Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 43
 
User avatar
GCT64
Posts: 1852
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 6:34 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:17 pm

As a regular United customer and Star Silver, I am disgusted by the treatment shown in the video and by the responses of many of the people on this thread. This guy is a CUSTOMER, when I buy a ticket and sit in my seat I do not expect to then be physically assaulted by the airline's staff (I don't care if they are contractors or whoever, in my mind and 100% of other customers the airline I bought the ticket from, and whose name is all over the plane, is responsible for their behaviour).

Anyone who defends this video on the basis that "hired security can legally beat up passengers who don't do exactly what the airline staff say" has lost any sense of perspective or humanity.
Flown in: A20N,A21N,A30B,A306,A310,A319,A320,A321,A332,A333,A343,A346,A359,A388,BA11,BU31,(..56 more types..),VC10,WESX
 
User avatar
Keith2004
Posts: 302
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 11:59 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:19 pm

Aquila3 wrote:
Keith2004 wrote:

The security officers are legally in the wrong for the abusive treatment not United Airlines. Security officers who are not even law enforcement
United is in the wrong for allowing the situation to get to that point, they should not have boarded passengers if enough seats were not available, if they get in any legal issues it will be for this

Thank you for the explanation, and sorry, I misjudged you.
Also I thought that the Gentleman in jeans that used violence on the Passenger (so-called Security) was an employee or contracted by United. Not that this makes the situation humanely less worrying if he was a plainclothes policeman. I mean we are not speaking about a gangster, a drug dealer or a raper. Just a mabe non-compliant passenger. If anybody in this industry (and especially at United), accepts this pure violence, what next? Taser him? Shoot him in the mouth? Did you see the video clip?


No worries, glad I was able to clarify

I saw the clip, it was disturbing
Escalating level of violence is an ongoing problem in the USA, some law enforcement departments are better than others, it comes down to Training
 
goCOgo
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:24 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:21 pm

glbltrvlr wrote:
goCOgo wrote:
"Failure to follow flight crew instructions" - you mean the instructions to leave in violation of the Contract of Carriage? Rule 21 spells out the only reasons United can remove someone from an aircraft, none of which applied to this customer. By boarding him, they threw Rule 25 out the window.


Doesn't sound like you have a good backing in aviation law. I'm referring to:

Interference With Flight Crew Members Or Flight Attendants -- 49 U.S.C. 46504

One who assaults, threatens, or intimidates a flight crew member or attendant while aboard an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States, and thereby interferes with the performance of that crew member's duties...


goCOgo wrote:
You sound like one of those cops that thinks they can arrest someone on the sole charge of resisting arrest.


You may not like it, but the police were acting within their lawful authority. An no, I'm not a cop or a United employee.

goCOgo wrote:
This guy isn't going to Cook County Jail. He is instead going to split a few fat checks with his lawyer from United, Republic, and the O'Hare PD.


Sorry - O'Hare airport is owned and operated by the City of Chicago. The police at O'Hare are Chicago police.


Where do you see where he "assaulted, threatened, or intimidated" anyone?

And whoever the PD is, they will be paying up.
"Why you fly is your business, how you fly is ours"
 
User avatar
climbing230
Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 3:21 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:22 pm

Something is terribly wrong with UA. Now seeing this article and the couple of fresh incidents I am considering to alter my tickets that I got booked on UA for my trip. Gives me jiggers ..god knows who would be next. Wished if Mr. Munoz was sitting on that plane in economy and witnessing this "Prestigious" customer service unveil would have made him awestruck !!!
Wings take you higher
 
User avatar
mbmbos
Posts: 2953
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 4:16 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:25 pm

ROSWELL41 wrote:

So this passenger gets to hold up the flight for everyone else? He gets to dictate to the police and the airline as to how they do their jobs? I don't think the outcome was good for anyone, but at that point the passenger IS getting off and it's up to the passenger to decide how it's going to go. He chose to be non compliant and to resist. That situation is not a negotiation.



Gosh, do you think there could be alternatives to knocking the guy out and then dragging his unconscious body down an aisle?

As far as I'm concerned, if the only option is physical violence, then negotiation is an option. Later, United can sue the %&#$ out of the doctor, if they think they can handle the negative publicity. But inflicting physical harm is unacceptable.
"If I don't manage to fly, someone else will. The spirit wants only for there to be flying. As for who happens to do it, in that he has only a passing interest."
- R.M. Rilke
 
apfpilot
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:25 pm

goCOgo wrote:
glbltrvlr wrote:
goCOgo wrote:
"Failure to follow flight crew instructions" - you mean the instructions to leave in violation of the Contract of Carriage? Rule 21 spells out the only reasons United can remove someone from an aircraft, none of which applied to this customer. By boarding him, they threw Rule 25 out the window.


Doesn't sound like you have a good backing in aviation law. I'm referring to:

Interference With Flight Crew Members Or Flight Attendants -- 49 U.S.C. 46504

One who assaults, threatens, or intimidates a flight crew member or attendant while aboard an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States, and thereby interferes with the performance of that crew member's duties...


goCOgo wrote:
You sound like one of those cops that thinks they can arrest someone on the sole charge of resisting arrest.


You may not like it, but the police were acting within their lawful authority. An no, I'm not a cop or a United employee.

goCOgo wrote:
This guy isn't going to Cook County Jail. He is instead going to split a few fat checks with his lawyer from United, Republic, and the O'Hare PD.


Sorry - O'Hare airport is owned and operated by the City of Chicago. The police at O'Hare are Chicago police.


Where do you see where he "assaulted, threatened, or intimidated" anyone?

And whoever the PD is, they will be paying up.



I doubt it - the PD will be covered under qualified immunity and nothing will happen to them (sadly)
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3595
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:26 pm

Nothing in either video appears to suggest that the man's head hitting the armrest across the aisle was an intentional act by the officers, but merely incidental to the man's removal from the seat and his subsequent toppling over across the aisle.

As has been said earlier in the thread, noncompliance with an officer's request, then order, will lead to use of force. If, in the course of a struggle against lawful use of force the resisting party sustains injuries, even serious/potentially life-threatening injuries merely incidental to the lawful use of force (such as a head incidentally hitting an armrest during the course of detainment), then that liability is on the resisting party...NOT the detaining officer in the course of his/her official duties.

It's no different than if, in the course of the use of lawful and non-lethal self-defense during a street encounter using a hand-to-hand technique, the offending party happens to be tripped over by the defending party and incidentally smacks his/her head on a curb, causing death by severe head injury...Courts (at least in the U.S.) generally hold that death or great bodily harm resulting incidentally to the use of non-lethal defensive methods against an offending party is not the liability of the defending party, as the defending party generally would not have reasonably known that the use of a defensive method established by law and precedent to be "non-lethal" would have resulted in death or great bodily harm.
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
goCOgo
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:24 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:28 pm

Rdh3e wrote:
goCOgo wrote:
Read it for yourself. Nowhere else does it call for removing people. Only denied boarding, which does not apply once the passenger boarded.

You seem to be defining denied boarding as simply getting on the plane. Denied boarding is not a defined term in the contract of carriage and is used more broadly than your suggestion. You can get on the plane, and be asked to leave and that considered denied boarding. It actually happens all the time due to weight restrictions. Sometimes a flight will board, but weather conditions will change and force the crew to take fewer passengers after the boarding is completed. Those passengers are thus "denied boarding" because they were not allowed to complete the flight.

You're reading too tightly to the language and not the intent of the language.


Then they need to define it or use more precise terminology. They don't. Otherwise it means exactly what the denotation means.

The fact they elsewhere use the phrase "remove from the aircraft" says they can be more precise.
"Why you fly is your business, how you fly is ours"
 
apfpilot
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:29 pm

Hillis wrote:
ExDubai wrote:
ozark1 wrote:
I get so tired of these social-media induced tales with only the side of the "victim" being told. Since when are airlines always guilty until proven innocent?. I've never seen an industry more abused in this manner. Yes they screw up. Sometimes badly. But it really gets old when there is another side to the story that we may never know about. If the airline tries to explain, big woo, they must be lying.

Agree, but not in that case. There are enough ways to solve such a case before boarding.


Compensation was offered. Apparently, no one took it. In that case, especially in the case of a crew that needed to be in SDF the next morning, else a flight could cancel, the airline can involuntarily deny someone boarding. Again, it happens more than people might imagine.


891 times out of 22mm + boardings in Q4 isn't that often at all.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
 
flyguy84
Posts: 770
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:26 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:29 pm

The man refused law enforcement instructions. Fail to see how that's United's fault.
SFO
 
goCOgo
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:24 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:29 pm

apfpilot wrote:
goCOgo wrote:
glbltrvlr wrote:

Doesn't sound like you have a good backing in aviation law. I'm referring to:

Interference With Flight Crew Members Or Flight Attendants -- 49 U.S.C. 46504

One who assaults, threatens, or intimidates a flight crew member or attendant while aboard an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States, and thereby interferes with the performance of that crew member's duties...




You may not like it, but the police were acting within their lawful authority. An no, I'm not a cop or a United employee.



Sorry - O'Hare airport is owned and operated by the City of Chicago. The police at O'Hare are Chicago police.


Where do you see where he "assaulted, threatened, or intimidated" anyone?

And whoever the PD is, they will be paying up.



I doubt it - the PD will be covered under qualified immunity and nothing will happen to them (sadly)


No criminal charges, but there will likely be civil penalties.
"Why you fly is your business, how you fly is ours"
 
DaufuskieGuy
Posts: 411
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:35 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:30 pm

this incident is an unfortunate symptom, as pointed out already the cause was the relentless down gauging post 9-11 in order to drive greater profitability, I don't have stats handy but load factors are much higher now which makes IDB much more likely. I'm also wondering if any industry insiders think that crew management practices have evolved in a way that drives profit but often leaves crew out of position. Also perhaps backup.safety valve employees have been reduced/eliminated leaving them vulnerable to these situations. I guess my main point is that airlines have changed a lot post 9-11, and in many cases it doesn't appear that it has accrued to the passengers benefit.

edit to add: this is linked on Drudge and probably other heavy trafficked web sites. cable news presumably too.
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 2232
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:36 pm

Failure by "Republic" shilling as UA to board the passengers if they were oversold by four.
Failure by the gate agent/staff to up the compensation up to the limit allowed by law.

So are they going to pull anyone out of first? Nope. Are they going to analyze the list to see if the person pulled is connecting at ORD onward (especially international) apparently not.

Violence isn't the answer folks. Once they boarded the flight, that flight leaves and the four employees who really really need to get to ORD can take the next flight or can be booked on a competitor.

Use some common sense and don't think that resorting to force a paying passenger who was boarded on the plane off the plane is a good answer.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5460
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:37 pm

This is disgraceful. Not flying UA anytime soon.
 
socalgeo
Posts: 408
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:56 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:37 pm

Cubsrule wrote:
Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe.

Airlines cannot and should not be in the business of picking IDBs based on whose time is most valuable. If this man's arrival in Louisville were truly as important as it evidently is in his head he should have (1) checked in sooner, (2) bought a more expensive ticket, (3) booked a flight that returned him to Louisville with more time to spare or (4) not traveled in the first place.

Like most people who travel a lot for business, I play the "take the last flight out" game from time to time. It is not without risk.


Seriously? You are blaming the passenger? As far as I can tell he broke no rules, was seated in his assigned seat, that he paid for, and was not affecting the safety of the other passengers. Surely you aren't saying that it was his fault? This video makes my blood boil. I won't be flying united again.
 
SMUtexan
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 5:41 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:40 pm

I'm not sure how liable United will be if this goes to court but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that they severely dropped the ball on this. They set the stage for a very unfortunate incident.
 
socalgeo
Posts: 408
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:56 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:41 pm

KFLLCFII wrote:
Nothing in either video appears to suggest that the man's head hitting the armrest across the aisle was an intentional act by the officers, but merely incidental to the man's removal from the seat and his subsequent toppling over across the aisle.

As has been said earlier in the thread, noncompliance with an officer's request, then order, will lead to use of force. If, in the course of a struggle against lawful use of force the resisting party sustains injuries, even serious/potentially life-threatening injuries merely incidental to the lawful use of force (such as a head incidentally hitting an armrest during the course of detainment), then that liability is on the resisting party...NOT the detaining officer in the course of his/her official duties.

It's no different than if, in the course of the use of lawful and non-lethal self-defense during a street encounter using a hand-to-hand technique, the offending party happens to be tripped over by the defending party and incidentally smacks his/her head on a curb, causing death by severe head injury...Courts (at least in the U.S.) generally hold that death or great bodily harm resulting incidentally to the use of non-lethal defensive methods against an offending party is not the liability of the defending party, as the defending party generally would not have reasonably known that the use of a defensive method established by law and precedent to be "non-lethal" would have resulted in death or great bodily harm.


You seem to feel like this gentleman deserved this treatment. Do you work for United?
 
kavok
Posts: 848
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:43 pm

If I am not mistaken, air travel in the U.S. still legally falls mostly under the old shipping laws, as far as who is legally in command of the vessel and able to instruct and order passengers from a purely legal standpoint.
And if so, since the plane is still at the gate and not in flight, the "ship" (plane) would legally still be under the command control of the "harbormaster"/airport until takeoff. Which all that means is the crew has much less "legal" authority on the ground then while in flight.
Hence, under the old shipping laws, this would be more akin to a legal argument of trespassing on vessel, as opposed to not following crew orders. And if it is trespassing, where he was allowed to board with a legal ticket, it will set up a very interesting legal argument for both the airport and airline. Basically, ORD might be in trouble too...
 
billreid
Posts: 761
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:04 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:47 pm

When I worked for AA they had a program of NO involuntary bumps. So how did they manage this. They simply upped the compensation until someone got off. AA paid a family of four $16,000 to deplane. UA would have been wise to keep upping the the award. $10,000 in travel vouchures would have done it.
Some people don't get it. Business is about making MONEY!
 
User avatar
United787
Posts: 2942
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:48 pm

I am a United fan but this is disgusting. This is a failure on so many levels and the buck stops at UA. I am also disappointed the UA hasn't provided more information from their end... they need to get a handle on this story ASAP.

And for everyone that excuses this as normal collateral damage when someone refuses instructions of a law enforcement professional, BULLSHIT. The Chicago Police need to be better trained in how to handle these types of situations and this coming from a Chicagoan. This is a very visible example of what is so wrong with the Chicago Police right now and is contributing to the violence in the City... except now we are seeing the affects on someone other than the teenage inner city kid.

Furthermore, regardless of whether UA was legally justified in calling law enforcement, they should have never called them because the situation didn't warrant it. This should have and could have been handled professionally by the gate agents and manager, end of story.
Last edited by United787 on Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14623
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:52 pm

socalgeo wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:
Unless UA violated the contract of carriage -which does not appear to be the case based on the limited information available - this is no gaffe.

Airlines cannot and should not be in the business of picking IDBs based on whose time is most valuable. If this man's arrival in Louisville were truly as important as it evidently is in his head he should have (1) checked in sooner, (2) bought a more expensive ticket, (3) booked a flight that returned him to Louisville with more time to spare or (4) not traveled in the first place.

Like most people who travel a lot for business, I play the "take the last flight out" game from time to time. It is not without risk.


Seriously? You are blaming the passenger? As far as I can tell he broke no rules, was seated in his assigned seat, that he paid for, and was not affecting the safety of the other passengers. Surely you aren't saying that it was his fault? This video makes my blood boil. I won't be flying united again.


I wouldn't say I "blame" him for getting IDB'd, although there were some things he could have done that would have substantially improved his odds of not being chosen.

He is certainly not at fault for boarding the airplane. He equally certainly is at fault for refusing to deplane when asked.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
User avatar
OA260
Posts: 24593
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:50 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:53 pm

Always been a fan of United but this is very disturbing. United are in the media these days for all the wrong reasons. They need to do damage limitation and I hope this guy gets a full apology and compensation from UA. Despite it being the authorities that took him off it was at the request of UA and this situation was caused by UA. They are to blame 100% .
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8454
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:55 pm

billreid wrote:
When I worked for AA they had a program of NO involuntary bumps. So how did they manage this. They simply upped the compensation until someone got off. AA paid a family of four $16,000 to deplane. UA would have been wise to keep upping the the award. $10,000 in travel vouchures would have done it.


Can't they just announce a technical issue with the plane, let every one deplane and IDB four.

Tight turn times are one reason FAs call cops on a dime. They don't want to miss the departure.
All posts are just opinions.
 
kavok
Posts: 848
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:03 pm

The United PR team is being pretty quiet overall about this one (other than the not very soothing twitter response). I suspect the UA lawyers have advised to the PR to not say much, as unlike the leggings case, they might be in some legal trouble this time.
Last edited by kavok on Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
captaincrackers
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 12:46 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:03 pm

This is just gross. Not flying United is one thing -- this is behavior that will stop people visiting the United States. As if that other political thing going on right now wasn't enough. Not that that will matter much to many of the defenders of such bullying.
 
User avatar
Cyow
Posts: 174
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:41 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:04 pm

GCT64 wrote:
As a regular United customer and Star Silver, I am disgusted by the treatment shown in the video and by the responses of many of the people on this thread. This guy is a CUSTOMER, when I buy a ticket and sit in my seat I do not expect to then be physically assaulted by the airline's staff (I don't care if they are contractors or whoever, in my mind and 100% of other customers the airline I bought the ticket from, and whose name is all over the plane, is responsible for their behaviour).

Anyone who defends this video on the basis that "hired security can legally beat up passengers who don't do exactly what the airline staff say" has lost any sense of perspective or humanity.


Here here!!

Never flying United again. Bring back Continental. This merger has been a disaster.
"Broadsword calling Danny Boy"
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3698
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:08 pm

Cyow wrote:
Never flying United again. Bring back Continental. This merger has been a disaster.


Hope you avoid AA and DL as well since they also contract with Republic.
 
AaronPGH
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 9:13 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:12 pm

At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter who's fault it is here. Republic, United, security, etc. At least public perception wise. All that matters is that my entire Facebook news feed is filled with people disgusted with United right now. Airlines need to understand the social landscape they are operating under in 2017 and adjust practices, otherwise these things will keep on happening. If you're worried about security contractors potentially yanking someone off the flight, do everything you can do not let it escalate to that point.
Last edited by AaronPGH on Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
coronado
Posts: 1278
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 1999 9:42 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:14 pm

exunited wrote:
The flight was by Republic Airlines, not United mainline but then nobody would take the click bait if the headlines said Republic now would they?



I went on the Republic web site and I could not buy a ticket from them. All booking, overbooking, fares, volunteer buy outs are strictly decided on by United. Republic has nothing to do with any of this. they are being paid a fee per departure and these so called regional airlines are nothing more than contracted lift providers, essentially nothing more than a wet lease.

It is United.
The Original Coronado: First CV jet flights RG CV 990 July 1965; DL CV 880 July 1965; Spantax CV990 Feb 1973
 
User avatar
Joshu
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:05 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:16 pm

EWR762 wrote:
smokeybandit wrote:
The Twitter link is already the top post on Reddit, so it's going to explode in the morning.


It appears that the Reddit post has been taken off the front page


And the thread discussing the removal, has been removed. What the hell?
Washington-Baltimore Spotters Group
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10898
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:19 pm

Cubsrule wrote:
He equally certainly is at fault for refusing to deplane when asked.

No he is not.
You are not required to follow improper or illegal instructions. You may get whacked over the head by a police officer but in court the right to refuse to follow improper orders will be enforced. As others have stated, the passengers were boarded, the airline decided to "confiscate" a a ticketed, boarded, and seated passenger's paid for seat for which there is no allowance for in the CoC.

United lost this battle and looks foolish.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
wingman
Posts: 4019
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:22 pm

Cubsrule wrote:
He equally certainly is at fault for refusing to deplane when asked.


No, no and no. If UA can't catch this overbook prior to departure and select passengers beforehand by bidding up the compensation then their four employees should drive to Louisville. The only fault here in a massive public display of violence against a paying passenger is United, no one else. This is one of the most repugnant acts I have ever seen perpetrated against a customer anywhere in the world. Just as I was 3000 miles from status after a long absence flying VX and AS I can assure anyone from United reading this comment, I will never fly your disgusting POS airline again. I almost vomited watching this video.

United, you are truly repulsive and there is nothing you can do now to save yourself. Anyone working for this airline should be under a rock today in pure shame.
 
trex8
Posts: 5593
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:23 pm

Keith2004 wrote:
[

I saw the clip, it was disturbing
Escalating level of violence is an ongoing problem in the USA, some law enforcement departments are better than others, it comes down to Training

The problem with law enforcement is the training these days is suboptimal to put it mildly, if you havent seen this show see it. A person who started the SWAT team in his town in Utah years later watches a SWAT team kill his son in law and every step of the way the police escalated what could have been de-escalated. But what does he know he only started and trained the SWAT team in that area for a decade or two before he retired and cowboys took over.
http://kutv.com/news/local/utah-based-f ... bs-netflix

some time in the early 90s I was on a NW MSP-LGW flight, they needed to deadhead a whole crew out to Europe, by the time they were done enticing volunteers to get off it was a first class ticket from anywhere in the US to anywhere overseas and $2500 cash.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14623
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:23 pm

Tugger wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:
He equally certainly is at fault for refusing to deplane when asked.

No he is not.
You are not required to follow improper or illegal instructions. You may get whacked over the head by a police officer but in court the right to refuse to follow improper orders will be enforced. As others have stated, the passengers were boarded, the airline decided to "confiscate" a a ticketed, boarded, and seated passenger's paid for seat for which there is no allowance for in the CoC.

United lost this battle and looks foolish.

Tugg


I agree generally that he did not need to follow an improper or illegal instruction, but he got IDB'd. The IDB was unwise for all sorts of reasons that people have discussed in this thread, but how was the IDB "improper" or "illegal?" UA was well within its rights to IDB him.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
StuckinCMHland
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2015 10:59 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:26 pm

Thanks for the post Tugger, I like you hard-nosed attitude. Now put yourself in the seat the passenger was in. When they ask you to get off the plane and you refuse, and they insist, what are you going to do? Are you going to put up a fight? Are you going to make them carry you off the plane or arrest you?

I'm interested in your answer. Thank you for sharing it.
Last edited by StuckinCMHland on Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10898
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:26 pm

Cubsrule wrote:
Tugger wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:
He equally certainly is at fault for refusing to deplane when asked.

No he is not.
You are not required to follow improper or illegal instructions. You may get whacked over the head by a police officer but in court the right to refuse to follow improper orders will be enforced. As others have stated, the passengers were boarded, the airline decided to "confiscate" a a ticketed, boarded, and seated passenger's paid for seat for which there is no allowance for in the CoC.

United lost this battle and looks foolish.

Tugg


I agree generally that he did not need to follow an improper or illegal instruction, but he got IDB'd. The IDB was unwise for all sorts of reasons that people have discussed in this thread, but how was the IDB "improper" or "illegal?" UA was well within its rights to IDB him.

Except they did in fact board the passenger.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
jfidler
Posts: 388
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 3:32 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:28 pm

wingman wrote:
If UA can't catch this overbook prior to departure and select passengers beforehand by bidding up the compensation then their four employees should drive to Louisville.


I agree they should have caught this before boarding in this case, but what about in cases when they can't? I was on a RJ years ago, and only after we all boarded did they determine we were over the weight limit. Some people volunteered (and received compensation) so we were fine, but what if no one did?
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14623
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:31 pm

Tugger wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:
Tugger wrote:
No he is not.
You are not required to follow improper or illegal instructions. You may get whacked over the head by a police officer but in court the right to refuse to follow improper orders will be enforced. As others have stated, the passengers were boarded, the airline decided to "confiscate" a a ticketed, boarded, and seated passenger's paid for seat for which there is no allowance for in the CoC.

United lost this battle and looks foolish.

Tugg


I agree generally that he did not need to follow an improper or illegal instruction, but he got IDB'd. The IDB was unwise for all sorts of reasons that people have discussed in this thread, but how was the IDB "improper" or "illegal?" UA was well within its rights to IDB him.

Except they did in fact board the passenger.

Tugg


Why does that matter? If the weather changes after boarding and the airplane becomes weight restricted, what are the passengers removed in that situation if not IDB?
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
apfpilot
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:36 pm

People are confusing things here. There are a few points that I want to make. a) he needed to get off of the airplane, if not because of the IDB situation, but because the airline asked him to get off and as long as they aren't doing it because of his status as a protected class they can do that. b) the LEO's escalated this way too fast, at the very least they should have raised the arm rests between his seat and the aisle seat, and the aisle seat and the aisle, would have made removal much easier. c) even if you think the airline was wrong (which I do in this case) the time and place to litigate a breach of the C of C isn't with the gate agent, crew, F/As or law enforcement. It is with a lawyer over the phone in a less stressful and intense atmosphere.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
 
socalgeo
Posts: 408
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:56 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:37 pm

jfidler wrote:
wingman wrote:
If UA can't catch this overbook prior to departure and select passengers beforehand by bidding up the compensation then their four employees should drive to Louisville.


I agree they should have caught this before boarding in this case, but what about in cases when they can't? I was on a RJ years ago, and only after we all boarded did they determine we were over the weight limit. Some people volunteered (and received compensation) so we were fine, but what if no one did?


Deplane everyone and reassign seats. Duh....

No passenger who has broken no rules and has followed the instructions on safety should ever end up with injuries. PERIOD.

Did united seek and provide medical attention for him? He was bleeding and was clearly disoriented on the later video where he was running around the cabin.

I doubt they even offered to make sure he was ok.

Shameful display by united.
 
tp1040
Posts: 369
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 6:30 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:38 pm

jfidler wrote:
wingman wrote:
If UA can't catch this overbook prior to departure and select passengers beforehand by bidding up the compensation then their four employees should drive to Louisville.


I agree they should have caught this before boarding in this case, but what about in cases when they can't? I was on a RJ years ago, and only after we all boarded did they determine we were over the weight limit. Some people volunteered (and received compensation) so we were fine, but what if no one did?


Being overweight is not the same as this. People are a lot more understanding.

I got caught in an overweight situation, due to weather, they had to load more fuel than normal. For flight safety, 4 people were prevented from boarding, offered vouchers, rerouted, rebooked on another airline. Guess what, weather screwed up my rebooked airline. 8 hours later, we departed. It wasn't anyone's mistake or fault.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10898
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:40 pm

Cubsrule wrote:
Tugger wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:

I agree generally that he did not need to follow an improper or illegal instruction, but he got IDB'd. The IDB was unwise for all sorts of reasons that people have discussed in this thread, but how was the IDB "improper" or "illegal?" UA was well within its rights to IDB him.

Except they did in fact board the passenger.

Tugg


Why does that matter? If the weather changes after boarding and the airplane becomes weight restricted, what are the passengers removed in that situation if not IDB?

Well I can't quote chapter and verse but I believe there is a difference with "safety of flight" and "convenience of the airline". They were going to simply replace the passenger with another passenger (the deadheading crew). There needs to be a valid reason to "take" from a person something they have paid for, and as many have noted a seat on an airline is an expiring asset, it has a set value for a set time. There is often no way to cover that for many people.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:42 pm

mia wrote:
I came here looking for matue discussion on what is an OBJECTIVELY appalling situation. I would expect more nuanced discussion from 4chan that the trash that has been written by commenters.

Are we so immune to violence in our society that there are people actually finding justifications for the fact that hired security assaulted a passenger to involuntarily remove him from a flight?

I hope this passenger finds a lawyer and takes United/Republic/security company for all they got.

Can someone that knows more about operations than me chime in here: how do other airlines handle this situation? Do they tell the folks that haven't boarded to pound sand and give them their denied boarding compensation? Or do they also forcibly remove passengers on board like this? I would think that non physical coercion could get this man off the plane quicker including but not limited to threatening to ban him should he refuse to deplane. What do I know?


It's very common to deny boarding involuntarily, happens every day. Sometimes the flight is replaced by a jet with 25 fewer seats. You get 17 volunteers, you pull 8 other people off. Generally this is always done before boarding.

The unique thing here is, some people had to come out AFTER they boarded, because airline decided to route a flight crew on this jet to save 80 other people's day the next day. In other words, the airplane's passenger capacity suddenly went down by 4.

Morally and legally, this is exactly the same as if they were denied boarding before hand. As always, this is at the airline's and captain's sole and complete legal discretion.

When this ignorant "doctor" started ignoring lawful orders, he chose to endanger himself and others. United should praise its employees for resolving this assailant situation without any deaths... and ban this idiot for life. He can sue BUT he is woefully outgunned by laws and norms on this post-9/11. The crew is in charge -- backed up by airport police on the ground... and the US Air Force in the air. The police and Air Force will resolve any such situations with force, if you beg for it.
Last edited by Flighty on Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
ROSWELL41
Posts: 777
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2001 3:50 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:43 pm

Tugger wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:
He equally certainly is at fault for refusing to deplane when asked.

No he is not.
You are not required to follow improper or illegal instructions. You may get whacked over the head by a police officer but in court the right to refuse to follow improper orders will be enforced. As others have stated, the passengers were boarded, the airline decided to "confiscate" a a ticketed, boarded, and seated passenger's paid for seat for which there is no allowance for in the CoC.

United lost this battle and looks foolish.

Tugg


Completely incorrect. The airline instructed the passenger to deplane. He refused. Legally, the passenger is now trespassing. He ignored instructions from law enforcement officers (police) to deplane (not contract security as some here claimed). The police physically removed said non compliant passenger. United is certainly to blamed for overbooking. The passenger is to blame for being dragged down the aisle since he chose to ignore the legitimate instructions of law enforcement. Sorry, you don't get to use alternative facts.
 
tigamilla
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu May 26, 2016 11:05 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:46 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:
The way security handled the situation was a gaffe, but that's really not UA's gaffe.

Do I understand correctly that you believe that you and I ought to be able to decline an IDB because we don't feel like dealing with the inconvenience? I'd point out also that ORD-SDF is a doable drive.

No, I don't think it should be an option, but if the passenger is putting them in a position where they have to forcibly remove him (as in this situation), then some sort of alternative would need to be devised. Physically dragging a non-violent individual off the aircraft isn't a proper solution.


He was non compliant with their orders. They did what they had to for removal.

Special snowflakes.


Wow! Do you really believe that what they did here to a passenger who's only fault was PAYING UA for a ticket, was right? Not everything is simply black and white, right or wrong, this is disturbingly unfair and was handled incredibly poorly - that is paying passenger not a criminal. Regardless of the terms of carriage - this is not how you treat customers, ever. There are ways of doing things, and I hope this video is used for years as an example of how to ruin a brand image in seconds.
 
DoctorVenkman
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 10:10 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:47 pm

A lot of people on this board idolize authorities. Whether that authority is police, crew, or an airline you'll see people rush to defend them regardless of the situation.

In this case it's clear that multiple authorities failed to act properly. The gate agent should not have started boarding if the flight was overbooked. The police/security failed to de-escalate the situation. In the end what should have been a negotiation ended up with a man's face getting slammed by security and a (probable) lawsuit for UA. Awful for everyone involved.
 
wingman
Posts: 4019
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:48 pm

I just sent UA a note through my Mileage Plus account letting them know what I feel about this video and their treatment of this passenger. Last week's flight from PHL to PDX was my last ever on this airline. I'm too old to participate in all the social media sites but I hope someone somewhere has started a petition or campaign to boycott UA. I still cannot quite wrap my head around what I'm seeing in these videos.
 
User avatar
tlecam
Posts: 1500
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:49 pm

Just not a good look for United. Yes, yes, CoC, overbooking happens all the time etc....

Still not a reason you want your airline to be in the news. Between offering more money to incent volunteers and figuring out the involuntary boarding before the passengers are on the plane, United has got to find ways to de-escalate these PR situations.

Yes, this will quickly exit the notoriously ADD publics' mind...but over time, these events have impact on things like brand and net promoter scores.
BOS-LGA-JFK | A:319/20/21, 332/3, 346 || B:717, 735, 737, 738, 739, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 787, 772, 744 || MD80, MD90
 
bob75013
Posts: 1014
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:49 pm

apfpilot wrote:
goCOgo wrote:
glbltrvlr wrote:




I doubt it - the PD will be covered under qualified immunity and nothing will happen to them (sadly)


Really? Then why is it that police departments (actually cities/towns) REGULARLY make multi million dollar settlements with citizens who have been mistreated by police?
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3595
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

Re: Another United gaffe - forces doctor off plane

Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:49 pm

socalgeo wrote:
KFLLCFII wrote:
Nothing in either video appears to suggest that the man's head hitting the armrest across the aisle was an intentional act by the officers, but merely incidental to the man's removal from the seat and his subsequent toppling over across the aisle.

As has been said earlier in the thread, noncompliance with an officer's request, then order, will lead to use of force. If, in the course of a struggle against lawful use of force the resisting party sustains injuries, even serious/potentially life-threatening injuries merely incidental to the lawful use of force (such as a head incidentally hitting an armrest during the course of detainment), then that liability is on the resisting party...NOT the detaining officer in the course of his/her official duties.

It's no different than if, in the course of the use of lawful and non-lethal self-defense during a street encounter using a hand-to-hand technique, the offending party happens to be tripped over by the defending party and incidentally smacks his/her head on a curb, causing death by severe head injury...Courts (at least in the U.S.) generally hold that death or great bodily harm resulting incidentally to the use of non-lethal defensive methods against an offending party is not the liability of the defending party, as the defending party generally would not have reasonably known that the use of a defensive method established by law and precedent to be "non-lethal" would have resulted in death or great bodily harm.


You seem to feel like this gentleman deserved this treatment. Do you work for United?


Assuming that the male first refused an officer's request to vacate the aircraft, and then a verbal order to vacate the aircraft, I believe the use of basic hands-on force was justified in removing the male from the aircraft. And I believe that (what appears to be) the fact that the male toppled over the aisle and hit his head on the opposite-side armrest during the struggle was merely incidental during the course of the officers conducting their official duties, which therefore would not cause the officers to be liable for the head trauma or any other injuries sustained by the male.

No, I do not work for United, nor have I ever worked for any airline...As the saying goes, I have "no dog in this hunt".
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 43

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos