Live data from Hacker News

Leaked email from United Airlines CEO blames passenger for violent removal

resistancereport.com

151–160 of 274 posts

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

#151
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are the CEO of a public company, you know anything you write at all@ is, most likely, public record. "They were just following protocol" is the new "Befehl ist Befehl" - also known as Nurember defense https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders The fact that a defenceless man has left a plane covered in blood should give everyone pause. They followed orders is a very poor response.

My comment was not meant to suggest that what happened was right. My comment was meant to suggest that anger at the CEO for supporting his employees, who only called security, and didn't beat the guy up themselves, is misplaced. UA screwed up, but the email wasn't what went wrong. The UA employees followed protocol by calling security. Protocols are generally in place for a reason, and they can be reworked. I don't t…

We can argue what "be a cheerleader for them[employees]" means. If I were a United employee, I'd not be impressed by my employer. I'd feel ashamed of being part of an organization that has managed to escalate a logistical problem (because that's what we are talking about) into violence. I'd like to be proud of my employer and, today, I'd not feel great knowing my company is ok with beating up a harmless man. I'd seriously question the ethics and core value of my employer. As an employee, I'd like to know that /something/ went wrong in that situation - and we do not stand for violence. Frankly, that would cheer me up.

As comparing overbooking to German soldiers - the Nuremberg defense, despite originated from Nazi's trial, refers today to any account where "I was just following orders". It refers to /any/ situation where someone claims unaccountability because "it is the protocol". This is exactly the case. If the protocol accounts for beating up a passenger, are the employees unaccountable just because "that's what the manual says"? No, they are not. They are human beings and they could say "fuck the protocol". There are a million other ways to handle a logistical problem without the use of violence.

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

#152
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's even worse than that. They were disembarking passengers to make room for their own staff who were not even planned on this trip.

You understand their staff needed to be on this flight so that another plane full of passengers in Louisville wouldn't be delayed by not having a flight crew?

Everyone gets that. We're mad that United messed up the logistics of having staff in the right cities, and instead of treating their customers well they decided to use literal force to removed a customer with a confirmed seat who was already boarded.

They had better alternatives: other customers had offered to leave for higher voucher value, I'm sure they could have paid someone already in Louisville 4x overtime. Instead they chose force and intimidation.

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

#153
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's even worse than that. They were disembarking passengers to make room for their own staff who were not even planned on this trip.

You understand their staff needed to be on this flight so that another plane full of passengers in Louisville wouldn't be delayed by not having a flight crew?

At least they weren't on the fucking plane already. It was a next morning flight, plenty of time to wave off the customers affected by United's own fuckup. This is why we need to re-regulate the airlines.

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

#154

This is what happens when you normalize violence, you focus on the blaming and legal stuff instead and you get people like this CEO but no one is reacting to the fact that a human being has been knocked out, dragged out like an animal for something he didn't have to give up. He had a legitimate reason not to give up his seat, he had patients he needed to see the next day. The airline CANNOT act like the computer is r…

> He had a legitimate reason not to give up his seat

This is true until an officer of the law asked him to get off the plane. Argument time happens before that, and after that in court. But at that point, you're being ordered off a plane by a law enforcement officer. When you don't comply there's only one way for it to proceed at that point.

> The airline CANNOT act like the computer is right all the time

It was the police officers who were right when they ordered the man off the plane.

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

#155

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…

What I mean is, that if that is the proposition on the table, don't take it.

I think what surprises people is that that proposition was on the table in the first place. Maybe it's specified in the fine print of the contract, but it violates most people's sense of fairness and decency.

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

#156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airlines overbook because people don't show up for flights. Overbooking means airlines can offer passengers refundable tickets. Occasionally they get it wrong and have too many people show up. So they offer compensation to get people to voluntarily give up seats. If they can't get people to voluntarily give up seats they have the right to pick who to deny service to (but by law have to pay specific compensation to).…

>Airlines overbook because people don't show up for flights. That's false. They overbook because it makes them more money and for some reason people just accept it. Pretty much no other industry could get away with doing that to its customers. Imagine the shit storm that would have unveiled if some random movie theatre sold 110% of its seats for the midnight premier of Star Wars VII and subsequently physically remove…

Hotels do this all the time. They book over 100% occupancy and usually someone cancels at the last minute and there's no problem. If everyone shows up they bump one of the people on the lowest rate. They give them a room at a comparable hotel nearby and some sort of other compensation. Most price-sensitive guests are okay with this trade because they're getting something for free.

They​ don't have fiascos like this because​ they aren't foolish enough to let them into the room before removing them. Unsurprisingly, kicking a guest out of a room/plane has a much higher risk of escalation than not letting them in.

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

#157

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 hav…

I'm sure some lawyer will try to go down this path for the alleged physician. But the reality is the flight crew has the right to kick anyone off the plane, and they need to have that right.

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

#159
How to fix this problem:

1. Hand out prefilled in vouchers/checks to all the passengers with the amount filled in, which become valid when redeemed at the counter. There's an irrational human thing that people hate losing something they have more than they like gaining something[1], so helping to feel like they are losing the $800 voucher by not redeeming it would be more beneficial. I imagine that having the (fake) voucher/check in their hand would increase voluntary rates by a lot (and lower the compensation the airlines would need to pay), while only increasing some paper printing costs.

--- Other ideas ---

1b. Add in language during ticket purchase saying "To keep prices low, bla bla bla, 1 in 20,000 passengers may be unable to fly. Purchase protection from this event for $1". The passengers that don't purchase that protection would then be eligible for denied boarding, but at least they had more of a choice. Although, it still feels like "guaranteed seat" should just be included by default when you purchase a ticket (as I type this, it feels insane that "guaranteed seat" would be an upsell... but that seems to be the case).

1c. Offer more in compensation to passengers (obvious). This is not like eminent domain, where you need 100% of people in a given area to agree to something. You only need 4/100 passengers to agree to something, it truly can work like an auction.

--- Other thoughts ---

1. Everyone is blaming United for this event, but is there a different US airline who this event couldn't have happened to? They all have involuntary boardings, and presumably if you choose not to go peacefully, the airline will involve law enforcement. The only reason people leave peacefully when they don't want to is because they know the airline has the ultimate physical control.

2. Jimmy Kimmel mentioned it, but you just cannot imagine this happening in any other industry. Being kicked out of a restaurant table after being seated, being kicked out of a hotel room just checked into, etc.

3. The management of United seems completely out of touch with sentiment and reality, given their statements. Using the word "re-accomodate" in a three sentence statement seems like a symptom of a larger problem... it should have been obvious how people would react to that. I believe they are so deep into their philosophy of "this is how the industry works" that they have lost sense of the bigger customer picture. It's really as simple as: He bought a confirmed ticket with real money->boarded the plane->told ticket is no longer valid and kicked off. No amount of industry financial rationalization will change that.

4. This is still a rare issue, only about 1 in 15,000 flyers in the US is involuntarily denied boarding[2]. That said, United has 5x the rate as Delta, so this problem is not inherently terrible everywhere in the industry. Worth noting that this flight was operated by Republic, not United.

--Citations--

[1] https://hbr.org/2016/05/why-buyers-and-sellers-inherently-di...

[2]http://6331-presscdn-0-25.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/u...

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

#160
post #48

Overbooking is an indefensible practice. You sell a service that you knowingly have no intention to provide to people who base their travel plans on that expectation. This is like playing Russian roulette with your customers. No sympathy for United.

Without overbooking, your plane ticket would cost roughly 10% more. So go ahead and start a "non-overbooking" airline, and see how popular you are with customers.
Post reply on HN