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

Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident

hasbrouck.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 379 posts

Re: Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident

#91

Post by taurath »

ryandrake wrote: post #9
dsacco wrote: post #5

This was a fascinating read. The money quote, in summary form: * The flight was technically a Republic Airlines flight subcontracting for United Airlines. * Almost none of the staff involved worked directly for United Airlines; they are subcontractors required to wear United Airlines' branded uniforms. * Republic Airlines is bankrupt, and none of the parties involved in the lawsuit has attempted to shift blame to the…

The infuriating thing about all of this is how deliberately obfuscated and phony everything is: * Airline employees who aren't quite airline employees * Cops who aren't quite cops * Reserved seats that aren't quite reserved Doesn't anyone honestly sell a real product that you can take at face value anymore?

Microsoft employees that aren't Microsoft employees..

Re: Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident

#92

Post by leni536 »

maze-le wrote: post #86
dba7dba wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can vouch for this story. My parents went through this scenario exactly. They had gotten into office cleaning because it was relatively well paying in the 90's. But in the 90's middle men came into the mix. Someone with better sales ability would win the contract for cleaning office, and subcontract it to someone else. And even that 2nd person might subcontract it to someone else. Eventually, the person really doin…

That is a nice example of why the free market is not neccessarily the guarantor of efficiency.

But why? It exactly looks like a problem that free market should be able to solve.

Re: Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident

#93

Post by leni536 »

edent wrote: post #79
tarsinge wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intrigued by how can it be cost competitive for the middle men, why aren't small business selling directly? Is the sales part the only edge of middle men?

Because a small company has the ability to supply cleaning to X square metres across one city. A middle-man can say "We will supply your cleaning in several cities no matter your office size." So a company pays a higher cost - but only has to deal with one contract, which saves them effort elsewhere. It's the same as taxi companies. It would be cheaper for you to call a small firm with lower overheads, but you're hap…

Hmm, Uber for office cleaning?

Re: Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident

#94

Post by diminoten »

blizkreeg wrote: post #29

Does anyone else worry from a safety perspective that the pilots flying these "subcontracted" flights are probably paid very low? I read somewhere that even Captain pay at some of these guys can be 60-70K. I know FAA license requirements are stringent but I would have a hard time believing that working for shitty, bankrupt or nearly bankrupt low-cost airlines that don't pay well has to affect your performance to some…

I'm not worried, because the incidents aren't there to support any concern. Flying is safe if a poorly paid pilot is flying the plane, too.

It seems like flying commercial flights has a "good enough" bar that the US government does a good job of making sure everyone who operates flights is over.

Re: Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident

#95

Post by djsumdog »

ryandrake wrote: post #9
dsacco wrote: post #5

This was a fascinating read. The money quote, in summary form: * The flight was technically a Republic Airlines flight subcontracting for United Airlines. * Almost none of the staff involved worked directly for United Airlines; they are subcontractors required to wear United Airlines' branded uniforms. * Republic Airlines is bankrupt, and none of the parties involved in the lawsuit has attempted to shift blame to the…

The infuriating thing about all of this is how deliberately obfuscated and phony everything is: * Airline employees who aren't quite airline employees * Cops who aren't quite cops * Reserved seats that aren't quite reserved Doesn't anyone honestly sell a real product that you can take at face value anymore?

Contracted pilots are often paid peanuts too. Some non-union pilots are even on food stamps. They might even be better off driving for Uber, and that's kinda terrible.

Re: Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident

#96

Post by flukus »

leni536 wrote: post #93
edent wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because a small company has the ability to supply cleaning to X square metres across one city. A middle-man can say "We will supply your cleaning in several cities no matter your office size." So a company pays a higher cost - but only has to deal with one contract, which saves them effort elsewhere. It's the same as taxi companies. It would be cheaper for you to call a small firm with lower overheads, but you're hap…

Hmm, Uber for office cleaning?

So the yellow pages was basically just an uber uber?

Re: Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident

#97

Post by TeMPOraL »

killjoywashere wrote: post #19
ryandrake wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The infuriating thing about all of this is how deliberately obfuscated and phony everything is: * Airline employees who aren't quite airline employees * Cops who aren't quite cops * Reserved seats that aren't quite reserved Doesn't anyone honestly sell a real product that you can take at face value anymore?

Please tell me you the ToS for every online service, every time it's updated. The internet-enabled side of industry virtually invented this modus operandi.

> The internet-enabled side of industry virtually

I see what you did there.

Are Internet services even obligated to notify you when they change their ToS, or do I really have to run a script every night that diffs the current ToS with last recorded one, for every service I use?

Re: Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident

#98

Post by IIIIIIIIIIII »

SilasX wrote: post #78
IIIIIIIIIIII wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That does not change anything I wrote. > Because when there are no options left, you only have force. It actually makes it worse that you try to justify it. You used your brainpower to find a justification for what is. But there is none. This is a non sequitur - there is no reason to use force even when people don't cooperate! Also, the vast majority of such instances require no special level of competence to deescal…

What are you taking about? In Germany, to this day, if the airline decides to remove you from a flight, based on reasons they deem justified, and you steadfastly refuse, they don't just shrug and say "oh well, guess we're stuck with you, let's go ahead with the flight". And once security is tasked with removing a noncompliant person, then yes, it does take training to do it without hurting them. You're right that the…

The numbers for police actions comparing Germany and the US speak a clear language. Any kind of violence is on a far lower level than in the US. We don't need to talk about the reasons - policing in the US is harder - but your argument does not work. Nor does any of it contradicts my argument, I'm tempted to call yours "whataboutism" (that doesn't even have a basis). We certainly have our own issues, and things like profiling, the same (completely innocent) people getting controlled over and over wherever they go (darker skin, wrong haircut, etc. - who knows the criteria), but none of it pertains to this issue.

Re: Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident

#99

Post by maze-le »

leni536 wrote: post #92
maze-le wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a nice example of why the free market is not neccessarily the guarantor of efficiency.

But why? It exactly looks like a problem that free market should be able to solve.

I am not an economist, but I think it is a problem with information assymetry. The cleaning worker does not have many connections to CEOs, to wich he can sell his services, but the middle men have. The middle men can leverage this situation to gain the profit, the cleaning worker would have gained. But I have no idea, why this would evolve into a pyramid scheme. One level of "management" would have solved the "information assymetry"-problem, without inefficiency (and this could be done in a fair way, so the worker can profit too).

Re: Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident

#100

Post by flukus »

edent wrote: post #79
tarsinge wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intrigued by how can it be cost competitive for the middle men, why aren't small business selling directly? Is the sales part the only edge of middle men?

Because a small company has the ability to supply cleaning to X square metres across one city. A middle-man can say "We will supply your cleaning in several cities no matter your office size." So a company pays a higher cost - but only has to deal with one contract, which saves them effort elsewhere. It's the same as taxi companies. It would be cheaper for you to call a small firm with lower overheads, but you're hap…

A lot of this played out with single location companies and single city contracting companies (before they start merging). So I don't think that's the reason.

I suspect it was cost. The middle men would just under bid and then under deliver.

Post reply on HN