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

Leaked email from United Airlines CEO blames passenger for violent removal

resistancereport.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 274 posts

Re: Leaked email from United Airlines CEO blames passenger for violent removal

#101

Post by hedora »

_fizz_buzz_ wrote: post #66
tsunamifury wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with your logic is giving private companies complete rights over your physical person once you enter their plane will (and does as shown by the incident) lead to abuse for profit. There was no security issue, there was no emergency, there was no legitimate reason to remove this person from the plane. The abuse and physical harm of a passenger was done entirely in the name of saving a few dollars by not se…

The thing is, on a plane the crew is king and you have to follow their orders. If they decide that you have to leave the plane, you must leave the plane. Now, their reasons might be questionable. You have every right to fight the airline once you are off the plane. But there is no room for this while on board. Basically, as soon as he started to refuse to follow the crew's orders, it was a lost case for him.

s/plane/bus/g

s/leave/sit in the back of/g

Re: Leaked email from United Airlines CEO blames passenger for violent removal

#102

Post by rlanday »

mavelikara wrote: post #82
cube00 wrote: post #4

If they had just increased the compensation passengers would have voluntarily given up their seat, everyone has their price. It didn't even need to be money, free flights, upgrades, it costs them next to nothing, especially when you consider this is still running in the media days later. Everyone hates to hear they overbook flights so you'd think when they get bitten United would take some of the savings made overboo…

I believe this is capped at a maximum of $1300. From [1]: If it’s more than two hours (four hours for international flights), or if the airline does not offer alternate flights, the compensation is 400 percent of your one-way fare, with a $1300 maximum. [1] http://www.cntraveler.com/stories/2014-09-04/bumped-due-to-o...

That's the cap on what they're legally required to offer. There's no law that says they can't exceed that to avoid a PR disaster.

Re: Leaked email from United Airlines CEO blames passenger for violent removal

#103

Post by _benedict »

kps wrote: post #35
maxerickson wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it was stupid business not to offer more money for other people to leave the plane (or to find some other way to move the crew), there's nothing to argue about there. What did they do that should be illegal? Overselling each flight makes the tickets cheaper. People want cheaper tickets. So it isn't obvious to me that over selling is wrong. Is the problem that they failed to stop the people boarding before deciding…

An honest way to overbook would be to sell seats beyond capacity as standby.

Selling "over-capacity" as stand-by is potentially problematic, as it's not at all clear when you're overcapacity. It's always a probability game. Classifying tickets as "stand-by" as soon as probability > 0 would likely reduce their desirability, resulting in less full planes and higher overall prices.

The opposite setup would not, though. i.e., like refundable tickets, offer non-refundable guaranteed tickets that are locked out of the ticket system. This maintains the current pricing characteristics while offering travellers the option of paying more when it matters to them.

Or a sliding scale of probability of being seated. If your typical ticket has a 99% chance of being seated, most people won't care to pay extra but they know they have the possibility of being booted and cannot possibly complain.

The problem with all of these approaches is they add to the complexity of purchasing a ticket, which consumers generally don't like.

Re: Leaked email from United Airlines CEO blames passenger for violent removal

#104

Post by ropiku »

valuearb wrote: post #75
Shivetya wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I take issue with the idea it was over booked when it was the airline wanting to transport its own people in place of booked customers. If anything we shall get to witness if the power of social media can overcome such abuse, It has helped turn the tables a bit with policing but usually only when it occurs in a public setting. People do need to take note that this actually is another case of police abuse just at the…

So United should not have tried to board their flight personnel so that another plane full of passengers could sit on the tarmac for hours in Louisville with no crew?

United should've planned ahead for their staff to get to where they need without forcing somebody off the plane. They already knew how many tickets were sold, how many checked in and how many boarded (they were already on the plane).

Re: Leaked email from United Airlines CEO blames passenger for violent removal

#105

Post by devy »

cube00 wrote: post #4

If they had just increased the compensation passengers would have voluntarily given up their seat, everyone has their price. It didn't even need to be money, free flights, upgrades, it costs them next to nothing, especially when you consider this is still running in the media days later. Everyone hates to hear they overbook flights so you'd think when they get bitten United would take some of the savings made overboo…

One of the reports I heard from interviews of some other passengers on that flight was that the United issues voucher in $50 denominations, or 16 $50 vouchers expires in a year and have lots of restrictions and fine prints. In other words, the offer was NOT worthy the face value and hassle of "re-accommodation".

Re: Leaked email from United Airlines CEO blames passenger for violent removal

#106

Post by danso »

benji-york wrote: post #58

I honestly don't understand the outrage. A person was legally required to do something he didn't want to do, he refused to relent and escalated the situation. The passenger is the only person I see as having done anything wrong here. I don't claim that there aren't better ways to handle the situation, but I also don't see any wrongdoing in how this shook out.

People can be outraged by legal actions, especially since legal definitions leave a lot undefined in terms of how legal orders are actually carried out. The people who are outraged about this can apparently imagine other ways to alleviate the common situation of overbooking which don't require physically dragging a 69-year-old man unconscious and bleeding from a plane.

Anecdotal evidence, obviously, but I've been on many overbooked flights. Have never seen anything arise to this level of authorized violence. YMMV of course.

Re: Leaked email from United Airlines CEO blames passenger for violent removal

#107

Post by ben1040 »

mavelikara wrote: post #82
cube00 wrote: post #4

If they had just increased the compensation passengers would have voluntarily given up their seat, everyone has their price. It didn't even need to be money, free flights, upgrades, it costs them next to nothing, especially when you consider this is still running in the media days later. Everyone hates to hear they overbook flights so you'd think when they get bitten United would take some of the savings made overboo…

I believe this is capped at a maximum of $1300. From [1]: If it’s more than two hours (four hours for international flights), or if the airline does not offer alternate flights, the compensation is 400 percent of your one-way fare, with a $1300 maximum. [1] http://www.cntraveler.com/stories/2014-09-04/bumped-due-to-o...

That's a cap on what they're mandated by statute to give you as compensation. If for whatever reason your one way fare cost more than $325, then they don't have to pay you 4x that, just the cap.

It doesn't mean they can't offer you more.

Re: Leaked email from United Airlines CEO blames passenger for violent removal

#108

Post by cortesoft »

cafard wrote: post #91
cortesoft wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the alternative to commercial airlines for someone who isn't crazy rich?

Unfortunately, it seems to be bus or car, and I don't think that Greyhound is what it was 40 years ago.

Bus and car are not suitable replacements. I can't add 6 days of driving to my work trips to the East coast, or to my family visits to New York.

Re: Leaked email from United Airlines CEO blames passenger for violent removal

#110

Post by BlackFly »

mvdwoord wrote: post #13

I feel the current system of overbooking and how it is "regulated" is backwards, and airlines should rethink. Perhaps they could do some sort of an auction without a maximum. It is their problem after all, and a market mechanism seems a reasonable way to deal with this. Sometimes this would mean someone who does not care as much will gladly take $150 as compensation. Other cases might lead to much higher numbers. The…

1. The flight was not overbooked, they wanted to eject holders of confirmed reserved seats in favor of their own employees in contravention of 14 CFR 250.2a.

2. Overbooking rules can only be used to deny boarding. The passenger had already boarded.

3. United's own Contract of Carriage enumerates for "Refusal of Transport" in rule 21. None of the rules apply.

What United did was illegal, plain and simple. They may have made false statements to authorities to get him ejected as well.

Post reply on HN