The case of being ejected from a seat is so extremely rare there is no good reason to not auction off seats to the lowest bidder with no cap on the funds the airline can pay out.. once people are buckled into their seats the odds of this happening is way less than 0.09%, so that even a 100k$ payout would not hurt the airlines, and only be fair,
I was removed from my seat after buckling in out of a flight of Dallas a few years ago. A two hour flight turned into a 12 hour delay arriving at my destination after midnight separated from my luggage... not fun, even with the free ticket voucher i was given , I would not have gave up my seat other wise but for fear of arrest.
The author is wrong, suggesting, in error, there was no legal question about United’s action, while in fact there is, plenty.
All other matters he discusses are side issues and don’t change the legal ramifications.
In other words, he offers another diversion from the essentials of the case.
A VA employee beat an old Veteran to death and that didn’t get 1/10th the attention this has.
This is a stupid article because it is mostly about overbooking when we know that the flight was not overbooked.
Also, the discussions of compensation and “bumping” are generally making no distinction between bumping a passenger at the gate and removing from their assigned seat and booting them off the aircraft. By virtue of the airline’s contract with the passenger, this is legally something very different.
The story is resonating not so much because the passenger in question is such a compelling figure or behaved particularly well, but because of public unhappiness with the Stalinist police state mentality of airline customer service especially in coach class. So many flight attendants appear to be either grumpy older women or very prickly gay men that the customer experience has gone down the tubes. The first way to fix the airlines is to hire different gate agents and different flight attendants. Employees who cannot muster a smile and be nice to customers should not be allowed to continue on the job. The airlines could easily fix this by sending undercover evaluators on their flights, but then they don’t really want to know, do they?
You had your seat bought and paid for. You are sitting in it. What right does an airline have to forcibly remove you from your seat and give it to someone else? What would happen if I sold 1200 condo apartments but only had 1000?
According to Part 21 - Refusal To Transport of the CoC’s, there are 19 specific reason you can ‘re-accommodate’ a passenger after he has been seated, i.e., drunk, rowdy, barefoot, smelly, blind, etc.
Needing his seat for a company employee isn’t one of the 19.
So sad that the author of the article has no access to a search engine:
UNITED CEO: ‘This can never, will never happen again on a United Airlines flight’
Bob Bryan Apr. 12, 2017, 8:02 AM 42,036
United Airlines CEO Oscar Munoz.AP
UAL United Contl
In an interview with GMA, Munoz said he apologized to the passenger —identified Tuesday as Dr. David Dao — and promised that nothing similar would happen on a United Airlines flight again.
“The first thing that I think is important to say is to apologize to Dr. Dao, his family, the passengers on that flight, our customers, our employees — that is not who our family at United is,” Munoz said. “You saw us at a bad moment, and this can never, will never happen again on a United Airlines flight. That’s my premise, and that’s my promise.”
snip
“No, he can’t be,” Munoz said when asked whether Dao was at fault in any way. “He was a paying passenger sitting on our seat, in our aircraft, and no one should be treated that way.”
Stupid read. United lost in the court of public opinion. And it will also lose in the courtroom, should Dao’s case make it that far (it probably won’t. United will be much better off just settling). Delta was smart enough to drastically raise the amount of compensation that will be offered in the future. I seriously doubt that bidding will ever reach the top amount of approximately $10,000. And if it does, it will be so infrequently as to have virtually no impact on the bottom line. And it will certainly be cheaper than a four or five percent stock devaluation, the PR nightmare, the loss of customers and the inevitable lawsuits.
Somebody has a conflicting point of view...a guy by the name of Oscar Munoz...ceo of an airline I believe.
Of course United didn't do the right thing. The 'right thing' for United is to perpetuate their business and maximize profits. I guarantee that this entire incident will do the exact opposite.
United has ticked off customers for decades. They are a horrible service company. It does not matter if the Doctor was not in the right. The fire storm is not about him. Its about the rest of us. We have been mistreated by United or we have watched United mistreat people. That is why the fire storm happened.
This author is an A hole of the highest ranking. First of all, I am fed up with the false narrative of the oversold flight. Bee Ess!!! We’ve been over this a million times - the flight had enough seats for the boarded passengers until the airline decided to stuff its employees on this already full flight. Then had the gall to involuntarily “volunteer” people to give up their seat and use a police state to enforce their shitty customer service.
I realize the flying public can be entitled, disrespectful jerks, but let’s not forget this industry also treats its paying customers worse than any other. If I show up at Wal-Mary to purchase an advertised sale item only to find it is sold out, no harm no foul. But to pay several hundred dollars or more for a plane ticket AND make travel arrangements around thaybscheidled flight only to have it yanked out from under you is just plain wrong. These airlines SUCK and it’s high time the entire industry gets an overhaul.
United, just give the guy a blank check and be done with this. having to resort to the use of physical force to remove folks ain’t the way to run an airline.. unless you want it to auger in. I miss Continental, I won’t miss United.
I think this is the better way to handle it.
This case has nothing to do with over booking, selling the same seat twice, but rather removing someone, to make room for an airline worker. It is about using the force of the government to remove a passenger who paid for his seat five months earlier. United could buy back a seat it needed if it offered the right price.
No they was not right, they may have done what they thought was totally legal but they was not right even if the guy ended up being a idiot. He paid for his ticket, offer enough money and someone will volunteer to mess up their weekend.
If a passenger is a no-show and not a cancellation, they don’t get their money back, right? So the airline already has collected for a full flight.
.
Just another misdirecting nonsense post!
(Fake news)
.
1. He already paid for a seat.
2. He was already sitting in the seat he already paid for.
Everything else, including the mountain of horse manure in the article posted, is nothing but a huge mountain of horse manure.
1. He already paid for a seat.
2. He was already sitting in the seat he already paid for.
” ... it’s well known at this point that the flight he’d booked a ticket for wasn’t oversold as much as United wanted to transport four crew members to Kentucky in order to staff a flight the next day”
The four crew members were from a partner airline, not United employees.
There are many other false statements in this screed, including the claim that Robert Samuelson is an economist. He is not, but he pretends to be one at the Washington Post.
Right or wrong I hope their stock tanks and long shot of long shots UAL goes bankrupt and its assets get sold to other companies. UAL lost my luggage three times and flat out stole my bag one of those times. Wife confirmed they had the bag and knew where it was. UAL sent me a letter explaining that their legal department said UAL had no liability so I would not get my bag back or compensation. Flying in the cheap seats on UAL after one or two long flights is an exercise in Masochism.