271–274 of 274 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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...
Note: I believe this only applies to involuntary bumps, not voluntary ones(when you take the offer).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's really only two tiers, and the price jump is crazy. And does nothing for large parts of the bad experience.
I disagree, the flying experience is much more segmented than 2 tiers in the US. Each airline has an a la carte menu of experience configurations. More legroom? Premium Economy (or business/first class) Aisle seat? Pay for seat selection. Slow boarding? Pay for priority. No food? Onboard purchases. Security line too long? TSA Precheck. Long lines at immigration? Global Entry. Whether you're willing to purchase these…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 agai…
I'm not absolving them of anything. What happened was wrong, no doubt about it. I'm making a best effort to explain why it's unreasonable to think that flights will never end up in this "oversold" situation. By your logic they better go ahead and just block of 20 seats. You know, just in case they need to re-position a B747 crew. Wonder what tickets will cost when they can only sell 30 seats on those 50 seaters.
I would think that a better argument could be made than a straw-man, but in this case, I don't think there is, so I don't blame you for it.
What's unreasonable is to think that a moderate action shouldn't be taken due to an unlikely extreme result that would never happen.
The company needs to eat the cost. Whether that means blocking out a few seats or offering more to get someone to volunteer. And sure, you can argue, that this could make tickets go up for all-but the rates at which these events happen is very low, it's hard to argue that would happen. And due to competition, many airliners would find a better way-they still have to compete on price.
I guarantee you United wishes they did.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?…
I didn't talk about "intent" but about what you did.
> Nope.
Ahh, somebody likes selective quoting. Care to read the entire section next time?
> If you knew me, you might reconsider that evaluation.
I know what you wrote and that's what I responded to. I don't care what you do with the rest of your life, I don't see it so there is nothing to comment. I commented on the visible part.