seem entirely clear in this circumstance, FAA/DOT regulations and United’s own contract of carriage were violated. That is clear to anyone that reads the contracts and regulations.
Regardless, I am personally less disturbed by the incident itself than the response from Oscar Munoz. Mistakes happen. Those of us in a service industry that excel at our profession realize that how we deal with those mistakes shapes the perception that customers have of our brand.
I have been a loyal United flyer ever since my bride and I were upgraded to first class on our honeymoon by a desk agent that did a nice thing. That level of service in the airline industry is a thing of the past. And the 27 years of loyalty that this one act created was destroyed by Oscar Munoz in his statement and indifference.
Seems to me united airlines could have sent there 4 employees by private plane . The fallout of the CEO’s comments that united needed the seats for employees. And his bs comments about we tried to compensate the passengers we ask to leave . Yes they tried to but one passenger said no he needed to fly now . He bought a ticket payed his money and got the sh%# kicked out of him . United made there money from that flight and another flight also . The stock is getting hit in the hind end because of there actions . And well I would think that the doctor will have enough money after court to buy a private plane now . If he doesn’t that would be a crime in it’s self . The point is airlines have so much business they want to crap on customers. And if the customer doesn’t like it they will beat you and drag you out of the seat you bought and payed for . It is a shame money driven decision made that happen. It will cost united more money than just giving a call to delta or American Airlines or a private jet to take 4 people to where they had bought a ticket to go . Inconvenience of 4 customers or a CEO to pay extra to make customers happy . Hummm we will see how this plays out .
This event has solicited personal opinion comments, minus any facts whatsoever. First, a person can refuse to follow an unlawful order verbally spoken by Law Enforcement. It may not be the safest thing to do, but one does not have to jump to attention if the order is unlawful. This entire debacle is ridiculous. United screwed up big time, and they are stepping all over their ignorant selves. I’ve not read a time frame as to when the four airline employees showed up at the gate to report they needed seats. Had they showed up in plenty of time, before the passengers were permitted to board, this entire ordeal may have ended differently. As it is, the passengers were seated and ready to fly to their destination. Was their luggage stored in the cargo hole? Federal law prohibits luggage on a plane without a physical passenger(owner of luggage) in a seat. I can foresee all sorts of nightmare situations with a computer selecting who should get off. Let’s pretend for a moment that a parent, and two infant children are flying. The computer picks one of the babies to get off the plane. Then what? Or, someone flying to attend a wedding, funeral, or whatever milestone event. Back to reality. This particular passenger may not have understood why he was being picked on. I’ve not read any information about the other three passengers who may have been told to get off. It doesn’t matter if they cooperated, got drunk, or punched someone. We are only hearing about the man who was battered by some sort of authority. Several agencies of Law Enforcement have been mentioned as involved. In the end, United has a bigly black eye, and it’s going to cost them millions in lawsuit settlements to end the mistake. The man may not sue, but he should. This activity cannot occur again. Congress needs to get their heads out of their asses, and repeal whatever law granted permission to treat paying passengers as punching bags.
Why has nobody asked why this flight crew of 4 were not ALREADY in the airplane getting ready for the flight with their seating ALREADY preassigned? Whatever the reason it occurs to me that they were LATE which precipitated this “horrible” fiasco
Stop using the “Denied Boarding” argument. The man had already boarded so any arguments you pose in your article for this are not accurate and you need to remove them. You’re reaching for reasons to blame the man and this is a BIG overreach. He had already boarded so he couldn’t have been denied boarding.
This passenger did nothing wrong. The control freaks and those here who demand passivity and slavish obedience need to understand that United Airlines broke the law, not the passenger. And, their monumental stupidity is going to cost them a lot more than whatever they could have offered to get someone else to voluntarily leave the plane.
Mr article writer why should a 69 year old be dragged out from a plane if he has not done any crime. And you defending it is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. May your mom or dad or wife be dragged out from somewhere and then defend that case.
Great, balanced article, bit I think blaming the police is a little harsh as they were placed in an invidious situation where there was no good solution. From my view as a long time traveller on many airlines around the world, I have to say United is one of the worse ones that I use as a last resort, so this event doesn’t surprise me.
United!s excuse that they needed the seats for transferring crew really doesn’t ring true as they should have known this before the plane was boarded and asked for volunteers at the gate. Letting people board and allowing the process to degenerate to what eventuated smacks of both arrogance on the part of the staff involved and hubris on the part of the airline management. In reality both regard passengers as numbers not people.
I’m in heated agreement with Theresa and Neil and all others on this blog who will vote with their feet. For full disclosure I made that decision with United about 16 years ago for another situation – not one that included a bloody trip down the aisle, but one that more directly affected me.
I’m saddened to see the sprinkling of posts that sink to racist and other hateful comments – including the personal attacks on Gary, however misguided his commentary on this matter may have been.
We’re all suffering through the stressful consequences of unbridled corporate greed – which current circumstances have accelerated us into what feels like a Twilight Zone episode. These times will test nearly everything – our system of government; the viability of our American culture and even our ability as a species to evolve in a positive direction.
Good luck to everyone.
Rosa Park was not a terrorist, and neither is this brave passenger. Whoever thinks he deserves what happened needs to have the same things done to them. Remember the golden rule.
Remember that some people will refuse to comply to injustice when they’ve had enough of it in their life. We all do that at some point. I’m waiting for Trump to weigh in on this domestic issue.
If Dao was black, the CEO of United would be be asked to resign for his insensitive remark of blaming the victim as belligerent and the Chicago police chief would be asked to resign for his department’s “belligerent” lies, and the penalty on the corporation and officers and gate agent would be stiffer than imaginable. And the one who blames the victim would be called a racist because prejudice blinds him/her from seeing the real issue here. And rioting (please don’t destroy other people’s property or lives.)
Munoz’s compensation of the passengers later on rewards the non victims for what happened to the victim to buy their loyalty. Too late to spend money now. Should have spent it to prevent passengers removal before this took place. Some people also needs to be fired, from the top down.
It also doesn’t matter what the victim’s past is. Character assassination is a tool to demonize the victim and take people away from the true issue, the work of darkness. Each situation has its own merit. No one deserves to be beaten to compliance for refusing to give up what belongs to him or her.
Most of us have been victimized by bullies. Please, don’t give the bullies our business. They make much money off our backs and treat us like dirt, and try to buy our loyalty once their sin found them out. Fire them!
Trump- please enable more competitors to the airline business.
The situation never was “federal”. Security officers or Chicago he vision department personnel. In addition, no federal law was being violated as the federal laws only apply to airplanes in flight. This was a commercial dispute in which United was in the wrong where they called on local authorities to act as their bouncers.