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

[laughing dog]

Silly communist. Corporations can't make mistakes. The invisible hand of the free market automatically corrects any errors in judgment before they get to the point that they'd affect consumers.

Nope they fuck up all the time, that's why 90% of businesses fail. But there are also times like in marriage where you can e right but sleeping on the downstairs couch doesn't mean you are right. and the addage, customers are always right, isn't true either.

Once he became unruly they should have said this flight is now cancelled, please unboard.

It would have been less costly to UA and the other passengers if UA had just either
1) offered more compensation until someone gave up a seat, or
2) found another flight to put the other crew on that would have got the crew to Louisville on time.

 

[Derec]

Other passengers could have handled the problem without involving the police.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Nope they fuck up all the time, that's why 90% of businesses fail. But there are also times like in marriage where you can e right but sleeping on the downstairs couch doesn't mean you are right. and the addage, customers are always right, isn't true either.

Once he became unruly they should have said this flight is now cancelled, please unboard.

It would have been less costly to UA and the other passengers if UA had just either
1) offered more compensation until someone gave up a seat, or
2) found another flight to put the other crew on that would have got the crew to Louisville on time.

Except this wouldn't be the first time that any airlines would have asked someone to give up their so it's not something new. Maybe #2, but that's assuming facts we don't know that they could have made it in time. Or the other option was to cancel the flight, would have been less costly.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Silly communist. Corporations can't make mistakes. The invisible hand of the free market automatically corrects any errors in judgment before they get to the point that they'd affect consumers.

Nope they fuck up all the time, that's why 90% of businesses fail. But there are also times like in marriage where you can e right but sleeping on the downstairs couch doesn't mean you are right. and the addage, customers are always right, isn't true either.

Once he became unruly they should have said this flight is now cancelled, please unboard.

Good idea. Lets see, $850ish per passenger, so that'd cost the airliner how much? Forget that the plane may have been needed in Louisville for another flight, that is another plane load of people that get $850 each...

The passenger's rights seem a bit of a gray area in this case because they were boarded... a mistake United made, not the passengers. Generally, forcing a passenger off a plane is not a good idea unless security is at issue.

- - - Updated - - -

It would have been less costly to UA and the other passengers if UA had just either
1) offered more compensation until someone gave up a seat, or
2) found another flight to put the other crew on that would have got the crew to Louisville on time.

Except this wouldn't be the first time that any airlines would have asked someone to give up their so it's not something new. Maybe #2, but that's assuming facts we don't know that they could have made it in time. Or the other option was to cancel the flight, would have been less costly.

Not flying a plane is very expensive.

 

[Ford]

It would have been less costly to UA and the other passengers if UA had just either
1) offered more compensation until someone gave up a seat, or
2) found another flight to put the other crew on that would have got the crew to Louisville on time.

Except this wouldn't be the first time that any airlines would have asked someone to give up their so it's not something new. Maybe #2, but that's assuming facts we don't know that they could have made it in time. Or the other option was to cancel the flight, would have been less costly.

Except that they didn't ask him to give up the seat. It is something entirely new for a paying customer to be forcefully removed from their seat for no other reason than the convenience of an airline employee.

 

[laughing dog]

It would have been less costly to UA and the other passengers if UA had just either
1) offered more compensation until someone gave up a seat, or
2) found another flight to put the other crew on that would have got the crew to Louisville on time.

Except this wouldn't be the first time that any airlines would have asked someone to give up their so it's not something new.

And that is relevant because?

Maybe #2, but that's assuming facts we don't know that they could have made it in time.

Someone in this thread posted a link to a McClacthey report that said there were at least 3 options on UA or other airlines that would have gotten the crew to its destination on time.

Or the other option was to cancel the flight, would have been less costly.

Not less costly than the first 2.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Except this wouldn't be the first time that any airlines would have asked someone to give up their so it's not something new.

And that is relevant because?

Maybe #2, but that's assuming facts we don't know that they could have made it in time.

Someone in this thread posted a link to a McClacthey report that said there were at least 3 options on UA or other airlines that would have gotten the crew to its destination on time.

Or the other option was to cancel the flight, would have been less costly.

Not less costly than the first 2.

Since it sounded like the 4 crew were required to be at the other airport, or face fines it is much better to put them on your flight which you can control then putting them on a different airlines which you can't control. since they couldn't get them on those other flights does sound like those flights would be full and then it would up to one of the other airlines to bump passengers for a competitor.

They needed 4 seats, so at $1500 that's $6K for the four of them and at $300 a ticket they would be losing 20 seats of revenue. At same point you do have to say that we aren't going to lose all of our revenue just to to make one person happy.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

They needed 4 seats, so at $1500 that's $6K for the four of them and at $300 a ticket they would be losing 20 seats of revenue. At same point you do have to say that we aren't going to lose all of our revenue just to to make one person happy.

If that's the cost of doing business, then that's the cost of doing business. United was apparently unaware a half hour earlier that they would need these four seats for their crew so that they could make arrangements to bump passengers for them prior to boarding. That was a logistics error on their part and it's incumbent on them to pay whatever costs are necessary to correct their error. If that means increasing the bribe they need to pay in order to get someone to get off the plane, then so be it.

 

[Malintent]

The practice of airlines overbooking to maximize their profits should be criminal. Sure, mistakes can happen.. in that case, FULL compensation would be expected (full retail cost of ticket plus every penny of expense, such as cost of hotel, cost of time off from work... every penny).

Selling a seat on a plane that does not exist is (should be) fraud. In what other industry is it acceptable to solicit and take payments for services that have no intention or possibility to provide (such as selling 500 seats on a 450 passenger plane)?

The example of a doctors visit is not the same. That is more like the plane being scheduled to take off at 5:00, but is delayed to 6:00 due to weather. It's not like showing up at the doctors office, waiting 2 hours after your scheduled appointment just to be asked to leave the office and come back another time... that does not happen routinely at all.

 

[laughing dog]

Since it sounded like the 4 crew were required to be at the other airport, or face fines it is much better to put them on your flight which you can control then putting them on a different airlines which you can't control. [/qu since they couldn't get them on those other flights does sound like those flights would be full and then it would up to one of the other airlines to bump passengers for a competitor.

You have no idea whether UA even bothered to try other flights.

S
They needed 4 seats, so at $1500 that's $6K for the four of them and at $300 a ticket they would be losing 20 seats of revenue. At same point you do have to say that we aren't going to lose all of our revenue just to to make one person happy.

Why are you making up numbers? But taking your $6,000 as accurate, do you think the odds are pretty high that if UA had offered someone $3,000 or $4,000 or even $5,999.99 that they would have obtained that last seat?

 

[dismal]

The practice of airlines overbooking to maximize their profits should be criminal.

Well, I guess if the practice of not showing up for a flight is criminal to.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

The practice of airlines overbooking to maximize their profits should be criminal.

Well, I guess if the practice of not showing up for a flight is criminal to.

Why? They still paid for the seat. The airline gets as much money for a paid seat whether or not the passenger shows up.

 

[TSwizzle]

The practice of airlines overbooking to maximize their profits should be criminal. Sure, mistakes can happen.. in that case, FULL compensation would be expected (full retail cost of ticket plus every penny of expense, such as cost of hotel, cost of time off from work... every penny).

Selling a seat on a plane that does not exist is (should be) fraud. In what other industry is it acceptable to solicit and take payments for services that have no intention or possibility to provide (such as selling 500 seats on a 450 passenger plane)?

The airlines are crooks. In these instances where people don't show up, they have charged twice for the same seat. And it's bullshit to suggest that this is to keep consumer costs down, it's to keep share holder dividends up.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well, I guess if the practice of not showing up for a flight is criminal to.

Why? They still paid for the seat. The airline gets as much money for a paid seat whether or not the passenger shows up.

And it sounds like they may sometimes get paid twice for a seat.

 

[KeepTalking]

No. This wasn't a planning problem. The way things played out it's quite obvious it wasn't planned.

That is pretty much the exact definition of a planning problem: the planning did not plan for the problem encountered.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The practice of airlines overbooking to maximize their profits should be criminal. Sure, mistakes can happen.. in that case, FULL compensation would be expected (full retail cost of ticket plus every penny of expense, such as cost of hotel, cost of time off from work... every penny).

Selling a seat on a plane that does not exist is (should be) fraud. In what other industry is it acceptable to solicit and take payments for services that have no intention or possibility to provide (such as selling 500 seats on a 450 passenger plane)?

That is the very successful business model of Health Clubs. Ever tried to workout at one in January or February?

Regardless, I would need to see the numbers. I thought I read about 20,000 to 40,000 seats were bumped on airlines in the past year, which given the total number flying annually, isn't that high. And I think the $850 to $1350 depending on the delay time for a bumped passenger is meant to cover additional costs, not just the flight.

The airliners are trying to put buns in every seat, so I can understand their purpose. If flights were always selling out and being overbooked and people were always being bumped on a majority of flights, the system would need an overhaul, but it doesn't sound like that is the case. But if the numbers show otherwise, I'm open to seeing them.

- - - Updated - - -

The practice of airlines overbooking to maximize their profits should be criminal. Sure, mistakes can happen.. in that case, FULL compensation would be expected (full retail cost of ticket plus every penny of expense, such as cost of hotel, cost of time off from work... every penny).

Selling a seat on a plane that does not exist is (should be) fraud. In what other industry is it acceptable to solicit and take payments for services that have no intention or possibility to provide (such as selling 500 seats on a 450 passenger plane)?

The airlines are crooks. In these instances where people don't show up, they have charged twice for the same seat. And it's bullshit to suggest that this is to keep consumer costs down, it's to keep share holder dividends up.

Yet when Charter Schools do this, that is good business. /derail

 

[Malintent]

The practice of airlines overbooking to maximize their profits should be criminal.

Well, I guess if the practice of not showing up for a flight is criminal to.

Why, if the ticket is paid for? Non-refundable tickets is the norm. The airlines should WANT people to not show up... free money... ability to sell the same seat twice, without the legal issue of committing fraud.

Would you also say it should be illegal to not finish your dinner at a restaurant? how about paying for dinner at a restaurant, but the server giving the meal to the busboy and you have to pay anyway?

Refundable tickets are more expensive... that covers the percent of people that cancel at the last minute... and the whole point of having that option.

 

[Malintent]

That is the very successful business model of Health Clubs. Ever tried to workout at one in January or February?

Regardless, I would need to see the numbers. I thought I read about 20,000 to 40,000 seats were bumped on airlines in the past year, which given the total number flying annually, isn't that high. And I think the $850 to $1350 depending on the delay time for a bumped passenger is meant to cover additional costs, not just the flight.

The airliners are trying to put buns in every seat, so I can understand their purpose. If flights were always selling out and being overbooked and people were always being bumped on a majority of flights, the system would need an overhaul, but it doesn't sound like that is the case. But if the numbers show otherwise, I'm open to seeing them.

- - - Updated - - -

The practice of airlines overbooking to maximize their profits should be criminal. Sure, mistakes can happen.. in that case, FULL compensation would be expected (full retail cost of ticket plus every penny of expense, such as cost of hotel, cost of time off from work... every penny).

Selling a seat on a plane that does not exist is (should be) fraud. In what other industry is it acceptable to solicit and take payments for services that have no intention or possibility to provide (such as selling 500 seats on a 450 passenger plane)?

The airlines are crooks. In these instances where people don't show up, they have charged twice for the same seat. And it's bullshit to suggest that this is to keep consumer costs down, it's to keep share holder dividends up.

Yet when Charter Schools do this, that is good business. /derail

Numbers game, ey? How many times is it ok for a restaurant to charge you for a meal that they give to the cook to eat? How often have you accepted that as perfectly acceptable?

 

[LordKiran]

And that is relevant because?

Maybe #2, but that's assuming facts we don't know that they could have made it in time.

Someone in this thread posted a link to a McClacthey report that said there were at least 3 options on UA or other airlines that would have gotten the crew to its destination on time.

Or the other option was to cancel the flight, would have been less costly.

Not less costly than the first 2.

Since it sounded like the 4 crew were required to be at the other airport, or face fines it is much better to put them on your flight which you can control then putting them on a different airlines which you can't control. since they couldn't get them on those other flights does sound like those flights would be full and then it would up to one of the other airlines to bump passengers for a competitor.

They needed 4 seats, so at $1500 that's $6K for the four of them and at $300 a ticket they would be losing 20 seats of revenue. At same point you do have to say that we aren't going to lose all of our revenue just to to make one person happy.

So can you explain to me why the business' mismanagement should be made the customer's problem? This goes beyond what is legal and what is not. This comes down to basic principles of service and customer care. If a resturaunt decided to kick you and your party out so they could seat a more 'important' guest, they might have every right to do that, but it still speaks to how poorly that business regards you and your custom and the poor business ethic of the proprietor. Just because a business has the legal wherewithal to take an action doesn't make it okay, and this is all assuming that United was in the legal right to begin with, which remains to be seen.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

That is the very successful business model of Health Clubs. Ever tried to workout at one in January or February?

Regardless, I would need to see the numbers. I thought I read about 20,000 to 40,000 seats were bumped on airlines in the past year, which given the total number flying annually, isn't that high. And I think the $850 to $1350 depending on the delay time for a bumped passenger is meant to cover additional costs, not just the flight.

The airliners are trying to put buns in every seat, so I can understand their purpose. If flights were always selling out and being overbooked and people were always being bumped on a majority of flights, the system would need an overhaul, but it doesn't sound like that is the case. But if the numbers show otherwise, I'm open to seeing them.

- - - Updated - - -

The practice of airlines overbooking to maximize their profits should be criminal. Sure, mistakes can happen.. in that case, FULL compensation would be expected (full retail cost of ticket plus every penny of expense, such as cost of hotel, cost of time off from work... every penny).

Selling a seat on a plane that does not exist is (should be) fraud. In what other industry is it acceptable to solicit and take payments for services that have no intention or possibility to provide (such as selling 500 seats on a 450 passenger plane)?

The airlines are crooks. In these instances where people don't show up, they have charged twice for the same seat. And it's bullshit to suggest that this is to keep consumer costs down, it's to keep share holder dividends up.

Yet when Charter Schools do this, that is good business. /derail

Numbers game, ey? How many times is it ok for a restaurant to charge you for a meal that they give to the cook to eat? How often have you accepted that as perfectly acceptable?

I said I need to see the numbers. How many no-shows get their money back verses how many no-shows means a seat is paid for twice? I can't say one way or the other.