Posted on 04/11/2017 2:37:49 PM PDT by nickcarraway
The passenger is being treated for injuries in a Chicago hotel
United Airlines' parent company CEO Oscar Munoz on Tuesday apologized to the passenger dragged off a flight over the weekend.
"Like you, I continue to be disturbed by what happened on this flight and I deeply apologize to the customer forcibly removed and to all the customers aboard," Munoz wrote in a memo to his team. "No one should ever be mistreated this way."
Brief Marriage Preceded Fatal Calif. School Shooting The passenger has been identified as Dr. David Dao, of Elizabethtown, Kentucky, NBC News reported. The Associated Press also confirmed that Dao is the man in the video.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcbayarea.com ...
Explain that.
“Trains aren’t popular on FreeRepublic since Willie Green’s demise.”
Why? I didn’t know Willie Green. Whatever he said, his posts don’t speak for me. If you are implying that I need to self censor because of something he said, that’s silly.
We just got a stop added to my tiny home town in Missouri and I love it. Non stop. No driving. No TSA (at least not yet). Nobody checking or weighing my bags. Can sleep in my own private compartment with a private bath. Works for me.
And you found this statement in the Contract of Carriage? I don't think so. And not 'logical' at all.
The passenger had already boarded. And now the CEO of United has already apologized.
Flier Talk has a good discussion about this and probably Legal Insurrection will have one soon.
United created the situation by putting four of their deadhead employees on the plane: not unforeseen.
“Let me explain this to you. If you have a 100 seats, and you sell 110 at $200, then you have $22,000.
If from now on you have to sell 100 because of this type of behavior, even if not overbooking, in case you have to accommodate your employees, etc (exactly this situation), then you get $20,000.
The $2000 loss gets eaten by future customers in more expensive airline tickets.”
_________________________________________________________
The $2000 is either refunded to the customers or applied to a ticket on a later flight.
How do the future customers eat that?
My argument is not whether that’s good business practice. The fact is that it is done. It’s done because it helps their bottom line. If you force them to not do that, then the loss in profit is made up by increasing ticket prices, which is a loss for all ticket buying passengers.
So the ethics of it is a different argument that you can have with whoever closest is studying philosophy that you know.
I’m talking about the extra $30 that we would all have to pay buying tickets on Travelocity.
I enjoy rail travel too, but we are in the minority here.
Your math is in error.
Just stating it does not make it a fact. Your conclusion is in error.
They all overbook, not to refund, but to maximize profit. Some cancel and eat the cancellation fees while the airline still can have a full flight, Or others don’t show, etc. It’s a good way to have a full or mostly full flight except at times you may have to incentivize volunteers if it is more than full.
If they lose the ability to maximize their profits, you and I, on future flights, get to eat that by paying extra in prices that they jack up to now cover the above loss.
Comprende?
United Airlines: Fly the Friendly Skies
Fly the Friendly Skies of United (1)
Fly the Friendly Skies of United (2)
and here are some songs which United Airlines might want to use for their future commercial background music -
(I predict that this will be settled out of court fairly quickly, and that United Airlines will have millions of dollars less in their coffers, while Dr. David Dao and his lawyers will have millions of dollars more in their bank accounts. Prior to that happening, I predict that the current United Airlines CEO, Oscar Munoz, will have resigned as CEO. I also believe that many people will stop flying on United Airlines because of this incident.)
“I enjoy rail travel too, but we are in the minority here.”
I don’t understand why, especially when air travel is so onerous. I get that Amtrack is government owned and less than optimal because of it. Train stations are not always located in good areas, either, but it still might be worth a re-think, at least for some destinations, given the current travel options.
Ultimately, I don’t care either way. I am not trying to give Amtrack business because the more people who ride, the sooner TSA will discover a need to move in. Right now, it is small potatoes and mostly beneath the radar. I do wish there was a way for a passenger train company to be privately owned rather than government subsidized.
If from now on you have to sell 100 because of this type of behavior, even if not overbooking, in case you have to accommodate your employees, etc (exactly this situation), then you get $20,000.
The $2000 loss gets eaten by future customers in more expensive airline tickets. What other explanations would you like?
This is why your math is in error: they didn't "get" $22,000, they collected $22,000. There's $22,000 of contingent liability attached to that. So the most they can book as income is $20k plus whatever no show fees they may collect. That's a market transaction and I have no problem with that.
But there's the $2k contingent liability that has to be satisfied before the remaining $2k can be booked as income. They have to buy their way out, bump to other airlines or flights, etc. So that $2k will not be booked as income until that's satisfied, and that will cost.
Selling the chance to take a flight is not the same as selling a flight. If they're not acknowledging the difference up front, that's fraud.
That's why your math doesn't work. Now, let's go to the idea that overbooking as a policy in general and involuntary bumping as a practice is unethical, immoral and should be illegal.
If it's simply a dollars issue as you say, treat it as such. No involuntary bumps. Keep raising compensation until you get the volunteers needed. But disrupt their life with an arbitrary bump because it's cheaper? That's just wrong.
BTW, I work in the transportation industry. Flight crews are strictly limited in on/off duty time. Did you know, for example, that if a flight crew lands at an airport on an overnight stay, they aren't off duty until they reach their hotel? Timing out of flight crews happens more often than you might think. So I understand the need to get a fresh flight crew somewhere so you don't have a cancelled flight. My objection to this situation wasn't the bump but the arbitrary, involuntary nature of it.
I do not care if there are economic benefits to others. It's immoral, unethical and wrong, wrong, wrong. At some point it will end. Sooner would be better.
UA broke the law. And then invited the security guards to batter Dr. Dao.
Airlines, such as, UA operate under strict regulations and contracts. (Common carriers). It is unlawful for them to deny transport of paid and boarded passengers for their own convenience. UA will argue that they did not deny transport since the aircraft had not pushed off. They consider it involuntary denial of boarding.
Okay, guess what? UA failed to follow procedure for that as well. There is a prioritization process for selecting passengers for involuntary denial of boarding that does not include randomly selecting anyone. Non-fare, late-booking passengers, like UA’s employees would be the first get selected for denial of boarding.
Also, not an oversale since the aircraft was full and passengers were seated before UA “booked” their employees.
So Munoz actually apologised to "his team", not the guy that waqs assaulted.
You don’t like my attitude or motivation, huh? I don’t care. You seem like a very angry person with a huge chip on your shoulder but hey, whatever floats your boat.
Nope, like I said his past has nothing to do with the thuggish way he was treated. Obviously you think it does, good for you.
The United CEO’s apology is about the same as un-ringing a bell. Considering I have flown United for many years I realize they are a substandard airline compared to most other carriers
Where did I say I agreed with the thuggish way he was treated, exactly?
The United CEO’s apology is about the same as un-ringing a bell. Considering I have flown United for many years I realize they are a substandard airline compared to most other carriers
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.