• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Wow! This is horrible. The doctor should sue United to the extreme.

Here's how often airlines involuntarily bump passengers

 
I wouldn't say it's not political. These airlines didn't the market positions and regulations that allow them to treat their customers this way by accident.
 
senseamp said:
I wouldn't say it's not political. These airlines didn't the market positions and regulations that allow them to treat their customers this way by accident.
Click to expand...

Regulations don't work quite that way. Any entity can do what they will unless forbidden. There was never a regulation that I am aware of that says airlines can't do what happened. It's wrong but many news sites are saying the poor guy is SOL. I hope he has a good attorney which can find a way around it. UA's response to the incident has been ridiculously inadequate.
 
NTMBK said:
Complete bullshit. Don't book more people than you have seats, you cheap bastards.
Click to expand...

They do that because in most cases, at least a few people don't show up.

However, in this case, it is even worse than that.

They had enough seats for all of the paying customers. But, they did not have enough seats for their own staff that wanted a free ride.

So, they assaulted a passenger to make room, and then accused the passenger of being belligerent.
 
Ancalagon44 said:
They do that because in most cases, at least a few people don't show up.

However, in this case, it is even worse than that.

They had enough seats for all of the paying customers. But, they did not have enough seats for their own staff that wanted a free ride.

So, they assaulted a passenger to make room, and then accused the passenger of being belligerent.
Click to expand...

If people want to waste their money and miss their flight, that's their prerogative. Doesn't mean that the airlines should dick around their customers because they saw another opportunity to maximise profit.
 
JEDI said:
im thinking $millions$ in bad PR/goodwill lost.

didn't they also have a minor PR nitemare last month with not letting on 2 females because the gate agent thought their attire was too sexy? (Leggings/yoga pants)
Click to expand...

That one is not the airline's issue. They were flying on employee family tix and they stipulate a dress code for people using those tix. Stupid rule, but it is the company's (discounted?) ticket, their rule.
 
MZ6wWRL.jpg
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Don't see how United can be sued for the actions of Airport Security personnel.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...y-removed-from-united-flight-prompting-outcry
Click to expand...

That's a really shitty weasel out of responsibility. The airline (or at least those on the airplane) called for the security to come, and one way or another the airline (along with others) pay for those security officers to be there. 'We don't condone of that activity' doesn't fly when it's in the other direction, why should it here?
 
United, time to pay up. The CEO is clueless and praising his employees for doing a terrible job that went viral. Sadly if this asshole ever gets fired he will still have a nice multi million dollar compensation package.
 
NTMBK said:
If people want to waste their money and miss their flight, that's their prerogative. Doesn't mean that the airlines should dick around their customers because they saw another opportunity to maximise profit.
Click to expand...

To be fair some people end up missing their flights because of the TSA.
 
[DHT]Osiris said:
That's a really shitty weasel out of responsibility. The airline (or at least those on the airplane) called for the security to come, and one way or another the airline (along with others) pay for those security officers to be there. 'We don't condone of that activity' doesn't fly when it's in the other direction, why should it here?
Click to expand...
Even though the airline called airport security they have no responsibility for the actions of security. Chicago taxpayers are the one's that pay for the airport security officers.
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Even though the airline called airport security they have no responsibility for the actions of security. Chicago taxpayers are the one's that pay for the airport security officers.
Click to expand...

What did United think was going to happen when they called security?
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Even though the airline called airport security they have no responsibility for the actions of security. Chicago taxpayers are the one's that pay for the airport security officers.
Click to expand...

They called security for the specific intent of forcibly removing the person, since asking him nicely didn't work. I suppose the airline called airport security to have a more intense talk with him?

Maybe they didn't think they would beat the man, but they knew they were calling in the muscle.
 
Yes, they called security however, they bear no responsibilities for the actions of the security officers. Don't see how the person has any grounds for suing the airline for the actions of a third party.
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Yes, they called security however, they bear no responsibilities for the actions of the security officers. Don't see how the person has any grounds for suing the airline for the actions of a third party.
Click to expand...

Because here's how this is going to go otherwise:
TSA will announce that the actions of the officers was out of line, and they were administratively punished. Not their fault.
Airline states that they aren't responsible for the actions of the TSA.
Folks on the airplane state they didn't know this was going to happen.
Officers that actually beat the man get a slap on the wrist, a week or two of administrative leave, paid on the taxpayer's dime.
This man continues to have had his face beaten in, for the financial benefit of a company, with no recompense.

This is the airline's ballgame, and they called in a ringer. I *wish* this would go to a jury panel.
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Yes, they called security however, they bear no responsibilities for the actions of the security officers. Don't see how the person has any grounds for suing the airline for the actions of a third party.
Click to expand...

The security officer was asked to forcibly remove the passenger. The security officer did their job, from what I've seen.

The fault is with the order he was given; expecting a security guard to exhibit better PR and conflict resolution skills than management is just fucking silly, and so therefore the fault lies with the management. Anything else is giving management a free pass to use force (make sure you get someone else to do it though!) whenever a situation doesn't go their way.
 
So should a brick and mortar call the police to arrest a shoplifter, should said store be responsible for the actions of police officers responding to the call?
 
Genx87 said:
Was this guy breaking a law by taking his legally purchased seat? Apples and Oranges.
Click to expand...
Obviously you've never read the federal regulations concerning overbooking when purchasing an airline ticket. I've been bumped a few times from an overbooked flight in the past 30 years, they've always compensated me very well including putting me up in a decent hotel close to the airport.
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Obviously you've never read the federal regulations concerning overbooking when purchasing an airline ticket. I've been bumped a few times from an overbooked flight in the past 30 years, they've always compensated me very well including putting me up in a decent hotel close to the airport.
Click to expand...

I have not read it, but understand it. And in no way was this guy breaking the law. Your example was bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top