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

United Passenger “Removal”: A Reporting and Management Failure

nakedcapitalism.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 178 posts

Re: United Passenger “Removal”: A Reporting and Management Failure

#31

Post by hueving »

jpollock wrote: post #2

Even if it wasn't a passenger overbooking, it was overbooking in that they failed to properly account for the likelihood of having to ship crews around their network. If their occupancy ratio was lower, then there wouldn't have been a problem, they could have fit the crew in. If they reserved 4 seats for crew on every flight, again there wouldn't have been a problem. If they had even reserved 2 seats and run sufficie…

>The airline played the game, ran too lean and paid the price.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with this, they just didn't follow through with the correct way to free up seats, which is increasing the bid.

Some family cleared something like $13,000 in amex gift cards during the delta debacle last week by volunteering their seats multiple times. If you keep increasing the bid, you will find a price at which someone will give up their seat.

Re: United Passenger “Removal”: A Reporting and Management Failure

#32

Post by tunesmith »

jph wrote: post #14

This is a new kind of UI/UX dark pattern. The United app lets customers pay for seats, and any reasonable person thinks that's the whole of it. But the fine print says that's not true, and says you can be forcibly removed if the flight is oversold. https://darkpatterns.org/ "When you use the web, you don’t read every word on every page - you skim read and make assumptions. If a company wants to trick you into doing s…

But that is explicitly not true, that is what the article is about. You cannot be forcibly removed if the flight is oversold. That's the whole point.

Re: United Passenger “Removal”: A Reporting and Management Failure

#33

Post by heisenbit »

zeteo wrote: post #19

The subtext here is that customers don't have any actual rights when dealing with a large corporation. The terms of service have become so lengthy and obscure that it's virtually certain for a corporate lawyer to find some justification somewhere for almost anything. The corporate employees and the police both operate on this assumption. As a customer, your only recourse is to meekly accept whatever treatment is comi…

Yes, passengers don't know their rights but pilots and other administrators should. So United personal should have known they are in a legal grey area when removing a passenger who had boarded.

I found the argument interesting that United should have lied and just invented a plane swap with a smaller body. Would have left the affected passengers is a weak position.

There is so much wrong on all levels including the reaction of the CEO. This will be a case study for long time.

Re: United Passenger “Removal”: A Reporting and Management Failure

#35

Post by Animats »

zeteo wrote: post #19

The subtext here is that customers don't have any actual rights when dealing with a large corporation. The terms of service have become so lengthy and obscure that it's virtually certain for a corporate lawyer to find some justification somewhere for almost anything. The corporate employees and the police both operate on this assumption. As a customer, your only recourse is to meekly accept whatever treatment is comi…

The subtext here is that customers don't have any actual rights when dealing with a large corporation.

The problem is that people now believe that. In fact, lawsuits against big companies often are settled on very favorable terms for the customer. As the article points out, United violated their own contract of carriage and FAA regulations. This is going to cost them.

Re: United Passenger “Removal”: A Reporting and Management Failure

#36

Post by yladiz »

jazzyk wrote: post #25

No, the real failure (and the source of this and many other issues in the airline industry) is the lack of competition in the US domestic market. Pure and simple. The huge, 350-million US domestic market is served by 4-5 major airlines, while the EU with 500 million people is served by tens of airlines. I recently flew from Barcelona to Nice for 30 euros, round-trip (with seat assignment). Where are the (potentially…

Why would what happened to United being more competitive practices? I don't see the connection.

Re: United Passenger “Removal”: A Reporting and Management Failure

#37

Post by kafkaesq »

zeteo wrote: post #19

The subtext here is that customers don't have any actual rights when dealing with a large corporation. The terms of service have become so lengthy and obscure that it's virtually certain for a corporate lawyer to find some justification somewhere for almost anything. The corporate employees and the police both operate on this assumption. As a customer, your only recourse is to meekly accept whatever treatment is comi…

The subtext here is that customers don't have any actual rights when dealing with a large corporation.

Well, no -- they just don't have much bargaining power. Which is different.

Re: United Passenger “Removal”: A Reporting and Management Failure

#38

Post by dionidium »

daenney wrote: post #20
dionidium wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems, like usual for American police, officers are insensitive to anything but violence; no logic, just apply force My understanding is that there was a lengthy conversation that took place before the outrage-inducing video starts. They did attempt to resolve the situation peacefully. At some point there is an impasse. Police are making a request and he's ignoring it. There are two ways that can go: 1) Police shr…

> 2) He's going to be forcefully removed. Yet why does the forceful removal of that passenger justify knocking him down and dragging him off the plane? There's plenty of ways to forcefully remove someone from something without doing what they did. Police is allowed to apply force, but that doesn't immediately give them the right to go loco.

This, like the notion that police should aim for the knees when shooting at suspects, is one of those perennial concerns that doesn't survive contact with reality. Once force is applied, you shouldn't be surprised when things go wrong. Force is messy. Which is why, yes, it should be viewed as a last resort.

Maybe there are better ways to resolve this situation wrt to the police and the airline. But I think basic common sense says that there are much better ways this passenger could have handled it, too. At some point it must have been obvious to any reasonable person that 1) the cops weren't going to change their minds; and that 2) force would eventually and inevitably be applied to resolve the situation in their favor.

Re: United Passenger “Removal”: A Reporting and Management Failure

#39

Post by andmarios »

dionidium wrote: post #17
LeoNatan25 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if that is the case, there are much better methods of dealing with a situation like this than calling a police officer. It seems, like usual for American police, officers are insensitive to anything but violence; no logic, just apply force. The man is lucky they didn't taze him. The crew should have known that. It's good that this policy is about to change, but it is too little too late.

It seems, like usual for American police, officers are insensitive to anything but violence; no logic, just apply force My understanding is that there was a lengthy conversation that took place before the outrage-inducing video starts. They did attempt to resolve the situation peacefully. At some point there is an impasse. Police are making a request and he's ignoring it. There are two ways that can go: 1) Police shr…

The article suggests that the airline was the one breaking the law and not the passenger. So in this case the police helped the airline commit a crime. Is this nowadays what means to have a police force?

Re: United Passenger “Removal”: A Reporting and Management Failure

#40

Post by LeoNatan25 »

drfuchs wrote: post #26

Why didn't they just keep doubling the offer for volunteers? Surely by $1600 or $3200 someone would bite. Then everyone is happy, it all gets finished quickly, and there's no chance of this sort of PR disaster (even docile removees can end up in the news if they then, say, miss the death of a hospitalized family member due to the delay).

Because handbook says a certain amount is the maximum they can offer, and likely the crew offering more would risk their job. Following this fiasco, Munoz said they will expand the handbook. We'll see.
Post reply on HN