More dick moves and it's not even political- United Airlines

[Sunburn74]

how about this to make your analogy comparable...

you buy a bottle of wine, which is bagged and handed to you along with a receipt of purchase. as you are walking towards the exit, an employee tells you to stop and that you have to return the bottle of wine for a refund and you can't buy another bottle from that store until tomorrow. when you question them, the cops come and drag you out of the store.

quite simply, your initial perspective is typical victim shaming.

United should never have let the man on the plane to begin with, once they did, it became their problem to solve.

As stated before, if I have the bag in hand and the money has left hands, the transaction is probably complete.

When is the transaction complete for this guy in the United case? When he pays? When he boards the plane? Or when the plane takes off? I would argue its even beyond that: the transaction is complete when you arrive at your destination. Until that point, they can refuse.

They can fly you midway from miami to new york, stop in north carolina or turn the plane around return to miami and order everyone off the plane. I know they can do that because they've done it on flights I've been on multiple times.

Then she is stealing from me. I already handed her cash, she did not give me the bottle. You can say that the cashier will give you the cash back but that isn't what United is doing. They are giving a voucher. So to add on to your analogy, you paid her cash, she doesn't let go of the bottle and says you have to take this coupon instead.

However, flight and travel plans are much more complex than a simple wine bottle. A bottle of wine may hamper dinner plans, killing travel plans due to being IDB'd has a much greater impact on a person.

What I hope is that because of this man standing up for his rights, people from now on will stand up for theirs. So United either has to assault people off of their flights or companies in general have to change their policies.

Actually by law they are obligated to give him compensatory cash in addition to the free flight with the amount varying up to 400% of the amount he originally paid assuming no other damages occur in the process. In fact, for that particular flight he was not only offered a free flight but also $1000 in cash at the time.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/10/news/united-overbooking-policy/index.html

"When airlines must involuntarily bump, there are rules to follow.
Passengers must get to their final destination within one hour -- or carriers have to start coughing up money.
If fliers get to their final destination one to two hours late (or one to four hours late if they're flying internationally), airlines are required to pay double the original one-way fare, with a $675 limit. If fliers get in more than two hours late (or four internationally), airlines have to pay 400% of the one-way fare, up to a $1,350 limit"

Look PR nightmare for united, yes. But unfair? No. Did the guy act like an ass? Yes. Did patient's die the next day? No.

 

[alien42]

When is the transaction complete for this guy in the United case?

when United boarded the man on the plane.

all United had to do was offer enough money and someone would have deboarded that plane peacefully.

 

[DrunkenSano]

Actually by law they are obligated to give him compensatory cash in addition to the free flight with the amount varying up to 400% of the amount he originally paid assuming no other damages occur in the process. In fact, for that particular flight he was not only offered a free flight but also $1000 in cash at the time.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/10/news/united-overbooking-policy/index.html

"When airlines must involuntarily bump, there are rules to follow.
Passengers must get to their final destination within one hour -- or carriers have to start coughing up money.
If fliers get to their final destination one to two hours late (or one to four hours late if they're flying internationally), airlines are required to pay double the original one-way fare, with a $675 limit. If fliers get in more than two hours late (or four internationally), airlines have to pay 400% of the one-way fare, up to a $1,350 limit"

The law only protects them and allows them to IDB a passenger before he has been boarded and seated in the plane. Also, he was a passenger that had a reserved seat. The United crew that needed seats did not. By United policy, they were not allowed to IDB any passengers that had reserved seating over any other passengers that did not have reserve seating, including United crew. So any of that obligation is out the window.

 

[Sunburn74]

The law only protects them and allows them to IDB a passenger before he has been boarded and seated in the plane. Also, he was a passenger that had a reserved seat. The United crew that needed seats did not. By United policy, they were not allowed to IDB any passengers that had reserved seating over any other passengers that did not have reserve seating, including United crew. So any of that obligation is out the window.

Yes. They can ask every single person to get off the plane if they want.
You're getting caught up in what sort of internal policy they like to follow as to preferential treatment vs what they actually can legally do.

If united had asked every single person to get off the plane, would this have made the news? No.

 

[DrunkenSano]

Yes. They can ask every single person to get off the plane if they want.
You're getting caught up in what sort of internal policy they like to follow as to preferential treatment vs what they actually can legally do.

If united had asked every single person to get off the plane, would this have made the news? No.

By law they cannot IDB every single person off of the plane. You are incorrect. The Captain can unload the plane for safety reason, he is legally to do so. But in this case, there was no safety issue. United fucked up which is why legally they will most likely lose this battle and a settlement will be reached between that man and United.

 

[Sunburn74]

By law they cannot IDB every single person off of the plane. You are incorrect. The Captain can unload the plane for safety reason, he is legally to do so. But in this case, there was no safety issue. United fucked up which is why legally they will most likely lose this battle and a settlement will be reached between that man and United.

Yes they can. Its in the contract we all agree to when you buy the ticket.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

By law they cannot IDB every single person off of the plane. You are incorrect. The Captain can unload the plane for safety reason, he is legally to do so. But in this case, there was no safety issue. United fucked up which is why legally they will most likely lose this battle and a settlement will be reached between that man and United.

I actually hope they don't settle. I dunno if the passenger has the stamina for this, but I think it'd be great if United was raked over the coals for this in court, and set a legal precedent which brought some consumer protection laws in place to keep this from happening again in the future (outside of airlines fearing a payout).

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Yes they can. Its in the contract we all agree to when you buy the ticket.

You agree to a lot of things throughout life when you are obligated to for purchasing of a product, that doesn't mean they hold up in court once tested. Lots of EULA's have been invalidated due to this.

 

[DrunkenSano]

Yes they can. Its in the contract we all agree to when you buy the ticket.

If a large company suddenly decided to slip into their contract that they can beat you, enslave you, and even kill you, do you think they would legally be able to do all of the above and have it hold up in court?

 

[Sunburn74]

You agree to a lot of things throughout life when you are obligated to for purchasing of a product, that doesn't mean they hold up in court once tested. Lots of EULA's have been invalidated due to this.

What happened to this guy happens 46,000 times per day. The only difference is he got on the plane when he never should have; normally it happens at the gate. However the contract doesn't say once you sit down, then you cannot lose the seat.

People sue all the time. Usually for damages related to having to take a different flight and they often win! But its small claims stuff. A few thousand here and there for hotel fees and lost job interests/opportunities/salary and etc

If a large company suddenly decided to slip into their contract that they can beat you, enslave you, and even kill you, do you think they would legally be able to do all of the above and have it hold up in court?

That escalated quickly... We're talking about a company being able to reschedule a flight for like 2 hours later at the last minute whilst compensating you in various amounts. You're talking about Django unchained type stuff here here.

 

[Exterous]

UAL just told the whole world, in the worst way possible, that they don't believe that their paying customers' time is in any way valuable. They don't care if you have a connecting flight to make, reservations for the vacation of a lifetime, your mother's funeral, or patients to treat.

So which US airline are you going to fly on to avoid any chance of an IDB?

The law only protects them and allows them to IDB a passenger before he has been boarded and seated in the plane.

No where does it specify 'seated' one way or the other. It says 'boarding' but as I've mentioned there is much debate over where that line is with many in the industry coming down on the side of 'Passengers are not considered fully boarded until the passenger manifest is handed over and the boarding door is closed.' The general theme is 'They may have had the right to but should they have?'

Also, he was a passenger that had a reserved seat. The United crew that needed seats did not. By United policy, they were not allowed to IDB any passengers that had reserved seating over any other passengers that did not have reserve seating, including United crew. So any of that obligation is out the window.

This is not correct. They are not allowed to IDB people for 'non-ticketed' people - it has nothing to do with reserved seats. Deadheading crew are issued tickets

 

[DrunkenSano]

I actually hope they don't settle. I dunno if the passenger has the stamina for this, but I think it'd be great if United was raked over the coals for this in court, and set a legal precedent which brought some consumer protection laws in place to keep this from happening again in the future (outside of airlines fearing a payout).

I agree, and I hope more passengers stand up to the corporate bullshit of these large companies, forcing them to change their policies so it isn't there to just maximize profit.

That escalated quickly... We're talking about being able to reschedule a flight for like 2 hours later at the last minute. You're talking about Django unchained here.

Looking at the poor guy's face, we're not far off.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

What happened to this guy happens 46,000 times per day. The only difference is he got on the plane when he never should have; normally it happens at the gate. However the contract doesn't say once you sit down, then you cannot lose the seat.

People sue all the time. Usually for damages related to having to take a different flight and they win! But its small claims stuff. A few thousand here and there for hotels and job interests and etc

Yeah, and most people at the gate don't get an armrest to the face. This is the kind of thing that can bring down regulations on what a commercial entity can/cannot do. Basically, United shit in the collective airline punchbowl and now something's gonna get mucked with so that can't happen again.

 

[Sunburn74]

I agree, and I hope more passengers stand up to the corporate bullshit of these large companies, forcing them to change their policies so it isn't there to just maximize profit.

Looking at the poor guy's face, we're not far off.

Look I'm not saying I enjoy it when an airline cancels a flight for flimsy reasons (often because not enough people bought the flight to be profitable), or overbooks my seat and forces me onto a flight I don't really want to take or makes me check my luggage by intentionally building small amounts of overhead space when I wanted to carry it on the plane and then it gets lost and I have no suit for my interview the next day. No one enjoys that and yes it shows a bit of a callous indifference to the customer.

But at the same time, i don't see it as being evil and still put responsibility on adults to behave like adults even in the face of intermittent unfairness and unprofessionalism by others.

 

[Vic]

So which US airline are you going to fly on to avoid any chance of an IDB?

You're confused. This passenger wasn't denied boarding. He was forcibly deplaned after boarding, without legitimate cause.
The overbooked/IDB argument doesn't quite work in this circumstance because the passenger was already sitting in his seat. That's an important distinction you're overlooking.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Look I'm not saying I enjoy it when an airline cancels a flight for flimsy reasons (often because not enough people bought the flight to be profitable), or overbooks my seat and forces me onto a flight I don't really want to take or makes me check my luggage by intentionally building small amounts of overhead space when I wanted to carry it on the plane and then it gets lost and I have no suit for my interview the next day. No one enjoys that and yes it should a bit of a callous indifference to the customer.

But at the same time, i don't see it as being evil and still put responsibility on adults to behave like adults even in the face of intermittent unfairness and unprofessionalism by others.

So we, as the customer, should 'behave like an adult' by complying with the provider's demands, but the provider shouldn't 'behave like an adult' by taking a loss when they fail to either plan ahead sufficiently (as in this case) or because they didn't sell enough tickets to be in the black (in your case)? If I wanted the odds against me, I'd be in Vegas or District 12, not giving money to an airliner.

 

[Paratus]

If you told me today's lottery numbers 2 days ago I would pick those too. Regardless of getting volunteers people have been getting IDB'd for decades so there is a clear and established trend that having limits on your compensation does not equate to having police bloody up your customers. If you're a CEO you're not going to have a job long if you are spending all your time thinking up all the ways to avoid issues that occur 0.00001% of the time

Their communications plan afterwards was absolutely terrible though

Well that's what the job of risk analysis is. I understand what you are saying but don't necessarily agree.

Most organizations should have a group that assess risks to safety, cost, and schedule.

Airlines already deal with risks in the area of 0.00001% chance of occurrence as that is almost exactly the risk of an airline crash, (about 1 in 11,000,000).

Most orgs use a risk matrix tailored for their organization.

(As an example airplane crashes would be catastrophic and likely to occur. With maintenance and other processes put in place the likelihood is lowered to unlikely or rare)


The questions for this event are:

• What is the likelihood of it occurring
• What is the consequence of it occurring
• Was there a process in place that previously addressed the risk of this event

From what I could find:

The odd on being involuntarily bumped are 0.011%. A lot higher than the low likelihood of a crash. It would be a frequent event.
However being involuntary denied is normally a low consequence event. The airline just pays the federally mandated fee, upto $1300 or so.

This however was an unlikely event. Normally people are denied before they board and more importantly people who are denied don't usually require security to drag them away. I'd say that moves it down to a 2 - unlikely.

The consequences due are also larger than a simple denial. It's completely reasonable to assume someone will video a disturbance in a plane or at a gate and that has public relations and legal implications. Dealing with bad publicity or legal issues problably puts this into a 2-3 (minor-moderate) financial consequence.

Using our matrix above that means a yellow box and a moderately aggressive approach to reducing the risk.

Delta for example is trying a process that allows fliers to bid on giving up their seat when the flight is over booked. They pick the cheapest bids. It's reduced the number of involuntarily denied fliers.


A CEO of 22B airline that doesn't have a risk process in place to manage low likelihood but catastrophic risks should be fired.

If he does have a process and they just mis-addressed this risk then the risk is updated and mitigations are created.

 

[senseamp]

Now they'll have to add another row to their table, risk of PR disaster and mitigation cost.

 

[Sunburn74]

You're confused. This passenger wasn't denied boarding. He was forcibly deplaned after boarding, without legitimate cause.
The overbooked/IDB argument doesn't quite work in this circumstance because the passenger was already sitting in his seat. That's an important distinction you're overlooking.

Its all the same to me whether he was refused at the gate or refused after just sitting down. The gate and the seating are both in the same part/process of the transaction.

You're asking more when is the transaction complete in this case. When the transaction is complete, one party cannot forcibly wiggle out of it without the agreement of the other party.
So when is it complete? When the guy pays online? When he sits down in his seat? When the flight takes off? Or when he arrives at his destination?

I would say the last one (if I pay to be flown to new york and they fly me to north carolina, the transaction is not complete).

So we, as the customer, should 'behave like an adult' by complying with the provider's demands, but the provider shouldn't 'behave like an adult' by taking a loss when they fail to either plan ahead sufficiently (as in this case) or because they didn't sell enough tickets to be in the black (in your case)? If I wanted the odds against me, I'd be in Vegas or District 12, not giving money to an airliner.

I think in bad situations often there is plenty of blame to go around. It could have been handled better by United with better planning, preparation and training. At the same time, the victim was being an ass, especially if he was an MD.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Well that's what the job of risk analysis is. I understand what you are saying but don't necessarily agree.

Most organizations should have a group that assess risks to safety, cost, and schedule.

Airlines already deal with risks in the area of 0.00001% chance of occurrence as that is almost exactly the risk of an airline crash, (about 1 in 11,000,000).

Most orgs use a risk matrix tailored for their organization.

(As an example airplane crashes would be catastrophic and likely to occur. With maintenance and other processes put in place the likelihood is lowered to unlikely or rare)


The questions for this event are:

• What is the likelihood of it occurring
• What is the consequence of it occurring
• Was there a process in place that previously addressed the risk of this event

From what I could find:

The odd on being involuntarily bumped are 0.011%. A lot higher than the low likelihood of a crash. It would be a frequent event.
However being involuntary denied is normally a low consequence event. The airline just pays the federally mandated fee, upto $1300 or so.

This however was an unlikely event. Normally people are denied before they board and more importantly people who are denied don't usually require security to drag them away. I'd say that moves it down to a 2 - unlikely.

The consequences due are also larger than a simple denial. It's completely reasonable to assume someone will video a disturbance in a plane or at a gate and that has public relations and legal implications. Dealing with bad publicity or legal issues problably puts this into a 2-3 (minor-moderate) financial consequence.

Using our matrix above that means a yellow box and a moderately aggressive approach to reducing the risk.

Delta for example is trying a process that allows fliers to bid on giving up their seat when the flight is over booked. They pick the cheapest bids. It's reduced the number of involuntarily denied fliers.


A CEO of 22B airline that doesn't have a risk process in place to manage low likelihood but catastrophic risks should be fired.

If he does have a process and they just mis-addressed this risk then the risk is updated and mitigations are created.

Solid explanation of risk assessment, and the kind of thing that should have already been accounted for PRIOR to this event taking place. It doesn't take a stretch to imagine, upon going through the flow chart of offering cash, getting no offers, and selecting people, that someone might be belligerent enough to make a scene. Frankly I'm surprised it hasn't made the news more often. I like the bid idea, or hell, just increase the rate. Bring that up to $2k and someone will bite.

I think in bad situations often there is plenty of blame to go around. It could have been handled better by United with better planning, preparation and training. At the same time, the victim was being an ass, especially if he was an MD.

Fair enough, and I'll say that yeah the victim was being an ass, but I would've been too. A busted lip is a small price to pay for exposing the ridiculous behavior of a multi-billion dollar company wrt its paying customers.

 

[Kwatt]

This is a result of the "entitlement" mentality.

Just because he used some of the pay for his services to buy something he thought he was "entitled" to it.
/s

United is testing their new policy. Now instead of getting "bumped" from a flight you will be "LUMPED" from the flight.

.

 

[alien42]

ftr, UAL stock closed down 1.13% today, which is nothing.

 

[Vic]

Its all the same to me whether he was refused at the gate or refused after just sitting down. The gate and the seating are both in the same part/process of the transaction.

You're asking more when is the transaction complete in this case. When the transaction is complete, one party cannot forcibly wiggle out of it without the agreement of the other party.
So when is it complete? When the guy pays online? When he sits down in his seat? When the flight takes off? Or when he arrives at his destination?

I would say the last one (if I pay to be flown to new york and they fly me to north carolina, the transaction is not complete).

Many transactions, such as flying in an airplane, are incremental, and each stage in the transaction creates an increasing level of commitment towards completion for the parties involved.
In this case, boarding the passenger, and delivering them to their seat, nullified the airline's ability to terminate the transaction on the basis that there were insufficient seats available. Because clearly there were seats available, he was sitting in it. The airline was already committed past that stage of the transaction, and subsequently required a different reason, or the customer's consent, if they did not want to go forward.
And once again, I will reiterate that, even if UAL was perfectly within its legal rights, they still screwed up. Bigly. If you don't get that, I don't care. UAL's shareholders seem to be getting it just fine.

 

[K1052]

ftr, UAL stock closed down 1.13% today, which is nothing.

All the other US airline stocks closed up. UAL definitely got dinged by this, at least for today.

 

[Paratus]

Solid explanation of risk assessment, and the kind of thing that should have already been accounted for PRIOR to this event taking place. It doesn't take a stretch to imagine, upon going through the flow chart of offering cash, getting no offers, and selecting people, that someone might be belligerent enough to make a scene. Frankly I'm surprised it hasn't made the news more often. I like the bid idea, or hell, just increase the rate. Bring that up to $2k and someone will bite.

Exactly my point.

What's even weirder is the airline had to give them $1300 by law for involuntary denial. If the entire plane knew somebody might have bitten.