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

221–230 of 274 posts

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

#221

Post by panda88888 »

goatherders wrote: post #61
valuearb wrote: post #24

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).…

This is silly. If every plane had every ticket sold and no one showed up, the airlines would make out even better. Less cost of food and drinks, fuel, labor costs in moving baggage. Airlines should HOPE people don't show up and take seats on the plane. This idea that they overbook because people don't show up is a money-grab and when it bites them in the ass I, for one, am glad.

To be honest in that situation overselling would net airlines even more money. That's why airlines oversell.

IMO a better system would be a more market-based solution.

Disallow involuntary bumping except under exceptional circumstances, and require airlines to up theirs compensation until enough people voluntarily bump themselves. Airlines would still oversell but at lower % because the cost is now higher. And people who get bumped are at least given satisfactory compensations.

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

#222

Post by benji-york »

IIIIIIIIIIII wrote: post #218
benji-york wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's set aside the legality issue for the moment and assume that United was not legally allowed to have the man removed from the flight. What then is the appropriate response of the passenger? Is non-cooperation (i.e., require people to physically remove you from your seat) the right thing to do? Is physically resisting (hitting, pushing, grappling with, etc.) those sent to remove you permissible?

You reverse the questions. Why? The man didn't do anything, he just sat there. Those who did do something where those who injured him. Who was bleeding, the police, a United airlines person - or the passenger? But it is interesting that you still try to reframe the problem, anything to twist the issue. Do you work for United? I'm not accusing you, just asking, there certainly are more than enough people who are even…

> You reverse the questions. Why?

I didn't intend on reversing a question. The only questions I see in this thread are ones I asked. I initially approached the situation from the perspective of the passenger, his decisions, and what would be right or wrong actions for him to take. Thinking about the same questions for the other actors in this situation — as you suggest — is also a good idea.

> Do you work for United?

Nope.

> Your idea of law and order is top down - and one-way.

If you knew me, you might reconsider that evaluation.

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

#223

Post by askafriend »

wdr1 wrote: post #201
askafriend wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently someone on the plane offered to give up their seat for $1600 and the manager laughed in their face. Here's an account from someone who was actually on that plane: https://twitter.com/flsurfr/status/851556475013038080

Note that's $1,600 in United credits that expire .

That's how it always is right? It's always a voucher, not actual cash.

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

#224

Post by antisthenes »

tyingq wrote: post #217
antisthenes wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Er, okay. There are other products and services with heavy competition that aren't a terrible experience. Please, elaborate, and be specific about the regulation present in the sale of those products and services.

Are you asking for highly regulated products and services that aren't terrible? If so, automobile manufacturing is highly regulated, as is banking. Plenty of competition exists. In both, I have a very granular range of choices at different price points, and have no trouble finding ones I am happy with. Airlines generally have two tiers of service, and business/first does nothing for large parts of what makes the expe…

In this case, the service being offered by the airline is the booking itself.

Your manufacturing analogy isn't appropriate, since they have to meet a minimum standard of safety for the product being sold. It is regulated heavily, because it deals with the potential loss of human life.

What's more reliable - a flight that departs on time every time or the aircraft that performs the flight? (In case it isn't obvious, it's a rhetorical question)

> as is banking

Sure, if we're talking about the safety of putting your money in a CD, which offer no consumer utility whatsoever. It's actually not a service for the consumer, since the bank is the one that makes money on the deposit.

A better analogy would have been different credit cards, which is quite a predatory service that, in theory, is possible to benefit from by the consumer, but in practice has little consumer protection if the "incentives" of the cards expire.

What I was asking for, and sorry if the intent wasn't clear, were products and services without consumer protection that offer surplus utility to the consumer beyond the service itself, that aren't terrible. If you have a rudimentary knowledge of economics, you'll know it's a trick question, though.

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

#225

Post by bronco21016 »

ntsplnkv3 wrote: post #209
bronco21016 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really not that simple at all. A multitude of things could have happened in SDF (Louisville) causing the crew there to be unable to fly. Since it was a whole crew I would guess they hit up against FAA mandated rest requirements. In the interest of making sure that flight in SDF still went out the airline scrambled to get a reserve (flight crew members that are on-call) crew down to SDF. These things often happen…

> Since it was a whole crew I would guess they hit up against FAA mandated rest requirements. Gee, I wonder if they could, I don't know, hire more people so that these situations don't happen as often? Heaven forbid they lose a little bit of profit a year... You simply delay the other flight. You don't force someone off of a flight they've already boarded.

It's really hard to describe how all of this works without going into extremely detailed scenarios and edge cases. Simply put though hiring more people doesn't do anything.

Those extra people still would have to be sitting on call somewhere. Once they receive the call they're sent to where they're needed which still results in this situation. It's simply unreasonable to think they would have spare flight crews in every single possible destination. Unless you want about 1,000% increase in ticket prices of course.

I'm sure the other flight was delayed. Not getting a crew there on this last flight out for the night though would have likely meant cancelling the flight in Louisville or delaying it at least 24 hours. Stranding a plane in a city like Louisville would cause major ripple effects down the line resulting in probably another 10-15 flights being delayed. If they cancelled rather than delay now you have a plane full of passengers that need to be re-routed on multiple other planes that are likely already full.

Re-location of flight crews is simply a necessary option for the airlines at this point of time. Maybe down the road we can remotely pilot airliners and then situations like this won't arise.

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

#226

Post by ntsplnkv3 »

bronco21016 wrote: post #225
ntsplnkv3 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Since it was a whole crew I would guess they hit up against FAA mandated rest requirements. Gee, I wonder if they could, I don't know, hire more people so that these situations don't happen as often? Heaven forbid they lose a little bit of profit a year... You simply delay the other flight. You don't force someone off of a flight they've already boarded.

It's really hard to describe how all of this works without going into extremely detailed scenarios and edge cases. Simply put though hiring more people doesn't do anything. Those extra people still would have to be sitting on call somewhere. Once they receive the call they're sent to where they're needed which still results in this situation. It's simply unreasonable to think they would have spare flight crews in eve…

See, for some reason people will go to lengths to somehow absolve corporations of their responsibility in this country. It's really sad.

Sure, there may be issues that can't be planned for, and you can't hire for every case and solve every issue. But that is still not this customer's fault, and he was punished for it, arbitrarily. Frankly I don't care how difficult it is for United to prevent this from happening again-it is their responsibility, it should not be the responsibility of their customers.

> Re-location of flight crews is simply a necessary option for the airlines at this point of time. Maybe down the road we can remotely pilot airliners and then situations like this won't arise.

Then reserve 4 seats on every flight for possible situations that arise. It's not my problem that United loses money this way. It's theirs.

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

#227

Post by booi »

askafriend wrote: post #223
wdr1 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that's $1,600 in United credits that expire .

That's how it always is right? It's always a voucher, not actual cash.

You are legally entitled to cash compensation but you specifically have to ask for it.

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2017/04/11/what-are-y...

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

#228

Post by LoSboccacc »

cmurf wrote: post #192
scurvy wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People get sick. Stuff happens. Every airline does this. It sucks, but if you think your distributed system in the cloud is complicated, running an airline every day would blow your mind.

Nope. They needed to have their house in order before boarding. They have the contractual right to deny boarding for overbooking, but this was not strictly an overbooking. They wanted to replace paying customers with non-paying non-customer crew, i.e. not overbooked. But even if you word smith this into overbooking, once the plane is boarded, the contract has a list of reasons for removing a passenger and not a singl…

Also their right to deny boarding ends once a passenger is boarded

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

#229

Post by LoSboccacc »

unprepare wrote: post #211
valuearb wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

is your logic that a plane full of passengers sitting on the tarmac is worse than a man being assaulted and dragged off a plane? Because if not, the answer to your question is a very obvious yes - they should be made to wait. I would happily wait on a plane if i knew it was to prevent someone being assaulted.... (though if the crew wasnt there, they wouldnt board the plane anyways, the other flight would've been canc…

So by your logic if I don't want to upend my side of the deal I can just call muscle and smash a man face?

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

#230

Post by 4ad »

pdelbarba wrote: post #184
cortesoft wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

PPL ASEL will cost you about $8k (doable if you really want it) and a 172@$105/hr wet to travel around in at 110kts. Take two fearless friends and you have yourself a private airline.

What do these acronyms mean? Google is not helping me.
Post reply on HN