# United forcibly removes customer from it's plane, because they overbooked it.



## Hollowway (Apr 10, 2017)

Check this out. It just popped up on my FB feed. Apparently, United boarded this plane, then realized it was beyond capacity, so they offered travel vouchers for someone to volunteer to get off the plane. When no one volunteered, they chose 4 people at random and told them they HAD to get off the plane. One guy was a doctor who had patients the following morning, and said he couldn't be one to miss the flight. So the airport cops roughed him up and dragged him off. WTF? The airline is too cheap to offer enough compensation to get someone to miss their flight, so they decide that the way to build brand loyalty is to draw blood? Good lord, I thought United was bad before, but this is ridiculous.
http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/35110028/man-is-forcefully-dragged-off-overbooked-united-flight


----------



## USMarine75 (Apr 10, 2017)

Actually they asked and one person volunteered before they boarded, but after boarding they realized they needed 3 more. It was because they had 4 crewmembers that needed to fly to Louisville to crew another flight out of there. 

Also they offered him $800, a hotel, and an upgraded flight.

But yeah, those videos are damning and he has the money to afford a fantastic lawyer that ought to score him free flights for life at this point.


----------



## downburst82 (Apr 10, 2017)

Pretty ridiculous situation....but he should have gotten off the plane once the air marshalls intervened and asked him to get off. (To clarify he should never have been asked to get off in the first place but once its escalated to armed security asking you to leave the plane...just leave the plane. Absolutely doesnt excuse what happened after)

United is already playing the "well...we arent the ones who actually removed him..so its not our fault it went so badly" Card.

Im sure he will sue...im sure he will win...and im sure United will get another huge government bailout in a few years because they dont know how to run a buisness.


----------



## Hollowway (Apr 10, 2017)

Yeah, so many hints went wrong. For one, they should have realized they needed 3 more seats before boarding. If only they had computers to track that sort of thing....
And the simplest solution would have been to offer progressively more of enticing vouchers. Even if they didn't drag him off the plane, how would kicking someone off a plane develop more goodwill than spending another $200? And this, after recently refusing to allow two 10 year old girls on a United flight because they were wearing leggings. United has been a ....ty airline since I can remember, and they're not getting better. This is the same airline that refused to pay for that guy's $1200 guitar they crushed, and got a crapload of heat for it.


----------



## mongey (Apr 10, 2017)

this story is getting worldwide coverage. its been on our news here.

complete overkill and I hope the guy gets a big pay day but that said , right now with whats going on in the world air marshals are not going to mess around


----------



## narad (Apr 11, 2017)

I hear it's getting really harsh criticism in China.

But yea, if you're going to treat this like a business transaction I feel like they should be obliged to take it to the market and just keep increasing their offer until people relinquish their seats to accept it (or the flight becomes unprofitable and is cancelled, as a corner case). Like honestly, $800 and a free flight is not at all worth the inconvenience for most people. $2400 and 3 free flights and I'm outta there.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Apr 11, 2017)

narad said:


> J-custom funds and return Japan flights and I'm outta there.



"translated"


----------



## bostjan (Apr 11, 2017)

As someone who travels by air 5-6 times per year for work, I'm not surprised.

I refuse to patronize United already, because I have been duped into volunteering a seat before.

The hotel voucher they gave me was bull..... It didn't get me a free room at the very specific hotel it stated, just a "discount," which ended up being bull...., since the guy in front of me in line to check in paid the same amount I paid for the room, and he didn't have a voucher.

They also promised to upgrade me to business class, a promise they renegged later.

So, in that instance, by volunteering to give up my seat, I got nothing but the inconvenience of a later flight and having to pay for a hotel, which I was tricked into using.

That was 3 or 4 years ago, and I have not flown with them since then. I've had good luck with Southwest, Delta, and even American. It's kind of a big deal for me, since we have such a limit on choices here in BFE.


----------



## vilk (Apr 11, 2017)

Do air marshal's have to do whatever the airline says? Like, I thought they were federal employees or some form of law enforcement officer. If a guy working a hotdog stand sells some guy a dog and then turns to a cop and says "Take back that hotdog!" the cop doesn't have to do that sh/t, either because it's illegal or it's not part of their job description.

So are air marshals really just privately employed bouncers or what?


----------



## bostjan (Apr 11, 2017)

vilk said:


> Do air marshal's have to do whatever the airline says? Like, I thought they were federal employees or some form of law enforcement officer. If a guy working a hotdog stand sells some guy a dog and then turns to a cop and says "Take back that hotdog!" the cop doesn't have to do that sh/t, either because it's illegal or it's not part of their job description.
> 
> So are air marshals really just privately employed bouncers or what?



I sense you are asking a rhetorical question. 

Since 911, though, federal law has made flight crews the judge jury and executioner in the cabin.

The logistics of air travel are nightmarish. People need to get from A to B, but, usually, the cheapest way is to stop off at C, which may be along the way, but often is not. To top that off, planes and crews need to move around independently, and any kink-up in that plan causes a gridlock.

But, think about this for a second: We are trusting the same people to figure out hellish logistics of air travel as came up with the brilliant plan of seating people in the cabin starting with those closest to the door and working back. That's actually been verified by MIT's Mathematical Operations department as the _*worst*_ way to seat people, and that they could save ~20 min per flight by seating people in window seats first, from back to front.


----------



## narad (Apr 11, 2017)

Lorcan Ward said:


> "translated"



Pretty much but I'm more into Sugi and T's Guitars now. And I leave for Japan on Sunday...


----------



## Rachmaninoff (Apr 11, 2017)

downburst82 said:


> Im sure he will sue...im sure he will win...and im sure United will get another huge government bailout in a few years because they dont know how to run a buisness.



Pretty much this.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Apr 11, 2017)

bostjan said:


> I sense you are asking a rhetorical question.
> 
> Since 911, though, federal law has made flight crews the judge jury and executioner in the cabin.
> 
> ...



i think it's been proven that doing it completely randomly would be better then what they use on

on the topic of the air marshals...i think if the airline crew is like there is someone being dangerous on a plane....they don't really take the time to be like ok are you sure? let me see a video of his behavior...they just jump into action. which is good and bad?


----------



## Womb raider (Apr 11, 2017)

bostjan said:


> But, think about this for a second: We are trusting the same people to figure out hellish logistics of air travel as came up with the brilliant plan of seating people in the cabin starting with those closest to the door and working back. That's actually been verified by MIT's Mathematical Operations department as the _*worst*_ way to seat people, and that they could save ~20 min per flight by seating people in window seats first, from back to front.



I think this may be changing depending on what airline you take. I recently took a flight on Alaska Air who, after boarding first class started from the back and worked their way to the front of the cabin. Flight was jam packed but it took less than half the time to board since less people were clogging up the aisles. 

In any case, United is up sh!ts creek. They already had a terrible reputation and the CEO pretty much condoning this action could be a death sentence. They literally could have upped their offer to 1,500 for a few volunteers and this would have never happened. As it is, their stock is tanking and who knows how much in long term sales this will affect them. Probably will cost them close to a half a billion or more when it's all said and done. Just dumb


----------



## bostjan (Apr 11, 2017)

diagrammatiks said:


> i think it's been proven that doing it completely randomly would be better then what they use on
> 
> on the topic of the air marshals...i think if the airline crew is like there is someone being dangerous on a plane....they don't really take the time to be like ok are you sure? let me see a video of his behavior...they just jump into action. which is good and bad?



Well, that's the trouble with cop mentality in the USA. We see it all of the time with these "SWAT prank videos," where the police show up and start kicking ass, then stop to ask questions when everyone is bleeding on the floor trying to wipe the tear gas out of their eyes. None of that is ever really necessary.

If the cops just jump into action, guns blazing, at the first report of something dangerous, then it'd become too easy to kill someone, just by reporting them to the police and letting the police take care of them.

Anyway, in this case, we obviously don't know the entire situation. It's easy enough to judge the company from a short clip of the last few moments of a conflict. In my case, I've already dealt with this company, so I think I can say that I know first hand how they operate.


----------



## SwingMachine (Apr 11, 2017)

Anyone remember this? The bad publicity they got from just this situation caused an 11% drop in their stock value, roughly $180,000,000.

You would think that eventually an airline would learn from their mistakes.


----------



## narad (Apr 11, 2017)

bostjan said:


> the brilliant plan of seating people in the cabin starting with those closest to the door and working back. That's actually been verified by MIT's Mathematical Operations department as the _*worst*_ way to seat people, and that they could save ~20 min per flight by seating people in window seats first, from back to front.



It's only an equivalent logistics problem if all people are treated equally. I thought the whole purpose of that style of boarding was so that us plebs had to look at all the cozy business class people sprawled out in their mega chairs right before we're elbowing each other to get the last remaining nearby overhead.


----------



## bostjan (Apr 11, 2017)

narad said:


> It's only an equivalent logistics problem if all people are treated equally. I thought the whole purpose of that style of boarding was so that us plebs had to look at all the cozy business class people sprawled out in their mega chairs right before we're elbowing each other to get the last remaining nearby overhead.



It could be, but that strategy is not very good marketing. I'd honestly rather fly Southwest than any of those conventional carriers, simply for the fact that I can get on and off the aircraft much more quickly.

And, in terms of overhead luggage space, the reason there never is any is because people bring way too much .... with them into the cabin. It's supposed to be space enough for a medium sized duffel bag, not for a gigantic suitcase or rollerboard. I'd love to see each seat have an assigned overhead space, and if your .... doesn't fit in your assigned overhead space, then you need to either check your bag or buy an extra seat for your bag.


----------



## coreysMonster (Apr 11, 2017)

I think it's pretty clear that United employees chose the worst possible way of dealing with the guy not wanting to get off the plane (regardless of whether or not he was offered a "fair" reimbursement). They could've just offered more money until somebody else felt it was worth their while. But no, now they've got a PR crisis on their hands, in both the US and China.

Also, they've dug up dirt on his past, that he plays poker and got convicted for drugs, and are trying to smear him as a trouble-maker like that somehow invalidates the video footage of them literally knocking out a paying passenger.


----------



## lemeker (Apr 12, 2017)

I'm flying United out of Chicago at the end of the month, kinda concerned now.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 12, 2017)

*Friendly reminder that this isn't OT, but P&CE. Please keep the discussion free of memes and the like.*


----------



## cwhitey2 (Apr 12, 2017)

This is the exact reason why I fly Southwest anymore.


On my last flight they kicked the 'extra' flight attendants off to fit more paying customers on the flight.

Maybe United could learn a thing or 2 from Southwest.


----------



## bostjan (Apr 27, 2017)

In a related story: Man kicked off aircraft for bathroom emergency

Cliffs notes version: This man needed to go to the bathroom. The flight attendant told him to hold it. 30± minutes later, the man told the flight attendant it was an emergency and he could no longer hold it, and rushed to the bathroom. When he tried to return to his seat, he was told that he was removed from the flight. The aircraft returned to the gate. The FBI was waiting to arrest the man, but ultimately decided not to do so, because he was compliant. The rest of the passengers had to deplane and be seated again after further delay at the gate.

So, first off, I really feel bad for this guy. I think this has to be the most sympathetic story I've heard along these lines. Put yourself in his shoes. What is he going to do? Relieve himself in his pants? Then they'd have to evacuate the aircraft and delay for cabin decontamination. No- this guy was figuratively between a rock and a hard place, with no option. I guess you could say that he should have went before boarding, but honestly, with all of the airlines herding people hither and yon and waiting so long on the tarmac, it's understandable.


----------



## Overtone (Apr 29, 2017)

I've done that before. Somehow the carbon monoxide detector in the bathroom went off and the flight attendant was knocking on the door and accusing me of smoking. When I got out everyone was staring but then I just sat down. I'm sure it's happened thousands of times before without incident. Makes you wonder how the airline-passenger relationship has gotten so strained and tense. I noticed the same thing about flying with guitars becoming more difficult. I think that charging for the first checked bag just set off changes that have made the whole boarding process more stressful for everyone involved and things are reaching a climax.


----------



## Hollowway (Apr 29, 2017)

Yeah, I have absolutely no idea why they charge for checked bags, but not carry ons. Boarding would be so much faster and less stressful if they only allowed a purse or computer bag as a carry on, and charged for anything else.


----------



## flint757 (Apr 29, 2017)

Some airlines do charge for a carry-on and I refuse to take those flights.

I flew out to Chicago last week. The seats on planes feel like they've gotten smaller. I'm not a big dude and it was a struggle getting my bag under my seat and the seat belt on. It's capitalism gone mad. The search by airlines to make higher and higher profit margins packing everyone in like sardines. 

Also, it's not the carry-on that holds up flights, it's the fact that they load planes from front-to-back rather than back-to-front. Trying to give 'elite' customers the 'superior' experience. If they loaded back-to-front nobody would be in the way to hold up boarding.


----------



## narad (Apr 30, 2017)

Yea, one of the few times I feel a class divide in the US is when I'm flying. Even when international airlines offer this sort of thing, for many I don't feel it is as extreme. In the US you sit around for forever for like 3 tiers of premium travelers.


----------



## cwhitey2 (Apr 30, 2017)

flint757 said:


> Some airlines do charge for a carry-on and I refuse to take those flights.
> 
> I flew out to Chicago last week. The seats on planes feel like they've gotten smaller. I'm not a big dude and it was a struggle getting my bag under my seat and the seat belt on. It's capitalism gone mad. The search by airlines to make higher and higher profit margins packing everyone in like sardines.
> 
> Also, it's not the carry-on that holds up flights, it's the fact that they load planes from front-to-back rather than back-to-front. Trying to give 'elite' customers the 'superior' experience. If they loaded back-to-front nobody would be in the way to hold up boarding.



I totally agree with the seat size statement. Im 6'8". I hate planes. But you know what hate more....someone 5'2" who wants to sit in an emergency row because they want room. 


Anymore i just get wasted on plane fights to forget I'm even there


----------



## flint757 (Apr 30, 2017)

narad said:


> Yea, one of the few times I feel a class divide in the US is when I'm flying. Even when international airlines offer this sort of thing, for many I don't feel it is as extreme. In the US you sit around for forever for like 3 tiers of premium travelers.



I feel it elsewhere as well, but it is definitely most apparent in the flying process for sure.

Here's this little nugget of classism that happened a couple of days ago as well.



> Pending finalized contract negotiations, American Airlines will increase its payment of pilots and flight attendants by a total of nearly $1 billion over the next three years, according to a report by the Associated Press. American Airlines hopes this will quell employee discontent at the fact that their pay tends to be lower than that of employees at competing airlines.
> 
> After the plan was announced on Thursday, American Airline Group Inc.s stock dropped by 5.2 percent, reaching $43.98.
> 
> ...



http://www.salon.com/2017/04/28/labor-is-being-paid-first-again-american-airlines-investors-complain-after-company-gives-pilots-and-flight-attendants-raises/

The company does something right for their employees, and likely long-term investing as well, but it just isn't good enough for those millionaire/billionaire investors. They'd rather we all starve to death, but keep working just as hard so that they can continue to rake in profit every quarter while they insist every company cut 'costs' (AKA employees, wages, benefits, holiday mixers, unpaid overtime, etc.).

If we don't get a handle on this sort of attitude this country is going to crash hard eventually.


----------



## bostjan (May 1, 2017)

The air travel industry is a service industry.

How they treat their passengers is really the #1 deciding factor.

The idea that all service providers are horrible might just get people to use Greyhound more. 

I work with folks who might travel to Seattle or Idaho or Minneapolis, or even Wisconsin, and prefer to drive to Montreal, fly to the nearest Canadian airport and drive back across the border in a rental car. That says a lot, considering the hassle of crossing the boarder twice and having to explain that it's simply to avoid using US air carriers.


----------



## Hollowway (May 13, 2017)

Ah, United, it's just in your DNA, as they say.

http://alternativemediasyndicate.co...cebook&utm_campaign=FB_Biz_Part&utm_medium=FB


----------



## bostjan (May 15, 2017)

There is a "traveller's bill of rights." I suppose there is no enforcement of it, although it does not explicitly state anything about bathroom accommodations. I suppose it used to go without saying that if you were flying somewhere, you needed to be prepared to not have bathroom access for three or more hours when you board the aircraft.

Maybe we should bring back passenger blimps.


----------



## Overtone (May 16, 2017)

bostjan said:


> There is a "traveller's bill of rights." I suppose there is no enforcement of it, although it does not explicitly state anything about bathroom accommodations. I suppose it used to go without saying that if you were flying somewhere, you needed to be prepared to not have bathroom access for three or more hours when you board the aircraft.
> 
> Maybe we should bring back passenger blimps.




I genuinely think that there are situations where traveling by blimp would be ideal. Imagine a "cruise ship" kind of deal where you fly over the southwest and make stops along the way, but also just kick back with a cocktail and enjoy the expansive views.


----------



## vilk (May 16, 2017)

Most people can barely afford the cheapest mode of air travel available to us, so I don't see an extra-luxury version of it taking off. At least not among anyone who isn't already able to fly first class as they please.







If it costs 5-6 grand for just enough room to stretch your legs, could you imagine how much it would be to get on Indy's blimp there? Like 10, 15 thousand?


edit: OK I think that most of my image of the cost of flying is skewed because the place I've flown to the most is Japan which is probably one of longer and more expensive flights out there. I've paid $2,400 for the cheapest line, economy class, with two layovers.


----------



## bostjan (May 16, 2017)

vilk said:


> People can barely afford the cheapest mode of air travel available to us, so I don't see an extra-luxury version of it taking off. At least not among anyone who isn't already able to fly first class as they please.



But what better way to widen the class divide than to take those people out of first class jet travel and place them on high tech blimps? Then they can take the bathrooms off of jets completely.


----------



## Hollowway (May 16, 2017)

bostjan said:


> But what better way to widen the class divide than to take those people out of first class jet travel and place them on high tech blimps? Then they can take the bathrooms off of jets completely.



 Careful, they might hear you! They won't take the bathrooms off the jets, though. They'll just sell them as an extra seat. No bag storage, but it has a privacy door!


----------

