Posted on 04/12/2017 8:51:15 AM PDT by Presbyterian Reporter
The adage about a picture being worth a thousand words never seemed as true as it did Monday when a video clip shot around the Internet showing a passenger being violently removed from a United Airlines plane in Chicago for refusing to be “voluntarily” bumped from the flight.
United no doubt will expend thousands of words explaining or apologizing for this incident in the coming days and weeks. It won’t help. The video is just too raw.
Indeed, the airline’s initial response to the publicity has left it covered in shame.
United’s PR department first issued a statement explaining blandly that the Chicago-to-Louisville flight late Sunday was overbooked, and that “after our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation. Further details on the removed customer should be directed to authorities.”
United CEO Oscar Munoz then made things worse with a statement of Orwellian doublespeak. “This is an upsetting event to all of us here at United,” he said. “I apologize for having to re-accommodate these customers,” whatever that means.
According to CNBC, Munoz followed up Monday evening with a letter to employees defending the airline’s ground staff and describing the passenger as “disruptive and belligerent.” He said the airline agents “were left with no choice but to call Chicago Aviation Security Officers to assist in removing the customer from the flight.”
But Munoz, whose version of the episode appears to come from the playbook of how to dig oneself into an ever deeper hole, also undermined the argument that the flight was overbooked. He related that “after the flight was fully boarded,” gate agents “were approached by crewmembers that were told they needed to board the flight.” The implication is that the crew members heading to Louisville were late in arriving, that every passenger held a paid ticket and had been properly boarded, and that only belatedly did United decide to pull passengers off the plane to make room for the crew.
It’s unclear from United’s contract of carriage how either its rule regarding “refusal of transport” (Rule 21) or “denied boarding compensation” (Rule 25) applies to a passenger already seated and instructed to deplane to make room for a company employee rather than another paying passenger.
Whether United had “no choice” but to forcibly eject the passenger also is questionable, as presumably the airline could have transported its crew members to Louisville either by road (a five-hour drive) or by chartering another aircraft. In any event, Munoz in his letter asserts that “treating our customers and each other with respect and dignity is at the core of who we are.”
Plainly this was a botched job in countless ways and at multiple levels. Reports indicate the flight was the last one to Louisville on Sunday, and that United offered passengers an $800 voucher plus overnight accommodations and an alternative flight leaving Monday afternoon in order to free up four seats for a flight crew needing to reach Louisville.
When the voluntary offer failed, four passengers evidently were chosen at random to be involuntarily bumped. This happened after the plane had been loaded, which is certainly an unusual wrinkle in the annals of passenger treatment. One couple went quietly, but another passenger objected. Before being dragged off the plane, he reportedly identified himself as a doctor with patients to see Monday. When he refused to go, the ground staff summoned airport police, who physically manhandled him out of his seat and dragged him, bloodied, down the aisle as several other passengers documented the event on their smartphones.
What sort of training United offers its personnel to manage such episodes isn’t known, but plainly it stinks.
What’s even more important is what this episode says about the terms and conditions of air travel in the United States.
To begin with, the law allows air carriers to overbook flights — that is, sell more tickets than they have seats for. That’s plainly a situation that benefits the airlines almost exclusively, because it tends to ensure that every seat will be filled even at the cost of leaving some passengers behind. How many businesses do you know of that can sell you a good or service, accept payment and then withdraw that good or service unilaterally for their own purposes — much less by force?
Passengers bumped involuntarily have rights to compensation, but the airlines have great latitude to set their own priority rules for bumping travelers. Typically it’s those paying the lowest fares, lacking membership in a frequent-flyer program, or checking in late who are most at risk. Bumpees who are going to be more than two hours late to a domestic destination are entitled to compensation of 400 percent of their one-way fare, up to $1,350, plus the value of their ticket.
These rules, obviously, are in dire need of upgrading to suit modern conditions. The Department of Transportation acknowledges in its outline of passenger rights that some passengers may be more amenable to voluntary bumping than others, or more flexible in their travel plans: “Almost any planeload of airline passengers includes some people with urgent travel needs and others who may be more concerned about the cost of their tickets than about getting to their destination on time.” The agency encourages airlines to “negotiate with their passengers for mutually acceptable compensation” in order to secure needed seats.
As Daniel Gross observed at Slate.com, airlines have squeezed their overbooking privilege until it screams for mercy, even as they’re consistently flying fuller planes. In the most recent boom-and-bust airline cycle, the industry “load factor” — the percentage of seats filled — bottomed out at 72.21 percent in February 2009, in the teeth of a crushing recession, but more recently has run in the mid-80s. That appears to be as high as it’s been in this century and may be an absolute limit, because some routes will never run at 100 percent.
Tighter passenger loads have coincided with an economic recovery that makes flyers more resistant to giving up hours, even days, of inconvenience, even for a few hundred bucks. As Gross pointed out, a two-hour delay in a flight could translate to a missed family event or a lost business contract.
The solution to the conflict between an airline’s desire to fill every seat and passengers’ need to get where they’re going on time is blindingly obvious: Let the market work. The Louisville doctor’s need to get home was clearly worth more to him than $800. But so was United’s need to get a crew from Chicago to Louisville. The airline decided to cheap out by not offering passengers payment that would be enough to free up more seats. Instead of paying the true value of moving its crew, it decided to impose that cost on one unfortunate passenger.
Then, as though to prove beyond doubt that it considered its passengers the expendable players in this drama, it summoned the police to do its dirty work. Something’s wrong with the intellects running United Airlines, and if there’s any justice in the world, now they’ll really pay.
Especially since upon reading those accounts much of FR instantly believed the doctor was a "gay troublemaker" and those nice men in suits at United couldn't possibly have done anything wrong.
UAL is going to pay big time for this CF.
The Media's Credo...."Ready. Fire. Aim."
Exactly. If you look at the fine print in United's "terms of carriage" the process for dealing with overbooking BEFORE BOARDING is fully covered, as are the terms for denying carriage AFTER boarding... which do NOT include overbooking as a valid reason.
By the time boarding began, United should have already known how many crew would joining the flight and should have dealt with an overbooking situation BEFORE the boarding.
This was a screw-up by United in that their procedures for employees needing to deadhead somewhere should have to arrange their trip with their employer in a timely manner... before scheduled boarding time. If an employee shows up at the gate after the plane has pulled back and is waiting to take off should they bring the plane back, kick someone off and delay the flight for hours to accommodate the employee who for whatever reason didn't schedule their intent with the airline in advance?
There needs to be balance between the needs of the airline and its employees and the customers... I think United crossed that line this time.
It started with deregulation.
When flying was expensive and protected by the government, they could offer all sorts of perks because you were drastically overpaying for what you were getting.
Now it is a normal competitive business. They care no more or less for their customers than any other business, all things being equal.
The good news is that pretty much everyone can afford to fly now. The bad news is that the experience is more like riding a bus. If you miss the old days, feel free to cough up a lot more Benjamin for first class.
A lot of this discussion, to me, is like a guy buying a Toyota and complaining that it’s not a Bently. If you want a bently, there are dealerships in most major cities.
I think the problem is not what the airline did, but how they did it. It should be BEFORE the plane boards.
It’s all about managing expectations.
There was a problem in one airport where people were complaining that they had to wait WAY too long at baggage claim for their luggage. The final solution that actually WORKED: They rerouted the passengers so it took them longer to get to baggage claim. By the time they got there after their cross country walk, the luggage was either waiting or shortly showed up. The complaints went away. I kid you not.
Southwest Airlines: “We beat the competition, not the passengers!”
Per Twitter today:
Media found the criminal records of one David Anh Duy Dao. The doctor on the plane was David Thanh Duc Dao.
It could not get any worse if this is true.
Day-o, day-ay-ay-o
Daylight come and he wan’ go home
The guy was an entitled jerk with a whole lot of character flaws and almost solely responsible for this incident. Bad optics from a few seconds of video don’t change the facts but a whole of morons in the world float purely on a sea of emotion rather than logic.
I, for one, think that overbooking is bullsh*t and should be illegal.
If an employee shows up at the gate after the plane has pulled back and is waiting to take off should they bring the plane back, kick someone off and delay the flight for hours to accommodate the employee who for whatever reason didn’t schedule their intent with the airline in advance?
They deliberately and intentionally lied. This was not an overbook situation.
“disruptive and belligerent” = if you don’t bend over and bare your a$$ and act like a compliant sheep, you’re disruptive and belligerent.
F*ck them.
The Chicago police needs to fire the ones who beat this man. Then they need to put some money aside for the lawsuits.
Not to worry, Delta will figure this out.
They will charge each ticket purchaser an additional $100 “fee” that will buy them seat insurance for the seat they purchased.
Calling the cops to beat a customer into submission is almost never a good business policy.
They are only losing the "extra" money.
Alaska Airlines also has great customer service. It's the only airline I fly on as they have the best route structure in Alaska and on the west coast.
So the media lied. I hope this guy sues the media too, in a separate suit from the one against the airline + Chicago PD.
VDB (voluntarily denied boarding) is generally a win-win-win. The airline seats a higher paying or priority passenger, someone is happy to get vouchers, and someone is happy to get on the plane. I absolutely LOVE VDB, and will volunteer on full flights even before the announcement. For example, a few years back we got bumped twice on the way to Hawaii, gave up 2 days in paradise, but got $2,600 in vouchers and went again for free the next year.
IDB is a quite different case which is usually a win-lose-mixed deal. It's expensive for the airlines, bad fio one customer, but good for another.
Airlines are a very difficult business. They often lose billions. Scheduling planes, gates, food, fuel, flight staff, ground staff, seats, and more requires powerful computers and algorithms. The difficulty is compounded by weather, mechanical issues, staff sickness. Ticket prices are ridiculously cheap. I don't know if it's true, but I read overbooking has saved $100 billion over 30 years. Some of that has become profit, but surely most of it has resulted in lower ticket prices.
It's also worth noting that some of the problem may be over-regulation. Apparently airlines are constrained in the most compensation they can offer bumped passengers. This regulation should be eliminated. This would turn IVB into a win-win-mixed, where both passengers would be pleased, but the airline would have happier customers but lose more money.
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.