Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A man wouldn’t leave an overbooked United flight, so he was dragged off

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 549 posts

Re: A man wouldn’t leave an overbooked United flight, so he was dragged off

#411

Post by greenyoda »

enraged_camel wrote: post #213
rdtsc wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think United were wrong here (maybe not legally) but morally and, even from their self-interest they took a major PR hit. People involved in this should be getting termination letters immediately. However, I am curious. Once they made the decision to remove him. How could they have done so if he didn't want to move? A taser?

Simple: they announce that the plane is not taking off until enough seats open up. Then just wait. Sure, the flight would be delayed, perhaps significantly, but the impact of that would pale in comparison to this horrendous PR controversy.

Or, they could probably convince someone else to give up their seat voluntarily by just upping the incentive by a few hundred dollars. A very cheap solution, considering what the current fiasco will cost them.

Re: A man wouldn’t leave an overbooked United flight, so he was dragged off

#412

Post by roninb »

kyleblarson wrote: post #364
inputcoffee wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I will point out that it is not United that "chose" violence. They asked the police to intervene. The state is supposed to have a monopoly on physical force, so they did. Now, for the police, violence has always been normal, or normalized. Consider the appropriate responses: 1. An airline should not call in the police when dealing with customers because they can reasonably expect violence. 2. The police shou…

I'd also add that the police should have denied the request to get involved because this situation was a contractual issue between the airline and the passenger. No laws were being broken.

IANAL, but in the US, he'd be Trespassing if someone from the company asked him to leave and he didn't (which seems to be the case here). In some jurisdictions, DA/SAs will bump it up to Breaking and Entering so long as that statute allows to charge based on "remaining" in a conveyance rather than "entering" one.

It definitely should not have been requested of them, but it's possible laws were broken.

Re: A man wouldn’t leave an overbooked United flight, so he was dragged off

#413

Post by vijayr »

tedmiston wrote: post #281
AngeloAnolin wrote: post #253

It has been mentioned a lot in the comments that United was correct as per their Contract of Carriage - Involuntary Deny Boarding. But what's being missed here is that, the person who was dragged wasn't denied to board the plane in the first place. He was already seated, a seat number assigned to him, he is on the plane and by all means and precedents, he has already boarded . You cannot anymore deny boarding for som…

Their technical definition of boarding may include everything up to until taxing for takeoff. They definitely are able to remove people between boarding and takeoff, whether through IDB or another clause.

We are sitting here debating the "technical" definition of a simple thing such as boarding a plane :( In modern society (business especially), anything and everything seems to be centered around legality rather than common sense and being nice to fellow humans

Re: A man wouldn’t leave an overbooked United flight, so he was dragged off

#414

Post by coldpie »

xapata wrote: post #131
mabbo wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that costs money immediately. Forcing someone off the plane and causing a huge HR mess only costs money long-term, and it doesn't come out of my budget, so why should I care?

Good point. Whoever set the incentives badly and set some arbitrary cap at $1350 should be fired.

That's the maximum amount that they're required to offer by law. They're welcome to voluntarily exceed that cap.

Re: A man wouldn’t leave an overbooked United flight, so he was dragged off

#415

Post by vijayr »

justin66 wrote: post #345

From a purely customer service conflict resolution standpoint, the fact that the guy claimed to be a doctor gave whoever was handling the situation for United a very easy out and a way to move on to the next person. I wonder why they didn't take it.

Why does it matter if the person is a doctor or a janitor? He had a valid ticket, was assigned a seat and was already on the plane. They could've simply offered more money and there would've been takers, instead of all this nastiness

Re: A man wouldn’t leave an overbooked United flight, so he was dragged off

#416

Post by yeukhon »

Cshelton wrote: post #187
vwcx wrote: post #101

The real thing to fear here is the normalization of violence. Good perspective in the WP comments: "The truly shocking thing here is that violence - with the real possibility of serious injury - was viewed as appropriate in a situation that was purely logistical. The airline wanted seats for its own employees. This was not an emergency - such as a terrorist attack or a drunk passenger endangering people. The lack of…

Agreed. I for one will never fly United again. I hope many others do the same. The way that was handled just goes to show the culture and way things are done at that airline. Nobody had the logic to say, wait a minute, this is wrong. Calling the police to throw a passenger who did nothing wrong off? Countless ways to handle this better. In the end, this is going to cost United a TON. United could have flown a plane w…

I don't know. I won't for sure, but will this news just die off after a week? I hope politicians step up and media pound on #unitedairline for weeks ripping up their past ugly treatments.

Re: A man wouldn’t leave an overbooked United flight, so he was dragged off

#417

Post by cema »

khedoros1 wrote: post #284
MattSteelblade wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airlines are legally allowed to overbook. It's an established practice.

Well, yes, but established practice is to deny people the opportunity to board the plane, not to violently remove them after they've already been seated.

Seems like it may be crucial. I am really eager to see how it resolves!

Re: A man wouldn’t leave an overbooked United flight, so he was dragged off

#418

Post by kchoudhu »

xapata wrote: post #382
kchoudhu wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dream of a world where bump compensation is unlimited. The same people who now churn miles to fly everywhere for free would then start strategically chasing storms to get bumped from flights and make tens of thousands of dollars in compensation. We have mileage runs and mattress runs already; why can't we have bump runs as well? Someone get Carl Weathers on the phone!

The bump fee only works if it's not weather related. Mechanical and overbooking only. Oh, and pilot scheduling mistakes.

Today's cancellation is weather-related. But when you get bumped from the make-up flight tomorrow because of overcrowding, it's an operational issue.

It's a multi-day play.

Re: A man wouldn’t leave an overbooked United flight, so he was dragged off

#419

Post by kchoudhu »

phil21 wrote: post #363
justin66 wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That would be a regulator or Congress. No, it's a United policy: https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriag... The airline hasn't commented yet on why they didn't go above 800, when they could go to 1350.

That's just IDB coverage, mandated by the FAA. They don't get a choice here. You will find the exact same penalties and limits for all airlines. Voluntary compensation is entirely different - they are free to offer whatever they like to get someone off the flight. Involuntary unfortunately incentives keeping those limits low as a matter of airline policy though, of course. They can force someone off a plane for usual…

You're assuming that low level airline employees even realized they were rolling dice.

They were told to save cash, and by golly, they saved that cash.

Re: A man wouldn’t leave an overbooked United flight, so he was dragged off

#420

Post by denom »

rhino369 wrote: post #332
denom wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if he had the right to his seat, then why should he leave?

He didn't have the right to his seat. He had a carriage contract. Even if United breached the contract that doesn't allow you to trespass. Trying to solve business disputes by force, which is what the passenger did by refusing to leaves, is bad policy.

I completely disagree. It was United and the police who tried to solve this with force. As I saw the video, there is no violent act from him and he should have been left alone.

It's amazing how Americans can justify the most extreme violence for the most petty of reasons. This incident was absolutely meaningless _until_ this man had his face bloodied.

There were a thousand different options, besides force. Do that instead!

Post reply on HN