Man Dragged off United Airlines/Flight Overbooked, April 2017

[shadowdancer]

It does not really matter if he knew what he was doing or not- he tried to force his way onto an airplane. That action was going to be stopped.

That aside, no possible way that the good doctor was just having an olde fashioned human temper tantrum?

Given that there is no evidence of this and given that his head injury is on video, this is just your opinion. Its not a fact.

 

[Cryptic]

Given that there is no evidence of this and given that his head injury is on video, this is just your opinion. Its not a fact.

I think you are right. Of course, your medical diagnosis via video is also opinion and does not constitute fact either.

 

[shadowdancer]

I think you are right. Of course, your medical diagnosis via video is also opinion and does not constitute fact either.

The head injury is not my diagnosis. His head is bashed against the arm rest on the video. I have not claimed that he had concussion, I said his behaviour is consistent with concussion.

 

[jadejazzkayla]

I read somewhere that a passenger offered to volunteer for $1600, and the supervisor laughed in his face.

They are going to wish very dearly that they paid that $1600, because Dr Dao's settlement will be many, many times that amount.

Exactly. The airline should have offered an amount that would have encouraged 4 passengers to deplane happily.

This is America. The home of the free market. Everyone has their price.

Instead, united stock has lost 4% of it's value. It may bounce back, but I for one hope it keeps spiraling down.

 

[policyoftruth501]

If the plane doesn't have enough seats, and they offer $400 and a free nite in a hotel, and nobody takes the offer. Then they up it to $800 and the hotel, still no takers. So they tell everyone on the plane, the computer will randomly pick 4 names. How else can it be? Should he have been above the picking because he is a dr? What if I am an attorney with an important case tomorrow? or a parent with kids but no sitter?
should they have asked everyones occupation and income level before naming 4 people?
I agree the planes should not have been overbooked and the employees should have been the first choice to lose their seats. BUT, the guy should have just complied, and settled it in court or with his future business. IMO, he created the disturbance by refusing to get up and walk off the plane.
I have been booted and placed on another airline, still with the compensation money in my pocket, and arrived within hours of my scheduled arrival time.
Life is not perfect. things go wrong. You can go with the flow or kick up a stink.

Just like the leggings issue last week. If you want a free flight, play by their rules, even if you think they don't make sense. If not, just pay for your flight and wear whatever you want to.

JMO, and I know it probably won't be popular.

I too have been asked, MANY times, to take another flight because of overbooking. I have been offered upgrades and vouchers, as well as money, and at times I've taken them up on it. Other times I have not because sometimes you just get sick and tired of it. This guy sounds like he had a legit reason to not get off the plane. They could have picked someone else. They could have let their own employees stay behind. They could have done a lot of things instead of what they did do - most of all they could have accomplished their motive without knocking the man completely unconscious. That's where the lawsuit comes in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LaneGirl]

There are rules and regulations, there are contracts and then there is a human.

I hope I always choose the right thing in non dangerous situations. I may have a right to do something by law but hopefully I don't put that above harming an individual.

 

[policyoftruth501]

Exactly. The airline should have offered an amount that would have encouraged 4 passengers to deplane happily.

This is America. The home of the free market. Everyone has their price.

Instead, united stock has lost 4% of it's value. It may bounce back, but I for one hope it keeps spiraling down.

If the inconvenience will cause the customer a delay of over something like 12 hours they are supposed to offer around $1400. Clearly United is more concerned with getting off cheap.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hraefn]

First of all, this mans occupation, income, past, and family are all completely irrelevant to the situation at hand,

Second of all, I don't know what all the fuss is about, it's all right there in this mans UA ticket agreement....he is agreeing to these terms when he purchases his ticket....


Boarding Priorities - If a flight is Oversold, no one may be denied boarding against his/her will until UA or other carrier personnel first ask for volunteers who will give up their reservations willingly in exchange for compensation as determined by UA. If there are not enough volunteers, other Passengers may be denied boarding involuntarily in accordance with UA’s boarding priority:

• Passengers who are Qualified Individuals with Disabilities, unaccompanied minors under the age of 18 years, or minors between the ages of 5 to 15 years who use the unaccompanied minor service, will be the last to be involuntarily denied boarding if it is determined by UA that such denial would constitute a hardship.
• The priority of all other confirmed passengers may be determined based on a passenger’s fare class, itinerary, status of frequent flyer program membership, and the time in which the passenger presents him/herself for check-in without advanced seat assignment.

Get up and get off the damn plane when your told to do so....people are booted off flights every day at every airport in the entire world



.

The policy states they may be denied boarding, not that they may be ejected with force after being allowed to board.

 

[shadowdancer]

If the inconvenience will cause the customer a delay of over something like 12 hours they are supposed to offer around $1400. Clearly United is more concerned with getting off cheap.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It was a false economy in the end.

 

[Gunslinging Granny]

This interviewed man states that the assaulted, bleeding guy collapsed at the front of the plane (after he had returned to the plane). That sounds like he had a concussion.
http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2017/04/11/united-flight-passengers-recount-incident-sot.cnn

 

[gitana1]

First of all, this mans occupation, income, past, and family are all completely irrelevant to the situation at hand,

Second of all, I don't know what all the fuss is about, it's all right there in this mans UA ticket agreement....he is agreeing to these terms when he purchases his ticket....


Boarding Priorities - If a flight is Oversold, no one may be denied boarding against his/her will until UA or other carrier personnel first ask for volunteers who will give up their reservations willingly in exchange for compensation as determined by UA. If there are not enough volunteers, other Passengers may be denied boarding involuntarily in accordance with UA’s boarding priority:

• Passengers who are Qualified Individuals with Disabilities, unaccompanied minors under the age of 18 years, or minors between the ages of 5 to 15 years who use the unaccompanied minor service, will be the last to be involuntarily denied boarding if it is determined by UA that such denial would constitute a hardship.
• The priority of all other confirmed passengers may be determined based on a passenger’s fare class, itinerary, status of frequent flyer program membership, and the time in which the passenger presents him/herself for check-in without advanced seat assignment.

Get up and get off the damn plane when your told to do so

Wow. He had already boarded. He wasn't "denied boarding". That would be different. He was yanked off the plane after boarding.

It is very strange. I have noticed a sort of psychology in the US that doesn't exist in other westernized democracies. It's this attitude that people who assert their rights are being jerks but that corporations have the right to do whatever they want with us. Yank us bodily from a plane they purposefully overbooked so their employees can fly? No problem. The guy who booked his flight, paid, got to the airport on time, went through security, found his seat, and got settled- he's a miserable jerk who needs to do as he is told by the business. Because he supposedly "agreed to those terms" (actually he didn't. But let's go with that for a moment.)

But when a person enters into an employment contract which involves a pension, and works for decades assuming he will be entitled to the pension he contracted for, suddenly he is greedy and has "no right" to those benefits, when the business decides to change its terms. I hear people argue that all the time.

I find it strange how much we value and defend businesses over the rights and freedoms of individuals in this country. It's odd.

 

[margarita25]

(O/T, I know a physician who was driving fast down the road in the middle of the night trying to get to a medical emergency at the hospital. He was pulled over for speeding, explained the situation to the cop, and the cop escorted/followed behind him all the way to the hospital. When the doctor got out of surgery, there was a speeding ticket waiting for him. The cop told him, "I understand you're trying to save a life, but you can't take one on the way there."

 

[LaneGirl]

Wow. He had already boarded. He wasn't "denied boarding". That would be different. He was yanked off the plane after boarding.

It is very strange. I have noticed a sort of psychology in the US that doesn't exist in other westernized democracies. It's this attitude that people who assert their rights are being jerks but that corporations have the right to do whatever they want with us. Yank us bodily from a plane they purposefully overbooked so their employees can fly? No problem. The guy who booked his flight, paid, got to the airport on time, went through security, found his seat, and got settled- he's a miserable jerk who needs to do as he is told by the business. Because he supposedly "agreed to those terms" (actually he didn't. But let's go with that for a moment.)

But when a person enters into an employment contract which involves a pension, and works for decades assuming he will be entitled to the pension he contracted for, suddenly he is greedy and has "no right" to those benefits, when the business decides to change its terms. I hear people argue that all the time.

I find it strange how much we value and defend businesses over the rights and freedoms of individuals in this country. It's odd.

I cannot do thanks enough for this post so I'm quoting to thank you again!!!

 

[shadowdancer]

This interview man states that the assaulted, bleeding guy collapsed at the front of the plane (after he had returned to the plane). That sounds like he had a concussion.
http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2017/04/11/united-flight-passengers-recount-incident-sot.cnn

It certainly sounds consistent with concussion, especially combined with the blood from the mouth and the behaviour displayed by the passenger after he returned to the plane.

Of course we will know for sure when the lawsuit is filed and his medical report is submitted as evidence.

 

[Hraefn]

Wow. He had already boarded. He wasn't "denied boarding". That would be different. He was yanked off the plane after boarding.

It is very strange. I have noticed a sort of psychology in the US that doesn't exist in other westernized democracies. It's this attitude that people who assert their rights are being jerks but that corporations have the right to do whatever they want with us. Yank us bodily from a plane they purposefully overbooked so their employees can fly? No problem. The guy who booked his flight, paid, got to the airport on time, went through security, found his seat, and got settled- he's a miserable jerk who needs to do as he is told by the business. Because he supposedly "agreed to those terms" (actually he didn't. But let's go with that for a moment.)

But when a person enters into an employment contract which involves a pension, and works for decades assuming he will be entitled to the pension he contracted for, suddenly he is greedy and has "no right" to those benefits, when the business decides to change its terms. I hear people argue that all the time.

I find it strange how much we value and defend businesses over the rights and freedoms of individuals in this country. It's odd.

Thank you! IMO, any attorney will have a field day if that is the actual policy language. It clearly does not apply to a situation after boarding has occurred. Glad you are here, Gitana.

 

[Cryptic]

Wow. He had already boarded. He wasn't "denied boarding". That would be different. He was yanked off the plane after boarding.

The contract allows the airline to change the travel plans- period. Before boarding or after boarding are not relevant.

I have noticed a sort of psychology in the US that doesn't exist in other westernized democracies. It's this attitude that people who assert their rights are being jerks

I find it strange how much we value and defend businesses over the rights and freedoms of individuals in this country. It's odd.

Nobody has a "right" to fly on a particular flight. Likewise, the man was free not to buy the ticket with a contract allowing changes and also free to charter a private flight where there is no chance of being bumped.

In short, Freedoms of religion, speech, bearing arms, petitioning the government etc are rights. Travelling on a particular flight is not.

 

[Hraefn]

The contract allows the airline to change the travel plans- period. Before boarding or after boarding are not relevant.

Based on the policy language quoted it is very relevant, JMO.

 

[Cryptic]

Based on the policy language quoted it is very relevant, JMO.

Not if 'boarding' is equivelant to 'travel'. My bet is that the fact that he was seated does not preclude him from being bumped.

 

[Cryptic]

I too have been asked, MANY times, to take another flight because of overbooking. I have been offered upgrades and vouchers, as well as money, and at times I've taken them up on it. Other times I have not because sometimes you just get sick and tired of it. This guy sounds like he had a legit reason to not get off the plane. They could have picked someone else. They could have let their own employees stay behind. They could have done a lot of things instead of what they did do - most of all they could have accomplished their motive without knocking the man completely unconscious. That's where the lawsuit comes in.

Whether or not better administrative decisions could have been made are irrelevant. The man signed a contract allowing modifications to be made to travel. The reasons for such modifications can be good, bad, or indifferent. When the man decided to force his way on a plane, he was risked getting hurt. He got hurt, and now blames the big evil company with deep pockets.

 

[shadowdancer]

Whether or not better administrative decisions could have been made are irrelevant. The man signed a contract allowing modifications to be made to travel. The reasons for such modifications can be good, bad, or indifferent. When the man decided to force his way on a plane, he was risked getting hurt. He got hurt, and now blames the big evil company with deep pockets.

Here we go again. You say he forced his way onto the plane, and you have provided no evidence for this, presumably because none exists.