Posted on 04/15/2017 1:23:22 PM PDT by Morgana
FULL TITLE: Adding insult to injury: United did NOT take passenger's bags off his plane after he was dragged off - then sent his luggage to the WRONG address hundreds of miles from where he was hospitalized
The doctor dragged off a United plane in scenes which created global outrage was further insulted when the airline withheld his luggage, sending it on a convoluted path home.
Dr David Dao was accused of refusing to give up his seat on Sunday's United Express flight UA3411 flight from Chicago to Louisville for the airline's staff.
Cell phone footage then shows the moment when he was forcibly and violently removed from the airline by heavy-handed Chicago Aviation Security police officers.
Now, it has been revealed that on top of being forced out of their seats and off the plane, the airline did not take the time to release their luggage to Dr Dao and his wife, instead sending it back to Kentucky and leaving them with nothing.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Because that would make sense!!!
Or better yet say to them “I’m sorry our paying customers come first, you will either have to sit in the back or take another flight”.
Am I dense or is this how most businesses would do this? Let the paying customer go first?
Not many subjects get the extended news treatment. Abusive airline stories pop up about once each 5-10 years. None of them have real staying power.
Sorry but the fact is Planes fall under Train laws. And No his contract controls plus hes a phoney. Full Videos show its a shakedown.
If the thugs have a good union, their story would be that the airline personnel told them that a passenger was being disruptive and was a threat to other passengers and crew, and that they were trying to mitigate the threat that they'd be told of.
That would create enough FUD that the jury might just pile on the airline.
Any airline that denies Dr. Dap service in the future will face an immediate PR disaster on the scale of which United is currently facing. He’s going to be treated with kid gloves for the rest of his life, because public opinion is on his side; any perceived mistreatment of him is going to generate immediate headlines.
Well, from what I read...the flight crew had to be in the city that the plane was going to...because of flight delays.
I get that. Business is business. But this debacle will be more costly than any solution they could have dreamed up. A charter flight would have been CHEAP.
I won’t lie. I haven’t flown since pre-911. It wasn’t pleasant then...and I can’t imagine it would be pleasant now.
“So you believe we should be living in a police state? Obey everything the cops say or else? How utterly dictatorial and totalitarian of you.”
What’s the alternative - everyone decides when they want to obey the pigs and when they don’t? Again, short of being ordered to harm others, people are expected to BEHAVE and obey orders from the pigs - and then seek redress later. If they don’t, that’s their problem - certainly not United’s problem.
The fact that unitd has said they will not do things this way again, plus changing their policies regarding overbooking, plus bribing the entire planeload of passengers with 9-10 grand apiece, says hes got a great case.
Depends on how you define win. The question is how many zeros will there be in the settlement.
Well, first of all. I totally dislike you calling cops “pigs”. So there’s absolutely not taking this conversation any further. Go over to DU with the rest of the leftists and BLM’ers. You’ve defeated your “position” by using that slur on law enforcement.
Sorry, but show me where trains are governed by the FAA and the F.A.R. (Federal Aviation Regulations)
Here is Part 21 - Refusal to Transport
Once passenger has boarded and been seated, there are basically 19 reasons a passenger can be ejected from a plane. And needing his seat for another employee is not on the list.
RULE 21 REFUSAL OF TRANSPORT
UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:
Breach of Contract of Carriage – Failure by Passenger to comply with the Rules of the Contract of Carriage.
Government Request, Regulations or Security Directives – Whenever such action is necessary to comply with any government regulation, Customs and Border Protection, government or airport security directive of any sort, or any governmental request for emergency transportation in connection with the national defense.
Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions – Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, acts of God, force majeure, strikes, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, terrorist activities, or disturbances, whether actual, threatened, or reported.
Search of Passenger or Property – Whenever a Passenger refuses to submit to electronic surveillance or to permit search of his/her person or property.
Proof of Identity – Whenever a Passenger refuses on request to produce identification satisfactory to UA or who presents a Ticket to board and whose identification does not match the name on the Ticket. UA shall have the right, but shall not be obligated, to require identification of persons purchasing tickets and/or presenting a ticket(s) for the purpose of boarding the aircraft.
Failure to Pay – Whenever a Passenger has not paid the appropriate fare for a Ticket, Baggage, or applicable service charges for services required for travel, has not paid an outstanding debt or Court judgment, or has not produced satisfactory proof to UA that the Passenger is an authorized non-revenue Passenger or has engaged in a prohibited practice as specified in Rule 6.
Across International Boundaries – Whenever a Passenger is traveling across any international boundary if:
The government required travel documents of such Passenger appear not to be in order according to UA’s reasonable belief; or
Such Passenger’s embarkation from, transit through, or entry into any country from, through, or to which such Passenger desires transportation would be unlawful or denied for any reason.
Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to:
Passengers whose conduct is disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent;
Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;
Passengers who assault any employee of UA, including the gate agents and flight crew, or any UA Passenger;
Passengers who, through and as a result of their conduct, cause a disturbance such that the captain or member of the cockpit crew must leave the cockpit in order to attend to the disturbance;
Passengers who are barefoot or not properly clothed;
Passengers who appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs to a degree that the Passenger may endanger the Passenger or another Passenger or members of the crew (other than a qualified individual whose appearance or involuntary behavior may make them appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs);
Passengers wearing or possessing on or about their person concealed or unconcealed deadly or dangerous weapons; provided, however, that UA will carry law enforcement personnel who meet the qualifications and conditions established in 49 C.F.R. §1544.219;
Passengers who are unwilling or unable to follow UA’s policy on smoking or use of other smokeless materials;
Unless they comply with Rule 6 I), Passengers who are unable to sit in a single seat with the seat belt properly secured, and/or are unable to put the seat’s armrests down when seated and remain seated with the armrest down for the entirety of the flight, and/or passengers who significantly encroach upon the adjoining passenger’s seat;
Passengers who are manacled or in the custody of law enforcement personnel;
Passengers who have resisted or may reasonably be believed to be capable of resisting custodial supervision;
Pregnant Passengers in their ninth month, unless such Passenger provides a doctor’s certificate dated no more than 72 hours prior to departure stating that the doctor has examined and found the Passenger to be physically fit for air travel to and from the destination requested on the date of the flight, and that the estimated date of delivery is after the date of the last flight;
Passengers who are incapable of completing a flight safely, without requiring extraordinary medical assistance during the flight, as well as Passengers who appear to have symptoms of or have a communicable disease or condition that could pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others on the flight, or who refuse a screening for such disease or condition. (NOTE: UA requires a medical certificate for
Passengers who wish to travel under such circumstances. Visit UA’s website, united.com, for more information regarding UA’s requirements for medical certificates);
Passengers who fail to travel with the required safety assistant(s), advance notice and/or other safety requirements pursuant to Rules 14 and 15;
Passengers who do not qualify as acceptable Non-Ambulatory Passengers (see Rule 14);
Passengers who have or cause a malodorous condition (other than individuals qualifying as disabled);
Passengers whose physical or mental condition is such that, in United’s sole opinion, they are rendered or likely to be rendered incapable of comprehending or complying with safety instructions without the assistance of an escort. The escort must accompany the escorted passenger at all times; and
Unaccompanied passengers who are both blind and deaf, unless such passenger is able to communicate with representatives of UA by either physical, mechanical, electronic, or other means. Such passenger must inform UA of the method of communication to be used; and
Passengers who are unwilling to follow UA’s policy that prohibits voice calls after the aircraft doors have closed, while taxiing in preparation for takeoff, or while airborne.
Any Passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, consents and acknowledges that he or she shall reimburse UA for any such loss, damage or expense. UA has the right to refuse transport, on a permanent basis, to any passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, or who has been disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent. In addition, the activities enumerated in H) 1) through 8) shall constitute a material breach of contract, for which UA shall be excused from performing its obligations under this contract.
UA is not liable for its refusal to transport any passenger or for its removal of any passenger in accordance with this Rule. A Passenger who is removed or refused transportation in accordance with this Rule may be eligible for a refund upon request. See Rule 27 A). As an express precondition to issuance of any refund, UA shall not be responsible for damages of any kind whatsoever. The passenger’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be Rule 27 A).
He’s already won
United will settle, no doubt about that. The settlement amount won’t be revealed either
Yes we shall see Nostradamus
The union will hire lawyers for them
Baaa Baaa Baaa
It’s nice to see we are in complete agreement. Can you believe some of these people actually believe that guy didn’t hurt himself and of course had $$$ signs in his eyes right from when he heard them ask politely to disembark?
Some people are so gullible. One born every minute they say...
Sadly, even though he should be paying them, there is a chance he could get a couple of bucks out of this farce. He should also be arrested for fraud as well.
Maybe this UA airline is a bad one. I dunno and don’t care. All I care about is he is pulling a fast one. From the second he decided to start a fight with the security people he was breaking the law of common sense and decency. The way he did it cost him his man card too. What a weenie eh! How does a grown man make a scream like a little girl anyway? I wonder if he went to acting school and practiced this for months or even years getting ready for just the right opportunity to present itself. Sure wouldn’t surprise me.
Crazy homosexuals do the dangest things.
You got my curiosity up so I watch some youtube vids of people getting tased and sure enough; some did scream. Some were even over the top like Dao’s was.
It could simply be Dao has a very low threshold to pain so the tasing affected him more severely. I could be wrong about the scream. I still think he set up the whole thing knowing he was going to be injured, maybe even helped the injuries happen, but we know he’s a nut case and doesn’t mind doing things illegal and probably has a lot of resentment built up for the system. I still believe he saw a way to get a big payday and went for it when the opportunity presented itself.
I guess we will never know because everyone keeps saying it will never go to trial so it can all come out in court.
Regardless; he was in the wrong the second he chose to disregard his orders to leave the plane. Everything that happened after that was on him.
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.