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

441–450 of 549 posts

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

#441

Post by cmurf »

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…

I do not see how the passenger violated the contract of carriage.

Section 25 doesn't apply, they were not denied boarding. And I don't see anything in section 21 they've violated either. Their forced removal seems to be the airline violating their own contract, not the passenger.

https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriag...

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

#442

Post by dogma1138 »

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…

As far as I know not complying with orders from the aircrew on board of an aircraft is against the law.

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

#443

Post by dingaling »

rhino369 wrote: post #27
ww520 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

United employees taking passenger's seats? That's not overbooked. That's robbery.

Not like united employees going on vacation or to a meeting. But a flight crew going to where they need to be. It's part and parcel of an airline service. If they can't get to where they need to be a flight will have to be delayed or canceled.

> But a flight crew going to where they need to be. It's part and parcel of an airline service.

Some airlines have an alternative means of crew transport, used for such contingencies. For example Jet2 in the UK has a Piper Navajo to move misplaced crew around and TNT in Europe ( now ASL Airlines ) have a Learjet 45.

Even Ryanair, king of the bottom-line, occasionally uses its engineering Learjets to position crews. Much cheaper to send one small corporate jet than have a 189-passenger 737 stuck crewless and causing a cascading schedule disaster.

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

#444

Post by tarlinian »

tedmiston wrote: post #287
djsumdog wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they can just take the hit. In this case, they decided to comp four people so they didn't have to cancel a plane load. Seems like good economics, but no one wanted to give up their seats. I mean why would you. It's bad enough you have to get molested by the TSA once. Twice? Fuck that. I want to go home. No I don't want a voucher for $200 of my next flight with the same shitty airline that will expire before I can…

You are legally entitled to cash compensation over an airline voucher -- you just have to ask for it and a lot of people either don't know that or just don't do it. Also the rebooking is not necessarily on the same airline if they don't have a similar flight available that day but others do.

This is only true if you are involuntarily kicked off...if you volunteer you get whatever they agreed to give you.

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

#445

Post by cmurf »

whitepoplar wrote: post #20
rhino369 wrote: post #8

The outrage mob is pushing this pretty hard. Booting people off a plane is pretty shitty behavior for an airline. It's bad customer service and they should dealt with it earlier than after boarding. But if they have to do it, the passenger shouldn't be allowed to just refuse. This guy did. And he had to get dragged off the plane. I don't really see an alternative other than just letting anyone willing to scream to st…

I think you're wrong. They should have upped their monetary incentive until someone left voluntarily. It was their business fuckup, not the passenger's, and they should pay for it.

It's hilarious to me people engage in blaming the victim over this.

At a particular moment it's $800 and voluntary. At the very next moment passenger is subject to forced removal.

This makes no sense. And I also see nothing in the contract of carriage that permits it.

The airline can deny boarding, but this person is physically inside the airplane having used his boarding pass for the purpose for which it exists: to facilitate boarding the plane. He is boarded. He was not in any way denied boarding. Rescinding that status is not listed at all in the contract of service.

Second, this is deeply uncivilized. The airline invited violence for a civil, non-criminal dispute resulting from their own planning negligence, and their own unwillingness to provide monetary compensation that anyone on board thought was reasonable.

And the police have liability here as well for agreeing to become violently involved in what is ultimately a monetary dispute.

Shame, shame, shame.

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

#446

Post by papabrown »

ryandrake wrote: post #274
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 airline had plenty of options. When you ask the police to intervene, you are explicitly requesting a violent resolution.

I don't believe that to be true. I believe that often ends up happening but I don't believe it to be a sure enough outcome that one can link the two with such certainty.

I hate to sound like an old guy but I do remember when police used to try to resolve issues. Much like many police interactions I've witnessed in Europe and elsewhere in the world.

Police used to try to get everyone to calm down and figure out a solution that did not involve the need to get violent or anyone going to jail.

For instance, in this case, the police could have asked the doctor why he didn't want to deplane. With that knowledge they could have approached the United crew and informed them that this was a doctor who had to be at work tomorrow and imply that getting their four staff to another location seemed to be less important, so maybe they could find another passenger or find another solution.

If United persisted, the police should have gone back to the doctor and said, "Listen, we're on your side. They're being a-holes. But, it's their plane and they're asking you to leave which means you're trespassing and failing to follow the orders of a flight crew. We don't not want to arrest you or have to remove you by force, but we're boxed in a corner here. Just come with us and we'll help you file a complaint."

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

#447

Post by cmurf »

SamBam wrote: post #243
ajhurliman wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm glad he did act out, though. Ultimately, he's doing so on our behalf as passengers. When United freaks out about negative PR they're conditioned to be more wary about pushing customers around. If I were in his position I'd quietly fume about it and United would get more comfortable about booting people who have boarded without repercussions. It's pretty rare that passengers' cases get brought to light so it's kin…

Exactly. 100% this. If he had just left when the police arrived, as commenters above you are suggesting, then that would mean that the threat of violence was a successful solution to United's mistake, and we'd never have heard about it.

I agree. Someone who has committed no crime, and no breach of the contract of carriage, has the right if not the responsibility to resist police power. It's a misuse of power. United should not have requested police presence and the police should have refused to intervene.

Otherwise this becomes might makes right.

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

#448

Post by CamelCaseName »

zeveb wrote: post #406
SamBam wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, what they should have done is exactly what other airlines do when they are overbooked: keep raising the voucher amount until someone volunteers to get off. And if you can't find someone to get off at a price that seems appropriate (which is very unlikely: you're always going to find someone willing to take $1000), work out other arrangements. The moment you've escalated to "we've selected people at random, and we…

> And if you can't find someone to get off at a price that seems appropriate (which is very unlikely: you're always going to find someone willing to take $1000), work out other arrangements. I think that randomly selecting passengers is the 'other arrangements' their policy works out. I agree that they should have increased vouchers past $800, but I disagree that it's guaranteed that there would be enough takers at e…

Honestly, I'm amazed that in a whole plane, no one jumped at $800. I was very, very, happy to take a $1,000 voucher for a flight to China that required me to take an extra flight (Dallas to Chicago then to Beijing as opposed to Dallas to Beijing) -- Then again, perhaps my day is less valuable than others'.

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

#449

Post by CamelCaseName »

mastax wrote: post #121
xapata wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoever decided to force the guy off the plane is an idiot. They could have simply raised the comp for volunteering slowly until someone took the money.

According to Reddit hearsay they offered increasing amounts up to $800 but no one budged. One passenger offered to leave for $1500 and the crew laughed. I'm assuming there's corporate policy that puts a maximum cap on compensation.

I also got laughed at when I tried to negotiate up an offer of $1,000 to switch flights.

Learn from my lesson though, try negotiating before you accept, not after. Not sure if it would have made a difference, but definitely less embarrassing.

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

#450

Post by cmurf »

rhino369 wrote: post #327
inputcoffee wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think physical violence is qualitatively different. Consider: suppose a kid lays across your driveway and refuses to budge. Are you allowed to drive over the kid? After all, if everyone starts doing this, you will lose your job and can't feed your own family, right? Well, no. You have to figure out a way. Take a deep breath and call their parents, get an Uber or whatever it takes. The situation would be different i…

You can pick the kid up and move him. Choosing a kid in this senario is cheating because kids are dumb and don't understand consequences. If my doctor was laying on my driveway I'd drag him off and then leave. And it's morally and legally right to do so.

Nope.

You have a "contract of lying on the driveway" with him, you've granted him permission to lie on the driveway for the next 1.5 hours, and your contract doesn't list you changing your mind as a reason for rescinding that prior permission, nor has he breached the contract in a way that permits you to remove him.

You're welcome to point out where in the contract of carriage you're basing your opinion. I'm finding no justification.

Post reply on HN