Anyone know jack shit about the airline industry?

Alieberman · Post by **Alieberman** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 9:49 am

PHXCATS wrote:
Alieberman wrote:
MrBug708 wrote:
Alieberman wrote:Once you are sitting on that plane, I would never give it up either. The airline needs to figure their shit out before passengers are sitting in their seats.

I never understand how people / companies continue to do things like this, when we are in the age of smart phones / twitter.
I get being upset with United for overbooking. I get people saying they'd never fly United for not offering more for a customer to leave. Heck, if I was booted from a flight, I'd never fly that airline again.

But that guy has no right to sit on that plane. He was trespassing. He was belligerent. You can argue that the response was way over-the-top, but that sometimes happens when you put yourself in a violent confrontation in a closed space.

At point, what do you think should happen? That if you just say no you can fly wherever you want? That someone else has to get kicked off? It's a shitty situation to boot someone from a flight but someone had to go in that situation. This guy got the short end of the stick.

I guess it is good to have a little public outrage over the way airlines treat people. But those poor other passengers who just left their seats like normal people before the incident, and had their own lives disrupted, aren't going to get the settlement this guy probably will all because they followed the rules.
I am so confused by this. Trespassing? WTF are you talking about?

He bought a seat. His ticket was honored. He went through the boarding process and United welcomed him onto the plane... then they decided to kick him off.... after they sat him in his seat. How is this trespassing?
I believe in the agreement you say you read and agree to but never do that they can bump you at any time for any reason.

That may be true, but this is done and settled 99% of the time... before anyone gets on the plane. It is done at the ticket desk... not on the plane, and for good reason... because if not, incidents like these would take place every day.

84Cat · Post by **84Cat** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 12:52 pm

Oops!

A little too late jackass

ASUHATER! · Post by **ASUHATER!** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 12:55 pm

With the payout this guy is going to get, I'd absolutely make a scene and get roughed up by cops taking me off a plane.

TucsonClip · Post by **TucsonClip** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 1:40 pm

http://www.tmz.com/2017/04/11/united-ai ... drugs-sex/

PHXCATS · Post by **PHXCATS** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 1:42 pm

United should have just said they weren't moving until this guy got off and that if he didn't they would sue him.

He did not deserve to be roughed up like he was but he was completely at fault legally until the police touched him.

MrBug708 · Post by **MrBug708** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 2:21 pm

84Cat wrote:Oops!

A little too late jackass

5 days ago it opened at 70.25 and it's at 70.77 right now. Could have bought it last June for 37.75 even. They not only survived the shit storm this morning, the stock went up.

MrBug708 · Post by **MrBug708** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 2:23 pm

That may be true, but this is done and settled 99% of the time... before anyone gets on the plane. It is done at the ticket desk... not on the plane, and for good reason... because if not, incidents like these would take place every day.

https://mobile.twitter.com/NateSilver53 ... 6301559808" target="_blank

84Cat · Post by **84Cat** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 2:41 pm

No column for assault on that list.

Alieberman · Post by **Alieberman** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:48 pm

PHXCATS wrote:United should have just said they weren't moving until this guy got off and that if he didn't they would sue him.

He did not deserve to be roughed up like he was but he was completely at fault legally until the police touched him.

So you would be ok if you checked into a hotel and while you were already in the room, the hotel staff decided to kick you out of the room because the manager's family needed a room?

Or you and your family were seated at a restaurant.... ordered your food and then the waiter told you that you had to leave because the owner decided to stop by with his friends and they wanted your table?

This is ridiculous.

scumdevils86 · Post by **scumdevils86** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:58 pm

I agree with you lieb buuuut your scenario with the hotel makes no sense. The hotel managers family isn't using the room to get to work to staff another hotel 2000 miles away.

PHXCATS · Post by **PHXCATS** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:07 pm

Alieberman wrote:
PHXCATS wrote:United should have just said they weren't moving until this guy got off and that if he didn't they would sue him.

He did not deserve to be roughed up like he was but he was completely at fault legally until the police touched him.
So you would be ok if you checked into a hotel and while you were already in the room, the hotel staff decided to kick you out of the room because the manager's family needed a room?

Or you and your family were seated at a restaurant.... ordered your food and then the waiter told you that you had to leave because the owner decided to stop by with his friends and they wanted your table?

This is ridiculous.

I do not agree to allowing the hotel or restaurant do so when I get a hotel room or purchase a meal but I do when I buy an airline ticket.

United is completely wrong for letting him board and letting it get that far and for how he was removed, but he did agree to their rules. Just like the leggings girl.

MrBug708 · Post by **MrBug708** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:07 pm

Alieberman wrote:
PHXCATS wrote:United should have just said they weren't moving until this guy got off and that if he didn't they would sue him.

He did not deserve to be roughed up like he was but he was completely at fault legally until the police touched him.
So you would be ok if you checked into a hotel and while you were already in the room, the hotel staff decided to kick you out of the room because the manager's family needed a room?

Or you and your family were seated at a restaurant.... ordered your food and then the waiter told you that you had to leave because the owner decided to stop by with his friends and they wanted your table?

This is ridiculous.

Is there a union contract as part of it?

Being forced the change rooms at odd hours isn't unheard of it. If you don't move, they generally call security or cops.

Not quite the hospital in hospitality, but close enough

PHXCATS · Post by **PHXCATS** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:12 pm

I wonder what the penalty is for breaking the rule for how much you can compensate someone for being bumped. I am sure the fine if there is one is far far far less than the damage this caused.

JMarkJohns · Post by **JMarkJohns** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:17 pm

What happens if the random selectee is the parent of a child on the plane, or the child of a parent on the plane?

It sucks this happened, but clearly there are significant holes in the process for removal which aren't even needed if they fixed the holes in the process overall.

PHXCATS · Post by **PHXCATS** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:20 pm

JMarkJohns wrote:What happens if the random selectee is the parent of a child on the plane, or the child of a parent on the plane?

It sucks this happened, but clearly there are significant holes in the process for removal which aren't even needed if they fixed the holes in the process overall.

I heard an aviation expert on the radio today. Said it is not a true random selection. Miles flown with that airline, connecting flight, combined purchases (family), military, minors, etc. are all factored in. The doctor was the third and his wife was the fourth selected.

legallykenny · Post by **legallykenny** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:40 pm

JMarkJohns wrote:What happens if the random selectee is the parent of a child on the plane, or the child of a parent on the plane?

It sucks this happened, but clearly there are significant holes in the process for removal which aren't even needed if they fixed the holes in the process overall.

It's not random. They select based on fares paid and date ticket was purchased and stuff like that. I'm sure their policy prohibits breaking up parents with minors and probably avoids breaking up groups who bought tickets together.

MrBug708 · Post by **MrBug708** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:42 pm

PHXCATS wrote:
JMarkJohns wrote:What happens if the random selectee is the parent of a child on the plane, or the child of a parent on the plane?

It sucks this happened, but clearly there are significant holes in the process for removal which aren't even needed if they fixed the holes in the process overall.
I heard an aviation expert on the radio today. Said it is not a true random selection. Miles flown with that airline, connecting flight, combined purchases (family), military, minors, etc. are all factored in. The doctor was the third and his wife was the fourth selected.

Are you saying that booking it through priceline.com probably doesn't get you very high on the list?

ASUHATER! · Post by **ASUHATER!** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 5:24 pm

legallykenny wrote:
JMarkJohns wrote:What happens if the random selectee is the parent of a child on the plane, or the child of a parent on the plane?

It sucks this happened, but clearly there are significant holes in the process for removal which aren't even needed if they fixed the holes in the process overall.
It's not random. They select based on fares paid and date ticket was purchased and stuff like that. I'm sure their policy prohibits breaking up parents with minors and probably avoids breaking up groups who bought tickets together.

Yep. It's definitely not random. First to be bumped off are non revs usually.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 5:48 pm

I think the real analogy is if you went out to dinner, and after you ordered, the server delivered you a check, and told you to pay and vacate the table immediately, and informed you that you were welcome to pick up your food as a take-out order at 2:30 PM the following day. And then you disagree with that arrangement and they call the cops, who smash your face into your empty salad place and drag out with your shirt pulled over your head.

Wouldn't happen in a restaurant, but it's supposedly okay on an airplane.

ASUHATER! · Post by **ASUHATER!** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 5:51 pm

Longhorned wrote:I think the real analogy is if you went out to dinner, and after you ordered, the server delivered you a check, and told you to pay and vacate the table immediately, and informed you that you were welcome to pick up your food as a take-out order at 2:30 PM the following day. And then you disagree with that arrangement and they call the cops, who smash your face into your empty salad place and drag out with your shirt pulled over your head.

Wouldn't happen in a restaurant, but it's supposedly okay on an airplane.

Airlines and restaurants operate completely diffently. So not a great analogy.

84Cat · Post by **84Cat** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 5:58 pm

They were from a security company, not cops

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 6:07 pm

ASUHATER! wrote:
Longhorned wrote:I think the real analogy is if you went out to dinner, and after you ordered, the server delivered you a check, and told you to pay and vacate the table immediately, and informed you that you were welcome to pick up your food as a take-out order at 2:30 PM the following day. And then you disagree with that arrangement and they call the cops, who smash your face into your empty salad place and drag out with your shirt pulled over your head.

Wouldn't happen in a restaurant, but it's supposedly okay on an airplane.
Airlines and restaurants operate completely diffently. So not a great analogy.

That's precisely why it's a great analogy. The poignant observation is that it's somehow acceptable for U.S. carriers to operate in ways that would never be tolerated in any other industry.

ASUHATER! · Post by **ASUHATER!** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 6:11 pm

It all comes down to them maximizing the number of full seats they have on planes. They have whole departments dedicated to the analysis of flight loads and patterns to determine if and how much they can overbook by so that they can make sure they go out with full planes every time.

Every other industry does the exact same thing...Determine how they can sell the most of what they sell.

NYCat · Post by **NYCat** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 6:14 pm

TucsonClip wrote:http://www.tmz.com/2017/04/11/united-ai ... drugs-sex/

PHXCATS · Post by **PHXCATS** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 6:20 pm

Longhorned wrote:
ASUHATER! wrote:
Longhorned wrote:I think the real analogy is if you went out to dinner, and after you ordered, the server delivered you a check, and told you to pay and vacate the table immediately, and informed you that you were welcome to pick up your food as a take-out order at 2:30 PM the following day. And then you disagree with that arrangement and they call the cops, who smash your face into your empty salad place and drag out with your shirt pulled over your head.

Wouldn't happen in a restaurant, but it's supposedly okay on an airplane.
Airlines and restaurants operate completely diffently. So not a great analogy.
That's precisely why it's a great analogy. The poignant observation is that it's somehow acceptable for U.S. carriers to operate in ways that would never be tolerated in any other industry.

This is absolutely an awful analogy. You agree to let them kick you off for no reason when you buy a ticket.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 6:58 pm

PHXCATS wrote:
Longhorned wrote:
ASUHATER! wrote:
Longhorned wrote:I think the real analogy is if you went out to dinner, and after you ordered, the server delivered you a check, and told you to pay and vacate the table immediately, and informed you that you were welcome to pick up your food as a take-out order at 2:30 PM the following day. And then you disagree with that arrangement and they call the cops, who smash your face into your empty salad place and drag out with your shirt pulled over your head.

Wouldn't happen in a restaurant, but it's supposedly okay on an airplane.
Airlines and restaurants operate completely diffently. So not a great analogy.
That's precisely why it's a great analogy. The poignant observation is that it's somehow acceptable for U.S. carriers to operate in ways that would never be tolerated in any other industry.
This is absolutely an awful analogy. You agree to let them kick you off for no reason when you buy a ticket.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're referring to the customer agreement, which renounces a customer's rights when purchasing a ticket with a U.S. carrier. In Europe, by contrast, a customer's rights not to get jerked around by a carrier's policies are protected. This is what I mean by it being somehow tolerable for U.S. carriers to operate in ways that should otherwise be considered unacceptable.

Back to great analogy.

CalStateTempe · Post by **CalStateTempe** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 8:08 pm

Like most things in life, Europe is incredibly pro-consumer at the expense of the corporation.

http://www.airpassengerrights.eu/en/" target="_blank

Same goes with regulations of toxins in food. In Europe, the burden is to prove it is safe, in the US it's to prove no harm. When you think about those are too very different thresholds/philosophies.

Post by **UAdevil** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 8:12 pm

They can deny you for any reason, they cannot however kick you off after boarding due to overbooking. It is illegal in fact and United may see a fine.

MrBug708 · Post by **MrBug708** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 8:19 pm

UAdevil wrote:They can deny you for any reason, they cannot however kick you off after boarding due to overbooking. It is illegal in fact and United may see a fine.

I have yet to see anything to the contrary. Do you have a source/link

ASUHATER! · Post by **ASUHATER!** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 8:22 pm

UAdevil wrote:They can deny you for any reason, they cannot however kick you off after boarding due to overbooking. It is illegal in fact and United may see a fine.

Incorrect. It is absolutely legal to remove people after boarding. As long as the plane is at the gate it is considered a denied boarding and people can be bumped off.

Post by **UAdevil** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 8:27 pm

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/united- ... passenger/" target="_blank

Under a federal rule [14 CFR 253], commercial airlines are governed by a document known as a “Contract of Carriage” [COC], a legally binding contract which, among other things, protects the legal rights of passengers, and imposes legal duties upon carriers. United’s COC contains two distinct sections: Rule 21 entitled “Refusal of Transport,” and Rule 25 entitled “Denied Boarding Compensation.”

ASUHATER! · Post by **ASUHATER!** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 8:37 pm

And part of that contract of carriage is that you can be bumped as long as you're at the gate. I've been bumped while sitting in my seat before. It's legal.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 8:39 pm

I think the lesson here is that when someone "in charge" tells you to punch yourself in the dick, the only response is "how hard?"

ASUHATER! · Post by **ASUHATER!** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 8:44 pm

Chicat wrote:I think the lesson here is that when someone "in charge" tells you to punch yourself in the dick, the only response is "how hard?"

I hate that that's true but it sadly is anymore. In this situation united went way overboard in how they removed the guy from the plane...But they were 100% in the right legally to be able to remove him. Guy kinda made it worse on himself by hiding in the plane and running around as well. But still, very poorly handled by united

Post by **UAdevil** » Tue Apr 11, 2017 8:47 pm

"Once someone in possession of a valid ticket has been seated – whether on an airplane, a train or bus, or at the symphony – he cannot be ordered to give up that which he has a valid contractual right to enjoy, simply because his seat is needed for someone else.

While it is of course permissible to remove a seated person is such a situation for unruly behavior, drunkenness, to deal with a medical emergency, etc. – as spelled out here in United’s Rule 21 – simple over booking can only be dealt with by denying boarding originally, pursuant to United’s Rule 25."

John F. Banzhaf III is a professor of public interest law at the George Washington University Law School.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 5:46 am

A big part of the problem is the culture of flying in the US. It hits all of your senses immediately upon arriving at a US airport from abroad. You go from being treated like a human being to being treated like a farm animal. Americans have largely accepted that they are, indeed, farm animals and should be treated as such. I mean, look at the food Americans eat. Look at who they elect to govern their country. Of course they're going to allow themselves to be dicked around by US carriers.

MrBug708 · Post by **MrBug708** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 6:07 am

Looks like the press release criminal records about the wrong guy.

HiCat · Post by **HiCat** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 6:26 am

MrBug708 wrote:Looks like the press release criminal records about the wrong guy.

Humor?

side note:
Hey Bug, are you a fan of LaVar? Just wondering

MrBug708 · Post by **MrBug708** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 6:33 am

press released

Not really.

MrBug708 · Post by **MrBug708** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 7:22 am

http://m.tmz.com/#article/2017/04/12/un ... ane-video/" target="_blank

JMarkJohns · Post by **JMarkJohns** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:08 am

MrBug708 wrote:Looks like the press release criminal records about the wrong guy.

Where are you seeing this?

MrBug708 · Post by **MrBug708** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:10 am

JMarkJohns wrote:
MrBug708 wrote:Looks like the press release criminal records about the wrong guy.
Where are you seeing this?

Saw it on google. It seems there might be two doctors with the same name

HiCat · Post by **HiCat** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:26 am

United may have smeared the wrong "Dr. David Dao"
It turns out there are two Dr. David Daos, one with a criminal past, one without.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10028922181" target="_blank

Merkin · Post by **Merkin** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:44 am

MrBug708 wrote:Looks like the press release criminal records about the wrong guy.

In any event.

PHXCATS · Post by **PHXCATS** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 12:48 pm

I asked earlier and I am genuinely interested in what you all think.

What should the security guys and United have done when they "randomly chose" this doctor to be reassigned and he refused for a long period of time?

Forget the many wrongs of United prior to that.

azgreg · Post by **azgreg** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 1:19 pm

PHXCATS wrote:I asked earlier and I am genuinely interested in what you all think.

What should the security guys and United have done when they "randomly chose" this doctor to be reassigned and he refused for a long period of time?

Forget the many wrongs of United prior to that.

NYCat · Post by **NYCat** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 1:23 pm

JMarkJohns · Post by **JMarkJohns** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 1:26 pm

This identity mix up is confusing. Seems like the court documents filed today using the middle initials of the victim indicate he is the Dao with prior convictions and poker winnings. Not that it matters. But the names seem to line up that reports on him, while unnecessary and not pertinent to his victim status, were not slanderous.

CalStateTempe · Post by **CalStateTempe** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 2:37 pm

If there is was an issue with identifying the wrong Dao, add a defamation of character lawsuit to the mix.

If not, dude's license is at stake. If there is one thing physician health programs don't like, it's publicity. If this guy went through one and then was reinstated only for everything to come to light in this manner...not good. Especially if he was hospilizated and if there is anything alcohol or worse in his system...goodbye ability to practice.

JMarkJohns · Post by **JMarkJohns** » Wed Apr 12, 2017 4:51 pm

CalStateTempe wrote:If there is was an issue with identifying the wrong Dao, add a defamation of character lawsuit to the mix.

If not, dude's license is at stake. If there is one thing physician health programs don't like, it's publicity. If this guy went through one and then was reinstated only for everything to come to light in this manner...not good. Especially if he was hospilizated and if there is anything alcohol or worse in his system...goodbye ability to practice.

The good news is if he is the troubled Dao, United is backing his stake in a retirement-long poker match, where apparently the troubled Dao doesn't have much trouble.

Login • Register