User avatar
YSAPW
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 2:50 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Fri Aug 10, 2018 8:27 pm

Wow.
 
Gatorman96
Posts: 840
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:22 am

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Fri Aug 10, 2018 10:03 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
So you are completely satisfied with an airline selling a service, that they are unwilling or unable to provide. Posters here also forget that the passenger has already fulfilled his/her part of the contract that is paid.

The service and contract was fulfilled by the airline, just on a later flight that could safely accommodate her Cello and case.

mjoelnir wrote:
If the flight crew has the right to deny the passenger the flight is not in question, but do they have the right to call the goon squad on a passenger, because of a mix up by their own airline?

The "goon squad," huh? Good to see how you view law enforcement, but what none of us know is how the passenger behaved between being told that she needed to deplane and when she actually left the aircraft. It's possible she refused to deplane in which case LEO's were called.

mjoelnir wrote:
I also call the "safety angle" in doubt.

So then why would AA ask the passenger to deplane if it wasn't a safety issue? I can't wait to hear your theories.

mjoelnir wrote:
Yes the crew can deny the transportation of the cello, but why do many of you hold the airline and their staff blameless?

I only know the side of the passenger's story and based off of what I've read and the picture that the passenger posted of the Cello, the case was too large to safely fit in the seat. The crew most likely determined that it wasn't safe to fly with the way the Cello case was stowed in the seat. I personally don't blame the passenger or the airline because the only time they were able to determine if the combination between the aircraft seat and the large Cello case wouldn't fit was after it was strapped in. The crew made a judgement call and they were well within their rights, according AA's published policy, to deny transportation for this Cello on that specific flight. This concept should not be this hard to grasp.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1251
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Fri Aug 10, 2018 11:40 pm

Gatorman96 wrote:
I only know the side of the passenger's story and based off of what I've read and the picture that the passenger posted of the Cello, the case was too large to safely fit in the seat.

You can tell from the picture that it doesn't fit in a 737? If it doesn't fit in the window seat of a 737, how's it going to fit in the window seat of a 767, as they scheduled her into the next day? The difference in seat width is less than an inch, if that.

You can google image search cello on a plane, and see many photos of a cello on a plane, strapped in exactly as in this incident. I firmly believe that AA's excuse of a 737 being too small is just them hiding behind their vaguely worded policy, in order to save face for a crew who made a bad decision.
 
trex8
Posts: 5345
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Sat Aug 11, 2018 12:29 am

aerolimani wrote:
Gatorman96 wrote:
I only know the side of the passenger's story and based off of what I've read and the picture that the passenger posted of the Cello, the case was too large to safely fit in the seat.

You can tell from the picture that it doesn't fit in a 737? If it doesn't fit in the window seat of a 737, how's it going to fit in the window seat of a 767, as they scheduled her into the next day? The difference in seat width is less than an inch, if that.

You can google image search cello on a plane, and see many photos of a cello on a plane, strapped in exactly as in this incident. I firmly believe that AA's excuse of a 737 being too small is just them hiding behind their vaguely worded policy, in order to save face for a crew who made a bad decision.

Didnt she fly down there on a 757, are AA 757 seats that different from AA 737s??
 
FlyDeltaJets
Posts: 1652
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 4:24 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Sat Aug 11, 2018 2:18 am

WTXJET wrote:
If the AA policy is so easy to understand, then how did the passenger get to her seat with the Cello? If AA knows the cello doesn't fit on a B737, then why was the passenger allowed to board with the cellos? To me this discussion is simple, even AA employees don't know their company policy OR the policy interpretation was made up while on-board the aircraft.

The flight from ORD-MIA that the passenger flew in June was on a B757.

The ambiguous language about the instrument may not fit on some aircraft could possibly be AA's language to cover themselves due to the number of RJ in the fleet.

Carry-on with the discussion.



The hard bulkhead rule seems to be safety based, so that the cello wouldn't go flying forward into someone in the event of a hard braking situation.
The only valid opinions are those based in facts
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1251
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Sat Aug 11, 2018 2:33 am

FlyDeltaJets wrote:
The hard bulkhead rule seems to be safety based, so that the cello wouldn't go flying forward into someone in the event of a hard braking situation.

Except that the DOT/FAA don’t require that. Besides weight restrictions, the only rules are that it must be sufficiently restrained, not block anyone’s access to emergency egress (thus a window seat), and not block anyone’s view of certain signage; no smoking, seatbelt, and emergency exit signs.

It’s AA’s own rule.
 
M564038
Posts: 198
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:16 am

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Sat Aug 11, 2018 8:50 am

Here starts the looping thread.

a/That is not a legal or regulatory requirement.

because

b/A 35-40lbs cello hardcase is strapped in much more securely, through handles and secure points, in the seat than a 200lbs human using the exact same belts.

c/AA have their own special bulkhead rule not grounded in any safety concern, but they sold her the trip, took her money, assigned her the seat, got her on the airplane and as such waived any right to then start enforcing their own special little rule.


FlyDeltaJets wrote:
WTXJET wrote:
If the AA policy is so easy to understand, then how did the passenger get to her seat with the Cello? If AA knows the cello doesn't fit on a B737, then why was the passenger allowed to board with the cellos? To me this discussion is simple, even AA employees don't know their company policy OR the policy interpretation was made up while on-board the aircraft.

The flight from ORD-MIA that the passenger flew in June was on a B757.

The ambiguous language about the instrument may not fit on some aircraft could possibly be AA's language to cover themselves due to the number of RJ in the fleet.

Carry-on with the discussion.



The hard bulkhead rule seems to be safety based, so that the cello wouldn't go flying forward into someone in the event of a hard braking situation.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8804
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Sat Aug 11, 2018 10:31 am

Gatorman96 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
So you are completely satisfied with an airline selling a service, that they are unwilling or unable to provide. Posters here also forget that the passenger has already fulfilled his/her part of the contract that is paid.

The service and contract was fulfilled by the airline, just on a later flight that could safely accommodate her Cello and case.


Only somebody in the airline industry could declare that a contract stating time and date is fulfilled at a different time and date.

Gatorman96 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
If the flight crew has the right to deny the passenger the flight is not in question, but do they have the right to call the goon squad on a passenger, because of a mix up by their own airline?

The "goon squad," huh? Good to see how you view law enforcement, but what none of us know is how the passenger behaved between being told that she needed to deplane and when she actually left the aircraft. It's possible she refused to deplane in which case LEO's were called.


Yes the goon squad. An organisation that is known to illegally beat up passengers on the say so of the airline having a civil dispute with an passenger.

Gatorman96 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
I also call the "safety angle" in doubt.

So then why would AA ask the passenger to deplane if it wasn't a safety issue? I can't wait to hear your theories.


did you read the next sentence from me?

Gatorman96 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Yes the crew can deny the transportation of the cello, but why do many of you hold the airline and their staff blameless?[/I only know the side of the passenger's story and based off of what I've read and the picture that the passenger posted of the Cello, the case was too large to safely fit in the seat.


An absurd observation Either the cello is too large for a seat in an AA 737, or not. If it fit the next day, it would have fit the first day or vice versa.

Gatorman96 wrote:
The crew most likely determined that it wasn't safe to fly with the way the Cello case was stowed in the seat. I personally don't blame the passenger or the airline because the only time they were able to determine if the combination between the aircraft seat and the large Cello case wouldn't fit was after it was strapped in. The crew made a judgement call and they were well within their rights, according AA's published policy, to deny transportation for this Cello on that specific flight. This concept should not be this hard to grasp.


When the flight was booked and paid, there was a seat bought for the passenger and another seat for the cello. AA does know what airplane fly on what routes. AA does know according to its own rules what seats are applicable to be booked for a passenger and the cello. AA sold the tickets, booked the seats, got paid so accepted the contract. There was no weather delay or other mishaps that allow an airline to renegade on their contract.

It is perhaps a difficult concept to understand for people in the airline industry that a contract including a date and time, is not fulfilled when you do not keep to the date and time. There are some acceptable reasons for an airline to renegade on its contract, this time there is none.

Regarding the safety angle, it should be aloud the question why AA has a rule regarding the hard bulkhead, that is not from the FAA and is not used by other airlines? Is it really in regards to safety or just an arbitrary decision?
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1667
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Sat Aug 11, 2018 12:58 pm

This thread continues be a horror show. Imagine being served by an airline staffed by posters from the thread? We take your money, we have the final authority, you lose. Despite customer doing everything they ever could have.

And yes, if staff says you have to leave, you leave. But, that doesn't mean company or said staff wouldn't be subject to refund, compensation, apology, visit to the manager's office or even court and/or termination of employment or license. Depending on what they did.

The right way to deal with this from the passenger side would have been to take it in the chin, exit, and make a complaint. And if that wouldn't work, have a day in court. The right way for the staff to deal with of course would have been to follow procedures and accommodate customer as sold, planned, and required. And if that for some reason would not have been possible due to an earlier error or equipment change, apologise and compensate so well that the customer understands they really are sorry and are trying to make it up.

(Also, Aptivaboy provides very useful facts on the Dao case.)
 
User avatar
PPVLC
Posts: 255
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 12:07 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Sun Aug 12, 2018 9:15 pm

Exeiowa wrote:
PPVLC wrote:
I had a cello as a 1st class passenger years ago, we even gave the owner an extra blanket to wrap around the case so it wouldn't get scratched by the seat belt. The cello didn't eat or drink anything during the flight but the owner was very happy ;)



See it's not that hard after all. Thank you for being a good and conscientious person Shepparding us through the skies.


My pleasure!
Cabin crew L188 707 727 737 767 A300 DC10 MD11 777 747
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2291
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Mon Aug 13, 2018 11:57 am

Thankfully no such problems for a Cellist on DL994 BOS-MSP this morning, his Cello fit nicely in the window seat, him next to it and all good...
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
xxcr
Posts: 382
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 6:37 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Mon Aug 13, 2018 5:17 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
xxcr wrote:
I flew SFO-EWR a few months ago on UA 77W in business, and 2 passengers had purchased 2 seats for their cellos. I had no idea what instrument it was so i asked the owner and he told me it was a one off Carbon Fiber cello that he didnt trust checking in. IIRC he said it cost upwards of 65k for the 2 cello's so i dont blame him for buying a seat for it.

Most planes today can fit a cello in the cabin, even if you're flying in economy. I will not defend the airlne or the passenger but maybe it was a safety issue??? If she was cleared to fly with it on the first flight, i dont see why it would be an issue on the 2nd flight.....Did i miss something in the article?


You missed that AA has the rule that the seat for the cello must be a window seat at a hard bulkhead. The hard bulkhead is special to AA, not a safety measure by the FAA and does not apply at other airlines That seems to be something that nobody bothers about at AA, until the fun part of booting a passenger of the plane while calling the goon squad.
It seems to be more and more a police matter, when an airline denies you a service that you contracted and paid for.



Gotcha! yeah, i missed that part. Thanks for clarifying.
 
User avatar
ricport
Posts: 147
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:17 pm

Aptivaboy wrote:
Actually, that’s not quite accurate. In Dr. Dao’s case, United’s own policy was that once a validly ticketed passenger was seated, they couldn’t be removed. They could be bumped before getting on the plane ans sitting down, but once on the plane they couldn’t be asked to leave. This was codified in United's DOT filings and testimony before that body, and in United’s own internal policies and rules in effect BEFORE Dr. Dao’s face was kicked in. In other words, the command or request to exit the plane wasn’t one that as per United’s own rules could be given to a validly ticketed and seated passenger for the simple reason of wanting a seat. Barring some other legally enforceable issue or reason for ordering him deplaned, the actual order or request to give up his seat was invalid and therefore Dr. Dao (his real name, m’kay?) was under no legal obligation to get up and leave.


DOT regulations supersede an airline's policy.

Aptivaboy wrote:
He was breaking no rules. In fact, to reiterate his conduct was in accordance with United’s own preexisting policies and rules!


He was breaking the law by not complying with the instructions of the crew. Again, THREE other passengers showed the maturity you seem to be advocating and got up and left the aircraft.

Aptivaboy wrote:


Sorry, but I won't be dancing to your tune. I am willing to be factually accurate and refer to him as the multiple felon who decided he was above the law and everyone else and who was wrongly rewarded for it.
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 804
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:48 pm

The fact that Dr. Dao may have been a past felon has no bearing on what happened to hum aboard that plane. There was no causal connection between his past actions, which he served consequences for, and being beaten.

Also, I again refer you to United's own DOT filings. Their own documentation indicates that their policy was not to remove passengers who were validly ticketed and already in their seats. Period. Done. End of story. That being the case, it was United (or, their subsidiary) who was violating policy by demanding that Dr. Dao to leave the plane. I'm not sure why you cannot or will not see that.

Oscar Munoz certainly did. In his words, quoted form a Washington Post article: "When asked if the passenger, David Dao, was at fault for the actions that led to his removal from the plane as it sat on the runway Sunday at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, Munoz said, simply: "No, he cannot be. He was a paying passenger sitting in his seat on our aircraft. No one should be treated that way."

Also, I don't see how being beaten and losing teeth, and then being offered an out of court settlement means that Dr. Dao was unjustly enriched. United moved Heaven and Earth to settle this thing FAST, in order to get it out of the news. The last thing they wanted was for this to go to trial and have their dirty laundry aired any more publicly than it already had been. The speed with which a party moves to settle a lawsuit or claim is directly proportional to their level of guilt or culpability - don't forget that.

Finally, I'm not sure what you mean by "tune" There is no tune here. I'm merely stating facts (go look up United's DOT filings).

You say,
"I am willing to be factually accurate and refer to him as the multiple felon who decided he was above the law and everyone else and who was wrongly rewarded for it."


As already shown, Dr. Dao was breaking no laws, therefore he hadn't decided that he was above the law. The security types who abused him were fired after being found to have acted improperly, He was compensated for this out of court by a desperate United. That's hardly unjust enrichment.
 
User avatar
ricport
Posts: 147
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Wed Aug 15, 2018 5:50 pm

Aptivaboy wrote:
The fact that Dr. Dao may have been a past felon has no bearing on what happened to hum aboard that plane. There was no causal connection between his past actions, which he served consequences for, and being beaten.

Also, I again refer you to United's own DOT filings. Their own documentation indicates that their policy was not to remove passengers who were validly ticketed and already in their seats. Period. Done. End of story. That being the case, it was United (or, their subsidiary) who was violating policy by demanding that Dr. Dao to leave the plane. I'm not sure why you cannot or will not see that.

Oscar Munoz certainly did. In his words, quoted form a Washington Post article: "When asked if the passenger, David Dao, was at fault for the actions that led to his removal from the plane as it sat on the runway Sunday at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, Munoz said, simply: "No, he cannot be. He was a paying passenger sitting in his seat on our aircraft. No one should be treated that way."

Also, I don't see how being beaten and losing teeth, and then being offered an out of court settlement means that Dr. Dao was unjustly enriched. United moved Heaven and Earth to settle this thing FAST, in order to get it out of the news. The last thing they wanted was for this to go to trial and have their dirty laundry aired any more publicly than it already had been. The speed with which a party moves to settle a lawsuit or claim is directly proportional to their level of guilt or culpability - don't forget that.

Finally, I'm not sure what you mean by "tune" There is no tune here. I'm merely stating facts (go look up United's DOT filings).

You say,
"I am willing to be factually accurate and refer to him as the multiple felon who decided he was above the law and everyone else and who was wrongly rewarded for it."


As already shown, Dr. Dao was breaking no laws, therefore he hadn't decided that he was above the law. The security types who abused him were fired after being found to have acted improperly, He was compensated for this out of court by a desperate United. That's hardly unjust enrichment.


First off, the fact that the multiple felon is a multiple felon who committed his felonies in the course of his "practice" is certainly germaine as it relates to his character...or total lack thereof.

And since you want to cite the government, I find it interesting that you conveniently omit the fact that the DOT did not find UA in violation of any laws or statutes. The only reason why the multiple felon was likely not charged for failing to obey a flight crew is probably because the government did not want to risk raising the ire of you, the lazy media, and the hoards of social media dipwads who think that he was in the right. I suspect they felt it was best left to be a matter for the civil courts. And again, not arguing that the "boots on the ground" involved at ORD didn't violate UA's policy, but again - POLICY is quite different from LAW. One is set by the company. The other is set by the government. Period. Done. End of story. I'm not sure why you cannot see that.

And, as far as Munoz, he - and UA's legal team - didn't do what was right - they did what was expedient and face-saving (after standing behind the facts at first), as the lazy media and legion of social media dipwads had already killed and buried the facts. And I can assure you that many companies get shaken down with lawsuits and settle even though they are in the right.

Once again, other passengers got up and left when asked. They were not "beaten," and got very little for obeying the law. The multiple felon chose to disobey the law, resisted law enforcement, and undoubtedly got handsomely rewarded for it. You have a very warped sense of what's right, and it's sadly representative of far too many Americans these days.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8804
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Wed Aug 15, 2018 6:48 pm

ricport wrote:
Aptivaboy wrote:
The fact that Dr. Dao may have been a past felon has no bearing on what happened to hum aboard that plane. There was no causal connection between his past actions, which he served consequences for, and being beaten.

Also, I again refer you to United's own DOT filings. Their own documentation indicates that their policy was not to remove passengers who were validly ticketed and already in their seats. Period. Done. End of story. That being the case, it was United (or, their subsidiary) who was violating policy by demanding that Dr. Dao to leave the plane. I'm not sure why you cannot or will not see that.

Oscar Munoz certainly did. In his words, quoted form a Washington Post article: "When asked if the passenger, David Dao, was at fault for the actions that led to his removal from the plane as it sat on the runway Sunday at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, Munoz said, simply: "No, he cannot be. He was a paying passenger sitting in his seat on our aircraft. No one should be treated that way."

Also, I don't see how being beaten and losing teeth, and then being offered an out of court settlement means that Dr. Dao was unjustly enriched. United moved Heaven and Earth to settle this thing FAST, in order to get it out of the news. The last thing they wanted was for this to go to trial and have their dirty laundry aired any more publicly than it already had been. The speed with which a party moves to settle a lawsuit or claim is directly proportional to their level of guilt or culpability - don't forget that.

Finally, I'm not sure what you mean by "tune" There is no tune here. I'm merely stating facts (go look up United's DOT filings).

You say,
"I am willing to be factually accurate and refer to him as the multiple felon who decided he was above the law and everyone else and who was wrongly rewarded for it."


As already shown, Dr. Dao was breaking no laws, therefore he hadn't decided that he was above the law. The security types who abused him were fired after being found to have acted improperly, He was compensated for this out of court by a desperate United. That's hardly unjust enrichment.


First off, the fact that the multiple felon is a multiple felon who committed his felonies in the course of his "practice" is certainly germaine as it relates to his character...or total lack thereof.

And since you want to cite the government, I find it interesting that you conveniently omit the fact that the DOT did not find UA in violation of any laws or statutes. The only reason why the multiple felon was likely not charged for failing to obey a flight crew is probably because the government did not want to risk raising the ire of you, the lazy media, and the hoards of social media dipwads who think that he was in the right. I suspect they felt it was best left to be a matter for the civil courts. And again, not arguing that the "boots on the ground" involved at ORD didn't violate UA's policy, but again - POLICY is quite different from LAW. One is set by the company. The other is set by the government. Period. Done. End of story. I'm not sure why you cannot see that.

And, as far as Munoz, he - and UA's legal team - didn't do what was right - they did what was expedient and face-saving (after standing behind the facts at first), as the lazy media and legion of social media dipwads had already killed and buried the facts. And I can assure you that many companies get shaken down with lawsuits and settle even though they are in the right.

Once again, other passengers got up and left when asked. They were not "beaten," and got very little for obeying the law. The multiple felon chose to disobey the law, resisted law enforcement, and undoubtedly got handsomely rewarded for it. You have a very warped sense of what's right, and it's sadly representative of far too many Americans these days.


Other people following an illegal order, is no reason for following an illegal order. There was no safety violation of any kind. The airline had a civil dispute with a customer about fulfilling a contract.
I do understand that people in the airline industry have a horror regarding the idea that airlines should not have a free choice about fulfilling their contracts with their customers.
It should tell you something that the goons, that beat up Mr. Dao on the order of the airline, were fired. The airline paid compensation and accepted fault and changed their procedure. I can hardly understand where you get the idea from, that the airline staff was in the right.
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 804
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Wed Aug 15, 2018 7:27 pm

First off, the fact that the multiple felon is a multiple felon who committed his felonies in the course of his "practice" is certainly germaine as it relates to his character...or total lack thereof.


But, not to this incident. His past crime(s) had nothing to do with aviation and aren't relatable in the slightest. And, he paid his consequence to society. To use your logic, we will continue punishing and holding in low regard everyone in history who has ever committed a crime. They will always be guilty going forward, no matter what. Sad...

And since you want to cite the government, I find it interesting that you conveniently omit the fact that the DOT did not find UA in violation of any laws or statutes.


I never said that United violated the law, only that United didn't follow its own policies and rules. Reading comprehension matters.

They were not "beaten," and got very little for obeying the law. The multiple felon chose to disobey the law, resisted law enforcement, and undoubtedly got handsomely rewarded for it. You have a very warped sense of what's right, and it's sadly representative of far too many Americans these days.


The goons who beat him up weren't law enforcement. They were private security contractors. Therefore, they couldn't enforce "the law." Had they been uniformed Chicago Police Department officers, we might be having a different discussion, but they were not. They possessed no real police powers and didn't even really have "real" badges. Dao also didn't actively resist. He just refused to leave his bought and paid for seat, and again, United's own publicly available rules said that he didn't have to. It was the security goons who threatened to bash his head in and then actually did it, grabbing him by the head and face slamming it down, knocking out several teeth, giving him a concussion, and other injuries. That's assault and battery by any interpretation.

And, my views are hardly warped. I simply expect a carrier to abide by the terms of its contract. That's not warped, at all. What's warped is someone like yourself apparently taking the view that an airline should not have to live up to the contract it willingly entered into with a paying customer, nor should have to follow the rules and policies that it submitted voluntarily to the United States Government and published publicly to its paying customers.
 
Exeiowa
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:49 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Wed Aug 15, 2018 7:59 pm

I don't think expecting to receive a service that you have paid for is a "sense of entitlement"
 
smartplane
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Wed Aug 15, 2018 8:16 pm

Exeiowa wrote:
I don't think expecting to receive a service that you have paid for is a "sense of entitlement"

Unfortunately in the aviation industry, at least in the USA, the definition of 'service' is being re-written, becoming increasingly one-sided. Heads we win, tails you lose.
 
ubeema
Posts: 397
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 3:48 am

AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Wed Aug 15, 2018 10:26 pm

Throwback April 2017, a snapshot highlighting the infamous report of UA3411 debacle involving Dr Dao.

IMO this sums it up and should be gold standard for any business:
Avoid putting our customers, employees, and partners into situations due to policies WE CONTROL.


Problem
Image

Solution
Image
 
AEROFAN
Posts: 1777
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 9:47 am

Re: AA booted a Cellist from the Aircraft (did not allow the Cello on a paid ticket)

Wed Aug 15, 2018 10:52 pm

Exeiowa wrote:
I don't think expecting to receive a service that you have paid for is a "sense of entitlement"


Only an airline employee would think this to be the case. I oft wonder if these self same employees do not live in the wider world.

Some of their comments are truly bizarre.

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