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

421–430 of 549 posts

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

#421

Post by nostrademons »

londons_explore wrote: post #285
threatofrain wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Violence will always underlie government, law, courts, and police. Nations can do research on de-escalation or non-violent interventions, but what happens when a nice method doesn't work? Violence comes next. The objection here is that violence wasn't sufficiently gated, and nor was violence minimally applied -- the airline could've just paid people to get off with a real offer, and not a dishonest offer where people…

There seem to be no evidence in this case that non-violent methods weren't used first. Surely the flight attendants politely asked the man to leave, and when he refused they called their manager who did the same, and only at that stage did they call the police, who also probably asked the man to leave first, before finally resorting to dragging him out. At the end of the day, the plane is owned by United, and they ha…

But there's a really obvious non-violent option that they apparently didn't take: pay people more. If nobody gets off the plane at $800, raise the offer to $1K. Or $5K. Or $10K. Most other overbooking situations are resolved once the offer gets above $1k + hotel, but even if it was, I really doubt that they couldn't have found 4 volunteers at $10K/each. $40K is a lot less than this incident is going to cost them in brand damage, legal fees, and plane delays.

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

#422

Post by talmand »

panarky wrote: post #395
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…

The bigger issue is that police forces now think it's their job to protect corporations from people, instead of protecting the people. This passenger violated no laws but the CPD willingly intervened as an agent of the corporation. Guys with guns weren't required. United could have offered more compensation to volunteers or accommodated their crew on competing airlines. In related news, we learn that Barclay's "recei…

>> This passenger violated no laws

I'm willing to bet it wouldn't be too difficult to place charges of some sort on him. Not complying with police orders might be one, trespass might be another.

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

#423

Post by mnm1 »

passivepinetree wrote: post #82
mnm1 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then they should have figured that out before boarding everyone. This is a colossal fuckup. The airline assaulted its own customers beating them till they had to be carried out on a stretcher. And yet people still defend them.

Obviously United was in the wrong here, but you might be going a little far. The main purpose of the stretcher might have been for restraining the man. It's wise to avoid making such inflammatory statements until we know more.

Whether he was beaten to the point he couldn't walk or restrained on a stretcher doesn't substantially change the colossal fuckup that is this situation nor the fact that they assaulted at least one passenger.

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

#424

Post by tyingq »

jessaustin wrote: post #179
mintplant wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that answers lamby's question. Surely they know how many of their own employees will be flying ahead of time?

Do uniformed airline employees get tickets? I've seen them board without producing tickets. They don't have to wait in line either. United might just have decided that it's easier to trust the discretion of its employees than to figure out ahead of time who's going where, when, especially since that could change constantly based on numerous factors.

There's a structured system and documents for any employee flying. They have a variety of statuses ranging from "space available" to "must ride".

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

#425

Post by jimmywanger »

dageshi wrote: post #315
jimmywanger wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that it doesn't matter if it's "fair" or "unreasonable" in your eyes. It's lawful, and eventually you will be taken off the plane. The time to fight the battle is after you get off, not struggling against overwhelming odds and then getting charges piled on you.

If he had done as you suggest, nothing would have happened, nobody would've noticed and he might have got $1000 in compensation if he was lucky. Instead, United look like a bunch of incompetent thugs and many of the people involved in this debacle will be worrying for their jobs, as they should. Laws/rules don't change if people don't make a fuss about them being wrong.

Right now he's looking at injuries and lack of a voucher/compensation, and possibly criminal charges.

This situation is akin to getting kicked out of a store that you were asked to leave.

Your rights and compensation are spelled out in the law dealing with situations like this. One person is not allowed to make these unilateral decisions because they feel as though the law is wrong in that time.

Laws and rules don't change if you act like an entitled drama queen that tries to bring race into the situation

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

#426

Post by talmand »

criddell wrote: post #379
grzm wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you ask the police to intervene, you are explicitly requesting a violent resolution. You're asking the police, a third-party representing the state and its acknowledged monopoly on legitimate use of force, to become involved. That doesn't necessarily mean that the resolution will or must be violent.

The police can also talk to the guy, determine he has a ticket and apparently has the right to be there, then leave and tell United to not call back until they've exhausted all their options.

Just because you have a ticket doesn't mean you can refuse to leave the plane when asked by the owner of said plane. Many people with tickets have been booted from planes for many reasons.

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

#428

Post by JohnLeTigre »

Some observations

- Surely there is a difference between overbooking and diminishing the number of available seats after the fact.

- Also, I would like to see how their "random computer pick" complies with their legal obligation of having IDB priority criterions.

- That was excessive force without any doubt. I mean, they had to clean up the blood afterwards.

- The doctor had to meet patients the next day, he had to uphold his hypocratic oath, I'm not sure this constitutes a "refusal" to vacate the plane in the legal sense.

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

#429

Post by talmand »

grzm wrote: post #390
dragonwriter wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're asking the police, a third-party representing the state and its acknowledged monopoly on legitimate use of force, to become involved. That doesn't necessarily mean that the resolution will or must be violent. The only thing the police have that United lacks in this circumstance is the monopoly on violence; by asking the police to become involved, United is asking for violence, by force or it's explicit or im…

'ryandrake expressed that by asking for the police, United was explicitly requesting a violent resolution . My initial comment is a reaction to the expectation that the resolution must be violent, which I don't believe is a foregone conclusion just by asking for the police to become involved. The only thing the police have that United lacks in this circumstance is the monopoly on violence United can't act as a third-…

Another way to further your point about police being a third-party moderator; we don't expect the police to shoot one or both people when answering a domestic dispute call.

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

#430

Post by yeukhon »

greenyoda wrote: post #411
enraged_camel wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Or, let it go. Seriously, or buy tickets from other airlines.
Post reply on HN