I’ve never disagreed with you before, but there’s always a first. I strongly disagree this time.
Toward the beginning of all this I read an article by a law prof written for a legal journal. He carefully walked through all United’s applicable Terms of Service. Here are the highlights.
At the gate, United had a free hand. They could have denied boarding for any number of reasons. They could have told Dao the plane was overbooked. [It wasn’t.] He’d have had no recourse; he’d just be high and dry.
Once United issued his boarding pass and allowed him to be seated, their own ToS limited the reasons they could kick him off. What it comes down to is disruptive behavior. Dao would need to be drunk, disorderly, making threats, etc. None of those conditions applied; Dao was sitting quietly in his seat, minding his own business.
Munoz, the CEO of United, has admitted Dao did nothing to warrant or justify being kicked off. Much less did this non-aggressive 69 yo man deserve the excessive force that was used on him. United screwed up. For that they will pay, as well they should.
The law and contract do provide, however, that at this point, Dao has variable rights or entitlements.
UAL gets him on another flight, not more than one hour delay, no compensation.
UAL gets him on another flight, up to two hour delay, he gets a cash award in addition to being transported. Cash award is 200% of ticket price, or $675, whichever is less.
UAL gets him on another flight, more than four hour delay, he is entitled to a cash award in addition to being transported, of 400% ticket value, or $1,350, whichever is less.
I'll concede that none of those is "recourse," but the contract does provide for compensation when being denied boarding (for something other than weather, etc.) results in a delay of over one hour. He is still "high and dry" in the sense of being stranded for the interval of the delay.
Terms of service means civil liabilities, but in no way does it give a passenger the authority to start a fight.
That’s the problem. All the numerous arguments are about the intricacies of the law and of course the big winner in this is going to be some lawyer. It is sickening that our society can’t get along on basic standards of decency and common sense. We become overwrought with the intricacies of “should have, could have, would have,” instead of the basic argument that used to prevail, the carrier decides. I’ve been flying commercially for well over sixty years and yes I have been asked to give up my seat, but I have also been upgraded to first class without my knowledge as to why. I have also had my seat changed so that I would have empty seats on each side giving me more room on an overnight flight. Over the years i have received good service from all the carriers I have flown with including United. The spoilsport attitude of many travelers only leads to unrest among all. When asked to give up his seat the “doctor” should have complied. HE is the one responsible for the treatment he received exactly like the rioters who have to be dragged off by the police. Won’;t it just be wonderful when some terrorist is asked to leave and throws a fit like this ‘doctor” so he wins the support of the passengers and fear of the authorities? It will happen because so many people are STUPID and never think beyond the immediate.