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

United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 464 posts

Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler

#181

Post by talmand »

mirimir wrote: post #20
Belphemur wrote: post #6

What a lack of professionalism. The customer even paid premium price to be in first class and instead of being notified at the gate, like any respectable airline would do, he's asked to give his seat to somebody "more important" than him when already seated. It doesn't make any sense, if that "more important person" came later, he should be the one getting compensated by the airline especially when the problem occurr…

Also, we know now that it's illegal to remove customers after boarding, unless they do something illegal. Saying no isn't illegal.

Where did this come from? I didn't read that in the article, did I miss it?

Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler

#182

Post by briandear »

coldpie wrote: post #144
stuff4ben wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that a big deal? You're warned not to bring bottles of liquids before you even get into the TSA line. Sure the TSA is bunch of security theatre in some cases, but if there's a rule there, why do you have to be a prick about it?

Because it's a huge waste of time and resources. No one benefits. There's no reason for these clowns to be wasting my time and making people buy water on the other side of the checkpoint. It's just one huge welfare program for unemployable morons, and I have to waste two hours every time I fly to put up with their dumb horseshit. I'm gonna throw a brick through your front window. No reason for it, just gonna do it. H…

Let me know when I can take the train from Houston to Frankfurt.

Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler

#183

Post by lsaferite »

coldpie wrote: post #144
stuff4ben wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that a big deal? You're warned not to bring bottles of liquids before you even get into the TSA line. Sure the TSA is bunch of security theatre in some cases, but if there's a rule there, why do you have to be a prick about it?

Because it's a huge waste of time and resources. No one benefits. There's no reason for these clowns to be wasting my time and making people buy water on the other side of the checkpoint. It's just one huge welfare program for unemployable morons, and I have to waste two hours every time I fly to put up with their dumb horseshit. I'm gonna throw a brick through your front window. No reason for it, just gonna do it. H…

Most airports I frequent have water bottle fountains now that dispense cold, filtered water into your bottle for you. Just bring a reusable bottle or dump your water from a disposable bottle.

Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler

#184

Post by tlrobinson »

Forcing passengers to relinquish seats they've already sat down in is clearly a terrible policy. Once you're in your seat you should be "locked in", except in exceptional circumstances. Pulling someone out of a seat has a much higher emotional (and PR) cost than denying someone boarding in the first place.

Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler

#185

Post by posguy »

Freak_NL wrote: post #134
tyfon wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The company I work at (in Norway) had planed to take all 70 employees to NYC this summer to celebrate a milestone reached. We just moved the whole thing to Paris instead as we had issues with all of the above, including employees that have visited "dangerous" countries. The thing that pushed everyone over was when our former prime minster was harassed[1] at the border for having been to a meeting in Iran. It says in…

It seems that the rules have become a lot stricter recently, and it looks like American citizens might end up feeling the consequences as well. This week a Dutch journalist wrote about being rejected by the ESTA visa waiver application because of a previous visit to Iraq as a journalist. So to travel to the US he gets to pay almost $200 and formally apply for a visa — for accredited journalists this is unheard of. Si…

Hey now, inferring that some journalists deserve protection because they may have credentials with a company or govt is both silly, and very dangerous. It creates a situation where you literally strip protection away from most journalists and put them in harms way.

Jake Appelbaum had a sendoff speech where he covered how his fellow journalists were putting him in grave danger when calling him an "Internet Activist" meanwhile he was publishing in the same paper as they were. He also covered how The Guardian left Julian Assange out to hang, allowed known compromised systems to remain in day to day use, and banned fellow journalists at other news orgs from writing about quite a few papers/topics from the Snowden archives.

Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler

#186

Post by sangnoir »

mirimir wrote: post #145
geggam wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Attitude isn't criminal.

Maybe not, but with cops it's stupid. And it can get you dead, if things go very wrong. Extreme politeness is the best course, in my experience.

"Pick up that can".

Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler

#187

Post by gambiting »

gergles wrote: post #177
gambiting wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's a Global Services passenger?

It's United's secret top tier frequent flyer program. They get their ass kissed for literally everything, even above full-fare revenue passengers. There's no published requirements for it or information about it - here's the closest thing: https://thepointsguy.com/2016/04/top-perks-united-global-ser... Fun anecdote: a few months ago I booked a Star Alliance ticket and had a United segment ORD-EWR. I was the only (!)…

That website is almost upsetting:

"The biggest benefit to Global Services is the excellent service that is given to those with the status. They receive what can only be described as the royal treatment. Below, some examples:[...]

Irritated with a flight attendant or gate agent? Complain about it and he/she will be reprimanded by HR."

So if you are a GS passenger you can literally get people reprimanded by their own HR? Fab.

Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler

#188

Post by tyingq »

gm-conspiracy wrote: post #120
michaelt wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a way, there are two questions at work here. The first question is whether you can have rent-a-cops throw a passenger off a plane after they have taken their seat. As I understand it, that is not legal. The second question is about over-booking more broadly. After all, though there's a legal distinction between a passenger a second before boarding and a second after, from a customer service standpoint they're stil…

Is it right that an airline can sell 310 tickets on a 300 seat plane, deliberately entering into 10 contracts it knows it cannot honour? As I understand it, that is legal. But should it be? I assume there are weasel words in the contract(airline ToS) to allow this.

There are full fare tickets that can be cancelled/refunded, or changed to other flights, at any time. So there's always some amount of no-shows. So they don't really "know" that they cannot honor the oversells. There's also equipment swaps to smaller aircraft, flights cancelled for mechanical issues that then moves passengers to other planes, etc.

Denied boarding is actually pretty rare, happens to about 0.1% of passengers: https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/pu...

The other approach would be to never overbook, but if you're the only airline not overbooking, your margins will be lower. Empty seats don't make money.

Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler

#189

Post by posguy »

talmand wrote: post #171
rangibaby wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a western person, the lack of invasive checks and procedures etc in Asia (live Japan, have travelled PRC HK Indonesia and Malaysia) was an eye opener for me. In every case the security involved an X-ray for luggage and walking thru a metal detector. That was it. Australia in 2014 otoh was nuts. I was taken aside and magic wanded at one airport, subject to a personal body scan (???) and patdown at another, and inte…

Asia hasn't discovered, or have the need for, the security theater jobs program.

Seriously, instead of a New Deal with public infrastructure projects, we're spending to create make work jobs with the TSA.

Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler

#190

Post by technofiend »

zippergz wrote: post #133
linker3000 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I asked United whether I could use their lounge at SFO as they cancelled my flight to Heathrow and I was going to be waiting the best part of a day for a flight to Dulles to take an alternative that would get me home 1.5 days late. By the look on the faces of the two lounge receptionists, you'd think I'd asked if I could take a dump on their desk. "Other people have paid membership to use this lounge" I was told in a…

I have a paid United Club membership. Those lounges are already pretty full a lot of the time, and one of the biggest reasons I (and many of the other members I know) pay for it is exactly the situation you describe. When something goes wrong with a flight, it's well worth the cost of the membership to have helpful agents, minimal lines, and a nice place to relax. It's not about the free mediocre food. Having a place…

And a spot to recharge your electronics along with free wifi! Don't forget those parts.
Post reply on HN