Did United Airlines have any other choice than to eject that passenger?

[whichphilosophy]

They applied their policies, and it has cost them a fucking massive fortune already, with more cost almost certainly coming.

But only because a lynch-mob of hysterical idiots have been whipped up into a frenzy over the incident.

Their guidelines are best for the sake of saving cost and serving the customers, as long as everyone follows the rules. But the unpredictable cost of a passenger disobeying the rules and going bezirk and causing a scene is not due to anything wrong about the guidelines. The company has no way to predict when such a fluke incident will happen.

If direct observation isn't proof enough for you, then nothing is. When you drop a brick on your toe, you cease to need assumptions about whether or not bricks are affected by gravity.

But you're observing what happened AFTER the fluke event with this abnormal passenger. How could they have predicted that he would refuse to cooperate? They had no reason to make such a prediction. They assumed he was a normal passenger who would comply with the rules like all the others. Why should they not have assumed this?

Airlines have to be competitive where service is a key factor, sometimes over price. There are also airlines rules and a way in dealing with people.

Without the full facts of the case I do know the passenger was allowed to check in and asked to leave while he was on the plane.
It is much easier to advise a passenger his seat is no longer available at the check out desk. Some bottom dollar economy tickets may not provide much in compensation except a tin foil snack or a meal voucher.

This is an interesting article.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ules-airlines-bumping-passengers-overselling/

Federal rules spell out how much the airline must pay each passenger who is forced off a flight. Airlines must give bumped passengers a written statement that explains their compensation rights.

However tens of thousands lose their seats and are 'bumped' but are generally given compensation.

I myself refused to be taken off a flight first which turned out to have a seat (Shanghai Airport)and then on a connection flight (Paris en route to Caracas). The flight was cancelled by the Air France Shanghai office and not the Paris office. I was given a flight.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's not ad-hoc. It's been a established procedure for years, and I'm not sure what percentage of flights I've gone to where they ask for people to voluntary their seat assignment. Do people know that if they don't find a volunteer that someone might be picked to not get on the flight? The DOT even gives instructions on how not to be IDBed.

You have still failed to show that it's been "established procedure for years" to involuntarily and violently remove an innocent paying passenger from an airplane after the airline personnel having already boarded said passenger onto the airplane.

Repeating your mantra about bumpings at the gate will never ever make it apply to this situation.

We have rules and regulations, but the airlines are dealing with individuals and if there is a court case the doctrine of Clean Hands would apply, namely if the airline acted inequitably towards the passenger. There could have been other passengers. I would possibly have re booked if I was given a free additional ticket plus hotel and compensation.

This is a good article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ules-airlines-bumping-passengers-overselling/

 

[Keith&Co.]

This is a good article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ules-airlines-bumping-passengers-overselling/

...except for the fact that this was NOT an overbooking situation.
And

When voluntary offers don't work, the airlines can deny boarding - or "bump" passengers against their will. That appears to be what happened before Sunday night's United flight from Chicago to Louisville, Kentucky.

United did not 'deny boarding' Dr. Dao. They boarded him.
The article DOES have many numbers and statistics, but is not really advancing the conversation at this point.

 

[coloradoatheist]

...except for the fact that this was NOT an overbooking situation.
And

When voluntary offers don't work, the airlines can deny boarding - or "bump" passengers against their will. That appears to be what happened before Sunday night's United flight from Chicago to Louisville, Kentucky.

United did not 'deny boarding' Dr. Dao. They boarded him.
The article DOES have many numbers and statistics, but is not really advancing the conversation at this point.

This is why all those Acceptable use agreements are hundreds of pages that nobody reads because you have to define every single term and every single instance. If an airline is planing on using a 100 person plane and finds out it has a 75 person plane is the plane oversold at that point?

 

[coloradoatheist]

No..the crew that was supposed to go overworked it's hours that it was allowed to fly. They found a replacement crew to go to Louisville out of O'Hare.

Again, provide factual evidence with links to your sources supporting this claim - particularly that it had to be THIS standby crew and that they had to be on THIS specific flight.

But here is a story in general.

I don't care about your stories in general. You brought "weather delays" into the discussion as if it had something to do with THIS situation. I'll take it, then, that you were just making shit up?

I'm trying to find what flight they were going to have to make. But I'm curious. Does FAA regulations require that they consult Raven to make sure scheduling is convenient?

 

[laughing dog]

Again, provide factual evidence with links to your sources supporting this claim - particularly that it had to be THIS standby crew and that they had to be on THIS specific flight.

But here is a story in general.

I don't care about your stories in general. You brought "weather delays" into the discussion as if it had something to do with THIS situation. I'll take it, then, that you were just making shit up?

I'm trying to find what flight they were going to have to make. But I'm curious. Does FAA regulations require that they consult Raven to make sure scheduling is convenient?

If you are trying to reduce your relevant and cogent response/total response rate, you are going in the wrong direction.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Again, provide factual evidence with links to your sources supporting this claim - particularly that it had to be THIS standby crew and that they had to be on THIS specific flight.

But here is a story in general.

I don't care about your stories in general. You brought "weather delays" into the discussion as if it had something to do with THIS situation. I'll take it, then, that you were just making shit up?

I'm trying to find what flight they were going to have to make. But I'm curious. Does FAA regulations require that they consult Raven to make sure scheduling is convenient?

If you are trying to reduce your relevant and cogent response/total response rate, you are going in the wrong direction.

Her argument is that the when Republic airlines makes a decision of who needs to be in Louisville to make the next day flight has to the one she approves of.

 

[laughing dog]

Again, provide factual evidence with links to your sources supporting this claim - particularly that it had to be THIS standby crew and that they had to be on THIS specific flight.

But here is a story in general.

I don't care about your stories in general. You brought "weather delays" into the discussion as if it had something to do with THIS situation. I'll take it, then, that you were just making shit up?

I'm trying to find what flight they were going to have to make. But I'm curious. Does FAA regulations require that they consult Raven to make sure scheduling is convenient?

If you are trying to reduce your relevant and cogent response/total response rate, you are going in the wrong direction.

Her argument is that the when Republic airlines makes a decision of who needs to be in Louisville to make the next day flight has to the one she approves of.

Produce the post where anyone said that. Asking someone to document his claim of fact is normal, especially when that someone has persistently confused his opinions and views with facts.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Her argument is that the when Republic airlines makes a decision of who needs to be in Louisville to make the next day flight has to the one she approves of. Produce the post where anyone said that. Asking someone to document his claim of fact is normal, especially when that someone has persistently confused his opinions and views with facts.

Here is her quote

Again, provide factual evidence with links to your sources supporting this claim - particularly that it had to be THIS standby crew and that they had to be on THIS specific flight.

She is making the claim that whatever schedule that Republic Airlines decided on had to a specific source and time. The scheduling crew for RA didd not have to take a list of all their possible reserve crews and look through the scheduled passenger list and said we can't assign O'Hare because we have an Asian doctor who won't refuse his seat.

 

[Artemus]

Her argument is that the when Republic airlines makes a decision of who needs to be in Louisville to make the next day flight has to the one she approves of.

Her argument is that when Republic airlines makes a decision of who needs to be in Louisville to make the next day flight it has to be the one that meets the Contract of Carriage for all passengers affected. Any other argument is stupid.

 

[Keith&Co.]

This is why all those Acceptable use agreements are hundreds of pages that nobody reads because you have to define every single term and every single instance.

No. The story is not relevant because it got the facts wrong, not because there is ambiguity in a term authoritarians are using as a base for their desperate defenses of the corporation, which the corporation itself is not attempting to use.

If an airline is planing on using a 100 person plane and finds out it has a 75 person plane is the plane oversold at that point?

What if you went one day or ten posts without a completely off-point 'what if' story and deal with what actually happened? United was not unaware of the number of seats available on the flight in question.

 

[Keith&Co.]

She is making the claim

You're not quoting anyone making this claim. She's questioning your claim, and you're spinning objection to your claim into a different claim of your making.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Her argument is that the when Republic airlines makes a decision of who needs to be in Louisville to make the next day flight has to the one she approves of.

Her argument is that when Republic airlines makes a decision of who needs to be in Louisville to make the next day flight it has to be the one that meets the Contract of Carriage for all passengers affected. Any other argument is stupid.

You mean based on the Internet's belief on contract of carriage rights and not legal precendant type of way. And even that doesn't apply. They make a decision when they find out and try and find a reserve crew that could make the flight and reserve crews usually have like an hour to get to the airport. We'll never know if this crew was late or the circumstances without it unless it goes to court. The scheduling crew isn't going to say, "Shoot we can't make that decision because some guy on that flight isn't going behave like an adult and accept that sometimes scheduling issues happen.

 

[laughing dog]

Her argument is that when Republic airlines makes a decision of who needs to be in Louisville to make the next day flight it has to be the one that meets the Contract of Carriage for all passengers affected. Any other argument is stupid.

You mean based on the Internet's belief on contract of carriage rights and not legal precendant type of way. And even that doesn't apply. They make a decision when they find out and try and find a reserve crew that could make the flight and reserve crews usually have like an hour to get to the airport. We'll never know if this crew was late or the circumstances without it unless it goes to court. The scheduling crew isn't going to say, "Shoot we can't make that decision because some guy on that flight isn't going behave like an adult and accept that sometimes scheduling issues happen.

For some reason, you think using force to get some peaceful passenger with a legitimate ticket off a place is acting like an adult, but offering sufficient compensation to induce a passenger off the plane is not.

- - - Updated - - -

Her argument is that the when Republic airlines makes a decision of who needs to be in Louisville to make the next day flight has to the one she approves of. Produce the post where anyone said that. Asking someone to document his claim of fact is normal, especially when that someone has persistently confused his opinions and views with facts.

Here is her quote

Again, provide factual evidence with links to your sources supporting this claim - particularly that it had to be THIS standby crew and that they had to be on THIS specific flight.

She is making the claim that whatever schedule that Republic Airlines decided on had to a specific source and time. The scheduling crew for RA didd not have to take a list of all their possible reserve crews and look through the scheduled passenger list and said we can't assign O'Hare because we have an Asian doctor who won't refuse his seat.

No. She is asking you to document that this crew was the only possible solution and that this flight was the only possible solution.

 

[coloradoatheist]

She is making the claim

You're not quoting anyone making this claim. She's questioning your claim, and you're spinning objection to your claim into a different claim of your making.

Huh? She is making the claim that the airline must use a crew that is most convenient for all the passengers on a specific flight. This flight wasn't scheduled to be the one transport the flight crew for Louisville the next day but that changed when another crew went illegal and they had to find a crew to get to that flight and now they needed four seats to do that.

 

[ksen]

Not sure why United defenders are against free market solutions when normally they are all over the free market being able to solve everything...except maybe cancer.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

[Artemus]

Her argument is that when Republic airlines makes a decision of who needs to be in Louisville to make the next day flight it has to be the one that meets the Contract of Carriage for all passengers affected. Any other argument is stupid.

You mean based on the Internet's belief on contract of carriage rights and not legal precendant type of way.

Arguing against the analyses of every single Professor of Law and aviation-law Attorney who has read the Contract of Carriage and FAA Regulations and offered an opinion is very stupid.

 

[coloradoatheist]

You mean based on the Internet's belief on contract of carriage rights and not legal precendant type of way.

Arguing against the analyses of every single Professor of Law and aviation-law Attorney who has read the Contract of Carriage and FAA Regulations and offered an opinion is very stupid.

Can you site a legal case on it? And every single law attorney has put up an opinion?

- - - Updated - - -

Not sure why United defenders are against free market solutions when normally they are all over the free market being able to solve everything...except maybe cancer.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

How is a not free market solution that says here is the penalty for not getting you on a flight that the flyer and airline have agreed to?

 

[Keith&Co.]

The scheduling crew isn't going to say, "Shoot we can't make that decision because some guy on that flight isn't going behave like an adult and accept that sometimes scheduling issues happen.

But the manager COULD say, "Okay, it's too late to involuntarily bump anyone from THIS flight, but we will try really hard to get volunteers."

Rather than "Okay, it's too late to involuntarily bump anyone from THIS flight, but we will give a limited try to get volunteers, then violate contracts and try violence."

 

[Keith&Co.]

Huh? She is making the claim that the airline must use a crew that is most convenient for all the passengers on a specific flight.

This is hilarious.
You bitch about 'the internet interpretation' of the CoC and think people are putting all sorts of odd spin on what the contract says and doesn't say, but you cannot quote Ravensky where she makes the claim you interpret from her posting.

...on the internet.