Posted on 04/11/2017 10:15:19 AM PDT by Morgana
FULL TITLE: PICTURED: The internal medicine specialist father-of-five who was beaten and dragged off an overbooked United flight as CEO pens 'tone deaf' email DEFENDING staff
The passenger who was dragged from an United Airlines flight is 69-year-old grandfather Dr David Dao.
Footage of the Vietnamese-American being hauled off the overbooked flight at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport on Sunday caused outrage on Monday.
Dr Dao was heard in videos captured of his shocking eviction saying he needed to get home to Louisville so he could see patients.
DailyMail.com can reveal Dr Dao is a father of five and a grandfather, who specializes in internal medicine. Four of his five children are doctors.
His wife Teresa, 69, is a pediatrican who trained at Ho Chi Minh University in Saigon and also practices in Elizabethtown, Kentucky - about 40 miles south of Louisville.
Their eldest son Tim, 34, practices medicine in Texas; their second son Ben, 31, is a medical graduate; their daughter Christine, 33, is a doctor in Durham, NC; and their youngster daughter Angela, 27, is a medical graduate of the University of Kentucky.
Scroll down for video
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
They did not “let him back on the plane”.
They left him, unconscious, in the hallway thingy while they went to get a wheelchair. He woke up. No one was around, so he ran back onto the plane!
The best homos IMO are old married homos who trade pills for anal secks!
Yes, I just read that, too. If true, he’s lucky he only got beaten up and dragged off a plane.
If you’ve flown United Airlines recently, you will find that their entertainment is limited to what a travel can receive over their own laptop, tablet, or phone. It must be Apple compliant or Android.
After flying UA about a year ago, I decided that the seats were too cramp, the attendants too brusk, and for me the entertainment on cross country flights nonexistent. I quite flying with them. It seems that after their merger with Continental that their service went downhill.
No one wants to check luggage, and so there is a struggle to fit all carry on into the bins available. It takes twice as long to load passengers, and the planes are flying bottom light, and top heavy.
I’ve had better experiences with Alaska and Southwest, than United or American. This incident will probably turn a lot of people off United in the future. They’ve made their own bed.
yes, stupid... that’s EXACTLY what i said only with more words
When the Government books a flight it is a guaranteed/refundable seat. And yes they pay extra for it.
“They are allowed to overbook. It keeps fares lower, and that’s the number one concern of passengers.”
Unfortunately they overbook with the idea that some passenger will not show for the flight, despite forfeiting their fare.
They have reduced the number of flights, crammed passengers into smaller and smaller seats, demanded that passengers pay extra for the same size seat that is “in a better area” of the plane, and feed them sparingly on long flights (five to seven hours). They then wonder why the public complains.
Recently I found I had more legroom on a puddle jumper from my local airport than a fourteen hour flight from LAX to Sydney Australia.
Fortunately I flew Qantas part of the way back. The first flight was a Qantas flight operated by Emirites (total luxury) in coach. The second leg was with Qantas itself (a step down, but good). My last three legs were by American and torture again.
So guess how I’ll fly in the future, if I go overseas. It won’t be by one of our carriers.
The quality of Freepers is certainly going downhill lately...
I did not realize he ran back on the plane! Did they remove him again? (I hope so)
Buying a ticket does not give you constitutional rights or something. I am amazed at the number of knew jerkers here who said “He paid for it, they should be FORCED to serve him”
Would those people insist they fly him during a tornado? Because he PAID FOR HIS TICKET! Things change- the airline must adjust. They needed pilots elsewhere... is that too hard to understand? (not you, T)
Thank you for being one of the three or so reasonable Freepers left in these United States.
This is true but misses the point of running a service oriented business. So you can throw customers off the plane. OK what does that get you. Because you can also charter a small jet and take the four crew members who were responsible for the overbooking to their destination without resorting to the awful contract that the coustomers must agree to in order to fly.
As I understand, a driver could have taken them to their destination too. United needs people in charge who can think. It is appropriate that people dump their stock, the company is being run by people who have reached the level of incompetence.
How is my comment EXACTLY like what you said? You basically said the airline was within their rights to do what they did. I questioned that with my comment.
C’mon HG.
Does bring up the adage “what can be done to the least of you...”
Things changed, but the airline didn't adjust. They demanded the adjustment come from the passengers on the plane. Big difference. And the change came because of incompetence on the part of the airline, but that's okay, and the passengers have to just accept it with a big smile, bend over, and take it in the A$$? Has the airline explained what happened to the original crew that was supposed to fly out of Kentucky the next day? Had they never been scheduled to work to begin with? Did they all call in sick? Were they drunk? How does it happen that you are down four employees on one flight. What the F*ck happened?
Saw a post on another thread that said the sex/drugs doc might be another doc.
Who knows? So much info/misinfo out there.
United and United CEO just released two statements....(Breaking, on FoxBiz)....
It’s never to late to do the right thing. We’l fix this.
We’re sorry. We’ll fix this.
The ticker said there could also be a multimillion dollar suit coming at them. Could be???
Other passengers sometimes provide entertainment.
Let me get this straight because other are making the same claim, United employees instructed the police to beat the man?
Actually NO! The agreement (section 25) states they can deny boarding... He had boarded , UNITED has no right to remove boarded passengers under their contract. They verbally assaulted this man who was asserting his contracted rights until he responded and then used his “indignant” response as an excuse to have police beat him and drag him off.
Interesting. I wonder if there's any past cases that would support this view. I could see a judge or jury making the decision that removal before taking off would be equivalent to denial of boarding. I think a captain also has considerable legal power to remove someone from the plane.
Actually, regardless of his past, what the airline did was wrong and I’ll bet they pay dearly for it.
You are aware that when you buy a ticket from ANY airline, you agree to be bumped from the flight if necessary.
Nah, lawyers would never do that! That is unethical!
I don’t fly, even more so after 9-11
I was just answering the "evidence" question. In my opinion, his past was irrelevant... except that it sounds like he's put himself in positions before.
In this case, the airline was wrong to allow people onto the plane before they took care of whatever "re-accomodation" was needing to happen.
The passenger was wrong as soon as he failed to comply with flight personnel. Rightly or wrongly, their orders need to be complied with fully, or you're in violation of your contract with them, and the federal government.
The airline has already lost millions over the deal, and harmed their public image (such that it was). I think they stand to lose a lot more as well.
The paying public will likely win here because the industry will likely be looking for ways to avoid this in the future.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.