United Airlines flight 871 from San Francisco to Taipei diverted and returned back to the U.S. on Thursday when a coach passenger refused to stay in their cabin. They kept going up into business class, and refused to stay in their seat. In grist for inequality commentators everywhere, two hours into the thirteen hour flight, the captain made the decision to turn back.
Here’s how one passenger on the aircraft described the situation,
I was in Polaris. The guy was in coach. He kept coming up to Polaris during the initial drink service. Flight attendant told him to return to his seat. He walked back but then a few moments later, he’s back up in the Business cabin. He appeared to be under the influence of something. Then the puraer told the entire cabin to return to their seats. He didn’t comply. Then restrained him & returned to SFO.
United Airlines Business Class
Another passenger on board characterizes how things developed a little differently, saying that a flight attendant “asked myself and a few other guys to help with the situation to keep an eye on the guy” and “[t]hings calmed down once he got seated.” Restraints were “at the ready” but not actually used.
The plane returned to San Francisco, where they had fresh crew, rather than diverting along the route and timing out. This all happened only a couple of hours into the flight so was the right strategic choice.
United Airlines Coach
According to a United Airlines spokesperson,
United flight 871 returned to San Francisco due to a disruptive passenger. Law enforcement officials met the aircraft on arrival and removed the passenger.
Aviation watchdog JonNYC reports that the incident was declared “threat level 2.” The plane was ultimately re-crewed and re-catered and sent on to Taipei for a middle of the night arrival. He calls it an “absolutely amazing job by” United. Indeed, there wouldn’t be many onward connections, so the inconvenience to passengers was likely limited to the late arrival.
I suppose it is protocol, but if it was one person who was high and not an obvious or immediate threat, does this reaction really make sense? At the least it was an incredibly expensive decision. This passenger could have been handcuffed with the restraints that flights carry and kept under complete control until Taipei.
Democrat voters, no consideration for others
May sound ok in theory to think it ok to handcuff a passenger for so long, but the guy likely has to go to the bathroom on such a long flight and a passenger subject to such extreme control measures may get infuriated when treated like a caged/chained animal and lash out on first opportunity thereafter.
@drrichard I agree that United seems too quick to divert / call police in these situations. We don’t know the nationality of the passenger, but if non-Taiwanese, he likely would be denied entry if United called police in TPE. United could then face fines for carrying an ineligible passenger and also have to deal with returning him back to his country of origin.
Gotta respectfully disagree, @GUWonder. Yeah, handcuffs may seem extreme, but then *don’t fly high* — or whatever it was that led to his behavior. In the end, while cuffs are unpleasant for him, a longer flight is unpleasant for the hundreds of other passengers. And coming in late CAN BE a significant problem, even if most don’t have connections. There are pickups that were scheduled, family friends on the arriving site inconvenienced. Then there is the fuel wasted, both environmental impact and financial impact on the airline. And the crew costs.
The inconvenience of cuffs is nothing compared to the larger impact this sort of behavior has. It’s time those responsible pay up — behaviorally and financially.
That said, I can see potentially putting him in cuffs for 30 minutes and then nicely ask him if he’s going to behave himself now. Kind of like what I did with my sons when they were 3 year olds.
GUWonder – boo frickin’ hoo. That passenger forfeited all rights and considerations when he behaved like a twat and inconvenienced the entire plane.
Considering the number of feral humans flying today, I’m surprised more actions like Southwest flight 1763 don’t take place.
i see the witness on FT agrees it was the right cal, so who am i to say but why do I get the sense the crews are escalating things more quickly than usual due to the contract negotiations.
guy was probably on ambien.
Our airlines are becoming a taxi for hire. Pitiful was is going on.
This story proves the phrase “hindsight is always clear”. The Captain made the right decision to return to SFO. This dope could have escalated his behaviour at any time, threatening the whole flight with violence instead of annoyance.
It seems like there is such an “unruly” passenger incident just about every day. Where are the Air Marshals? I haven’t read of any intervention by these “guardians of the sky.” It does appear also, that on board crew have more and more authority to inconvenience everyone on a flight due to a single disruptive passenger. If someone doesn’t want to sit in their seat, then let them sit elsewhere and have them arrested when they land. Flying for two hours on a 10+ hour flight and then turning back because someone doesn’t want to sit in their assigned seat appears to me to be an overreaction. My bottom line take on all of these “minor” incidents resulting in diversions, is a show of force by stewardesses and stewards that they are the “bosses” and everyone should sit down, shut up and don’t make any slightest hint of displeasure or disagreement. I fly frequently and more and more I witness bossy and selfish and minimalist behavior by the in cabin crew members.
Surely this should mean a lawsuit for incurred cost and a lifetime ban?
The reason these things happen so often in North America and Europe but not as much in the rest of world? Lax and guilt ridden parenting. Theres no fear of consequences instilled at a young age. There are no cultural expectations of civilized behavior instilled at a young age. Everyone is a victim and loaded up with mind drugs instead of being taught discipline. In Asia, Africa and Latin America, there are much fewer qualms about disciplining the youth and kids are not allowed to get away with the nonsense they are in western countries. Adults are a reflection of the way they were raised.
The Captain made the right call and there are other (confidential) ramifications with a Threat Level 2 that confirm this decision. Also, Federal Air Marshalls would not get involved unless this got more physical.
I hope someone with more expertise can answer this question. What are the protocols in this type of situation regarding at which airport to land? In this situation it appears SFO was the nearest as well as the originating airport. However, if this had been a flight to Sydney, could United have landed at Honolulu to simply discharge this passenger (and if yet, leave him to his own devises to continue his journey?).
Is the originating airport always preferred, or do the economics enter into the equation?
@DA Pilit- It’s spelled Air Marshals…..with one “l”. You have no credibility….
Why not just arrest him when he got to his destination? Leaves all other passengers and crew not having to be burdened with this.
The correct decision. Yes it inconveniences 200 people for 1 ignorant passenger, but the risk of continuing over the middle of the pacific with a passenger who has already demonstrated that they refuse to comply with crew instructions is inherently more dangerous. Wanting to sit in Polaris class is one thing, but the risk of escalation must be factored in. A lot can happen with an unruly passenger at 37000 ft over the middle of the ocean.
The decision to return was correct. If an allowance is made to continue the flight because it was just one passenger and the other passengers will be inconvenienced, then what happens if there are two passengers actin up, or six passenger, or 50? Or should the airlines have a published standard, such as, “No more than 3 passengers on any flight are allowed to be disruptive at the same time.”
Having kicked off this conversation I was just going to read the posts, which are interesting and often thoughtful. But Wesley did bring up some issues, even though he assumed the passenger was an American or European. I don’t know if he or she was on drugs or if “everybody who acts out” is–I don’t think so. But years ago I heard Tom Wolfe give an interesting talk in which he discussed how the big difference in U.S. society from when he was a child is that today often people feel no shame. Eisenhower’s aide Sherman Adams did what today would be a laughably small error in ethics and quit in disgrace, today…look at what some politicians, actors, business people do and when they are caught or publicized there isn’t the slightest sense of guilt or dishonor. (And it is widespread! When my wife was getting her MBA all the other students in the ethics class asked was what they could do without being charged.) And finally regarding all this I can answer Robbo’s kneejerk reaction about Democrats with the example of a certain grotesque presidential candidate who blames everybody else for his multiple indictments and business failures. Any normal human being would ask what was wrong with themselves and who they were hurting, but that requires a functioning soul.
Enough of this turnback crap.
The FAs continually say they are there for our safety not to “serve”, then do what you are paid to do. Learn to properly deal with the passenger, put him in restraints, put someone BIG next to him and continue to your destination.
Quit running to the captain. If you are so easily scared, find a new profession.
It’s not like he was running amok with box cutters and matches.
Just read of the AF flight where one guy tried to open an emergency door.
Did they turn the plane around? NOPE. Went on to its destination after the AF people handled. Our FAs in America may need to get some training on how to handle situations from them.
Flown most everything from A380s to some regional 3rd world planes I swear were held together with duct tape and super glue.
Except for 1 Egypt Air FA, not treated badly anywhere. Wish I could say the same on my domestic US flights. Atleast once a round trip,one FA has ass on shoulder. DL, AA, haven’t flown United so can’t speak to them. But the other 2…
When a passenger is supposedly rude, they get into trouble. What do we do with rude FAs. Who do WE complain to? The airlines? A joke. Most times if we get a response at all, it’s the generic sorry your flight wasn’t great.
I’m done taking crap with no reason other than they can. I’ll be filming every interaction from now on.
“Indeed, there wouldn’t be many onward connections, so the inconvenience to passengers was likely limited to the late arrival.”
But some would have their travel plans interrupted. There seem to be enough onward connections, just not on United. Incidents like these make me stay with Asian carriers.
The Captain did not need to turn the plane around and inconvenience everyone else. Go on to your final destination and let the authorities deal with it there. This guy posed no real threat to the aircraft. He was an annoyance.
When you have the crooks in the WH that we do. Well the example is evident. This administration lets criminals out of jail. Jails the good people. Their sons driving 170 mph while smoking crack and video taping it and only got a slap on the hand. Why would anyone think they have to abide by any laws? Cocaine found in Biden’s White House. Quid pro quo on national tv to protect said son. Not to mention sex with little girls in China. Yep that’s the example they set. Didn’t happen when Trump was there. Smh. A generation of sissies.