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

461–470 of 549 posts

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

#461

Post by justin66 »

vijayr wrote: post #415
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

> Why does it matter if the person is a doctor or a janitor?

If I were in a customer service position where policy dictated I kick the guy off the plane, and he did not cooperate, I'd honestly look for any way to avoid the whole police ejection bullshit. The passenger being a doctor gave those customer service people a pretty good out, in case they needed to defend their actions (to defend skipping over the guy who refused to get up and leave, specifically) to either their management or to the next person in the crowd to be picked to give up a seat. I am surprised they didn't take it.

I wasn't commenting on the wisdom of the policy.

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

#462

Post by mcv »

dvcc wrote: post #409
maxerickson wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but part of the point is that it isn't an accident. Airlines are paying attention to what people respond to so instead of going out of their way to compete on quality or whatever other factors, they compete on price.

I understand, but I don't think we can put the blame on the consumer alone. When all pretty-much compete on price alone, we can only compare on price alone.

If people manage to remember this event, they can now also compare on violently getting thrown off the plane.

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

#463

Post by syshum »

MattSteelblade wrote: post #261
mcv wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did he not have a legal right? I thought the only reason they removed him was because the plane was overbooked and they wanted the seat for their own employees. Sounds like he had a valid ticket and every right to be on that plane. The airline should not have overbooked, and discovering that they had, they should have put their own employee on the next plane. Treating paying customers like this is inexcusable.

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

Just because it is legally allowed or an established practice does not make it right

Lots of things were legally allowed established practices until they were not; people realized they were unethical and immoral, hopefully people will begin to realize this practice is also unethical and work to abolish legal overselling

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

#464

Post by syshum »

phil21 wrote: post #358
xapata wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The cap really isn't being explained properly, it's actually almost assuredly not relevant to this guy's situation. The actual penalty is 4x the cost of the segment. Note this is not what you paid for the ticket on your credit card divided by two (in the event of a direct round trip ticket). This guy was likely owed somewhere in the range of a few hundred bucks as a ORD-SDF segment is likely worth about $50-100 after…

This is incorrect

The law says

>Compensation shall be 400% of the fare to the passenger's destination or first stopover, with a maximum of $1,350, if the carrier does not offer alternate transportation

Stopover is defined in the law as

>>Stopover means a deliberate interruption of a journey by the passenger, scheduled to exceed 4 hours, at a point between the place of departure and the final destination.

Thus the carrier is responsible for 4x the total cost of the ticket, from Pick to destination unless the connecting layover is more than 4 hours in length

as to the point on "after fees excluded" the law requires compensation based on the full fare

fare is defined as

>>Fare means the price paid for air transportation including all mandatory taxes and fees

SO while some fees may be included, if they are optional addons like baggage fees, upgrades, drinks, meals, etc. Any mandatory fees and taxation must be included

Source:https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

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

#465

Post by syshum »

problems wrote: post #288
djsumdog wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It comes down to the balance I guess. We can kick four people off and offer them each shitty compensation (usually a first class ticket for the next flight and worthless $200 vouchers for the same shitty airline that expire in less than 6 months) or cancel the flight this crew is for and lose an entire plane load worth of income. I understand the economics, but it's still bullshit. Those customers want to get home an…

You have to understand why they overbook - jetfuel is extremely expensive and produces a massive amount of carbon pollution - most of the airlines barely operate at margin as it is. Cargo is cheaper to fly than passengers and many of them are converting more and more towards cargo for that reason. You don't want to be flying around in jets which aren't at capacity, it's an enormous waste of money and fuel - your tick…

> jetfuel is extremely expensive and produces a massive amount of carbon pollution

Which is not relevant to over booking,

>most of the airlines barely operate at margin as it is.

False, extremely false

>You don't want to be flying around in jets which aren't at capacity,

you do not want to be flying around jets that have UNSOLD seats, you do want to be flying around jets that have SOLD but unoccupied seats, it costs far less in jet fuel the fly an empty seat than a 150-250lbs human with all their luggage.

this is why the whole overbooking justification is bullshit.

They lose money when they have to fly a UNDER SOLD flight, meaning the seats are empty because no one bought a ticket. They DO NOT lose money when they sell a ticket and no one shows up. The Rebooking fees, and various other fees more and compensate for the no-shows, and in some cases the fare is non-changeable non-refundable, so the person that does not show up has to buy a new ticket at full value.

There is no ethical, economical, or any other justification for Overselling flights than Greed.. Pure and simple

It should be considered fraud and should be illegal

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

#466

Post by jimmywanger »

cmurf wrote: post #451
jimmywanger wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You're invited to provide citations to the violated rules, regulations and laws. I don't see United's contract of carriage rule 21 or rule 25 applicable. The passenger was granted boarding, not denied. FAR 91.3(a) doesn't apply, this has nothing to do with the operation of the aircraft. And federal regulation preempt state and local law, but you're welcome to try and convince me. I see no contractual basis for involu…

> You're invited to provide citations to the violated rules, regulations and laws.

From united contract of carriage: UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons...:

  C) Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions – Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond UA’s control

  H) Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to: 3) Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew.
He was definitely not complying with and interfering with the duties of the members of the flight crew.

Also, the distinction for boarding granting and non-granting is unclear to me. Is the fact that you receive a boarding pass indication that you're on the plane for good? Apparently not.

> people engaging in victim blaming

Assuming that the passenger was a victim. You should be blamed if you're at fault and unreasonable. If you're unhappy with the situation, deal with it later in the courts. Just like you can't talk your way out of a speeding ticket by "asserting your rights".

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

#467

Post by acchow »

ksrm wrote: post #271
crooked-v wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Hey, so, these four are being jerks, so we're starting over again, but they're not allowed to participate."

So they're guaranteed a seat on the flight? Sounds like a winning strategy for them.

Everyone gets a seat on the flight, except those volunteering to leave for the incentive...

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

#468

Post by toomuchtodo »

tutufan wrote: post #453
toomuchtodo wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't even have to be bizarre. I've been on flights where the entire flight is going to Mardi Gras, spring break in Daytona, or a cruise; when everyone is expecting to be somewhere, the clearing price can quickly exceed what you'd expect.

I suspect that in retrospect, United would gladly have paid $100,000 to avoid this fiasco.

Funny enough, it would've only cost United ~$10k to put their crew on a dedicated Embraer 145 commuter jet to Louisville from Ohare. Oops.

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

#469

Post by cmurf »

jimmywanger wrote: post #466
cmurf wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're invited to provide citations to the violated rules, regulations and laws. I don't see United's contract of carriage rule 21 or rule 25 applicable. The passenger was granted boarding, not denied. FAR 91.3(a) doesn't apply, this has nothing to do with the operation of the aircraft. And federal regulation preempt state and local law, but you're welcome to try and convince me. I see no contractual basis for involu…

> You're invited to provide citations to the violated rules, regulations and laws. From united contract of carriage: UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons...: C) Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions – Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyo…

C) Does not in any possible way apply here because the outcome of oversold seats is completely predictable, as is the need to accommodate crew shifts. This isn't "chance occurance" at all even in the most vivid imagination of one of my house plants.

And in fact there's no oversold issue either, as it turns out. Exactly four paying passengers were removed for exactly four non-paying non-customer crew. That is not an oversold situation.

H) What safety issue applies here? This isn't a safety issue.

The contract has allowances in specific situations for passenger removal, not one of those allowances is applicable. You have to stretch way above and beyond the simple meaning of words in a dictionary to get where you're going.

> If you're unhappy with the situation, deal with it later in the courts. Just like you can't talk your way out of a speeding ticket by "asserting your rights".

That's asinine. Speeding tickets presuppose a civil or criminal offense from the outset. There is no civil, criminal or contractual offense at all on the part of the passenger/victim.

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

#470

Post by tyingq »

talmand wrote: post #422
panarky wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The law typically invoked here is "interfering with a flight crew": https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1411-i...

I've never heard of trespass being used in this situation.

Since he appeared to be reasonably passive, I suspect it would be difficult to charge him with anything.

An aviation attorney commented about this and seemed to suggest it's very gray: http://denver.cbslocal.com/2017/04/10/united-airlines-remove...

Post reply on HN